So long and thanks for the fish!

[tzor]

No, the dolphins are not leaving; the rich are! They are not going to stand around and take all the taxes that Obama and the Progressives want to throw on them in order to pay with their Statist dreams, so they are leaving. One of the first to announce is the owner of the Independent, a newspaper that covers the Hamptons on Long Island, New York. He is going to sell his 40 million dollar home and move to Tuscany.

Unfortunately the Independent doesn't have that article in text format, but here on page 5 is a copy of the paper where the editor has written the news blurb. First it will be the rich, then what remains of the middle class and only you idiots will be left holding the bag.

[2dimes]

I you're middle class and want to get in on this you best head out now before you're no longer middle class. Just a guess Tuscany isn't the place for you. I'm pretty sure you can't afford to go there allready.

[jbrettlip]

I just love the title of this thread. 42

[Uncle Waldo]

You'll NEVER EVER be able to build a country again like the U.S. or better yet what it was and/or had the potential to be. From a global perspective things began to change slightly for the worse 186 years ago. Things really began to get nuts 151 years ago. Throughout that time, no power broker/psuedogod/Zeus no matter how twisted and/or fucked up he was could bring themselves to destroy it (I think alot of them spent alot of time here growing up). And so it was.......

[Phatscotty]

You'll NEVER EVER be able to build a country again like the U.S. or better yet what it was and/or had the potential to be. From a global perspective things began to change slightly for the worse 186 years ago. Things really began to get nuts 151 years ago. Throughout that time, no power broker/psuedogod/Zeus no matter how twisted and/or fucked up he was could bring themselves to destroy it (I think alot of them spent alot of time here growing up). And so it was.......

[2dimes]

Sure it might have been better in many ways a century or two ago. But I think things were going pretty great from 1998 until recently. There's been a lot of things I've been enjoying and some of them still. I don't think there's any really great up and comming places if you're not really wealthy. I think pockets of North America are going to be ok. There's going to be some nasty slums here too though.

I think in some places it will be pretty similar to 151 years ago soon.

Personally I like listening to loud distorted guitars and drinking ice cold beer I didn't have to make. You just couldn't enjoy that combo pre 1960 and it's peaking now people. Fire grilled beef steak is something I can probably keep up after the power goes out.

[Uncle Waldo]

I know for a fact that it was 1998 that power changed hands and things really started to take a horrible turn for the worse. Just look at that lack of quality music and films produced since then. The media business is the head of the beast in this country. Incidentally things took an additional turn for the worse in 1963, think JFK assasination. Animal House and American Graffitti are both supposed to be 1962 and film makers of both have been quoted as saying that that was the last year before things began to really take a turn for the worse. It's a little by little, year by year, decade by decade change for the worse. It wasn't all bad anti-progressive from 63 to 98. But it's been all bad anti-progressive since 98. I've said this numerous times as of late, in some ways the times we live in right now are worse than the dark ages. Most ways they're not but in some ways they are.

[DAZMCFC]

fucking hell Tzit, I thought you were doing one again. big dissapointment.

[daddy1gringo]

Incidentally things took an additional turn for the worse in 1963, think JFK assasination. Animal House and American Graffitti are both supposed to be 1962 and film makers of both have been quoted as saying that that was the last year before things began to really take a turn for the worse.

Gee, what a coincidence; that's when the supreme court kicked God out of public schools. Just pure coincidence of course.

[AAFitz]

I know for a fact that it was 1998 that power changed hands and things really started to take a horrible turn for the worse. Just look at that lack of quality music and films produced since then. The media business is the head of the beast in this country. Incidentally things took an additional turn for the worse in 1963, think JFK assasination. Animal House and American Graffitti are both supposed to be 1962 and film makers of both have been quoted as saying that that was the last year before things began to really take a turn for the worse. It's a little by little, year by year, decade by decade change for the worse. It wasn't all bad anti-progressive from 63 to 98. But it's been all bad anti-progressive since 98. I've said this numerous times as of late, in some ways the times we live in right now are worse than the dark ages. Most ways they're not but in some ways they are.

Yeah, I wouldnt say that in front of someone from the dark ages.

Except you have one good point about that. I doubt as many then complained about how hard their lives were, and how tough it was.

[MeDeFe]

No, the dolphins are not leaving; the rich are! They are not going to stand around and take all the taxes that Obama and the Progressives want to throw on them in order to pay with their Statist dreams, so they are leaving. One of the first to announce is the owner of the Independent, a newspaper that covers the Hamptons on Long Island, New York. He is going to sell his 40 million dollar home and move to Tuscany.

