Does the middle class have a future?

[HereWeGoAgain]

Maybe your whining doesnt resonate with me since I dont have money problems.

Sure Bubba, sure. Another internet millionaire right?

You go ahead and think what you want if it makes you feel better.

We have a political party and *news* channel that caters to people who live in Black-n-White World. Even though nearly all societies have some socialist aspects to them, Faux News and Republicans like to spotlight individual things and label them and anyone who supports them as "socialist."

Most of Faux News viewers are non-1%er retirees, which means they are lapping up most of the socialism the US offers its citizens: social security and Medicare.

What a dumbfuck. Of course most aren't 1%ers considering 1% is a damn small number.

Yet conservatives swallow the BS fed to them by faux, simply amazing. Conservatives policy for 30+ years is to reward the 1%es and see what trickles down, how has that worked out?

It's worked just fine for me. The only time I get bent out of shape is when a liberal levies yet another tax on me.
Which is why I avoid selling stocks while a dem is in office. I learned my lesson when Clinton was in office and I got my retro active CG tax break when Bush was elected.
It sure would be better for the economy if I did sell,but I'll be damned if I'm giving the gov more money if I dont have to.
Yes,liberal policy hurts the economy.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Every time federal income taxes are taken out of your salary, or from an investment you have made, you can wager that they are helping to offset the taxes that some 1% is avoiding with his GOP endorsed and protected tax shelter or loophole. Take it to the bank....if you have anything left...

The 1% are the owners of big business,tax the shit out of them and they'll just pass the added expense onto the consumer.

Sure, except THAT'S not historically happened, NOR what economists say. Weird conservatives don't get that?


20 percent of the corporate income tax burden as falling on labor, 20 percent on the normal return to all capital, and 60 percent on the supernormal returns to corporate
equity (shareholders)

http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/UploadedPDF/412651-Tax-Model-Corporate-Tax-Incidence.pdf

You're full of shit. I dont give a damn if you run a Cool Aide stand,if the price of sugar goes up you adjust the price to keep profits level.
Taxes are no different than the sugar.
You're nothing but a whiny lefty looking for a handout.

 

[Dad2three]

Sure Bubba, sure. Another internet millionaire right?

You go ahead and think what you want if it makes you feel better.

We have a political party and *news* channel that caters to people who live in Black-n-White World. Even though nearly all societies have some socialist aspects to them, Faux News and Republicans like to spotlight individual things and label them and anyone who supports them as "socialist."

Most of Faux News viewers are non-1%er retirees, which means they are lapping up most of the socialism the US offers its citizens: social security and Medicare.

What a dumbfuck. Of course most aren't 1%ers considering 1% is a damn small number.

Yet conservatives swallow the BS fed to them by faux, simply amazing. Conservatives policy for 30+ years is to reward the 1%es and see what trickles down, how has that worked out?

It's worked just fine for me. The only time I get bent out of shape is when a liberal levies yet another tax on me.
Which is why I avoid selling stocks while a dem is in office. I learned my lesson when Clinton was in office and I got my retro active CG tax break when Bush was elected.
It sure would be better for the economy if I did sell,but I'll be damned if I'm giving the gov more money if I dont have to.
Yes,liberal policy hurts the economy.

So no, you can't point to ONE policy conservatives have EVER been on the correct side of history either

Want a Better Economy? History Says Vote Democrat!

From this book loaded with statistical fact tidbits and comparative charts, here are just a few that caused me to realize that my long-term love affair with Milton Friedman‘s writing and recommended policies in “Free to Choose” were grounded in a theory I long admired, but that simply have proven to be myths when applied!

• Personal disposable income has grown nearly 6 times more under Democratic presidents
• Gross Domestic Product (GDP) has grown 7 times more under Democratic presidents
• Corporate profits have grown over 16% more per year under Democratic presidents (they actually declined under Republicans by an average of 4.53%/year)
• Average annual compound return on the stock market has been 18 times greater under Democratic presidents (If you invested $100k for 40 years of Republican administrations you had $126k at the end, if you invested $100k for 40 years of Democrat administrations you had $3.9M at the end)
• Republican presidents added 2.5 times more to the national debt than Democratic presidents
• The two times the economy steered into the ditch (Great Depression and Great Recession) were during Republican, laissez faire administrations

The “how and why” of these results is explained in the book. Not the least of which revolves around the velocity of money and how that changes as wealth moves between different economic classes.


