SKIN IN THE GAME!

Nov 2012
11,395
9,816
nirvana
Got it. The rich have more so they need to be punished for having more even though they worked for it. Success is a crime.
"The real tragedy of the poor is the poverty of their aspirations. "
AdamSmith

Got it. Who cares as long as someone has to pay (except me!)

Got it. But if that is fair then just think how much more fair 100% to infinity would be!

Because your politicians always talk about them but never define who they are. I would assume that you would want to know the most in order to see if you qualify for the checks.

Huh, did you read the question? 15% off what? What is the Median income? Starting at how much and ending at how much?

HOW MUCH?

Forget it. You answered and I accept your answers. Thank you....
I have a better one.

How about giving a large tax break to the large corporations and the wealthy and then hope it trickles down to the average working person. And when it doesn't work the 1st time, try it 2 or 3 more times.

Then when those corporations are flush with cash, rather than let it trickle down, they go on a record breaking stock buyback spree that artificially inflates the market.

Compound that with ridiculous tariffs that crush our farmers and steel industry. And rather than help the small farmer, you give out socialism to the large Con-Agra corporations who in turn buy up more broke small farmers.

Then when the market crashes and causes a recession, blame it on somebody else, say like a former president who fixed mess #2 and hasn't been in office for 3+years.
 
Dec 2015
21,206
22,170
Arizona
I have a better one.

How about giving a large tax break to the large corporations and the wealthy and then hope it trickles down to the average working person. And when it doesn't work the 1st time, try it 2 or 3 more times.

Then when those corporations are flush with cash, rather than let it trickle down, they go on a record breaking stock buyback spree that artificially inflates the market.

Compound that with ridiculous tariffs that crush our farmers and steel industry. And rather than help the small farmer, you give out socialism to the large Con-Agra corporations who in turn buy up more broke small farmers.

Then when the market crashes and causes a recession, blame it on somebody else, say like a former president who fixed mess #2 and hasn't been in office for 3+years.
OH you mean the "Tinkle on" theory?
 
Dec 2018
6,632
1,915
New England
The answer to your question is, I'm not so sure !! I truly don't think the vast majority of them have ever given it much thought if any at all. These are the same highly educated morons that gave us the dot com bubble followed by the housing bubble and "too big to fail" what utter fucking horseshit that was.

They are all so focused on this quarter and this year that they don't stop to consider the real long term effects of their actions. The higher-ups in any larger company have rather finite shelf lives. A few bad quarters, much less a bad year or two, and unless they have an obscene level of trust from the board and major stockholders, they can find themselves being escorted from the building. I think their only real concern is right now. Maximizing profits, and thus their bonuses.

IF they give it any thought they just aren't concerned about it because by the time it becomes an issue, they WON'T be the HMFIC anymore. They'll have collected their bonuses and retired to whatever they see as paradise.

Most companies these days are not experiencing major growth in the market. We're a mature economy and they are all just pillaging customers from each other. Most of their profit increase has come from reducing structural costs. Primarily reducing headcount. Making whoever is left do the work of two or more people. Their reward? Raises that barely cover inflation and the privilege of keeping their jobs.

So bottom line, either they have never stopped to think about it, or they just don't care, because they will have "gotten theirs" and fuck the rest of the world. I think we're starting the see the effects. Even in this robust economy, wages haven't really started to rise more than a few tenths above inflation. Wages have been flat for more than two decades now. Many in the middle class are starting to go backward. The idea that we're calling three percent a robust economy !!

I worry we are at a tipping point. I'm no economist, so I'm not sure what needs to happen, but if the middle class doesn't keep up, I fear we'll go crashing backward.
I think you've packed much into that answer, and a good deal of it overly negative, IMO.

Just to focus on two points, I think you're right in that many companies take a short-term, quarter-to-quarter measure of success (I've worked for a few of those) and some are locked in highly competitive markets where there's a scrap for every customer. But think about implications of those observations: how could one survive for long in conditions like those if one didn't focus on the needs of the customer?
 
  • Like
Reactions: FreeToChoose
Mar 2020
1,429
371
Land of Freedom
I have a better one.

How about giving a large tax break to the large corporations and the wealthy and then hope it trickles down to the average working person. And when it doesn't work the 1st time, try it 2 or 3 more times.
They don't need it since they incorporate and already know how to legally avoid taxes through many things such as loopholes and tax subsidies. One way is through finding ways to shift U.S. profits to foreign subsidiaries in countries with lower tax rates, a practice known as offshore tax sheltering. I myself am doing this right now and it is completely legal so no, I don't need your help.

However, I will reward you for your generosity with some help in the form of advice though. Stop being an employee. The problem is too many mouths to feed and you get fed the scraps.

