Log In

Your email is not your username

Register

If you were a member of the old Bodybuilding.com forums and would like to reuse your previous username, you can request it below. We use your email only for registration and do not store it. For more information, please see our Privacy Policy.

Confirm your email

A registration code was sent to your email. Enter it here.

Welcome

You have successfully setup your account.

Sign in

Quick Navigation Bottom Misc
Forum » I passed the welfare office around 9:00 this morning... (Pic)👻
  1. Results 241 to 270 of 297
  2. Page 9 of 10
  3. First
  5. 7
  6. 8
  7. 9
  8. 10
  10. Last

Thread: I passed the welfare office around 9:00 this morning... (Pic)👻

post 1453540283 07-19-2016, 06:02 PM
-
#241
  1. seanb1979
  2. Platinum User
  1. seanb1979
  2. Platinum User
  3. Join Date: Dec 2006
  4. Location: Boise, Idaho, United States
  5. Posts: 48,650
  6. Rep Power: 150567
Originally Posted By BearTactics⏩
Damn brah. Same age. Sorry to hear that. That's tough. Hopefully you find something soon. Might have to look for a temporary different line of work. I've been there before.



I really want one poster to explain in detail what they mean by "corporate welfare". Corporations pay tons of taxes and do society a favor by providing jobs. I'm interested to hear someone actually explain with some logic/facts what the problem with corporations are
The only real issue is they have collectively become more powerful than the government itself, and thus own the government, so there's no chance of voting someone in who will do anything against their best interests. The closer each moves towards a monopoly, the better for them but worse for us.
A million miles away - I don't.. feel.... anything.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PXGZu4yxjW0
post 1453544233 07-19-2016, 06:31 PM
-
#242
  1. donblaximus
  2. Registered User
  1. donblaximus
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Jul 2010
  4. Age: 50
  5. Posts: 12,396
  6. Rep Power: 70954
Originally Posted By BearTactics⏩
I really want one poster to explain in detail what they mean by "corporate welfare". Corporations pay tons of taxes and do society a favor by providing jobs. I'm interested to hear someone actually explain with some logic/facts what the problem with corporations are
Pretty standard concentration of wealth equating to concentration of power cycle. Politicians reach into the pockets of big corporations for backing especially during election years to get funding as campaigns are not cheap. In return certain legislation gets passed in favor of the corporation to be able to build more wealth and the cycle continues. Tax policies, deregulation, corporate governance etc.

If you think we are living in a true democracy you are kidding yourself. The wealthy people are driving this country with their dollars and power and ensuring joe general public doesn't get to shift that power. They want to paint the facade that you can get into that power position when in fact it is very difficult and to get to that level you have to play the game.

Its ironic but most people that I talk to who are against raising taxes for the rich are broke (relative to the wealthy)
I do alright, some years will pay north of $200k in taxes and have no problem with the progressive tax SO LONG AS REGULATION is put in place to ensure the money is spent productively.
By every sense of the definition, I do alright financially. But I am not even close to touching the power that the wealthy have in this nation.
post 1453548623 07-19-2016, 06:57 PM
-
#243
  1. BearTactics
  2. Habitual line stepper
  1. BearTactics
  2. Habitual line stepper
  3. Join Date: Feb 2015
  4. Posts: 5,270
  5. Rep Power: 26467
Originally Posted By donblaximus⏩
Pretty standard concentration of wealth equating to concentration of power cycle. Politicians reach into the pockets of big corporations for backing especially during election years to get funding as campaigns are not cheap. In return certain legislation gets passed in favor of the corporation to be able to build more wealth and the cycle continues. Tax policies, deregulation, corporate governance etc.

If you think we are living in a true democracy you are kidding yourself. The wealthy people are driving this country with their dollars and power and ensuring joe general public doesn't get to shift that power. They want to paint the facade that you can get into that power position when in fact it is very difficult and to get to that level you have to play the game.

Its ironic but most people that I talk to who are against raising taxes for the rich are broke (relative to the wealthy)
I do alright, some years will pay north of $200k in taxes and have no problem with the progressive tax SO LONG AS REGULATION is put in place to ensure the money is spent productively.
By every sense of the definition, I do alright financially. But I am not even close to touching the power that the wealthy have in this nation.
Honestly bro, i could care less how much money you make. You've referenced it a few time ITT i get the idea. You're right, we do not have a true democracy, it is a democratic republic. It was intended to be that way by the founding fathers. Deregulation is a good thing for the economy generally, so I can't see how that is a mark against corporations. UPS and FedEx are thriving corporations and the USPS is one of the biggest drains as far as government offices go. Govenrment jobs are highly regulated and that's why private businesses always profit where the government does not. I understand that corporations influence laws, as well as wealthy individuals. Think about it on a smaller scale. The richest few guys in a city or town are the ones that have the most influence over laws and goings on in the town. The same is true for the National government. The wealthiest players have the most influence...this is because they provide in return more than poor joe blow down the street. They are creating the jobs, propping up their communities, and paying the majority of taxes.