Want a Better Economy History Says Vote Democrat - Forbes

 

[Dad2three]

Every time federal income taxes are taken out of your salary, or from an investment you have made, you can wager that they are helping to offset the taxes that some 1% is avoiding with his GOP endorsed and protected tax shelter or loophole. Take it to the bank....if you have anything left...

The 1% are the owners of big business,tax the shit out of them and they'll just pass the added expense onto the consumer.

Sure, except THAT'S not historically happened, NOR what economists say. Weird conservatives don't get that?


20 percent of the corporate income tax burden as falling on labor, 20 percent on the normal return to all capital, and 60 percent on the supernormal returns to corporate
equity (shareholders)

http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/UploadedPDF/412651-Tax-Model-Corporate-Tax-Incidence.pdf

You're full of shit. I dont give a damn if you run a Cool Aide stand,if the price of sugar goes up you adjust the price to keep profits level.
Taxes are no different than the sugar.
You're nothing but a whiny lefty looking for a handout.

Got it, don't confuse you with FACTS right, after all you are a conservative, you Klowns LOVE feelings...


I guess in right wing world, economic things like competition and price variables aren't really true? You just up your price if you want the same incomes? lol

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

You go ahead and think what you want if it makes you feel better.

We have a political party and *news* channel that caters to people who live in Black-n-White World. Even though nearly all societies have some socialist aspects to them, Faux News and Republicans like to spotlight individual things and label them and anyone who supports them as "socialist."

Most of Faux News viewers are non-1%er retirees, which means they are lapping up most of the socialism the US offers its citizens: social security and Medicare.

What a dumbfuck. Of course most aren't 1%ers considering 1% is a damn small number.

Yet conservatives swallow the BS fed to them by faux, simply amazing. Conservatives policy for 30+ years is to reward the 1%es and see what trickles down, how has that worked out?

It's worked just fine for me. The only time I get bent out of shape is when a liberal levies yet another tax on me.
Which is why I avoid selling stocks while a dem is in office. I learned my lesson when Clinton was in office and I got my retro active CG tax break when Bush was elected.
It sure would be better for the economy if I did sell,but I'll be damned if I'm giving the gov more money if I dont have to.
Yes,liberal policy hurts the economy.

So no, you can't point to ONE policy conservatives have EVER been on the correct side of history either

Want a Better Economy? History Says Vote Democrat!

From this book loaded with statistical fact tidbits and comparative charts, here are just a few that caused me to realize that my long-term love affair with Milton Friedman‘s writing and recommended policies in “Free to Choose” were grounded in a theory I long admired, but that simply have proven to be myths when applied!

• Personal disposable income has grown nearly 6 times more under Democratic presidents
• Gross Domestic Product (GDP) has grown 7 times more under Democratic presidents
• Corporate profits have grown over 16% more per year under Democratic presidents (they actually declined under Republicans by an average of 4.53%/year)
• Average annual compound return on the stock market has been 18 times greater under Democratic presidents (If you invested $100k for 40 years of Republican administrations you had $126k at the end, if you invested $100k for 40 years of Democrat administrations you had $3.9M at the end)
• Republican presidents added 2.5 times more to the national debt than Democratic presidents
• The two times the economy steered into the ditch (Great Depression and Great Recession) were during Republican, laissez faire administrations

The “how and why” of these results is explained in the book. Not the least of which revolves around the velocity of money and how that changes as wealth moves between different economic classes.


Want a Better Economy History Says Vote Democrat - Forbes

I'm not going to sit here and play that stupid game.
Policy is discussed on this board every single day. And from the results of the last mid term I think it's pretty clear where Americans stand on obamas policies.
You miscreants vote for free shit,conservatives vote for policies that allow them to keep more of the money they actually earned.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Every time federal income taxes are taken out of your salary, or from an investment you have made, you can wager that they are helping to offset the taxes that some 1% is avoiding with his GOP endorsed and protected tax shelter or loophole. Take it to the bank....if you have anything left...

The 1% are the owners of big business,tax the shit out of them and they'll just pass the added expense onto the consumer.

Sure, except THAT'S not historically happened, NOR what economists say. Weird conservatives don't get that?


