LightningJoe
New member
But Hillary's constituents will use the $5000 for consumer spending (tennis shoes etc.) while the smart people will invest their $5000 in tennis shoe companies. You can't keep smart people from succeeding.
When will the decline of America reach the point of no return?
- Thread starter grymster2007
- Start date
LightningJoe
New member
The standard idea is the parable of the ant and the grasshopper. The industrious ant ends up wealthy, but the profligate grasshopper ends up destitute. That only works, though, when the ratio's 1:1. If there are one ant and ten grasshoppers, then the grasshoppers vote to tax the ant and have checks mailed to the grasshoppers.
401Ks and IRAs only work for people who can take care of themselves. The day's coming when the other 90% of the population is going to want that money. The line will be that 401Ks and IRAs didn't work because there was no government oversight. So, Congress will gather up all the money in America's retirement plan (your 401K), put it all in one pot, and distribute it fairly.
The first words out of my Thai, Japanese, or Brazillian account manager will be "Emm, no speaka English!"What to hear something really funny? The same people who complain that america is in decline due to lots of vague social and political reasons also claimed that the strength of the euro was evidence of this decline. Is that funny or what? Because europe is way more socialist and more highly regulated and more everything bad, at least by the OP's premise of what constitutes bad.
Still, I sold my gold mining shares the night before last thinking the dollar was ready to go the other way...and for once I was right.
Still, I sold my gold mining shares the night before last thinking the dollar was ready to go the other way...and for once I was right.
You are of course correct on the socialism in europe, but at the same time their tax reporting laws are shall we say, somewhat transparent and snooping by government into someone's bank account is frowned upon in most european countries, not just Switzerland. In short, it's way easier to hide income in europe, something that's been true for a long time and I don't see much signs of that changing.
While here, the federal and state governments take pride in being able to look at your bank balance whenever it pleases them to do so.
grymster2007
New member
I refer to Vietnam, Somalia, Yugoslavia, Iraq. In my opinion we had/have no business fighting these wars, at least not in the manner we have or are. If we really, really need to put the hurt on another country, just bomb the holy crap out of them! Destroy their infrastructure. Make them go away. It’s cheap and easy, but the political fallout can be horrendous and that’s exactly the thing that would make us think twice. With the stupid-ass, drawn out ground wars we seem to prefer, the political price is the same in the long run, but our objectives are rarely met.
I’ll be away for a few days, marrying off the daughter. You fine folks carry on the debate, because I think in the end, we’re all pretty much on the same side!
Northern Sod Breaker
New member
I'll take a stab at this.
First of all When MT. St. Helens blew her top do you have any idea how many tons a green houses gasses were released. Explain to me how this was man made. Everytime an animal, be it a deer, a bear, or any other other wildlife creature exhales it produces CO2, which is a greenhouse gas. Explain to me how this is man made.
Changing pages:...
Explain to me why the earth was on a cooling trend as recently as 30 years ago. Yet humans have been burning large amounts of fossil fuel since the industrial revolution?
To be honest science is an amusement to me. One person proposes a theory and everyone jumps on the bandwagon. Many years ago proven science said the world was flat, then it was round. Science is an oxymoron because it never remains constant. Always changing everytime some half baked idea comes down the road. And personaly I've never had much respect for "book smart" people. They sit in their own little living their little fantasies but if for just once they'd step out they'd see the truth.
Wildalaska
Moderator
Got any empirical evidence of that, or just another fantasy post to fit your weltanshauung..or wait you are extrapolating from this:
http://www.yale.edu/leitner/Tax_Morale_Leitner.pdf
By the way, you miss Justmes point entirely
Wildoyeahimthetaxma-a-anAlaska TM
The Tourist
Moderator
LightningJoe said:
And that day was last Thursday at about 3:00 in the afternoon.
The other day I met with our financial guy to best outline the way my wife is to retire.
In short, the sum of the meeting could be defined as how to keep the the work of a lifetime from being taken.
First off, forget fairness, there isn't going to be any no matter what political flag you fly. I have it, and chances are the government will find a way to take it to stop the whining.
It seems the about the best thing you can do as an individual is to simply stop working. That's right, quit being productive. You start accumulating wealth, and you're a target.
In many ways, I would actually have more spending power (as well as free time) if I just stopped working and lived on Social Security.
If I make too much, the government gets it anyway in increased taxes, and I blunt the amount I get back--after I've paid it in all of my working life--in Social Security checks.
Yep, that was my theory, that is why I am 46 and retired. I can trade stocks on the internet all day, talk to lots of women from eharmony and occasionally visit here. Personally I think it is a pretty good life. I can also earn about a $1,000 a month before they start taking some of my social security. My car and my house are paid for and I have enough money to buy what I need and some of what I want, nobody wants to take my stuff cause I don't have too much, just enough.