Unfortunately the Independent doesn't have that article in text format, but here on page 5 is a copy of the paper where the editor has written the news blurb. First it will be the rich, then what remains of the middle class and only you idiots will be left holding the bag.

So what's your suggestion? Lower taxes to make them come back? Every other country follows suite until noone pays taxes anywhere in the world?

[AAFitz]

No, the dolphins are not leaving; the rich are! They are not going to stand around and take all the taxes that Obama and the Progressives want to throw on them in order to pay with their Statist dreams, so they are leaving. One of the first to announce is the owner of the Independent, a newspaper that covers the Hamptons on Long Island, New York. He is going to sell his 40 million dollar home and move to Tuscany.

Unfortunately the Independent doesn't have that article in text format, but here on page 5 is a copy of the paper where the editor has written the news blurb. First it will be the rich, then what remains of the middle class and only you idiots will be left holding the bag.

So what's your suggestion? Lower taxes to make them come back? Every other country follows suite until noone pays taxes anywhere in the world?

no... his suggestion is obviously just make those who arent wealthy enough to leave or have any real economic power beyond a vote continue to provide the governmental support which has often helped so many of those wealthy get that power.

I think its amazing that people dont realize exactly how much money is spent on helping the super-rich maintain that wealth.
The main problem is, the upper middle class have enough, that they confuse themselves as the rich in the country, which is not really the case. It is the fleecing at the top which has eroded this country. It is obviously some waste at the bottom too, but the problem now, is the base tax payer in the middle class, is now struggling after being over taxed for years, while the ultra rich have had many of the benefits from it. But, the money is gone, and now that we are trying to even things out a bit... some are leaving....and its those that just want to even it out a bit, that are getting blamed for them leaving.

No one wants to steal anything from anyone... the goal is to pay a fair share. But when you have that much power and money, fair becomes very easy to corrupt.

[BigBallinStalin]

No, the dolphins are not leaving; the rich are! They are not going to stand around and take all the taxes that Obama and the Progressives want to throw on them in order to pay with their Statist dreams, so they are leaving. One of the first to announce is the owner of the Independent, a newspaper that covers the Hamptons on Long Island, New York. He is going to sell his 40 million dollar home and move to Tuscany.

Unfortunately the Independent doesn't have that article in text format, but here on page 5 is a copy of the paper where the editor has written the news blurb. First it will be the rich, then what remains of the middle class and only you idiots will be left holding the bag.

So what's your suggestion? Lower taxes to make them come back? Every other country follows suite until noone pays taxes anywhere in the world?

no... his suggestion is obviously just make those who arent wealthy enough to leave or have any real economic power beyond a vote continue to provide the governmental support which has often helped so many of those wealthy get that power.

I think its amazing that people dont realize exactly how much money is spent on helping the super-rich maintain that wealth.
The main problem is, the upper middle class have enough, that they confuse themselves as the rich in the country, which is not really the case. It is the fleecing at the top which has eroded this country. It is obviously some waste at the bottom too, but the problem now, is the base tax payer in the middle class, is now struggling after being over taxed for years, while the ultra rich have had many of the benefits from it. But, the money is gone, and now that we are trying to even things out a bit... some are leaving....and its those that just want to even it out a bit, that are getting blamed for them leaving.

No one wants to steal anything from anyone... the goal is to pay a fair share. But when you have that much power and money, fair becomes very easy to corrupt.

How does a few wealthy people leaving the States balance out anything? It's not like there's a MASSIVE flight of wealthy families leaving the country, and this emigration won't even lead to a lack of their hold on this country (the very rich, mind you). Their businesses and/or house may be based elsewhere, but they'll themselves will still be operating whatever they have going on in the US.

Nothing's really going to change whether or not a few wealthy people leave.

[thegreekdog]

As a related to example to BBS's statement... based on the taxes in the current healthcare bill, existing federal taxes, and existing state and local taxes, it is estimated (currently) that wealthy individuals living in New York City could be paying as much as 57% of their income and income-type taxes in a few years. I don't imagine those people will leave New York City, considering that part of the reason they make that money is because they live in New York City. However, those people will certainly attempt to cut costs somewhere... for example, buying less, laying off employees, providing less benefits to employees, and the like.

[AAFitz]

No, the dolphins are not leaving; the rich are! They are not going to stand around and take all the taxes that Obama and the Progressives want to throw on them in order to pay with their Statist dreams, so they are leaving. One of the first to announce is the owner of the Independent, a newspaper that covers the Hamptons on Long Island, New York. He is going to sell his 40 million dollar home and move to Tuscany.

