[ham] Re: [Rhodes22-list] Taxes & Politics

[Michael Meltzer]

my job is very tied to wall street trading and the firms, hedge funds and street firms, about 70% in ny/north jersey, southern ct,
10% Chicago, 5 % phila, 5% Boston, 5% la, and the rest everywhere else. make it hard to move out of the area for a warmer place :-)

BTW the good news, I got a 6 months exception from the current firm, happened right after an interview :-) my have been the suit :-)

MJM



----- Original Message -----
From: "Wally Buck" <tnrhodey@hotmail.com>
To: <rhodes22-list@rhodes22.org>
Sent: Saturday, January 18, 2003 10:33 AM
Subject: Re: [ham] Re: [Rhodes22-list] Taxes & Politics


> MJM,
>
> I hope you find a new job and get the hell out of there. I have heard you
> rule out the south before but I don't pay any state income tax or wages.
>
> Wally
>
> >>At 06:32 PM 1/17/2003 -0500, you wrote:
> >>I am here :-)
> >>
> >>lets see were I am in this debate.
> >>
> >>Section 1:
> >>I live in CT, the top state to get back the least tax dollars/services on
> >>taxes paid(per cap)
> >>I live in Fairfield county, the county to get back the least tax
> >>dollars/services on taxes paid(per cap) in ct
> >>I live in Westport, second only to bill in Greenwich, at the town level
> >>200%+ the USA cost of living average.
> >>
> >>Bottom line, at the fed/state/county level I see the least return on tax
> >>dollars and in fact fund everyone else,
> >>if a nuke was to go off in town, everyone taxes in the county/state/nation
> >>would go up.
> >>
> >>I pay my own health insurance, even paying top dollar the town/state/fed
> >>employs plan in better, infact I would have better coverage
> >>if I was on welfare.
> >>Like slim I pay my own SSI, both sides.
> >>I also pay unemployment insurance, been told I never will be able to
> >>collect.
> >>I pay fee to set up and maintain my retirement plain.
> >>I pay fee to my account(and their not cheap) to do my taxes.  I have to it
> >>would cost more in taxes if I did not.
> >>I can not have a simple will, that tax thing again, lawyers want 3000+ to
> >>draw it up.
> >>The tax code does effect how my family lives their life, as in day to day
> >>actions.
> >>Most of the town is experts in the tax code, why should I have to live my
> >>life that way ?
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>I do think Milton is right, Almost by definition. Kind of like the quote
> >>"you ever notice that their always enough news every day to
> >>fill a news paper", I do think we are getting to the point of "ternary of
> >>democracy",  to maintain power people are using class
> >>warfare tactics, passing laws that only effect others. In one breath
> >>"Social Security insurance" in a lock box, in the next "Cut
> >>payroll taxes (which are the SSI taxes)". I believe that to solve the ssi
> >>problem it will be taken a taken away from me and my
> >>family, to become an older welfare program. The Marjory of voters will
> >>befits that way.
> >>
> >>My problem is that it never lets up,  every time I try around someone
> >>after my wallet, lets see this week, bloomberg for ny comuter
> >>tax(selling it for high eraners), ct for an increase to the cig tax(it
> >>good for you), town for bonding for school construction(the
> >>state backed out of it share, tight budget westport can adfordit). The
> >>only choice anyone every give me it to cut and run, do like
> >>it move. never a thankyou. Even with that thier are still places I can not
> >>live or work in the area. Yep I in a foul mood.
> >>
> >>a couple of random thought:
> >>why is it the worst price from doctor is paying cash?
> >>why has it become being a vitims is now a lotory? less 100 victims of wtc
> >>have settled, thier waiting on the law suits.
> >>how did it become that value of human life is unlimited?
> >>the world only victims now, lawers doing risk tranfers, Tv ads for any
> >>stuiped thing "call 1800 lawwer", with high stacks payoffs.
> >>
> >>MJM
> >>
> >>Never did work in the CO spending cap
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>----- Original Message -----
> >>From: "Alex Bell" <alexbell@coastalnet.com>
> >>To: <wwrhodes@rhodes22.com>; "The Rhodes 22 mail list"
> >><rhodes22-list@rhodes22.org>
> >>Sent: Thursday, January 16, 2003 3:25 PM
> >>Subject: [ham] Re: [Rhodes22-list] Taxes & Politics
> >>
> >>
> >> > Stan,
> >> >
> >> > The only thing I would agree with your commentary is that there's a lot
> >> > of simplistic logic going on.
> >> >
> >> > I am not going to comment on and on about this since I have been
> >> > chastised in the past for any political view I expressed in joke form.
> >> > It amazes me that this joke sent by Paul, with a disclaimer attached to
> >> > boot, would end up becoming a platform for you to express your
> >>political
> >> > views. I think you should keep your commentary to the boats you build.
> >> > If the rest of us are supposed to adhere to some kind of non political
> >> > agenda here, then the least you could do would be to refrain from
> >> > expousing your views.
> >> >
> >> > As to debt, I don't want to pay off someone else's debts. I have plenty
> >> > of my own, thank you. I worked for mine. I started out delivering
> >> > telegrams on a bicycle, worked on the L&N Railroad section gang,  a
> >> > spring factory, and road grader manufacturer as a welders helper before
> >> > my education assisted me in better paying jobs. Like Brad said, I am
> >>not
> >> > going to apologize for what I've accumulated over the years.
> >> >
> >> > Someone commented on the fabled double tax and capital gains tax. I
> >> > suppose some people might feel that these taxes affect only the rich.
> >> > But it affects anyone who might want to sell a piece of property, only
> >> > to find that if sold, it would cost them dearly. How many people own
> >> > some kind of Mutual Fund? We had some that lost 40% of their value, but
> >> > we had to pay capital gains on them. Aint that great?
> >> >
> >> >  When times are tough, we cut back on spending. Something the
> >>government
> >> > programs don't seem to do. I'm tired of the guilt trips people lay on
> >>us
> >> > because we want to keep more of our money. I find myself paying taxes
> >>on
> >> > money I saved and put away once, and it's getting old. I've left the