LightningJoe
New member
There are things you can do to protect the money you've earned. I'm just saying that the populists of the future (and contemporary Democrats, I think, are mild compared to what's coming) will try to use the special tax status of 401k/IRA accounts as a justification to grab them.
In general, the more money you have, the better off you will be. That's why the typical American astonishes me.
Americans think they're wealthy because they own expensive things. But most of them have no money. They have a negative net worth in many cases. For the rest, they'd have a negative net worth if not for the equity in their houses (which is inherently a bubble phenomenon).
All their wealth is based on the assumption of future earnings (theirs or that of the person they think will buy their house). If that income stream ever stopped or were greatly reduced, the typical American would be pauperized.
Think seven fat cows.
In general, the more money you have, the better off you will be. That's why the typical American astonishes me.
Americans think they're wealthy because they own expensive things. But most of them have no money. They have a negative net worth in many cases. For the rest, they'd have a negative net worth if not for the equity in their houses (which is inherently a bubble phenomenon).
All their wealth is based on the assumption of future earnings (theirs or that of the person they think will buy their house). If that income stream ever stopped or were greatly reduced, the typical American would be pauperized.
Think seven fat cows.
Interesting current event pertaining to the global warming portion of this discussion.
A UK High Court will submit it's formal decision next week but it has announced that the film 'An Inconvienient Truth' isn't such a truth. That it contains a number of scientific inaccuracies, exaggerations and statements about global warming for which there is currently insufficient scientific evidence., promotes partisan views, and amounts to sentimental mush. It cannot be shown to children without informing them that it is an opinion piece and not scientific and that there are other scientific causes for global warming.
As mentioned in previous posts on this thread, the solar cycle has been documented and found to directly correlate with variances in the earths terrestrial and oceanic temperature.
The AP and UPI wire services covered the story but it has gone largely unreported in American News despite being a significant event.
This really is one of those "I don't care about the evidence, I believe it and my opinions are as valid as anything else" type emotional issues.
Between the choice of believing scientist that use the words 'direct evidence that correlates" and those that use words like "very likely based on apparent" I will go with the guys presenting hard evidence over presumptive hypothesis. The difference is one group has facts and has come to a conclusion based on them and the other group has a conclusion and is looking for facts to support it.
Over 100 years of directly correlating evidence shows this to be a solar cycle. Recently it has been discovered that Mars has been having the same effects. I believe our 'carbon footprint' is pretty small and very recent there.
'MAN MADE'.....nope
A UK High Court will submit it's formal decision next week but it has announced that the film 'An Inconvienient Truth' isn't such a truth. That it contains a number of scientific inaccuracies, exaggerations and statements about global warming for which there is currently insufficient scientific evidence., promotes partisan views, and amounts to sentimental mush. It cannot be shown to children without informing them that it is an opinion piece and not scientific and that there are other scientific causes for global warming.
As mentioned in previous posts on this thread, the solar cycle has been documented and found to directly correlate with variances in the earths terrestrial and oceanic temperature.
The AP and UPI wire services covered the story but it has gone largely unreported in American News despite being a significant event.
This really is one of those "I don't care about the evidence, I believe it and my opinions are as valid as anything else" type emotional issues.
Between the choice of believing scientist that use the words 'direct evidence that correlates" and those that use words like "very likely based on apparent" I will go with the guys presenting hard evidence over presumptive hypothesis. The difference is one group has facts and has come to a conclusion based on them and the other group has a conclusion and is looking for facts to support it.
Over 100 years of directly correlating evidence shows this to be a solar cycle. Recently it has been discovered that Mars has been having the same effects. I believe our 'carbon footprint' is pretty small and very recent there.
'MAN MADE'.....nope
Martyn4802
New member
Bruxley,
Very good posting!!!
We have too many people who are hysterical, and want to "believe" the worst scenario, rather than listening to scientists. And, once these hysteics assume their negative position, no amount of scientific evidence can change them. These hysterics always find a leader who has an agenda, driven by money, to lead their charge.
There is a whole lot of arrogance with them too, thinking they have the power to change the climate. The contribution to climate change by humans would equal a grain of sand on a beach, compared to the contribution of the solar system and volcano eruptions.
Martyn
Very good posting!!!
We have too many people who are hysterical, and want to "believe" the worst scenario, rather than listening to scientists. And, once these hysteics assume their negative position, no amount of scientific evidence can change them. These hysterics always find a leader who has an agenda, driven by money, to lead their charge.
There is a whole lot of arrogance with them too, thinking they have the power to change the climate. The contribution to climate change by humans would equal a grain of sand on a beach, compared to the contribution of the solar system and volcano eruptions.
Martyn
I believe in the wisdom of the American people
A long time ago, a friend of mine--a 1st-grade teacher--told me that she wasn't worried about the Russians or anyone else taking over. She said, "They'd just have to kill everyone down to the age of 4 and start over."
When I asked why, she said, "My kids are 5 and 6 and they won't do what I tell them."