Unfortunately the Independent doesn't have that article in text format, but here on page 5 is a copy of the paper where the editor has written the news blurb. First it will be the rich, then what remains of the middle class and only you idiots will be left holding the bag.

So what's your suggestion? Lower taxes to make them come back? Every other country follows suite until noone pays taxes anywhere in the world?

no... his suggestion is obviously just make those who arent wealthy enough to leave or have any real economic power beyond a vote continue to provide the governmental support which has often helped so many of those wealthy get that power.

I think its amazing that people dont realize exactly how much money is spent on helping the super-rich maintain that wealth.
The main problem is, the upper middle class have enough, that they confuse themselves as the rich in the country, which is not really the case. It is the fleecing at the top which has eroded this country. It is obviously some waste at the bottom too, but the problem now, is the base tax payer in the middle class, is now struggling after being over taxed for years, while the ultra rich have had many of the benefits from it. But, the money is gone, and now that we are trying to even things out a bit... some are leaving....and its those that just want to even it out a bit, that are getting blamed for them leaving.

No one wants to steal anything from anyone... the goal is to pay a fair share. But when you have that much power and money, fair becomes very easy to corrupt.

How does a few wealthy people leaving the States balance out anything? It's not like there's a MASSIVE flight of wealthy families leaving the country, and this emigration won't even lead to a lack of their hold on this country (the very rich, mind you). Their businesses and/or house may be based elsewhere, but they'll themselves will still be operating whatever they have going on in the US.

Nothing's really going to change whether or not a few wealthy people leave.

I never said them leaving will balance anything out...but at the same time, the middle class are simply done being held hostage, which is exactly what "dont tax me or ill leave" is. Its extortion. The damage is done as far as unfair benefits in the past to the wealthy. The bonuses are paid, the tax breaks have been given, the payments for researching "alternative fuels" have been made.

However, that does not mean they have to continue just because they threaten to leave, or that we need to support them any further, with a percentage of our taxes, that is far more relative to average people, just because we dont have the power to run away with the money.

[Titanic]

Oh please, most of these super rich people have most of their money in off shore accounts because they are too cowardly to actually do their duty and pay the taxes they owe. There is not going to be an exodus of rich people from the USA because, like stated earlier, they need to be in the USA to some extent to create the wealth that keeps their lifestyle going.

[thegreekdog]

Oh please, most of these super rich people have most of their money in off shore accounts because they are too cowardly to actually do their duty and pay the taxes they owe. There is not going to be an exodus of rich people from the USA because, like stated earlier, they need to be in the USA to some extent to create the wealth that keeps their lifestyle going.

Just so you know, rich people get taxed on their offshore accounts when that money comes back into the US. In other words, they cannot use that money without it getting taxed.

On a somewhat related note, it's kind of interesting as to what people think are existing tax loopholes.

[BigBallinStalin]

No, the dolphins are not leaving; the rich are! They are not going to stand around and take all the taxes that Obama and the Progressives want to throw on them in order to pay with their Statist dreams, so they are leaving. One of the first to announce is the owner of the Independent, a newspaper that covers the Hamptons on Long Island, New York. He is going to sell his 40 million dollar home and move to Tuscany.

Unfortunately the Independent doesn't have that article in text format, but here on page 5 is a copy of the paper where the editor has written the news blurb. First it will be the rich, then what remains of the middle class and only you idiots will be left holding the bag.

So what's your suggestion? Lower taxes to make them come back? Every other country follows suite until noone pays taxes anywhere in the world?

no... his suggestion is obviously just make those who arent wealthy enough to leave or have any real economic power beyond a vote continue to provide the governmental support which has often helped so many of those wealthy get that power.

I think its amazing that people dont realize exactly how much money is spent on helping the super-rich maintain that wealth.
The main problem is, the upper middle class have enough, that they confuse themselves as the rich in the country, which is not really the case. It is the fleecing at the top which has eroded this country. It is obviously some waste at the bottom too, but the problem now, is the base tax payer in the middle class, is now struggling after being over taxed for years, while the ultra rich have had many of the benefits from it. But, the money is gone, and now that we are trying to even things out a bit... some are leaving....and its those that just want to even it out a bit, that are getting blamed for them leaving.

No one wants to steal anything from anyone... the goal is to pay a fair share. But when you have that much power and money, fair becomes very easy to corrupt.

How does a few wealthy people leaving the States balance out anything? It's not like there's a MASSIVE flight of wealthy families leaving the country, and this emigration won't even lead to a lack of their hold on this country (the very rich, mind you). Their businesses and/or house may be based elsewhere, but they'll themselves will still be operating whatever they have going on in the US.

