What happened to all of the doom and gloom economic threads?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Your taxes? You don't pay tax as clearly evidenced by your 24/7/365 presence on these boards. In fact, have you EVER paid taxes?

this is a jeninflorida-type attack.

you're obviously intelligent and astute. please don't lower yourself to her standards. especially with busybody; he gives you so much material with which to work.
 
That's what you should rename one of your alts.

hey SCHMUCK

might as well can the shit remarks to me

I DONT GIVE A FLYING FUCK YOU ASSHOLE

I would REJOICE seeing you cut to pieces and 100 Muslims PISS on yoru CARCASS
 
Many Rich University Presidents Don’t Pay Taxes
by Nathan Harden - Fix Editor on December 10, 2012

Print This Post Print This Post Money_CashWhile many wealthy university presidents favor high taxes, many of them don’t pay taxes on their own income. According to the Chronicle for Higher Education, half of the nation’s 50 highest-paid college presidents had their taxes paid for them by the universities they lead.

As a group, university presidents are are generally outspoken advocates of tax-and-spend, big-government liberalism. That’s not surprising in light of the liberal bent of academia, as well as the fact that most large universities survive on tens or even hundreds of millions of government grants and federal aid dollars.

They want you to pay high taxes so that the government can pass the money to their institutions. But they don’t pay taxes out of their own pockets, despite their huge salaries.

Among the 50 highest-paid private-college presidents in 2010, half led institutions that provided top executives with cash to cover taxes on bonuses and other benefits, a Chronicle analysis has found. This practice, known as “grossing up,” has fallen out of fashion at many publicly traded companies, where boards have decided the perk is simply not worth the shareholder outrage it can invite.

“Those arrangements became radioactive over the last 10 years,” said Mark A. Borges, an expert on executive pay and a principal at Compensia, a consulting company.

Regardless of the amount of money involved, people typically recoil when they learn that an organization’s wealthiest employees are given help covering taxes, Mr. Borges said. In the throes of a national debate about tax fairness, those kinds of payments reinforce the perception that the well-off play by a different set of rules. They also point toward the significant bargaining power that presidents have in contract negotiations.

“The whole issue of paying people’s taxes on their behalf grates on people,” Mr. Borges said.

No matter what they pay in taxes, many private-college presidents occupy a rarefied financial position. In 2010, 36 private-college presidents earned more than $1-million, according to the most recent federal tax filings. The median compensation was $396,649. That figure represents a 2.8-percent increase over 2009.

You don’t need a college degree to know the word for this kind of thing–HYPOCRISY.
 
As if the apparatchiks on the California Air Resources Board really give a hoot in Hell about whether or not business is successful in California.:rolleyes:


Californians could face ‘double taxation’ with state, federal carbon taxes


Last month, environmentalists cheered as California launched a cap-and-trade program, but talks of a federal carbon tax raised concerns about double taxation.

The San Francisco Chronicle reports that while the chances of a federal tax on carbon emissions being adopted are still remote, California state officials are worried enough to have started discussing the prospect.

“We are aware that it is a possibility, and we have been considering it as of late,” said California Air Resources Board spokesman Stanley Young. “We want to make sure that California companies continue to transition into the program without any sort of disadvantage.”



Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/12/09/c...ith-state-federal-carbon-taxes/#ixzz2Efy3atGe


Two taxes on one item aren't double taxation anymore than areas where there is state and local property tax. Many conservatives want a flat tax system with a VAT in addition to state sales tax, are you going to call that double taxation as well?
 
Many Rich University Presidents Don’t Pay Taxes
by Nathan Harden - Fix Editor on December 10, 2012

Print This Post Print This Post Money_CashWhile many wealthy university presidents favor high taxes, many of them don’t pay taxes on their own income. According to the Chronicle for Higher Education, half of the nation’s 50 highest-paid college presidents had their taxes paid for them by the universities they lead.

As a group, university presidents are are generally outspoken advocates of tax-and-spend, big-government liberalism. That’s not surprising in light of the liberal bent of academia, as well as the fact that most large universities survive on tens or even hundreds of millions of government grants and federal aid dollars.

They want you to pay high taxes so that the government can pass the money to their institutions. But they don’t pay taxes out of their own pockets, despite their huge salaries.