She was right. Americans aren't real good at being told what to do. I think that even if the Libs take over, they will assume they have a nonexistent mandate and will inevitably overplay their hand. An enormous backlash will follow (remember Hillary's "health plan"?) and the pendulum will swing back to the right, maybe for decades.
Like the Founders, I have great faith in the people. Most Americans are basically conservative; that's why even Democrats campaign from the right--claiming to respect gunowners' rights, etc.--and then doublecross the voters when they get in. The last 2 Presidential elections were decided by razor-thin margins, and that only because of the perfidy of a massively biased and dishonest press; and as the MSM continue to lose viewers and readers, and as talk radio, Fox News, and the Internet continue to gain them, that advantage will carry less and less weight.
I'll say it again: 20 years ago, permits to carry were few and far between. Even here in Texas--in Texas!--only cops could carry at all. Now the overwhelming majority of the states are "shall issue", and more are soon to follow. Now matter how you slice it, that's an improvement. The tide, in the long run, is FOR freedom, not against it.
I'm a little surprised--and disappointed--that 65% of the members here think it's already too late. There are a lot of things that have made America the greatest country in the history of the world--but saying, "It's too late, let's give up and head for the bunker" isn't one of them.
We've done stupid things before, and it wasn't the End; we survived Prohibition and the Carter administration, and we're still here.
Hell, I even think the British people will eventually reclaim their traditional toughness and orneriness and reclaim their rights. As the crime wave continues over there, more and more of them will wake up. Wait and see.
A long time ago, a friend of mine--a 1st-grade teacher--told me that she wasn't worried about the Russians or anyone else taking over. She said, "They'd just have to kill everyone down to the age of 4 and start over."
When I asked why, she said, "My kids are 5 and 6 and they won't do what I tell them."
She was right. Americans aren't real good at being told what to do. I think that even if the Libs take over, they will assume they have a nonexistent mandate and will inevitably overplay their hand. An enormous backlash will follow (remember Hillary's "health plan"?) and the pendulum will swing back to the right, maybe for decades.
Like the Founders, I have great faith in the people. Most Americans are basically conservative; that's why even Democrats campaign from the right--claiming to respect gunowners' rights, etc.--and then doublecross the voters when they get in. The last 2 Presidential elections were decided by razor-thin margins, and that only because of the perfidy of a massively biased and dishonest press; and as the MSM continue to lose viewers and readers, and as talk radio, Fox News, and the Internet continue to gain them, that advantage will carry less and less weight.
I'll say it again: 20 years ago, permits to carry were few and far between. Even here in Texas--in Texas!--only cops could carry at all. Now the overwhelming majority of the states are "shall issue", and more are soon to follow. Now matter how you slice it, that's an improvement. The tide, in the long run, is FOR freedom, not against it.
I'm a little surprised--and disappointed--that 65% of the members here think it's already too late. There are a lot of things that have made America the greatest country in the history of the world--but saying, "It's too late, let's give up and head for the bunker" isn't one of them.
We've done stupid things before, and it wasn't the End; we survived Prohibition and the Carter administration, and we're still here.
Hell, I even think the British people will eventually reclaim their traditional toughness and orneriness and reclaim their rights. As the crime wave continues over there, more and more of them will wake up. Wait and see.
I write mine all the time, and I have a stack of letters BACK from them. I make my concerns known. And as someone who pays more than their fair share of taxes (I pay a LOT in income taxes every year and YES, I feel I pay too much) I feel I've earned some say so in how some of that money gets spent. So I speak up every time I feel I have to.
The Tourist
Moderator
cnorman18 said:
I believe this to be true, but that's not the sum and substance of deductive reasoning.
Granted, there are places like Japan where there is a solid tradition of just respecting authority. However, we do have 'white coat' syndrome in our country, as well.
For me the thinking is more like being a capable mechanic. An engine breaks down or runs at sub-parr output, so you do a diagnostic and tear the thing apart. If you don't like what you see, you fix it or tune it.
Having said that, there are lots of lazy folks who'll pour a quart of "motor honey" into the crankcase and push the engine until it craps.
I've decided on a third alternative. I'm going to sell the engine to an idiot while it still runs.
I'm not going to be a big target for government. I have paid down debt to avoid interest and live simpler. If I need cash, I'm allowed to make some without hurting my Social Security. And I have always avoided 401(K) plans like anything or anyone who drips.
It's not that I don't love my country. But I'm just doing my part to stand on the oxygen hose. We don't have to support or police the world. Heck, we shouldn't even support most of the people here. We have become an international lint trap for people who are too lazy to fix their own countries, but swim here to drink the gravy.
That's not what I paid taxes for all of those years. And I won't have much of a future at this rate at the hands of my own people.
We're going to have to learn to live with less.
LightningJoe
New member
The American people, sure. But we're importing the inhabitants of Mexico en masse and are likely to grant them citizenship. Do you believe in the wisdom of the Mexican people?