an excellent read from the ACLU

On 12/14/2011 2:53 AM, Trevor wrote:
wrote in message
...
As smart people know, you can't con an honest man, it takes a gun or
government to rob him instead :-(

Were they forced to buy?

Governments do the buying with taxpayers money, taxpayers rarely have any
say in it.

Was there coercion?

Governments control the police force, armies, national guard, security
agencies etc. How much more coercion do you need! :-)

Here is the contest of my question/comment. Your Snipping clearly shows
intellectual dishonesty?

Your trying to change the subject to something I never commented on shows
intellectual dishonesty.


You said: " It was the US banks that sold them truck loads of worthless
junk bonds though. Stupid of the Europeans to think US banks were
motivated by anything other than outright greed though, which of course
is what the Eurpopeans were also doing when they bought them!
As smart people know, you can't con an honest man, it takes a gun or
government to rob him instead..."

that way the comment to which I asked my question.

So you are happy to ignore the rest of what I have said in the thread, and
yet complain about my snipping?
Google is there for people who can't remember what was posted, and don't
have their own copy. Snipping simply highlights what is actually being
referred to.

Your response to my question was a meaningless rant

As opposed to your meaningless rant?

Trevor.



That's a nice practice. when you do not care to give a proper response.
you change the topic by making an unfounded statement about the poster.

Say what you will. As you point out, the full context is there for
anyone to see.


EOD

--
Peter

PeterN wrote:
On 12/10/2011 1:56 PM, Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:
wrote:
On 12/8/2011 3:29 PM, Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:
wrote:
On 2011-12-04 19:11:00 -0800, said:

Why not, isn't it the capitalists in France causing that problem? Seems to
me the US capitalists are far worse.

Just wait and see what the German capitalists have in mind for Europe.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/...wTO_story.html

Start behaving more responsible? 'orrible. The poor Greek ...
imagine having to have money before spending it! It's the
end of the world --- and all that because of US banks.

Please explain, in clear English, with supporting facts, exactly why it
is the fault of the US banking system.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Late-20...nancial_crisis
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Late-20..._Europe#Greece
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_Eu...is#Speculators

You have supplied links to the thoughts of others. YOUR interpretation
and thoughts are conspicuous by their absence.

My interpretation and thoughts aren't needed for well known facts.
BTW, you are drastically shifting goal posts. How about you
explain, with facts(!), that the US banks had nothing to do
with any global recession, and that a recession can never cause
economies that need growth to survive to falter.

If you manage that, you can become a well-paid ghost writer for
some of the politicans further removed from reality.

No! I am not going to wade through unexplained links.
this paper gets an "F"

You're not allowed to grade on shifted goal posts, assuming
for a second you *were* capable of grading me in any subject in
first place.

-Wolfgang

Pete Stavrakoglou wrote:

Your claim tha the burden falls on the middle class is wrong. 40% of all
federal income taxes are paid by the top 1%, the top 5% pay over 70% of all
federal income taxes, the top 10% pay over 80% of all federal income taxes.

Please fill out:
The top 1% own ...% of the money, but pay 40% of the FIT
The top 5% own ...% of the money, but pay 70% of the FIT
The top 10% own ...% of the money, but pay 80% of the FIT

And BTW, the top 10% pay at most 50%.

I give you
http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/money_huge.png
10 trillion USD in US households.
The top 1% gets 2 trillion.
The bottom 50% get 2 trillion, too.

Yes, there are more taxes paid from the top 1% than from the bottom
50%. Unfortunately, not ~50 times more, but only ca. 3 times more.
So 1.6 million households (worth 2 trillion income) pay 3 times
more than 63 million households (also worth 2 trillion income).

In other words, a single household in the bottom 50% pays *13
times* as much of it's income in FIT than a single household.

So the *burden* is not born by the rich, they pay vastly less
than an equal share of their income, no matter that they
could afford a larger share of their income.