Among the 50 highest-paid private-college presidents in 2010, half led institutions that provided top executives with cash to cover taxes on bonuses and other benefits, a Chronicle analysis has found. This practice, known as “grossing up,” has fallen out of fashion at many publicly traded companies, where boards have decided the perk is simply not worth the shareholder outrage it can invite.

“Those arrangements became radioactive over the last 10 years,” said Mark A. Borges, an expert on executive pay and a principal at Compensia, a consulting company.

Regardless of the amount of money involved, people typically recoil when they learn that an organization’s wealthiest employees are given help covering taxes, Mr. Borges said. In the throes of a national debate about tax fairness, those kinds of payments reinforce the perception that the well-off play by a different set of rules. They also point toward the significant bargaining power that presidents have in contract negotiations.

“The whole issue of paying people’s taxes on their behalf grates on people,” Mr. Borges said.

No matter what they pay in taxes, many private-college presidents occupy a rarefied financial position. In 2010, 36 private-college presidents earned more than $1-million, according to the most recent federal tax filings. The median compensation was $396,649. That figure represents a 2.8-percent increase over 2009.

You don’t need a college degree to know the word for this kind of thing–HYPOCRISY.

I wasn't going to comment til I saw this, Busybody. I read the Chronicle of Higher Ed article this morning. It was a good article. For example, the head of (I think) Pacific Lutheran University makes a very nice salary like many of the other people listed. I can't remember if he gets cash to pay his taxes with or not. But, yeah, a lot of people in higher ed make good salaries, especially at private universities. It's similar to the corporate world. When you reach a certain level, there are usually more "perks" and "entitlements" than an average worker gets or expects. However, it's been my experience that higher ed is more cut throat. Just sayin.

:rose:
 
Per Household Welfare Spending Exceeds Median Income

The tipping point is where so many people are gorging at the government teat that they will vote for whomever is most likely to keep the free money flowing, no matter how conspicuously awful that person might be as a leader. Here we see how our liberal rulers managed to push a once proud country to this point and past it:

welfare-spending-per-day

“Based on data from the Congressional Research Service, cumulative spending on means-tested federal welfare programs, if converted into cash, would equal $167.65 per day per household living below the poverty level,” writes the minority side of the Senate Budget Committee. “By comparison, the median household income in 2011 of $50,054 equals $137.13 per day. Additionally, spending on federal welfare benefits, if converted into cash payments, equals enough to provide $30.60 per hour, 40 hours per week, to each household living below poverty. The median household hourly wage is $25.03. After accounting for federal taxes, the median hourly wage drops to between $21.50 and $23.45, depending on a household’s deductions and filing status. State and local taxes further reduce the median household’s hourly earnings. By contrast, welfare benefits are not taxed.”

Except to the shrinking minority that has managed to preserve some moral integrity despite the incessant onslaught of liberalism, it doesn’t make sense to work for a living, now that voting for a living is more remunerative.

De Tocqueville warned us long ago that our democratic republic would only last until people figured out they could vote themselves everyone else’s money. Unless we rediscover the politically incorrect concept of theft being wrong, we are past democratic solutions to the obviously unsustainable state of affairs. Our only remaining hope may be that America will be rebuilt as if was, but with a constitutional prohibition against welfare, after the inevitable total collapse. However, given the extent to which liberalism has corroded our national character, authoritarian collectivism is a more likely outcome.
 
Good news, California is DONE

Better news, BronkOH!bama is leading the US that way as well


Only In California: School Owes $1 Billion On $100 Million 'PayDay' Loan
These three letters - C.A.B. - might just be the Dis-Humor story of the day. NPR reports that more than 200 schools across California are coming to the shocking realization that the upfront cash they needed so badly came at quite a price. These 'Capital Appreciation Bonds' are unlike normal bonds (requiring regular coupon payments and principal repayment); instead they provide the 'lent' money upfront and defer all interest and repayment to some magical faery land time in the future (by which time the interest accrued has grown exponentially as the interest accrues on the rising 'principal plus previously accrued interest'). Brilliant - as the Guinness chaps might say. So California schools are now undertaking PayDay or loan-shark style loans defending the idiocy of super-short-term thinking with such statements as "Why would you leave $25 million on the table?" referring to the upfront cash that one Treasurer was able to get his hands on - with clearly no comprehension of the financial instrument's massive convexity. California State Treasurer Bill Lockyer said "It's the school district equivalent of a payday loan or a balloon payment that you might obligate yourself for, so you don't pay for, maybe, 20 years - and suddenly you have a spike... It's so irresponsible."
There has to be some lesson in here - some philosophical reflection on our society's complete and utter inability to see beyond the next cashflow need... Simply mind-blowing...

