New Hires in UAW Now Get Just $14 an hour
in [Drive]
|
From: Dave Head on 25 Jun 2010 23:44 On Fri, 25 Jun 2010 23:09:32 -0400, lil abner <@daisy.mae> wrote: >The "Fair Tax" is a regressive tax. Those that spend the highest >proportion of their income pay the highest tax rate. Those at or below the poverty level don't pay a penny of the fair tax. Those that spend 2X the poverty level pay at 1/2 the Fair Tax rate. Those that spend 3X the poverty level pay at 2/3rds the Fair Tax rate. Doesn't sound regressive to me... >Tycoons and Billionaires really like the "Fair Tax" because they would >pay practically nothing. How's that? They go out to a shipyard in California and order a $50M yacht, they're going to have to cough up a serious pile of money. When they buy their $8M mansions, they're going to have to cough up a serious pile of money. And... all those rich folks that have a huge pile of $$$ sitting around, and are just spending a little of it every year to live high on the hog, are going to have to cough up a serious pile of money... >My taxes are high enough. No thanks. If we become a Multi Millionaire I >might change my position but I don't think so Each person's individual taxes will go down. That's 'cuz of all the help we'll be getting from the criminals that never paid any taxes and certain rich folk mentioned above that have never paid any taxes and those that have sequestered their $$$$ overseas, both legally and illegally, that still buy the fun stuff (Ferrarri's, mansions, etc.) but never paid any taxes, and even tourists, of which there are 45 - 56 million every year and, if they spend $5K or so each on average, well, that's a serious pile of money too. The illegal aliens will also be getting hammered (yahoo!!!!)
From: Dave Head on 25 Jun 2010 23:53 On Sat, 26 Jun 2010 03:38:11 +0000 (UTC), Brent <tetraethylleadREMOVETHIS(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >On 2010-06-26, Dave Head <rally2xs(a)att.net> wrote: > >> I can. Its called the Fair Tax. > >I got a better idea, it's called the no tax. Eliminate taxes starting >with the income tax and the SS ponzi scheme. > >> The best thing about the Fair Tax is that it gets rid of the income >> taxes - all of 'em - personal, corporate, self employment, capital >> gains, gift, alternative minimum, estate, social security, medicare, >> etc. etc. > >For about a year. 10 tops. Then we'll have the "fair tax" and everything >else. > >> And the criminals would be paying taxes, and tourists would be paying >> taxes, > >The criminals, those of any consequence, wash their money through the >banks. That's very profitable for the banks. Good luck shutting that >down. > >> But THAT would stop the exodus of jobs out of the country (the income >> tax is what's causing it, btw, not the labor rates - > >And hence why the income tax needs to be eliminated and replaced with >nothing. Closing down the world wide empire and ability of those in >elected and non elected office to play a giant game of risk across the >globe would offset the loss of the income tax. > >> American cars, and lots of other stuff are ALMOST competititve now. If >> we knock a 40% tax out of the equation, how will American business >> compete both domestically and internationally? Much, much better than >> they do now is the answer. >> >> Yeah, I think the Fair Tax would save our country. Do I think it'll >> happen? Nope - its so fantastic to have an actual answer, that I >> don't think enough people will believe it to make it happen. Read the >> link - study it for a few months - see for yourself. > >We'll just get taxed double that way. Replace it with no tax, eh? So you're an anarchists, favoring no gov't at all? That's what you get when you don't fund your gov't, and no tax at all would result in a defunded gov't.
