Housing bailout, smoke and mirrors????


Here we go Roy!

What if you received a notice that one of your investments had miraculously gone through the roof and the co was going to issue X-millions or even Billions in dividends.

Then you find out that the majority of the dividend money was going to be given to investors in ultra hi-risk, get rich overnight stocks that had tanked.


How would you feel then?




.
 
Scrambler1 said:
Roy, his point is that allowing people to keep what they have earned is the way it should be. Taking the money and giving it to "x" is spending. People keeping their earned income is not government spending. Giving a "tax credit" to people who pay no taxes is spending.

A major war has boosted the economy in the past. WWII for example. I don't think the US could compete in a war like that again as we no longer have the factories to build ships, tanks, planes, etc by the hundreds or thousands. An example my grandfather and great grandfather owned and operated a shipyard in Savannah Ga before and during WWII. Before the war they had ~100 employees. They bid for and won a contract to build minesweepers and subchasers for the Navy. In less than one year they had 800+ employees. Fast forward to today, the yard is still there, in fact it's for sale. Several companies have owned it since my family but ship building is no longer profitable in the states and the yard sits empty.

Maybe the US could compete in a war on that scale, but I seriously doubt it. That is the scale required. No amount of government spending on infrastructure or programs moves that fast and because of the speed needed there isn't enough time for the politicians to screw it up with political garbage like who can and cannot bid for the work. Also the volume of commodities needed immediately spreads the increase around the country. The government is completely incapable of doing this artificially, too many favors, asses to kiss, pork to waste vast amounts of money on.... just look at the so called stimulus bill.


Joe, I appreciate your interpretation! And I appreciate the point (now).

I guess my issue isn't disagreeing with the point. Rather, I think I am asking, what if we don't do anything? Is there a safety net that says we will not enter an economic spiral that cannot be corrected? I have not seen anyone characterize what the "catastrophe" would actually be for us. So I don't know what is really being forecast. Is it not the role of a government to act to avert catastrophe?

My concern is that if resources are not forthcoming from the people to handle the perceived on set of problems why do we have government at all? Without resources to react to potential issues there is no capability. So what is the difference between a hurricane that has hit and destroyed a city, and a hurricane that is about to hit? Do we not expect the government to do what it thinks is correct...and do we not provide resources and the power to obligate resources to do what they (our elected representatives) think is the correct action?
 
supercar1of1 said:

When you go back in time, is it not true that a society flourishes when the people are left alone to succeed or Fail without government intervention?


.


:congrats: :congrats: :congrats: :congrats: :congrats: :congrats: :congrats:

thewelshm
 
Prof said:
Your comment says much more about you than you should be willing to admit in public.

Sir you are a racist bigot, if the comment above is a true reflection of your feelings.

I feel very sorry for you, for there is no room for that kind of ignorant thinking and statement in a this world. You are much sicker than you realize. Your fear is evidenced by your loathing.



Roy, Ram From Hell is one of, if not THE most intelligent members on this forum. He like myself and some others use language that is very direct or blunt, which seems to bother you more than anyone else.

What amazes me is whether or not you even realize how blunt and abrasive you are when you respond to a members post that you don't aggree with? :p


And I'm not trying to pick, just point somethig out as you so often do.:p :p :p :D :D



.
 
Prof said:
Your comment says much more about you than you should be willing to admit in public.

Sir you are a racist bigot, if the comment above is a true reflection of your feelings.

I feel very sorry for you, for there is no room for that kind of ignorant thinking and statement in a this world. You are much sicker than you realize. Your fear is evidenced by your loathing.

Fear and Loathing was a great film, BTW.:D

...maybe I should have said "yellow dildo"? I was paraphrasing George Carlin, FWIW. Tell me you've never laughed at his jokes.

Whatever the case, I would have been very disappointed had someone not commented on my post. Although, I would have expected a bit less of a knee-jerk response from you. Further, I would have expected your response to be sans name-calling.

My post was a purposefully raw example of the kind of pent up rage that is now building among everyone with the good sense to see that this administration intends to rob us blind.

Am I sick? Yup. Sick, tired, and outraged. Just the kind of emotions my post was intended to illicit.
 
Your comment was pure racism, and bigotry.

I do feel very sorry for you.
 
Ram From Hell said:
Fear and Loathing was a great film, BTW.:D

...maybe I should have said "yellow dildo"? I was paraphrasing George Carlin, FWIW. Tell me you've never laughed at his jokes.

Whatever the case, I would have been very disappointed had someone not commented on my post. Although, I would have expected a bit less of a knee-jerk response from you. Further, I would have expected your response to be sans name-calling.

My post was a purposefully raw example of the kind of pent up rage that is now building among everyone with the good sense to see that this administration intends to rob us blind.

Am I sick? Yup. Sick, tired, and outraged. Just the kind of emotions my post was intended to illicit.





