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

[Disgustipated]

You really are scum no shame what you do I really hope one day when your in jail bubba breaks it off in you but then you might like it.

Does your mom still use? If so, can you let her know she can contact me here? Thanks!

 

[CHNOPS]

Proud drug dealer to the stars? Proud drug dealer to earn money for college? Proud drug dealer to support the idea of cross-border trade routes?

You've got to tell me how it ends. This isn't fair.

 

[thør]

Proud drug dealer to the stars? Proud drug dealer to earn money for college? Proud drug dealer to support the idea of cross-border trade routes?

You've got to tell me how it ends. This isn't fair.

You're talking about Levi's mom, eh?

 

[SevenSquared]

http://cdn.pjmedia.com/eddriscoll/wp-content/blogs.dir/24/files/2012/07/obama_unexpectedly_thumbnail_6-30-11-3.jpg
Looks fine to me!

You can make any graph look terrible by completely butchering the Y-axis to make comparatively small changes look like massive swings.

 

[mercury14]

Liberal chickens come home to roost:

In Maryland, Higher Taxes Chase Out Rich: Study

By: Robert Frank
CNBC Reporter & Editor

A new report says wealthy Maryland residents may be moving out due to recent tax hikes – a finding that is sure to escalate the battle over taxing the American rich.

The study, by the anti-tax group Change Maryland, says that a net 31,000 residents left the state between 2007 and 2010, the tenure of a "millionaire's tax" pushed through by Gov. Martin O'Malley. The tax, which expired in 2010, in imposed a rate of 6.25 percent on incomes of more than $1 million a year.

More here:

http://www.cnbc.com/id/48120446

Did you even read your own link? It was a "study" done by a conservative anti-tax group. And it refused to consider wealthy people moving into the state in its analysis. Furthermore, it didn't ask respondents why they moved. Now I know you have little formal education, but doesn't this sound just a wee bit shady to you? It's almost like this conservative group intentionally avoided doing valid research in order to sell a narrative to stupid people.

Then your article goes on to talk about how actual nonpartisan research has shown no link at all that taxes are driving the wealthy out of Maryland. How come you stopped your C&P right before you got to that part?

 

[busybody..]

Hey, you old homophobe, Vette

What say youbout NIGGERPOONZANDIs comment?

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Yes that's right. As an investor I don't run on opinion. I base my decisions on independent market analysis and consultation with professionals. I do not take into account political propaganda from either side of the spectrum.

How come you do?

Because I'm not investing, I talking about economics.

I let the professionals do most of the picking after we discuss where I want to see my money go...

And, as I showed before, which is why you shut up so quickly, you do have opinions on economic matters and it shows up clearly in your dialogs and diatribes against the "wingers..."

Trying to act like you are an impartial observer in the thread is a ludicrous claim which is easily seen through by one and all.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

As the Joint Committee on Taxation explained, “a very large portion of the insurance industry fee [would] be passed forward to purchasers of insurance in the form of higher premiums.” According to analysis by the actuarial firm Oliver Wyman, this tax could increase premiums for an average family in the small-group market by $6,800 over the decade that starts in 2014. This estimate is in line with other similar calculations.

Former director of the Congressional Budget Office Douglas Holtz-Eakin arrived at a similar conclusion, pegging the impact at about $500 per family each year. Unfortunately, most of these hardest-hit families are those of least means: low-income or middle-class families. In a new policy paper, Holtz-Eakin explained that “roughly 85 percent of the burden” of this new tax “will come out of the wallets of those making less than $100,000.”

The National Federation of Independent Business found that the rise in the cost of employer-sponsored insurance stemming from the health-insurance tax will result in a reduction in private-sector employment by as much as 249,000 jobs by 2021. Half of this job loss would fall on small businesses.

Not only will this tax pinch consumers’ wallets, it will dampen economic growth. This tax increases costs for small-business owners, which discourages them from expanding their companies, creating jobs, and hiring new employees. Since small businesses create roughly two-thirds of new jobs in America and this insurance tax is one of 17 taxes in the health law, it is no surprise that the research firm UBS has described the health-care law as the nation’s “biggest impediment to hiring.”

Finally, despite President Obama’s pledge not to raise taxes on American families making less than $250,000 annually, the health-insurance tax is a direct hit on the pocketbooks of millions of Americans in that category. Indeed, as the Joint Committee on Taxation confirmed, this tax will be passed on to middle-class Americans.

http://www.nationalreview.com/blogs/print/306577

 

[busybody..]

STFU WITH NRO RIGHT WING BS......................


Read books

Not

Blogs


FAGFENDY...............

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

busy? dat you?

I Kant sea U...



I'll bet without me your sigline has grown to proportion obnoxious...

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Anyone really think it's the rich paying for this?

Asked what labor wanted, the great 20th-century union leader Samuel Gompers answered, “More.” The modern welfare state lives by the same credo. About 17 million people received food stamps back in 2000. Some 30 million received them in 2008. Roughly 46 million people receive them today. From 1 in 50 Americans on food stamps at the program’s national inception in the 1970s, 1 in 7 Americans are on them now.

The grinding recession accounts for much of the increase the past few years, but not for its entirety. Spending on food stamps doubled between 2001 and 2006, even though unemployment was low in those years. Even when the economy is projected to improve in the future, usage of food stamps will remain elevated above historic norms. Food Stamp Nation is here to stay.