20 percent of the corporate income tax burden as falling on labor, 20 percent on the normal return to all capital, and 60 percent on the supernormal returns to corporate
equity (shareholders)

http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/UploadedPDF/412651-Tax-Model-Corporate-Tax-Incidence.pdf

You're full of shit. I dont give a damn if you run a Cool Aide stand,if the price of sugar goes up you adjust the price to keep profits level.
Taxes are no different than the sugar.
You're nothing but a whiny lefty looking for a handout.

Got it, don't confuse you with FACTS right, after all you are a conservative, you Klowns LOVE feelings...


I guess in right wing world, economic things like competition and price variables aren't really true? You just up your price if you want the same incomes? lol

You stupid fuck,all business will adjust to tax increases.
You might want to move out of your moms basement and start a lawn mowing service and test the waters of business. I figure even you can pull that off,assuming you can beat the mexican prices.

 

[Dad2three]

We have a political party and *news* channel that caters to people who live in Black-n-White World. Even though nearly all societies have some socialist aspects to them, Faux News and Republicans like to spotlight individual things and label them and anyone who supports them as "socialist."

Most of Faux News viewers are non-1%er retirees, which means they are lapping up most of the socialism the US offers its citizens: social security and Medicare.

What a dumbfuck. Of course most aren't 1%ers considering 1% is a damn small number.

Yet conservatives swallow the BS fed to them by faux, simply amazing. Conservatives policy for 30+ years is to reward the 1%es and see what trickles down, how has that worked out?

It's worked just fine for me. The only time I get bent out of shape is when a liberal levies yet another tax on me.
Which is why I avoid selling stocks while a dem is in office. I learned my lesson when Clinton was in office and I got my retro active CG tax break when Bush was elected.
It sure would be better for the economy if I did sell,but I'll be damned if I'm giving the gov more money if I dont have to.
Yes,liberal policy hurts the economy.

So no, you can't point to ONE policy conservatives have EVER been on the correct side of history either

Want a Better Economy? History Says Vote Democrat!

From this book loaded with statistical fact tidbits and comparative charts, here are just a few that caused me to realize that my long-term love affair with Milton Friedman‘s writing and recommended policies in “Free to Choose” were grounded in a theory I long admired, but that simply have proven to be myths when applied!

• Personal disposable income has grown nearly 6 times more under Democratic presidents
• Gross Domestic Product (GDP) has grown 7 times more under Democratic presidents
• Corporate profits have grown over 16% more per year under Democratic presidents (they actually declined under Republicans by an average of 4.53%/year)
• Average annual compound return on the stock market has been 18 times greater under Democratic presidents (If you invested $100k for 40 years of Republican administrations you had $126k at the end, if you invested $100k for 40 years of Democrat administrations you had $3.9M at the end)
• Republican presidents added 2.5 times more to the national debt than Democratic presidents
• The two times the economy steered into the ditch (Great Depression and Great Recession) were during Republican, laissez faire administrations

The “how and why” of these results is explained in the book. Not the least of which revolves around the velocity of money and how that changes as wealth moves between different economic classes.


Want a Better Economy History Says Vote Democrat - Forbes

I'm not going to sit here and play that stupid game.
Policy is discussed on this board every single day. And from the results of the last mid term I think it's pretty clear where Americans stand on obamas policies.
You miscreants vote for free shit,conservatives vote for policies that allow them to keep more of the money they actually earned.

MORE right wing bullsh*t. Shocking

Low info voters...

Sure, conservatives vote to put EVERYTHING on the credit card, then blame the next guy for the problem

 

[Dad2three]

Every time federal income taxes are taken out of your salary, or from an investment you have made, you can wager that they are helping to offset the taxes that some 1% is avoiding with his GOP endorsed and protected tax shelter or loophole. Take it to the bank....if you have anything left...

The 1% are the owners of big business,tax the shit out of them and they'll just pass the added expense onto the consumer.

Sure, except THAT'S not historically happened, NOR what economists say. Weird conservatives don't get that?


20 percent of the corporate income tax burden as falling on labor, 20 percent on the normal return to all capital, and 60 percent on the supernormal returns to corporate
equity (shareholders)

http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/UploadedPDF/412651-Tax-Model-Corporate-Tax-Incidence.pdf

You're full of shit. I dont give a damn if you run a Cool Aide stand,if the price of sugar goes up you adjust the price to keep profits level.
Taxes are no different than the sugar.
You're nothing but a whiny lefty looking for a handout.