From: lil abner on 26 Jun 2010 00:05 Brent wrote: > On 2010-06-26, lil abner <> wrote: >> Brent wrote: >>> On 2010-06-26, lil abner <> wrote: >>> >>>> I can't address how much GM makes but there is 40% somewhere between >>>> production and the showroom. >>> GM hasn't made 40% margin in decades if even in my life time. I remember >>> when I was in high school and reading a lot about cars and the >>> automotive business that one year GM's NET PROFIT was $17 per vehicle. >>> Yes, $17. >>> >>>> I can't count the times Dealers have told >>>> me they are losing money on every sale but the next time you look they >>>> are expanding. The Ceo and Board are making billions. they effectively >>>> control to the point of ownership, or use to anyway. >>>> All that aside labor is worth whatever they can get it for. The workers >>>> that unionize are trying to preserve their interests in the companies >>>> and a decent wage. The Company is trying to destroy unions and get labor >>>> as cheap as possible. depressing real wages is in Wall Street's interest >>>> not America's. The idea that Americans should start living and working >>>> like slave labor in China is unacceptable. is this our Country or Global >>>> Banking and Merchants? >>> Killing companies by forcing them to pay inflated wages is part of how >>> those you rant about above profit and expand their power. >>> >>> You want big wages? Restore/create the free market so people can be >>> productive. Higher productivity = higher wages. Simple as that. >>> >>> >> Illogical. Free Market or Fair Trade does not exist. > > Re-read. I said it didn't exist, it needs to be restored/created. > >> American politicians are not trying to preserve American >> Citizens or industry as the world leaders. They are trying to drive down >> America to Global ism's holy grail of equal poverty for the globe. They >> want to transfer our wealth to places where their are no resources or >> much wealth production so they can make a profit off them too. >> too hell with American sovereignty and the Republic and Americans. >> the rest of the world is looking to their interests. Our politicians and >> Wall Street is looking to their interest not ours. >> If our Leaders don't look to our interest sure as hell no one else will. >> I;m not interested in what is fair for India or Mexico's billionaires or >> any place else. >> I'm interested in what is best for American Citizens first last and >> always. Like I said they are looking out for themselves. It is about >> time our Leaders started looking out for our interests. >> A day's pay for a day's labor is apparently an American concept and >> Globalist Bankers and Merchants are trying to kill it and bring us into >> line with the third world. > > How does forcing companies to pay higher wages and then go under solve > the problem? It doesn't. It makes it worse. You need to attack the > underlying problem. The root cause. start with the all powerful > government that has eliminated the free market from which high > productivity, high wages, and low costs come from. > > There is no forcing. It is just bringing back American economics. We out competed the world with rising incomes and low taxation and had the American Dream. They are conforming us to their tinkle down economics an supplier side government and economics. Instead of responding to demand and labor supply they are bringing in Illegals and shipping out jobs and so on and on. Too tired to start this. Just think about it logically and in our interest. I;m not concerned if Swiss Bankers Association survives or not. I;m concerned about America and the American Dream for our kids and their kids.
From: Brent on 26 Jun 2010 00:21 On 2010-06-26, lil abner <> wrote: > Brent wrote: >> On 2010-06-26, lil abner <> wrote: >>> Brent wrote: >>>> On 2010-06-26, lil abner <> wrote: >>>> >>>>> I can't address how much GM makes but there is 40% somewhere between >>>>> production and the showroom. >>>> GM hasn't made 40% margin in decades if even in my life time. I remember >>>> when I was in high school and reading a lot about cars and the >>>> automotive business that one year GM's NET PROFIT was $17 per vehicle. >>>> Yes, $17. >>>> >>>>> I can't count the times Dealers have told >>>>> me they are losing money on every sale but the next time you look they >>>>> are expanding. The Ceo and Board are making billions. they effectively >>>>> control to the point of ownership, or use to anyway. >>>>> All that aside labor is worth whatever they can get it for. The workers >>>>> that unionize are trying to preserve their interests in the companies >>>>> and a decent wage. The Company is trying to destroy unions and get labor >>>>> as cheap as possible. depressing real wages is in Wall Street's interest >>>>> not America's. The idea that Americans should start living and working >>>>> like slave labor in China is unacceptable. is this our Country or Global >>>>> Banking and Merchants? >>>> Killing companies by forcing them to pay inflated wages is part of how >>>> those you rant about above profit and expand their power. >>>> >>>> You want big wages? Restore/create the free market so people can be >>>> productive. Higher productivity = higher wages. Simple as that. >>>> >>>> >>> Illogical. Free Market or Fair Trade does