Hey Ram, I voluteered to be the commander of the SouthEast Chapter of the New Hamshire Malitia.:) :)

I think you would be great as the commander of the East Coast Chapter, and will PM the contact info.

We are ready to rock and roll now.:rock: :rock: :rock: :p :D :p :D
 
Lots of good posts here by everyone! There are so many variables to consider. I feel bad for the ones who have already lost their homes before having had an opportunity to save them, and I also see the side of the people who are not in danger of losing their home feeling like they are bearing the burden of the irresponsible. I might also feel the same way if I felt I were being forced to help the irresponsible against my will.

I also know there are many, many people out there, like myself, who were not irresponsible, did live within their means, didn't get a "bad" loan but did, unfortunately, fall victim to the "housing market" crunch/economy and also suffered the loss of income. The bail out probably doesn't segregate the different categories of good people from bad people and good loans from bad loans which does tend to open the door for bitterness from those who feel they are being forced to pay the burdens of the so called irresponsible.

A winner won't quit, but a quitter will never win.

So, in light of the bad that many of us are facing, I hope everyone who finds themselves in a situation that seems unconquerable, will keep their head up and move forward. Educate yourselves, learn something new, stay on top of it and you will overcome!

And for those of you who are fortunate enought to help the others, be thankful that you have it to give in the first place :rock: :rock:

And best of luck to all of us :marchmellow: :marchmellow: :marchmellow:
 
Prof said:
That was a blue ribbon panel John...none of the people he asked for a response is unemployed...like the 7+ % of our nation. Consider the source of the data...but he makes a good point...are we supporting failure or should we support success...it is a never ending question.

In business I have often been faced with the question. If you have a super star department and a lagging department...where do you put your resources? Pour more into the superstars or try to prop up the sagging department? The eternal paradox...


Roy how do you feel about 0 capitol gains for 12 months? and the fairtax www.fairtax.org " The legit stimulas package" Unfortunately we all work for someone that is ( I know this is a bad word) " Rich" I think the trickle down effect with regards to jobs would be instant.


Take me I came to the USA 15 years ago with $75.00 I educated myself and with a lot of hard work went to the top. I invest in property for a hobby and it is very lucrative. If BO and the Dems raise capital gains Im sitting tight for years:mad:

that will affect about 10 of my subs and their families, I donate to several charities and when you have $$$ its the best feeling in the world, but dont take it or mandate others do to share it because govt think its right!!!!!:mad: :mad:

My 10 cents

thewelshm
 
Personally, I am all for revamping the tax system...and the fair tax approach is one of the interesting ones. To me it seems to be consumption based and that does seem much more fair than what we now have.

But a flat tax also (while philosophically different) also has some appeal.

But, much like my political self...who I am and and what I want are often different things. Personally, I can align with much of what many say because as you have heard me say, I am a fiscal conservative. But the paradox is that I am a social liberal (I know that is a contradiction but it is who I am) and in a country with so much wealth it just seems so harsh to me that many deserving and responsible people get left out of the dream.

Now there are those that deserve to be left out, but there are also those that need a hand up...and I just have to believe that we have to find ways to help the deserving. Your contributions to charity are exactly what we are about as Americans...as humans...but I fear that those who are willing to contribute are not sufficient to help those that deserve the help...that is where my social liberalism overrides my fiscal conservative nature...because in my mind people are more important than filling a few more wants in my psyche.

Am I as sick as that sounds?
 
Prof said:
Personally, I am all for revamping the tax system...and the fair tax approach is one of the interesting ones. To me it seems to be consumption based and that does seem much more fair than what we now have.

But a flat tax also (while philosophically different) also has some appeal.

But, much like my political self...who I am and and what I want are often different things. Personally, I can align with much of what many say because as you have heard me say, I am a fiscal conservative. But the paradox is that I am a social liberal (I know that is a contradiction but it is who I am) and in a country with so much wealth it just seems so harsh to me that many deserving and responsible people get left out of the dream.

Now there are those that deserve to be left out, but there are also those that need a hand up...and I just have to believe that we have to find ways to help the deserving. Your contributions to charity are exactly what we are about as Americans...as humans...but I fear that those who are willing to contribute are not sufficient to help those that deserve the help...that is where my social liberalism overrides my fiscal conservative nature...because in my mind people are more important than filling a few more wants in my psyche.


Roy No comment on 0% Capitol gains and the trickle down effect? That one must have slipped by you eh?:D :D :D :D

thewelshm
 
Prof said:
Personally, I am all for revamping the tax system...and the fair tax approach is one of the interesting ones. To me it seems to be consumption based and that does seem much more fair than what we now have.

But a flat tax also (while philosophically different) also has some appeal.