-Wolfgang

Pete Stavrakoglou wrote:

My figures are correct, check them out for yourself

So where are they? URLs, please ...

-Wolfgang

In article , "Trevor" wrote:

"Pete Stavrakoglou" wrote in message
...

Greece is in the state it's in because of government spending, overly
generous government benefits, lack of adequate tax collection,

Dead right there, just as the US would be OK *IF* they actually collected
taxes from the rich and big corporations.

Oh please, 40+ percent of the US doesnt even pay a penny in taxes where the
rich pay approx 52%

It's certainly not the poor where most of the money went in either country!

Trevor.

In article , tony cooper wrote:
On Wed, 14 Dec 2011 08:09:59 -0500, "Pete Stavrakoglou"
wrote:

"tony cooper" wrote in message
. ..
On Tue, 13 Dec 2011 14:17:09 -0500, "Pete Stavrakoglou"
wrote:

"tony cooper" wrote in message
m...
On Tue, 13 Dec 2011 08:41:46 -0500, "Pete Stavrakoglou"
wrote:

"Trevor" wrote in message
...

"tony cooper" wrote in message
news Governments do the buying with taxpayers money, taxpayers rarely have
any
say in it.

The government employees who do the buying are, themselves, taxpayers.
In fact, they are sharing the burden more than many since they are
employed - usually at rather good salaries

That's the problem, it's not their money they waste, and they usually
have
a
far better life style than many others.


and paying income taxes, property taxes, and taxes on purchases.

Which is why they love flat taxes so much. The old days of progressive
taxes
where those who could afford it actually paid more, are just about gone
unfortunately. The new paradigm is the richer you are, the better the
accountant you can afford, shelf companies you can set up, family trusts

you
can utilise, off shore tax havens you can register, and the less tax you
actually pay. The tax burdon now falls almost entirely on the middle
class
and
poorest members of the community because they have no ability to escape
it.

Trevor.

Your claim tha the burden falls on the middle class is wrong. 40% of all
federal income taxes are paid by the top 1%, the top 5% pay over 70% of
all
federal income taxes, the top 10% pay over 80% of all federal income
taxes.

The validity of the claim depends on what you think "the burden"
means. If you consider that the group paying the highest percentage
of all income taxes paid has the burden, then the statement is wrong.
If you consider that the group paying out the highest percentage of
their income has the burden, then the statement is correct.

There's no obfuscating on this. The "rich" pay their fair share while the
bottom 50% of income earners pay zero federal income taxes. The top 10% of
earners are shouldering the tax burden for 80% of the country. That is
quite
a
"burden" no matter how you try to spin it.

Speaking of spin...the original statement deals with the middle class.
What you have pointed out is that the *bottom* 50% of the wage earners
pay no taxes.

I pointed out a lot more than that and I'm not the one trying to spin this one

Tony, you are.


That "pay zero federal income taxes" is spin.

The bottom 50% of the wage earners loan the government money for
twelve months of the year. If they're earning a wage, withholding is
taken out. They may get back part or all of that money as a refund,
but they don't have use of the money until the refund is received.

Also "spin" is "fair share".

If they get it all back, then they paid "NO" taxes!

And on top of getting it all back, so many people squirt out endless little
kids and get thousands given to them that they didnt even earn via Child Tax
Credits etc... Why should i pay taxes just so those popping out endless kids
can get my hard earned money?

Eric Stevens wrote:
On Sat, 10 Dec 2011 19:56:37 +0100, Wolfgang Weisselberg
PeterN wrote:

Please explain, in clear English, with supporting facts, exactly why it
is the fault of the US banking system.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Late-20...nancial_crisis
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Late-20..._Europe#Greece
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_Eu...is#Speculators

It wasn't the US Banks which caused just about every country in the
world to pour out money by the bucket load for frivolous reasons
within their own economies.

True. It wasn't the heavy earthquake far away from the usual
earthquake areas that built the buildings it tore down.