One of its pillars is so-called categorical eligibility, which means that if someone is eligible for another welfare program, he is presumptively eligible for food stamps. In 2000, the Clinton administration issued regulations saying that merely getting a noncash welfare benefit could make someone eligible. Getting a welfare brochure or being referred to an 800 number for services is enough to qualify in almost all the states. In Vermont, receiving a bookmark with a telephone number and website for services is enough.

Categorical eligibility effectively wiped out the program’s old asset test (i.e., you couldn’t have $30,000 in the bank and get food stamps), although income limitations still apply. In the Obama stimulus, the work requirement was suspended, too, and hasn’t been restored. The requirement had discouraged young, able-bodied nonparents from utilizing the program; there are millions of them on food stamps. The bottom line is that government at all levels actively wants people on the program.

http://www.nationalreview.com/blogs/print/305894

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

I thought the young were living at home with their parents until they were 26...

 

[mercury14]

Because I'm not investing, I talking about economics.

I let the professionals do most of the picking after we discuss where I want to see my money go...

And, as I showed before, which is why you shut up so quickly, you do have opinions on economic matters and it shows up clearly in your dialogs and diatribes against the "wingers..."

Trying to act like you are an impartial observer in the thread is a ludicrous claim which is easily seen through by one and all.

You're not talking about economics, you're talking about right wing politics. But I'm curious about something - you predict doom and gloom and then invest anyway. You must think your opinion is pretty worthless.

Of course I have opinions about economic matters. But what I end up commenting on often times is the right-wing distortion and paranoia. Conservatives here will observe the GDP going from -6.5% to +2%, and then look you in the eye and say the economy hasn't gotten any better. The right wing stupidity here is thick and worthy of mockery.

That's more of a fact than an opinion though.

 

[unregistered]

 

[unregistered]

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

There you go again.

Anything that is not of your "opinion" is "right-wing."

What should I do? Stuff it into a mattress? Cash out and take the tax hit?

The idea that the economy has gotten better belies the numbers, you point to subsets and underperformance as being in the black, but ignore the people numbers which are decidedly in the red; a historical number of people have lost hope for any transformative change.

If you think that this is a healthy economy, then Japan's economy must appear to you to be a robust and booming economy, but I see a nation that went down the path of Obama and Europe before us with exactly the same economic plan that created a Lost Decade and has yet to produce any sort of a recovery, and I predicted two years or more ago that this was going to be the path that Obama was going to lead us on, and, in fact, he has, for he would rather have benefits than true growth for purely LEFT-WING ideological goals and you have been very supportive of him and have vociferously defended his course. Trying to claim otherwise goes past the small sin, of which you have often been guilty of, of lying to us and transgresses into the unpardonable sin of lying to yourself. I still must, in a friendly manner, insist that you seek some professional help and get some balance into your life and shed some of the negativity and hate. It is simply not warranted...

 

[RobDownSouth]

Drop dead, pompous ass. It isn't my story, it's a CNBC story the reporter and editor thought news worthy. Course they didn't know you'd take it all personally. The fact is the state lost revenue and apparently it wasn't replaced by the vast influx of rich folks the "non partisan"government hack Neil Bergsman claimed they left out. The article says:

The cowards on the Fringe Right here routinely flood the board with cut-and-paste, and when they get called out on some of the more implausible jibba-jabba it's always the same: "Oh NOE! I din't say THAT! I just posted the article!"

That way they can have their cake and eat it too: present their viewpoints while avoiding taking personal responsibility for their veracity.

 

[mercury14]

Drop dead, pompous ass. It isn't my story, it's a CNBC story the reporter and editor thought news worthy. Course they didn't know you'd take it all personally. The fact is the state lost revenue and apparently it wasn't replaced by the vast influx of rich folks the "non partisan"government hack Neil Bergsman claimed they left out. The article says:

Many contend that higher taxes drive out the highly mobile rich,

Some argue, however, that there is little real evidence that higher state taxes drive out large numbers of high earners. Some like your hack Neil Bergsman, working hard to protect the status quo.

You accidentally posted a link that debunks your whole point. This has been researched and there's no evidence to support this dumbass conservative religious belief.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Throb sagt, ich gewinnen!

http://www.downinthevalley.com/images/product/medium/164228.jpg

Throb thread:
http://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?t=745068

 

[unregistered]

 

[unregistered]

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

A 2006 article in The Washington Post titled "Old Money, New Money Flee France and Its Wealth Tax" pointed out some of the harm caused by France's wealth tax. The article gave examples of how the tax caused capital flight, brain drain, loss of jobs, and, ultimately, a net loss in tax revenue. Among other things, the article stated, "Éric Pichet, author of a French tax guide, estimates the wealth tax earns the government about $2.6 billion a year but has cost the country more than $125 billion in capital flight since 1998."[6][7]

Due to valuation and accounting difficulties, wealth taxes systems have high management costs, for both the taxpayer and the administrating authorities, compared to other taxes. Per one study in the Netherlands the aggregated cost of the tax’s yield was roughly five times that of income tax.[8]

Wiki

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Chief SwineHumpsDownSouth is up early.

The daily display of the heart of the Democrat Party...




Useful tool.

 

[RobDownSouth]

Wasn't talking to you, Chief

Throb sagt, ich gewinnen!

http://www.downinthevalley.com/images/product/medium/164228.jpg

Throb thread:
http://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?t=745068

Throb sagt, Dances Mit Falsehoods is mein bitch.

Dances mit Falsehoods sagt, Das is NICHT RACIST fur MICH!

 

[RobDownSouth]

Chief SwineHumpsDownSouth is up early.

Brave Vettebigot slings insults behind the safety of "ignore".