Got it, don't confuse you with FACTS right, after all you are a conservative, you Klowns LOVE feelings...


I guess in right wing world, economic things like competition and price variables aren't really true? You just up your price if you want the same incomes? lol

You stupid fuck,all business will adjust to tax increases.
You might want to move out of your moms basement and start a lawn mowing service and test the waters of business. I figure even you can pull that off,assuming you can beat the mexican prices.

So besides your FEELINGS, which conservatives are known for (as well as being on the wrong side of history on ALL policies that helped US), you got NOTHING to back up your assertion that tax incidence doesn't falls mainly on capital, the opposite of what economists say. Got it

 

[BlackSand]

I guess in right wing world, economic things like competition and price variables aren't really true? You just up your price if you want the same incomes? lol

Lolz ...You might want to leave business to folks that understand the relationship between price variables and cost variables.

.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

What a dumbfuck. Of course most aren't 1%ers considering 1% is a damn small number.

Yet conservatives swallow the BS fed to them by faux, simply amazing. Conservatives policy for 30+ years is to reward the 1%es and see what trickles down, how has that worked out?

It's worked just fine for me. The only time I get bent out of shape is when a liberal levies yet another tax on me.
Which is why I avoid selling stocks while a dem is in office. I learned my lesson when Clinton was in office and I got my retro active CG tax break when Bush was elected.
It sure would be better for the economy if I did sell,but I'll be damned if I'm giving the gov more money if I dont have to.
Yes,liberal policy hurts the economy.

So no, you can't point to ONE policy conservatives have EVER been on the correct side of history either

Want a Better Economy? History Says Vote Democrat!

From this book loaded with statistical fact tidbits and comparative charts, here are just a few that caused me to realize that my long-term love affair with Milton Friedman‘s writing and recommended policies in “Free to Choose” were grounded in a theory I long admired, but that simply have proven to be myths when applied!

• Personal disposable income has grown nearly 6 times more under Democratic presidents
• Gross Domestic Product (GDP) has grown 7 times more under Democratic presidents
• Corporate profits have grown over 16% more per year under Democratic presidents (they actually declined under Republicans by an average of 4.53%/year)
• Average annual compound return on the stock market has been 18 times greater under Democratic presidents (If you invested $100k for 40 years of Republican administrations you had $126k at the end, if you invested $100k for 40 years of Democrat administrations you had $3.9M at the end)
• Republican presidents added 2.5 times more to the national debt than Democratic presidents
• The two times the economy steered into the ditch (Great Depression and Great Recession) were during Republican, laissez faire administrations

The “how and why” of these results is explained in the book. Not the least of which revolves around the velocity of money and how that changes as wealth moves between different economic classes.


Want a Better Economy History Says Vote Democrat - Forbes

I'm not going to sit here and play that stupid game.
Policy is discussed on this board every single day. And from the results of the last mid term I think it's pretty clear where Americans stand on obamas policies.
You miscreants vote for free shit,conservatives vote for policies that allow them to keep more of the money they actually earned.

MORE right wing bullsh*t. Shocking

Low info voters...

Sure, conservatives vote to put EVERYTHING on the credit card, then blame the next guy for the problem

Have you looked at the debt lately?
Poor little liberal,begging on the street corner isnt enough for ya huh?

 

[RandallFlagg]

I wonder: With the current middle class squeeze and future automation, can the middle class as we know it survive? I was thinking, when in the past things were automated e.g: the mechanical loom, luddites, the automobile, people adapted so why not now? Could it be that we could go through another 1950's style boom?
I suppose NO.
How will this influence on the whole political and economical system?

In my opinion, as long as voters continue to elect and to re-elect professional politicians to serve in government, the Middle Class has no future.

I truly believe that the middle class is being culled out. I truly do. In America, there are the very rich and the very poor. those left (in the middle) are not being replaced as they retire. Wages are now for part-timers. One of the primary reasons the welfare rolls are swelling. Those on the government dole will be far easier to control in the next 10 or so years.

Thats exactly whats happening. The middle class is being replaced with immigrants who have much lower expectations about what successes means in America.