And indeed, spending money to save banks was frivolously spent,
as nobody gained influence over these run-away nuclear reactions
doing that. Turns out not spending the money is even worse.

-Wolfgang

On 13/12/2011 13:44, Pete Stavrakoglou wrote:
wrote in message
...

"Pete wrote in message
...

Greece is in the state it's in because of government spending, overly
generous government benefits, lack of adequate tax collection,

Dead right there, just as the US would be OK *IF* they actually collected
taxes from the rich and big corporations.
It's certainly not the poor where most of the money went in either country!

Trevor.

Per my last post. The top 1% pay over 40% of all federal income taxes, the top
5% over 70% and te top 10% over 80%. You can take all of the money rich people
have and it would not put a dent in the deficit because our federal government
has an insatiable appetite to spend.

You appear to be confusing marginal rates of taxation with actual taxes
paid - and that still assumes the highest earners do not cheat.

See for example the graph of top US marginal rate of taxation 1916-2010
and you can quickly understand why the US is near bankrupt now.

http://visualizingeconomics.com/2011...tes-1916-2010/

Or you can look at historical tax rates by income group

http://visualizingeconomics.com/2007...-income-group/

Left as an excercise for the reader to compute the actual tax take from
each sector.

What is entirely certain is that your claim is total garbage.

The present US system is geared to making the already super rich elite
with influence who can bribe politicians ever richer.

Regards,
Martin Brown

In article , tony cooper wrote:
On Wed, 14 Dec 2011 18:30:26 GMT,
(GMAN) wrote:

In article , tony cooper
wrote:
On Wed, 14 Dec 2011 08:09:59 -0500, "Pete Stavrakoglou"
wrote:

"tony cooper" wrote in message
m...
On Tue, 13 Dec 2011 14:17:09 -0500, "Pete Stavrakoglou"
wrote:

"tony cooper" wrote in message
news:rmvee7pg081j0oqkhc37tpef8nlqssp2pp@4ax. com...
On Tue, 13 Dec 2011 08:41:46 -0500, "Pete Stavrakoglou"
wrote:

"Trevor" wrote in message
...

"tony cooper" wrote in message
news Governments do the buying with taxpayers money, taxpayers rarely have
any
say in it.

The government employees who do the buying are, themselves,
taxpayers.
In fact, they are sharing the burden more than many since they are
employed - usually at rather good salaries

That's the problem, it's not their money they waste, and they usually
have
a
far better life style than many others.


and paying income taxes, property taxes, and taxes on purchases.

Which is why they love flat taxes so much. The old days of progressive

taxes
where those who could afford it actually paid more, are just about
gone
unfortunately. The new paradigm is the richer you are, the better the
accountant you can afford, shelf companies you can set up, family
trusts

you
can utilise, off shore tax havens you can register, and the less tax
you
actually pay. The tax burdon now falls almost entirely on the middle
class
and
poorest members of the community because they have no ability to
escape
it.

Trevor.

Your claim tha the burden falls on the middle class is wrong. 40% of
all
federal income taxes are paid by the top 1%, the top 5% pay over 70% of
all
federal income taxes, the top 10% pay over 80% of all federal income
taxes.

The validity of the claim depends on what you think "the burden"
means. If you consider that the group paying the highest percentage
of all income taxes paid has the burden, then the statement is wrong.
If you consider that the group paying out the highest percentage of
their income has the burden, then the statement is correct.

There's no obfuscating on this. The "rich" pay their fair share while the
bottom 50% of income earners pay zero federal income taxes. The top 10%
of
earners are shouldering the tax burden for 80% of the country. That is
quite
a
"burden" no matter how you try to spin it.

Speaking of spin...the original statement deals with the middle class.
What you have pointed out is that the *bottom* 50% of the wage earners
pay no taxes.

I pointed out a lot more than that and I'm not the one trying to spin this
one

Tony, you are.


That "pay zero federal income taxes" is spin.