But, much like my political self...who I am and and what I want are often different things. Personally, I can align with much of what many say because as you have heard me say, I am a fiscal conservative. But the paradox is that I am a social liberal (I know that is a contradiction but it is who I am) and in a country with so much wealth it just seems so harsh to me that many deserving and responsible people get left out of the dream.

Now there are those that deserve to be left out, but there are also those that need a hand up...and I just have to believe that we have to find ways to help the deserving. Your contributions to charity are exactly what we are about as Americans...as humans...but I fear that those who are willing to contribute are not sufficient to help those that deserve the help...that is where my social liberalism overrides my fiscal conservative nature...because in my mind people are more important than filling a few more wants in my psyche.

Am I as sick as that sounds?





Here Here Roy!:rock: :congrats: You have redeemed yourself with your view on taxes:congrats: :congrats: :congrats:


As far as your feelings about helping those that are deserving, I feel the same way, but here is the problem. You will never get two people to agree on who is deserving of a hand up, and it is wrong for anyone to take by force others property and give to some stranger that the taker thinks is deserving.

I just took a call from a probably now EX-friend wanting me to sign a friend of his sons bond who is in jail. I checked and the kid was on probation for burglary and then failed to show up for court after getting charged with DUI,OBSTRUTION, and false ID. He is in jail because he was caught burglarizing another business. Because of all this his bond was set at over $60K. I told him there was no way I would sign this idiots bond but my (again probably now EX-friend))kept going on about what a good kid he actually was and how rough it was on his family with him in jail. I finally about hung up on him.

Granted, if it were my son I might feel different, but there's the problem with forced charity or aid in a free society. Under the Dem's policy I would be on my way to bond this guy out because some other person thought I should.

Roy, In this country the government should keep the playing field level, not try to coach the game.




.
 
THEWELSHM said:
Roy No comment on 0% Capitol gains and the trickle down effect? That one must have slipped by you eh?:D :D :D :D

thewelshm


I think the trickle down effect works...but the result at the bottom of the trickle (where the most help is needed) is pretty meager.

Again personally, I love the concept of no capitol gains tax. But my heart bleeds for some of those that benefit from the distribution of capitol gains. I more than most will be sorry and happy no matter what happens...
 
supercar1of1 said:

Here Here Roy!:rock: :congrats: You have redeemed yourself with your view on taxes:congrats: :congrats: :congrats:


As far as your feelings about helping those that are deserving, I feel the same way, but here is the problem. You will never get two people to agree on who is deserving of a hand up, and it is wrong for anyone to take by force others property and give to some stranger that the taker thinks is deserving.

I just took a call from a probably now EX-friend wanting me to sign a friend of his sons bond who is in jail. I checked and the kid was on probation for burglary and then failed to show up for court after getting charged with DUI,OBSTRUTION, and false ID. He is in jail because he was caught burglarizing another business. Because of all this his bond was set at over $60K. I told him there was no way I would sign this idiots bond but my (again probably now EX-friend))kept going on about what a good kid he actually was and how rough it was on his family with him in jail. I finally about hung up on him.

Granted, if it were my son I might feel different, but there's the problem with forced charity or aid in a free society. Under the Dem's policy I would be on my way to bond this guy out because some other person thought I should.

Roy, In this country the government should keep the playing field level, not try to coach the game.




.


John I could be happy if we just helped all of the people that we agree need help.

But we seem to throw the baby out with the bath.
 
Prof said:
John I could be happy if we just helped all of the people that we agree need help.

But we seem to throw the baby out with the bath.


That would be fantastic if there were some way to figure that out.

Believe it or not Roy, I have a lot bigger heart than you think. My financial position would be alot better but for the money I have "loaned" or just given to people that I know.:mad:

It is sad for me to Roy, but the reality that must finally be accepted is that life simply never has and probably never will be fair.:(


One thing though, that has been proven before, is that trying to force others to make life fair doesn't work.(for long)



.
 
Last edited:
Maybe in the wrong thread, but this shows how everone is being affected :(
How will this trickle down:dontknow: :dontknow:

On Wall Street, sky-high payouts may fall to Earth


Email this Story

Feb 21, 5:34 PM (ET)
By SAMANTHA GROSS

NEW YORK (AP) - With the economy in the throes of a historic meltdown, financial workers everywhere fear layoffs. But even those who keep their jobs may face a far different future than they had imagined - one without the big payouts that have long made Wall Street a beacon for the ambitious and the acquisitive.

Those finance industry workers still standing after the brutal banking collapses of the past year had to contend with a major slash in bonus pay - with many losing as much as one-third of their total compensation. Then the Obama administration imposed a pay cap of $500,000 on certain senior executives whose companies receive substantial bailout money.

Now, analysts anticipate pay will sink even further, and some question whether the shift could permanently downsize the high-flying culture of Wall Street.