Why else would they be allowed unfettered access to this country, if not to "replace us"?

 

[RandallFlagg]

Middle America is being squeezed out of existence. WE pay for the tax shelters for the wealthy. WE pay for corporate bailouts. WE pay for bailouts to save Wallstreet, who turns their back on middle America when their profits are huge.

All the while the GOP defends the wealthy in their shafting of the tax system and the GOP defends multinational corporations as they shirk paying their fair share of taxes. The Repub party is in business for the rich guys and the low information poor, many of whom are in the south.

The middle class bears the highest tax burden no doubt. But taxing the rich isnt going to help matters just as taxing business doesnt help since they just pass the increased cost on to the consumer.

It is time for a head tax, payable in cash or labor.

All able bodied persons should have skin in the game, or, forfeit all voting rights and all welfare.

Contrary to "Entitlement Society" Rhetoric, Over Nine-Tenths of Entitlement Benefits Go to Elderly, Disabled, or Working Households


Such beliefs are starkly at odds with the basic facts regarding social programs, the analysis finds. Federal budget and Census data show that, in 2010, 91 percentof the benefit dollars from entitlement and other mandatory programs went to the elderly (people 65 and over), the seriously disabled, and members of working households. People who are neither elderly nor disabled — and do not live in a working household — received only 9 percent of the benefits.

Moreover, the vast bulk of that 9 percent goes for medical care, unemployment insurance benefits (which individuals must have a significant work history to receive), Social Security survivor benefits for the children and spouses of deceased workers, and Social Security benefits for retirees between ages 62 and 64. Seven out of the 9 percentage points go for one of these four purposes.

Contrary to Entitlement Society Rhetoric Over Nine-Tenths of Entitlement Benefits Go to Elderly Disabled or Working Households Center on Budget and Policy Priorities



BOTTOM HALF OF US MAKE 11% OF ALL INCOME. TOP 1% 20%+


Supply-Side Economics Sounds Good But It Hasn't Worked


Supply-Side Economics Sounds Good But It Hasn t Worked Byron Williams

You're missing the point.
Too many people pay nothing into the system so they dont give a rats ass about gov spending.

MORE RIGHT WING NONSENSE. Shocking

The idea that you are putting forth is that the destruction of the middle class is strictly on the right. You couldn't be more wrong. It is BOTH parties of the elite, rich, entitled assholes who control this country from generation to generation. It is the "royal families" who entrench themselves into our government, make themselves Kings and Queens and dole out what THEY deem "fair"

Remember, Bill Clinton is personally responsible for NAFTA - the treaty which shipped nearly 11 million jobs from the United States to Mexico and China. There is MORE than enough blame to go around for these assholes in government.

 

[BlackSand]

The idea that you are putting forth is that the destruction of the middle class is strictly on the right. You couldn't be more wrong. It is BOTH parties of the elite, rich, entitled assholes who control this country from generation to generation. It is the "royal families" who entrench themselves into our government, make themselves Kings and Queens and dole out what THEY deem "fair"

Remember, Bill Clinton is personally responsible for NAFTA - the treaty which shipped nearly 11 million jobs from the United States to Mexico and China. There is MORE than enough blame to go around for these assholes in government.

Damn ... And all this time I thought it was the idiots that keep putting them in office that were responsible.

.

 

[Dad2three]

The middle class bears the highest tax burden no doubt. But taxing the rich isnt going to help matters just as taxing business doesnt help since they just pass the increased cost on to the consumer.

It is time for a head tax, payable in cash or labor.

All able bodied persons should have skin in the game, or, forfeit all voting rights and all welfare.

Contrary to "Entitlement Society" Rhetoric, Over Nine-Tenths of Entitlement Benefits Go to Elderly, Disabled, or Working Households


Such beliefs are starkly at odds with the basic facts regarding social programs, the analysis finds. Federal budget and Census data show that, in 2010, 91 percentof the benefit dollars from entitlement and other mandatory programs went to the elderly (people 65 and over), the seriously disabled, and members of working households. People who are neither elderly nor disabled — and do not live in a working household — received only 9 percent of the benefits.