> >> > list before because of political discussions, but I think I'll stick
> >> > around and stir the pot for a change. Of all people, I have OPINIONS.
> >>If
> >> > someone encourages me, I will be able to supply a full diatribe. So
> >> > there.
> >> >
> >> > To Wally, I say, good job in questioning the written word. You are a
> >> > bright light in a dim day.
> >> > To RIK, he don't apologize for you comments. That first comment was
> >>just
> >> > not necessary. The second one was better.
> >> > To MJM, hey where are you?
> >> > To Brad, gee, I wish I had said that. But then I'm not quite as well
> >> > off. But I'm not full of envy. Hard work pays off...twice.
> >> >
> >> > Alex
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > General Boats wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > With the same caveat that Paul posted, here is a reply from the left.
> >>  Don't
> >> > > read it if it moves you to leave the list.
> >> > >
> >> > > Would it only be so simple as the professor from SD makes it.
> >> > >
> >> > > Just three minor complications -  many more can be contributed by
> >>musch wiser
> >> > > economists..
> >> > >
> >> > > a)   50,000,000 of us do not make enough to pay taxes no matter how
> >>hard we
> >> > > work - we are just not that smart. So Tax cuts are not a neutral
> >>issue.  Tax
> >> > > cuts invariably mean tax increases for us. With less revenues,
> >>services are
> >> > > diminished.  Cost of education rises. (That is a very costly error -
> >>the free
> >> > > GI educational bill of WW 2 got the US economy roaring).  States find
> >> > > themselves in financial holes and have to make up the shortfalls with
> >>all sorts
> >> > > of increases like higher sales taxes (which have the same rate no
> >>matter what
> >> > > your income), higher real estate taxes - perhaps gas taxes -anything
> >>to raise
> >> > > moneys the income tax cuts have taken from them. So tax cuts are a
> >>double edge
> >> > > sword that not only help those who need help the least, but at the
> >>same time
> >> > > hurt those who need help the most. I know some of you chafe at the
> >>idea of
> >> > > someone getting something for nothing.  But those who take advantage
> >>of any
> >> > > good nature the government shows are in the minority of good
> >>Americans and good
> >> > > policing can wean the freeloaders out. Overkill sooner or later leads
> >>to
> >> > > overthrow.   The funny thing about tax cuts is that the very wealthy
> >>think they
> >> > > are a mistake.
> >> > >
> >> > > b)   If you step back and see how the rich got rich, with the
> >>exception of
> >> > > those who stole it and then bought their way in and those who
> >>contributed
> >> > > nothing but happen to be born in the right circle, the majority made
> >>it the
> >> > > hard way, they worked for it.  But they were only able to succeed
> >>because they
> >> > > had the invaluable assistance of the police man and fireman and
> >>milkman (and in
> >> > > my day the iceman) and hosts of others that were needed to create the
> >> > > environment that made the accumulation of wealth possible in the
> >>first place.
> >> > > Part of any money due back the high end is really to be shared with
> >>their
> >> > > silent partners.  President Roosevelt understood this and pulled the
> >>country
> >> > > out of a depression most of you have no inkling of.
> >> > >
> >> > > c)   The Baltimore Sun ran an editorial pointing out that while our
> >>current
> >> > > leader says we should cut taxes because it is their own money we are
> >>giving
> >> > > back to them, he skips saying it is also their debt.  Yet it was and
> >>is the
> >> > > very creating of the debt that paved the way for the accumulation of
> >>wealth.
> >> > > But somehow when it comes to who should pay for the debt, that
> >>becomes a non
> >> > > progressive burden.  We are taught that when we have money we should
> >>pay off
> >> > > our debts and instead our leaders cut taxes - all the interest that
> >>could have
> >> > > been saved could have paid for the next war.  What a shame.
> >> > >
> >> > > Since no one is reading this I'll stop here.  But for the simplistic
> >>logic of
> >> > > our good professor, there are many other avenues of challenge.
> >> > >
> >> > > stan/gbi
> >> > >
> >> > > Rik Sandberg wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > > Paul,
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Yeah, I printed that one out. Think I'll frame it and hang it on
> >>the wall
> >> > > > in my office. We had that happen in Minnesota the last couple of
> >>years when
> >> > > > they did a sales tax rebate. People that were living off welfare or
> >>other
> >> > > > gov't programs were all bitching 'cause they didn't get any money
> >>back.
> >> > > > It's amazing how they can translate paying nothing into less of a
> >>benefit
> >> > > > to them than paying less is to someone else. To top it off, it seem
> >>there
> >> > > > really is a fool born every minute, so there's a lot of them out
> >>there. :-)
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Rik
> >> > > >
> >> > > > At 08:00 AM 1/15/2003 -0500, you wrote:
> >> > > > >Before you read this, it is a commentary on taxes & politics.  It
> >>is just
> >> > > > >one guy's opinion (not even necessarily mine) so don't go crazy
> >>with this
> >> > > > >& start a war.  If you don't like this kind of stuff, delete it
> >>now and
> >> > > > >don't read it. - Paul
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >A VERY simple way to understand the tax laws. Read on -- it does
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >make you think!!
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >Let's put tax cuts in terms everyone can understand. Suppose that
> >>every
> >> > > > >day,
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >ten men go out for dinner. The bill for all ten comes to $100. If
> >>they
> >> > > > >paid
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like
> >>this:
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >The first four men -- the poorest -- would pay nothing; the fifth
> >>would
> >> > > > >pay
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >$1, the sixth would pay $3, the seventh $7, the eighth $12, the
> >>ninth
> >> > > > >$18,