Nothing's really going to change whether or not a few wealthy people leave.

I never said them leaving will balance anything out...but at the same time, the middle class are simply done being held hostage, which is exactly what "dont tax me or ill leave" is. Its extortion. The damage is done as far as unfair benefits in the past to the wealthy. The bonuses are paid, the tax breaks have been given, the payments for researching "alternative fuels" have been made.

However, that does not mean they have to continue just because they threaten to leave, or that we need to support them any further, with a percentage of our taxes, that is far more relative to average people, just because we dont have the power to run away with the money.

Like I said, not a lot of them are leaving. This damage/extortion that you're talking about seems largely fictional.

You know, I'm pissed too about the maneuverings of the wealthy to wheedle out more money, which may seem unfair to some, but god damn those wealthy people are impressive.

What has the middle class done? Those fools are not powerless. They could protest. What are they protesting? Well, the reasons to protest for your complaint doesn't seem too strong. That, and Americans are generally too complacent and satisfied enough with the status quo, so honestly is there really a problem?

[Titanic]

Oh please, most of these super rich people have most of their money in off shore accounts because they are too cowardly to actually do their duty and pay the taxes they owe. There is not going to be an exodus of rich people from the USA because, like stated earlier, they need to be in the USA to some extent to create the wealth that keeps their lifestyle going.

Just so you know, rich people get taxed on their offshore accounts when that money comes back into the US. In other words, they cannot use that money without it getting taxed.

On a somewhat related note, it's kind of interesting as to what people think are existing tax loopholes.

Well the money in the banks are not getting taxed and all interest is tax free. If there was no benefit to off shore accounts they would not be so common for the wealthy.

BBS: I shocked at how unconcerned a huge amount of Americans are with just how wealthy the top 5% are compared to whats left of the middle class. Whats it, something like 65% of wealth generated now goes to the top 5%...

[thegreekdog]

Oh please, most of these super rich people have most of their money in off shore accounts because they are too cowardly to actually do their duty and pay the taxes they owe. There is not going to be an exodus of rich people from the USA because, like stated earlier, they need to be in the USA to some extent to create the wealth that keeps their lifestyle going.

Just so you know, rich people get taxed on their offshore accounts when that money comes back into the US. In other words, they cannot use that money without it getting taxed.

On a somewhat related note, it's kind of interesting as to what people think are existing tax loopholes.

Well the money in the banks are not getting taxed and all interest is tax free. If there was no benefit to off shore accounts they would not be so common for the wealthy.

BBS: I shocked at how unconcerned a huge amount of Americans are with just how wealthy the top 5% are compared to whats left of the middle class. Whats it, something like 65% of wealth generated now goes to the top 5%...

Wait... two things:

(1) Can you explain to me how someone in the US is earning interest tax-free offshore and when that person uses that money, that interest is not taxed? Because I'd love to give some advice to my clients.

(2) Let's assume that 65% of the wealth generated in the US goes to the top 5% and the remaining 35% goes to the bottom 95%. Explain to me why that is a bad thing? I think you used the term "whats left." Do you know what is left for the middle class after the top 5% get their 65%? Is it $50 or is it $50 billion? I assume that makes a difference right? Maybe I'm jumping to an early conclusion here, but I don't understand why 65% going to 5% is automatically a bad thing.

[bradleybadly]

Oh please, most of these super rich people have most of their money in off shore accounts because they are too cowardly to actually do their duty and pay the taxes they owe.

What is a "super" rich person? What is wrong with being rich? Are the poor or "super" poor more moral or ethical simply because they have less? This all smacks of class warfare imo.

There is no constitutional requirement in our country that those who have more wealth than others must provide for or support those who have less.

There is not going to be an exodus of rich people from the USA because, like stated earlier, they need to be in the USA to some extent to create the wealth that keeps their lifestyle going.

I hope not. We need as many people to stay and use every single resource available to repeal this health care bill, and eventually cut spending and taxes. The U.S. cannot continue on this path that everyone is entitled to social services at the expense of those who are providing jobs. You are correct that the traditional lifestyle of Americans is going to suffer as a result if the rich (evil people that they are) leave.

People don't need social programs as much as they need a steady, reliable source of income in order to pay their bills. If the job creators leave, we're screwed.

[Titanic]

Well the money in the banks are not getting taxed and all interest is tax free. If there was no benefit to off shore accounts they would not be so common for the wealthy.