not exist. >> >> Re-read. I said it didn't exist, it needs to be restored/created. >> >>> American politicians are not trying to preserve American >>> Citizens or industry as the world leaders. They are trying to drive down >>> America to Global ism's holy grail of equal poverty for the globe. They >>> want to transfer our wealth to places where their are no resources or >>> much wealth production so they can make a profit off them too. >>> too hell with American sovereignty and the Republic and Americans. >>> the rest of the world is looking to their interests. Our politicians and >>> Wall Street is looking to their interest not ours. >>> If our Leaders don't look to our interest sure as hell no one else will. >>> I;m not interested in what is fair for India or Mexico's billionaires or >>> any place else. >>> I'm interested in what is best for American Citizens first last and >>> always. Like I said they are looking out for themselves. It is about >>> time our Leaders started looking out for our interests. >>> A day's pay for a day's labor is apparently an American concept and >>> Globalist Bankers and Merchants are trying to kill it and bring us into >>> line with the third world. >> >> How does forcing companies to pay higher wages and then go under solve >> the problem? It doesn't. It makes it worse. You need to attack the >> underlying problem. The root cause. start with the all powerful >> government that has eliminated the free market from which high >> productivity, high wages, and low costs come from. >> >> > There is no forcing. It is just bringing back American economics. That means a free market. UAW uses force (on workers) and extortion (on automakers) to achieve higher than market wages. > We out competed the world with rising incomes and low taxation and had > the American Dream. through productivity. > They are conforming us to their tinkle down economics an supplier side > government and economics. No, it went to a central banking fiat money system. > Instead of responding to demand and labor supply they are bringing in > Illegals and shipping out jobs and so on and on. Thank the minimum wage and other economic interventions which make certain jobs viable only to those that are working outside the law. > Too tired to start this. Just think about it logically and in our > interest. I;m not concerned if Swiss Bankers Association survives or > not. I;m concerned about America and the American Dream for our kids and > their kids. Swiss? The Swiss are fine. You want goldman sachs, JP morgan, Chase, Citi, etc.
From: Brent on 26 Jun 2010 00:25
On 2010-06-26, Dave Head <rally2xs(a)att.net> wrote: > On Sat, 26 Jun 2010 03:38:11 +0000 (UTC), Brent ><tetraethylleadREMOVETHIS(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > >>On 2010-06-26, Dave Head <rally2xs(a)att.net> wrote: >> >>> I can. Its called the Fair Tax. >> >>I got a better idea, it's called the no tax. Eliminate taxes starting >>with the income tax and the SS ponzi scheme. >> >>> The best thing about the Fair Tax is that it gets rid of the income >>> taxes - all of 'em - personal, corporate, self employment, capital >>> gains, gift, alternative minimum, estate, social security, medicare, >>> etc. etc. >> >>For about a year. 10 tops. Then we'll have the "fair tax" and everything >>else. >> >>> And the criminals would be paying taxes, and tourists would be paying >>> taxes, >> >>The criminals, those of any consequence, wash their money through the >>banks. That's very profitable for the banks. Good luck shutting that >>down. >> >>> But THAT would stop the exodus of jobs out of the country (the income >>> tax is what's causing it, btw, not the labor rates - >> >>And hence why the income tax needs to be eliminated and replaced with >>nothing. Closing down the world wide empire and ability of those in >>elected and non elected office to play a giant game of risk across the >>globe would offset the loss of the income tax. >> >>> American cars, and lots of other stuff are ALMOST competititve now. If >>> we knock a 40% tax out of the equation, how will American business >>> compete both domestically and internationally? Much, much better than >>> they do now is the answer. >>> >>> Yeah, I think the Fair Tax would save our country. Do I think it'll >>> happen? Nope - its so fantastic to have an actual answer, that I >>> don't think enough people will believe it to make it happen. Read the >>> link - study it for a few months - see for yourself. >> >>We'll just get taxed double that way. > > Replace it with no tax, eh? So you're an anarchists, favoring no > gov't at all? That's what you get when you don't fund your gov't, and > no tax at all would result in a defunded gov't. The income tax came in with the federal reserve. Neither is needed. We had government before 1913. Also the income tax elimination only takes the federal government back to roughly 1998 funding levels. Do we really need government sucking up such a giantanic amount of GDP as it does today? the bigger the government, the poorer the people no matter how you collect the tax. Plus keep in mind it is through inflation that so many have to pay income tax today. When started the income tax only applied to a very very very tiny percentage of the population and then the rate was very low. |