The bottom 50% of the wage earners loan the government money for
twelve months of the year. If they're earning a wage, withholding is
taken out. They may get back part or all of that money as a refund,
but they don't have use of the money until the refund is received.

Also "spin" is "fair share".

If they get it all back, then they paid "NO" taxes!

Like most things in this area, it depends on your viewpoint. If you
loan someone $100 a month for twelve months, and then get that money
back in the thirteenth month, you are out of pocket from $100 to
$1,200 during the year. The person you loan the money to has the use
of that money for the twelve months.



If you get back that $100 that you sent in you paid zero.

On Wed, 14 Dec 2011 20:07:09 GMT,
(GMAN) wrote:

In article , tony cooper wrote:
On Wed, 14 Dec 2011 18:30:26 GMT,
(GMAN) wrote:

In article , tony cooper
wrote:
On Wed, 14 Dec 2011 08:09:59 -0500, "Pete Stavrakoglou"
wrote:

"tony cooper" wrote in message
om...
On Tue, 13 Dec 2011 14:17:09 -0500, "Pete Stavrakoglou"
wrote:

"tony cooper" wrote in message
news:rmvee7pg081j0oqkhc37tpef8nlqssp2pp@4ax .com...
On Tue, 13 Dec 2011 08:41:46 -0500, "Pete Stavrakoglou"
wrote:

"Trevor" wrote in message
...

"tony cooper" wrote in message
news Governments do the buying with taxpayers money, taxpayers rarely have
any
say in it.

The government employees who do the buying are, themselves,
taxpayers.
In fact, they are sharing the burden more than many since they are
employed - usually at rather good salaries

That's the problem, it's not their money they waste, and they usually
have
a
far better life style than many others.


and paying income taxes, property taxes, and taxes on purchases.

Which is why they love flat taxes so much. The old days of progressive

taxes
where those who could afford it actually paid more, are just about
gone
unfortunately. The new paradigm is the richer you are, the better the
accountant you can afford, shelf companies you can set up, family
trusts

you
can utilise, off shore tax havens you can register, and the less tax
you
actually pay. The tax burdon now falls almost entirely on the middle
class
and
poorest members of the community because they have no ability to
escape
it.

Trevor.

Your claim tha the burden falls on the middle class is wrong. 40% of
all
federal income taxes are paid by the top 1%, the top 5% pay over 70% of
all
federal income taxes, the top 10% pay over 80% of all federal income
taxes.

The validity of the claim depends on what you think "the burden"
means. If you consider that the group paying the highest percentage
of all income taxes paid has the burden, then the statement is wrong.
If you consider that the group paying out the highest percentage of
their income has the burden, then the statement is correct.

There's no obfuscating on this. The "rich" pay their fair share while the
bottom 50% of income earners pay zero federal income taxes. The top 10%
of
earners are shouldering the tax burden for 80% of the country. That is
quite
a
"burden" no matter how you try to spin it.

Speaking of spin...the original statement deals with the middle class.
What you have pointed out is that the *bottom* 50% of the wage earners
pay no taxes.

I pointed out a lot more than that and I'm not the one trying to spin this
one

Tony, you are.


That "pay zero federal income taxes" is spin.

The bottom 50% of the wage earners loan the government money for
twelve months of the year. If they're earning a wage, withholding is
taken out. They may get back part or all of that money as a refund,
but they don't have use of the money until the refund is received.

Also "spin" is "fair share".

If they get it all back, then they paid "NO" taxes!

Like most things in this area, it depends on your viewpoint. If you
loan someone $100 a month for twelve months, and then get that money
back in the thirteenth month, you are out of pocket from $100 to
$1,200 during the year. The person you loan the money to has the use
of that money for the twelve months.



If you get back that $100 that you sent in you paid zero.

Not so. You paid whatever interest you might have earned on the cash
stream as it accumulated over the year to $1200. The government
received a similar (although not necessarily identical) benefit.

Regards,

Eric Stevens