BBS: I shocked at how unconcerned a huge amount of Americans are with just how wealthy the top 5% are compared to whats left of the middle class. Whats it, something like 65% of wealth generated now goes to the top 5%...

Wait... two things:

(1) Can you explain to me how someone in the US is earning interest tax-free offshore and when that person uses that money, that interest is not taxed? Because I'd love to give some advice to my clients.

(2) Let's assume that 65% of the wealth generated in the US goes to the top 5% and the remaining 35% goes to the bottom 95%. Explain to me why that is a bad thing? I think you used the term "whats left." Do you know what is left for the middle class after the top 5% get their 65%? Is it $50 or is it $50 billion? I assume that makes a difference right? Maybe I'm jumping to an early conclusion here, but I don't understand why 65% going to 5% is automatically a bad thing.

1) Theres a simple reason off shore accounts exist - to save money by avoiding taxes. Why else go through all the hassle to set one up and maintain it?

2) I don't mind people earning more money, but I think that too much inequality is a very bad thing. When so much goes to so few people you are setting up a very bad society. Read "The Spirit Level", which describes through decades of empirical evidence how more equal societies actually have promote and get better levels of education, crime, health, teenage pregnancies etc..

Also, if so much is being taken by so few it means the real drivers of economic growth and prosperity (the middle class) receive a lower proportion hence they are less well off. By "whats left" I was talking about the dwindling middle class (in reality, not what people think they are) with the USA having the greatest economic inequality in the western world and the real wages for the middle class being almost stagnant for 30 years.

[thegreekdog]

You're misunderstanding or dodging my point, and so I will do the typical thegreekdog route and provide an example.

Country A has a wealth disparity. 95% of the wealth goes to 5% of the population. The overall "wealth" is $100,000.

Country B has no wealth disparity. Wealth is equally distributed among the entire population. The overall "wealth" is $1.

Which country is "better off?"

This is my point. For all we say that the middle class is doing poorly, let's take a look at the assets and incomes of the midde class in the US as compared to the middle class in other countries. Alternatively, let's take a look at the assets and incomes of the people in the US by "wealth band" as compared to other countries in the same "wealth band."

I don't think you, or anyone else, can say "look at the wealth disparity in the US" and then make the assumption that something is wrong. I mean, I live here. I see what people have and what they earn and what they spend. Are there people who are struggling? Of course. Do we not want to have such a wealth divide? Sure. Is there a big problem? Nopers.

[MeDeFe]

You're misunderstanding or dodging my point, and so I will do the typical thegreekdog route and provide an example.

Country A has a wealth disparity. 95% of the wealth goes to 5% of the population. The overall "wealth" is $100,000. The population is 100.

Country B has no wealth disparity. Wealth is equally distributed among the entire population. The overall "wealth" is $40,000. The population is 50.

Which country is "better off?"

This is my point. For all we say that the middle class is doing poorly, let's take a look at the assets and incomes of the midde class in the US as compared to the middle class in other countries. Alternatively, let's take a look at the assets and incomes of the people in the US by "wealth band" as compared to other countries in the same "wealth band."

I don't think you, or anyone else, can say "look at the wealth disparity in the US" and then make the assumption that something is wrong. I mean, I live here. I see what people have and what they earn and what they spend. Are there people who are struggling? Of course. Do we not want to have such a wealth divide? Sure. Is there a big problem? Nopers.

FTFY

Let's not be intellectually dishonest.

[thegreekdog]

You're misunderstanding or dodging my point, and so I will do the typical thegreekdog route and provide an example.

Country A has a wealth disparity. 95% of the wealth goes to 5% of the population. The overall "wealth" is $100,000. The population is 100.

Country B has no wealth disparity. Wealth is equally distributed among the entire population. The overall "wealth" is $40,000. The population is 50.

Which country is "better off?"

This is my point. For all we say that the middle class is doing poorly, let's take a look at the assets and incomes of the midde class in the US as compared to the middle class in other countries. Alternatively, let's take a look at the assets and incomes of the people in the US by "wealth band" as compared to other countries in the same "wealth band."

I don't think you, or anyone else, can say "look at the wealth disparity in the US" and then make the assumption that something is wrong. I mean, I live here. I see what people have and what they earn and what they spend. Are there people who are struggling? Of course. Do we not want to have such a wealth divide? Sure. Is there a big problem? Nopers.

FTFY

Let's not be intellectually dishonest.

Two requests:

(1) Can you please stop using internet acronyms? I literally have to look them up every single time.
(2) What did you fix? According to google, FTFY means "fixed that for you."