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >and the tenth man -- the richest -- would pay $59.
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >That's what they decided to do. The ten men ate dinner in the
> >>restaurant
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement -- until one
> >>day,
> >> > > > >the
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >owner threw them a curve (in tax language a tax cut).
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >"Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to
> >>reduce
> >> > > > >the
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >cost of your daily meal by $20." So now dinner for the ten only
> >>cost
> >> > > > >$80.00.
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes.
> >>So the
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >first four men were unaffected. They would still eat for free. But
> >>what
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >about the other six -- the paying customers? How could they divvy
> >>up the
> >> > > > >$20
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >windfall so that everyone would get his "fair share?"
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >The six men realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >subtracted that from everybody's share, Then the fifth man and the
> >>sixth
> >> > > > >man
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >would end up being PAID to eat their meal. So the restaurant owner
> >> > > > >suggested
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >that it
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >would be fair to reduce each man's bill by roughly the same
> >>amount, and
> >> > > > >he
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay. And so the
> >>fifth man
> >> > > > >paid
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >nothing, the sixth pitched in $2, the seventh paid $5, the eighth
> >>paid
> >> > > > >$9,
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >the ninth paid $12, leaving the tenth man with a bill of $52
> >>instead of
> >> > > > >his
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >earlier $59.
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four
> >>continued
> >> > > > >to
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >eat for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to
> >>compare
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >their savings. "I only got a dollar out of the $20," declared the
> >>sixth
> >> > > > >man,
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >but he, (pointing to the tenth) got $7!". "Yeah, that's right,"
> >>exclaimed
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >the fifth man, "I only saved a dollar, too, ........It's unfair
> >>that he
> >> > > > >got
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >seven times more than me!". That's true!" shouted the seventh man,
> >>why
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >should he get $7 back when I got only $2?" The wealthy get all the
> >> > > > >breaks!".
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison, "We didn't
> >>get
> >> > > > >anything
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >at all.  The system exploits the poor!"
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up. The next night
> >>he
> >> > > > >didn't
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >show up for dinner, so the nine sat down and ate without him. But
> >>when it
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >came time to pay the bill, they discovered, a little late what was
> >>very
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >important. They were FIFTY TWO DOLLARS short of paying the bill!
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >Imagine that!
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >And that, boys and girls, journalists and college instructors, is
> >>how the
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the
> >>most
> >> > > > >benefit
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being
> >>wealthy,
> >> > > > >and
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >they just may not show up at the table anymore. Where would that
> >>leave
> >> > > > >the
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >rest?
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >Unfortunately, most taxing authorities anywhere cannot seem to
> >>grasp this
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >rather straight-forward logic!
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >T. Davies
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >Professor of Accounting &Chair,
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >Division of Accounting and Business Law
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >The University of South Dakota
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >School of Business
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >========================
> >> > > > >Paul Grandholm
> >> > > > >C&H Technology
> >> > > > >GrandPower Components Div.
> >> > > > >========================
> >> > > > >_________________________________________________
> >> > > > >Use Rhodes22-list@rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list
> >> > > >
> >> > > > _________________________________________________
> >> > > > Use Rhodes22-list@rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list
> >> > >
> >> > > _________________________________________________
> >> > > Use Rhodes22-list@rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list
> >> > _________________________________________________
> >> > Use Rhodes22-list@rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list
> >>
> >>_________________________________________________
> >>Use Rhodes22-list@rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list
> >
> >_________________________________________________
> >Use Rhodes22-list@rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Help STOP SPAM: Try the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*
> http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
>
> _________________________________________________
> Use Rhodes22-list@rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list