"It's going to drop again in 2009, so it's a huge change," compensation consultant Alan Johnson said of the falling bonus payouts.

Johnson noted that pay has often dropped as part of a cyclical downturn and then rebounded after a few years. But he said the new federal pay caps have changed the equation and have many Wall Street workers concerned that their incentive pay could disappear altogether, cutting their compensation to one-third of what it was.

In the neighborhood surrounding the New York Stock Exchange, many finance industry employees say they are more worried about keeping their jobs than they are about their paychecks dwindling. Some believe the loss in compensation goes with the territory.

"You eat what you kill. It's a performance-based industry," said broker Drew R. Alexander, who has seen his pay drop since October and reports that some friends have lost upward of 60 percent of their income.

Even many of those performing well are being forced to cut back on some expenses. Most finance sector employees have come to depend on bonuses and incentives to cover about two-thirds of their total income - but in 2008 that bonus pay was sliced by about 45 percent, cutting total compensation by about one-third, Johnson said.

That means, according to Johnson, that workers who recently got their MBAs and once would have expected more than $150,000 in yearly pay likely got about $105,000. Vice presidents, who in flush years have made $300,000 to $500,000, saw a drop of $90,000 to $150,000. Even secretaries, who including a small bonus often make about $50,000 a year, have seen a drop.

At the big investment firms, where historically hundreds of employees have made millions, and thousands have made $300,000 to $500,000, workers are struggling to come to grips with a world gone suddenly awry.

"Morale is terrible right now," Johnson said. "People are getting laid off. Pay is down. You're working really hard."

A number of firms have seen a jump in the employee hours spent at the company gym, as people try to cope with declining opportunity and rising stress, he said.

Analysts believe the federal pay caps imposed on some of the highest-level executives, combined with public anger surrounding Wall Street bonuses, may very well trickle down to reduce the pay of employees at all levels of finance firms.

"It will have a deflationary impact on the organizations," said Pearl Meyer, executive compensation consultant with Steven Hall & Partners. "But I don't know how permanent that is."

"At the lower level, you're hitting Christmas money" with such cuts, along with home and car payments, Meyer said. New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg recently noted that more than half the city's financial services sector employees make less than $100,000 a year.

And at the upper range of the ladder, long-term pay cuts could permanently shift the character of Wall Street - long famous for drawing daredevil risk-takers seeking a luxe lifestyle.

Growing up in suburban Summit, N.J., David Gunther was surrounded by investment bankers and luxury sedans. After visiting a cousin on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange, he was hooked.

"Being down there, everyone's yelling. They have their own language, their own talk, their own swagger," said Gunther, 23. "It always seemed like fast easy money" and was "portrayed as one big party."

Gunther thought he might land a job making $80,000 out of college. Instead, shortly after graduation he was living with his parents and looking for his first job - hoping now for $30,000 a year, and considering other industries.

"The game's completely changed," he said
 
Prof said:
I think the trickle down effect works...but the result at the bottom of the trickle (where the most help is needed) is pretty meager.

Again personally, I love the concept of no capitol gains tax. But my heart bleeds for some of those that benefit from the distribution of capitol gains. I more than most will be sorry and happy no matter what happens...

I agree Roy but it will create a huge boost to the economy, the so called "Rich" will invest in a multitude of buisness stimulating the economy and providing jobs. Those that dont want to and those that can will be dealt with differently.

If you dont want to work get a cardboard sign:D

If you cant work? Charitable donation provided therough tax breaks will be provided plus welfare that is in place.

I think we got er done Roy:dontknow: :dontknow: :dontknow: :dontknow:



thewelshm
 
Business incentives are key, I agree...it is the natural way out of the problem we are facing...and I see some tiny movement in that direction...but once again I would like to see massive over-kill to get away from the problem.

Why not give well underwritten business loans for 6%...three or four percent of which is subsidized by the government? The effective interest rate for a well underwritten loan would be 2%!

We could back off that percentage as the economy recovers...the government would be assuring the financing organizations a good rate for their good loans...and the government would be paying the interest over time with what would probably be inflated dollars...

The same with auto loans...currently the government is saying we will give you a tax credit for taxes...posh! Why not say to consumers and businesses...buy new vehicles now...we will give you a tax credit for 25% of the purchase cost...

Those suggestions use existing channels to hype the economy...

And I might be compelled to get that new Viper at a 25% discount.

I do worry that with the arcane economic environment, some would look at a capitol gains tax relief provision as a chance to accumulate cash in case things get worse...and the desired effect of eliminating the tax would be counter productive...but if it were combined with the two suggestions above...maybe we would all go on an investment in capital assets spree rather than just trying to weather the storm.

Interesting stuff!!!! But it hurts my head to think so hard about these things.
 

Latest posts

Support Us

Become A Supporting Member Today!

Click Here For Details

Back
Top