Moreover, the vast bulk of that 9 percent goes for medical care, unemployment insurance benefits (which individuals must have a significant work history to receive), Social Security survivor benefits for the children and spouses of deceased workers, and Social Security benefits for retirees between ages 62 and 64. Seven out of the 9 percentage points go for one of these four purposes.

Contrary to Entitlement Society Rhetoric Over Nine-Tenths of Entitlement Benefits Go to Elderly Disabled or Working Households Center on Budget and Policy Priorities



BOTTOM HALF OF US MAKE 11% OF ALL INCOME. TOP 1% 20%+


Supply-Side Economics Sounds Good But It Hasn't Worked


Supply-Side Economics Sounds Good But It Hasn t Worked Byron Williams

You're missing the point.
Too many people pay nothing into the system so they dont give a rats ass about gov spending.

MORE RIGHT WING NONSENSE. Shocking

The idea that you are putting forth is that the destruction of the middle class is strictly on the right. You couldn't be more wrong. It is BOTH parties of the elite, rich, entitled assholes who control this country from generation to generation. It is the "royal families" who entrench themselves into our government, make themselves Kings and Queens and dole out what THEY deem "fair"

Remember, Bill Clinton is personally responsible for NAFTA - the treaty which shipped nearly 11 million jobs from the United States to Mexico and China. There is MORE than enough blame to go around for these assholes in government.

BJ Bill, the best conservative Prez since Ike is responsible for Heritage's NAFTA that Ronnie Reagan announced to the world the day he ran for Prez in 1979? The one negotiated by HW Bush and 60% of Dems voted against?

Yep, it's a conservative problem alright!

 

[Dad2three]

I guess in right wing world, economic things like competition and price variables aren't really true? You just up your price if you want the same incomes? lol

Lolz ...You might want to leave business to folks that understand the relationship between price variables and cost variables.

.

Weird, you mean people who "believed" markets would self regulate?

 

[Dad2three]

Yet conservatives swallow the BS fed to them by faux, simply amazing. Conservatives policy for 30+ years is to reward the 1%es and see what trickles down, how has that worked out?

It's worked just fine for me. The only time I get bent out of shape is when a liberal levies yet another tax on me.
Which is why I avoid selling stocks while a dem is in office. I learned my lesson when Clinton was in office and I got my retro active CG tax break when Bush was elected.
It sure would be better for the economy if I did sell,but I'll be damned if I'm giving the gov more money if I dont have to.
Yes,liberal policy hurts the economy.

So no, you can't point to ONE policy conservatives have EVER been on the correct side of history either

Want a Better Economy? History Says Vote Democrat!

From this book loaded with statistical fact tidbits and comparative charts, here are just a few that caused me to realize that my long-term love affair with Milton Friedman‘s writing and recommended policies in “Free to Choose” were grounded in a theory I long admired, but that simply have proven to be myths when applied!

• Personal disposable income has grown nearly 6 times more under Democratic presidents
• Gross Domestic Product (GDP) has grown 7 times more under Democratic presidents
• Corporate profits have grown over 16% more per year under Democratic presidents (they actually declined under Republicans by an average of 4.53%/year)
• Average annual compound return on the stock market has been 18 times greater under Democratic presidents (If you invested $100k for 40 years of Republican administrations you had $126k at the end, if you invested $100k for 40 years of Democrat administrations you had $3.9M at the end)
• Republican presidents added 2.5 times more to the national debt than Democratic presidents
• The two times the economy steered into the ditch (Great Depression and Great Recession) were during Republican, laissez faire administrations

The “how and why” of these results is explained in the book. Not the least of which revolves around the velocity of money and how that changes as wealth moves between different economic classes.


Want a Better Economy History Says Vote Democrat - Forbes

I'm not going to sit here and play that stupid game.
Policy is discussed on this board every single day. And from the results of the last mid term I think it's pretty clear where Americans stand on obamas policies.
You miscreants vote for free shit,conservatives vote for policies that allow them to keep more of the money they actually earned.

MORE right wing bullsh*t. Shocking

Low info voters...

Sure, conservatives vote to put EVERYTHING on the credit card, then blame the next guy for the problem

Have you looked at the debt lately?
Poor little liberal,begging on the street corner isnt enough for ya huh?

90%+ that can be traced back to GOP policy of starve the beast by Ronnie/Dubya? And?