Via NPR:
More than 200 school districts across California are taking a second look at the high price of the debt they've taken on using risky financial arrangements. Collectively, the districts have borrowed billions in loans that defer payments for years — leaving many districts owing far more than they borrowed.

In 2010, officials at the West Contra Costa School District, just east of San Francisco, were in a bind. The district needed $2.5 million to help secure a federally subsidized $25 million loan to build a badly needed elementary school.

Charles Ramsey, president of the school board, says he needed that $2.5 million upfront, but the district didn't have it.

"We'd be foolish not to take advantage of getting $25 million" when the district had to spend just $2.5 million to get it, Ramsey says. "The only way we could do it was with a [capital appreciation bond]."

Those bonds, known as CABs, are unlike typical bonds, where a school district is required to make immediate and regular payments. Instead, CABs allow districts to defer payments well into the future — by which time lots of interest has accrued.

In the West Contra Costa Schools' case, that $2.5 million bond will cost the district a whopping $34 million to repay.

'The School District Equivalent Of A Payday Loan'

Ramsey says it was a good deal, because his district is getting a brand-new $25 million school. "You'd take that any day," he says. "Why would you leave $25 million on the table? You would never leave $25 million on the table."

But that doesn't make the arrangement a good deal, says California State Treasurer Bill Lockyer. "It's the school district equivalent of a payday loan or a balloon payment that you might obligate yourself for," Lockyer says. "So you don't pay for, maybe, 20 years — and suddenly you have a spike in interest rates that's extraordinary."

Lockyer is poring through a database collected by the Los Angeles Times of school districts that have recently used capital appreciation bonds. In total, districts have borrowed about $3 billion to finance new school construction, maintenance and educational materials. But the actual payback on those loans will exceed $16 billion.

Some of the bonds can be refinanced, but most cannot, Lockyer says.

Perhaps the best example of the CAB issue is suburban San Diego's Poway Unified School District, which borrowed a little more than $100 million. But "debt service will be almost $1 billion," Lockyer says. "So, over nine times amount of the borrowing. There are worse ones, but that's pretty bad."

A Statewide Problem

The superintendent of the Poway School District, John Collins, wasn't available for comment. But he recently defended his district's use of capital appreciation bonds in an interview with San Diego's KPBS Investigative Newsource.

"Poway has done nothing different than every other district in the state of California," Collins told the program.

And he's right. In some cases, districts are on the hook to pay back anywhere between 10 and even 20 times the amount they borrowed.

But Lockyer says it distresses him to hear school officials defend these bonds.

"It's so irresponsible, that if I were on a school board — which I was, 40 years ago — I would get rid of that superintendent," Lockyer says.

Back in the '90s, the state of Michigan banned capital appreciation bonds altogether. But Lockyer says California needn't go that far. He supports a series of reforms such as capping the payback of debt to four times the amount borrowed. Otherwise, says Lockyer, these bonds will be paid well into the future, by the children of today's students.
 
If we do nothing our debt in 2022 will be 22.8 trillion. If Obama gets his plan passed it will be 22.4 trillion. If Boner's plan is agreed to it will be 22.2 trillion. That's all the bullshit is about folks. We're looking at an economic disaster in all cases. Spending must be cut or our children will have no future.

That's kind of all or nothing, gloom and doom. More revenue is needed as well as spending cuts.
 
His numbers also make two major assumptions. The first is that the deficit won't continue to shrink all on it's own. Which there is no reason to believe it won't as the wars continue to wind down and taxes go up and the economy continues to improve. Also by 2022 I'd expect enough inflation to have hit that 22.4 Trillion won't be the end of America anymore than 16 ended us, or 10.
 
Well, his command of English isn't good enough for a Mexican, but the welfare scrounger fits pretty well.

I'm not going to stand up for BB.

I finally reached the conclusion that he's Karl Rove crazy.

But you need to be more alert.

He's as smart as anyone on this board.

He abuses language by design. As do many propagandists.

Fine tune your observational skills. And your retorts.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top