Employee income is the most heavily taxed there is. In the USA you can expect that about half your salary will go to taxes. The tax system is designed to disguise how much you’re really giving up because some of those taxes are paid by your employer, and some are deducted from your paycheck. But you can bet that from your employer’s perspective, all of those taxes are considered part of your pay, as well as any other compensation you receive such as benefits. Even the rent for the office space you consume is considered, so you must generate that much more value to cover it. You might feel supported by your corporate environment, but keep in mind that you’re the one paying for it.

Another chunk of your income goes to owners and investors. That’s a lot of mouths to feed.

It isn’t hard to understand why employees pay the most in taxes relative to their income. After all, who has more control over the tax system? Business owners and investors or employees?

You only get paid a fraction of the real value you generate. Your real salary may be more than three to ten times what you’re paid, but most of that money you’ll never see. It goes straight into other people’s pockets.

What a generous person you are!
 
Mar 2020
1,429
371
Land of Freedom
But think about implications of those observations: how could one survive for long in conditions like those if one didn't focus on the needs of the customer?
It is kind of a trick question and a very well-meaning one. The reality is that company wouldn't even be in the first place. You are a patient man.
 
Dec 2018
6,632
1,915
New England
It is kind of a trick question and a very well-meaning one. The reality is that company wouldn't even be in the first place. You are a patient man.
I think the corporate behaviors that he describes are common. His error is in assuming they’re, per se, a problem.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FreeToChoose
Sep 2014
1,610
214
On the outside, trickling down on the Insiders
All these wonderful ideas for a fair system! Can ANY system based on competition and greed be fair?
What the Cheaters Tell You It Is Discredits the Notion



How would you know? In Postmodern America, you've never seen one. And "greed" leads to overreaching and losing the competition, so that's doesn't contribute to rational competition any more than the guillotine-fodder's hereditary head-start does.
 
Aug 2019
1,450
1,691
Albuquerque, NM
Just another Randian having wet dreams of her fairytale capitalist utopia. What they fail to understand is that we did that once. The late 1800s and early 1900s were the industrial revolution. The REASON was have rules and regulations and labor laws is because unfettered capitalism FAILS society the same way total communism does.

There was no middle class. There were the rich and the working poor. Often whole families had to work, even the kids, just to keep a roof and food. Outside the cities company towns and company stores sucked the wages right out of the workers and back into the owners pockets. That’s exactly what the song Sixteen Tons is all about.

What these Atlas Shrugged devotees fail to realize is the middle class is STILL what drives this country. But most major corporations are doing everything thing they can to kill off the middle class.

Once it’s gone WHO the fuck is going to buy their products and services???
Why they continually suck the D of capitalism is beyond me. Capitalism is terrible and leads to our insane poverty rates, our insane rate of imprisonment, insane cost of living and low wages, teh corruption etc etc etc. WTF is so great about unadulterated Capitlism? it's lead to the deplorable stuff we see in this country.
 
Jul 2014
16,447
10,818
massachusetts
So, you're a moralist, then?

Which candidate or non-candidate that would have been viable had they run, do you think is moral enough to be president?

In my humble opinion, there have only been two truly moral presidents. Meaning they preached a moral life and either lived it or hid any foibles well.

George Washington.

Jimmy Carter.

And George Washington was only moral if you give him a pass on slavery, because of cultural relativism. I don't, but most people do.

Jimmy carter was moral. If there was any thievery in his wealth, his brother never told him about it. He preached and practiced a life of public service, faith in God, fidelity in marriage, and complete honesty in government.

His presidency was a disaster.

So much so that when he flew from Los Angeles, where he made his 1980 concession speech, to DC to start packing, he did not fly over one state that had voted for him.

His presidency coincided with my high school years and I watched him crash and burn and bring the country with him. All the while with good intentions paving the way.

You ever hear another Republican or Democratic presidential candidate who talks like a Sunday school teacher, and I strong recommend taking your money out of the bank and buying gold. People who did that were the only ones who prospered in the Carter years (obvious hyperbole, to make a point).

I was skeptical about Trump to say the least. I thought he was running as a prank, or a publicity stunt or to help Hillary by trashing her opponent in the general.

I was surprised when he won and I was surprised that he has been so great for the country.
You right wing morons will believe anything.
Job growth under Carter was actually greater than job growth under Reagan.
In the last three years of the Obama administration, over a million more jobs were added than during the first three years of the Trump administration. Yeah, that's what really happened.

In the last 80 years, there is 90% correlation with the axiom that when there is a Democrat in the White House, the deficit falls, when there is a Republican in the White House the deficit rises.
And here's one you probably missed, GDP growth averages about 2% higher with a Democrat in the White House.

But that's just reality....
 
  • Like
Reactions: RNG