 

[Roadrunner]

The middle class fell for the lie that domestic tranquillity could be ensure by providing bread and circuses to the masses on borrowed money without being taxed sufficiently to pay for it.

The middle class killed itself; it is in its death throes now.

Ain't the Great Society wonderful?

You're close, but not quite there. The middle class fed and clothed itself with bread and circuses to the masses on borrowed money without being sufficiently taxed. They took their fatty share, bought a few houses, and have since been retiring and living off rents, telling the next generation that they're good for nothing lazy idiots who need to learn how to work harder if they can't afford to live 5 in a house. All while calling for the same programs that provided them bread and circuses to be cut, so that they can continue to be insufficiently taxed.

I did not ever imply the self-centered bastards learned their lessons; Obama did get re-elected, and they clamor for Hillary next despite all her crookedness and lies.

Not much changed.

I have a house I culd rent out, but, I refuse to because I consider it immoral.

I will sell it or leave it empty, but never rent it.

Hmmm, I guess that's your choice, though I don't understand it. Not sure what's immoral about it. But your house, your decision.

My point was simply to highlight the fact that much of what you describe takes place along generational divides, and tends to be based on world views developed in the vacuumous ego-centrism of disparate comparisons across the timeline.

Maybe just exploitive, not immoral.

I hate paying interest too, and when I loan money to friends or family, I never charge interest.

I think it's only exploitative if you charge exorbitant rent, are a slum lord, etc. In the past few years especially, as people have tried to cope with the collapse of the housing bubble and pass the buck on their own foolish house purchases for which they overpaid, there has been an influx of people who are viciously trying to make a quick buck off their house with any scheme they can. It's becoming very common for people to rent out houses piecemeal, renting (or trying to, at least) individual rooms in a three or four bedroom house for just barely less than an apartment. A few years back I was looking for a new place and came across a guy who was renting rooms out of a house for $600 a piece (in that area, a single bedroom would run for $600-$900) who wanted me to rent out the dining room of the house with a blanket pinned up as a door as if it were a bedroom. The place already had 5 bedrooms to it. I rejected it, but a few months later I found out someone who worked where I did ended up renting one of the rooms, and told me that even though the house was less than 10 years old, it was poorly maintained, and the owner was now was cramming a couple of the rooms with two people at $400 a head. The place was also infested with roaches and the landlord refused to exterminate because he said he couldn't afford it. It got me to doing some research and I found out that the owner had bought it in 2007 brand new, and could not have been realistically paying more than $1300 a month mortgage. Here he is pulling in $3k a month in rent off the place and can't be bothered to exterminate, and kept the thermostat padlocked and remote operated for 65* in the winter and 85* in the summer. My poor coworker had a hard time looking for other options because he just barely couldn't afford an apartment on his own and living in a small town made it hard to find someone who was looking for a roommate, in a place that was in his budget. That kind of shit is exploitative.

But if you're offering a fair product at a fair price and are reasonably living up to your landlord responsibilities, then there's nothing exploitative about that. There's someone out there who needs a fair rental home at a fair rental price. You could be the guy who ends up helping them out. If there were more people in the rental market offering fair homes at fair prices, it would suck the wind out of the price gougers who are flooding the place nowadays.

We are entitled to our own beliefs and opinions.

I'd do a lease purchase, I would never rent out a spare house.

Does that bother you?

 

[BlackSand]

Weird, you mean people who "believed" markets would self regulate?

If that was what I had meant ... Then that is what I would have posted.

To the contrary ... I specifically posted in regards to the actual "relationship" between price variables and cost variables.
It isn't theory or voodoo economics ... At least not to someone that knows business.
.

 

[BlackSand]

We are entitled to our own beliefs and opinions.

I'd do a lease purchase, I would never rent out a spare house.

Does that bother you?

That is a smart idea ... And helps someone who may not be able to get a loan invest towards a house ... As long as they pay on time.
At least if we have the same idea as to what a lease purchase is ... Like lease to own.

.

 

[Dad2three]

Weird, you mean people who "believed" markets would self regulate?

If that was what I had meant ... Then that is what I would have posted.

To the contrary ... I specifically posted in regards to the actual "relationship" between price variables and cost variables.
It isn't theory or voodoo economics ... At least not to someone that knows business.
.

So you CAN'T back up the other poster AND you can't refute my post. Got it Bubs