I still fail to see how this is "welfare". You're acting like corporations don't pull their weight in the economy which is exactly the opposite of the truth. So to bring this full circle, half the people in this thread are upset because corporations have a lot of influence politically and that hurts the tax base equally as bad as abuse of government entitlements? If that is the argument, please provide some examples of laws/regulation where corporations have influenced government decisions and it is hurting/abusing the tax base similar to individual welfare abuse.
Bald head scallywag
post 1453550193 07-19-2016, 07:07 PM
-
#244
  1. sif
  2. OG of the Amazon
  1. sif
  2. OG of the Amazon
  3. Join Date: Mar 2008
  4. Location: Canada
  5. Age: 41
  6. Posts: 6,763
  7. Rep Power: 11530
Originally Posted By BearTactics⏩
Cuck detected. They shouldn't have kids if they can't support themselves. There is a study that shows a single mother using all entitlements available would have to find a 70k/year job to incentivize them to actually work. (Welfare, food stamps, earned income credit, Medicare, ect.) give me a break. You should be responsible for your own life circumstances long term. I'm not saying there shouldn't be short term help, but the government and us that work are not here to support your circumstances. BE RESPONSIBLE FOR YOUR LIFE AND YOUR DECISIONS.

Oh and trust me.. I won't go through it. I have pride enough to support my own self no matter what it takes and I'm not retarded so I know not to bring a kid into this world that I cannot support
Please link to study.

Again, you have no idea what these people are facing in their day to day life and what the statistics are of those who are abusing the welfare system compared to those who actually need it for one reason or another. On a related note, there was a study in Ontariohttps://apps.osgoode.yorku.ca/osgmed...d%20Report.pdf(look at pg. 34 for number of actual convictions vs. investigations) and they found that the numbers of those who were convicted of fraud were very low which is why they don't use more resources to police welfare fraud; it's just not worth it.

You are spewing your own opinion, which you are entitled to, but it is based on faulty logic. You fail to see the bigger picture that the American people have come to a point where living on the premise of ' work hard and you will be rewarded for it' is no longer true. It USED to be true. It is no longer true. Working hard, no matter for how long and just HOW HARD does not give you the same opportunities that were once afforded to our parents and grandparents. Different economy, different social structure and different politics.

Listen, you were born a white(?) male. That already gives you an advantage in America, whether you'd like to admit it or not. Those people in line, I have no idea what their situation is, and neither do you. But laughing at their misfortune is absolutely a scum-bag thing to do. Maybe mind your own business and check yourself before you start judging others.
I think I'm Malcom X, Martin Luther
Add a King, add a Junior
Some bible verses, couple suras
An AK-47 that's a revolution
post 1453554283 07-19-2016, 07:33 PM
-
#245
  1. BearTactics
  2. Habitual line stepper
  1. BearTactics
  2. Habitual line stepper
  3. Join Date: Feb 2015
  4. Posts: 5,270
  5. Rep Power: 26467
Originally Posted By sif⏩
Please link to study.

Again, you have no idea what these people are facing in their day to day life and what the statistics are of those who are abusing the welfare system compared to those who actually need it for one reason or another. On a related note, there was a study in Ontariohttps://apps.osgoode.yorku.ca/osgmed...d%20Report.pdf(look at pg. 34 for number of actual convictions vs. investigations) and they found that the numbers of those who were convicted of fraud were very low which is why they don't use more resources to police welfare fraud; it's just not worth it.

You are spewing your own opinion, which you are entitled to, but it is based on faulty logic. You fail to see the bigger picture that the American people have come to a point where living on the premise of ' work hard and you will be rewarded for it' is no longer true. It USED to be true. It is no longer true. Working hard, no matter for how long and just HOW HARD does not give you the same opportunities that were once afforded to our parents and grandparents. Different economy, different social structure and different politics.

Listen, you were born a white(?) male. That already gives you an advantage in America, whether you'd like to admit it or not. Those people in line, I have no idea what their situation is, and neither do you. But laughing at their misfortune is absolutely a scum-bag thing to do. Maybe mind your own business and check yourself before you start judging others.
You're obviously not able to think critically or without being overwhelmed by your feelings and emotions. Get your estrogen levels checked

Here is a pretty dynamic write up on entitlement abuse from deloitte university:

http://dupress.com/articles/fraud-wa...enefits-fraud/

" The Government Accountability Office recently announced it found $137 billion in improper payments in 2015, an increase of $31 billion in just two years." AND LIBERALS ARE COMPLAINING ABOUT AT $10B BORDER WALL LOL
Bald head scallywag
post 1453555853 07-19-2016, 07:42 PM
-
#246
  1. donblaximus
  2. Registered User
  1. donblaximus
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Jul 2010
  4. Age: 50
  5. Posts: 12,396
  6. Rep Power: 70954
Originally Posted By BearTactics⏩
Honestly bro, i could care less how much money you make. You've referenced it a few time ITT i get the idea. You're right, we do not have a true democracy, it is a democratic republic. It was intended to be that way by the founding fathers. Deregulation is a good thing for the economy generally, so I can't see how that is a mark against corporations. UPS and FedEx are thriving corporations and the USPS is one of the biggest drains as far as government offices go. Govenrment jobs are highly regulated and that's why private businesses always profit where the government does not. I understand that corporations influence laws, as well as wealthy individuals. Think about it on a smaller scale. The richest few guys in a city or town are the ones that have the most influence over laws and goings on in the town. The same is true for the National government. The wealthiest players have the most influence...this is because they provide in return more than poor joe blow down the street. They are creating the jobs, propping up their communities, and paying the majority of taxes.

I still fail to see how this is "welfare". You're acting like corporations don't pull their weight in the economy which is exactly the opposite of the truth. So to bring this full circle, half the people in this thread are upset because corporations have a lot of influence politically and that hurts the tax base equally as bad as abuse of government entitlements? If that is the argument, please provide some examples of laws/regulation where corporations have influenced government decisions and it is hurting/abusing the tax base similar to individual welfare abuse.
If you look at how much federal income tax has been contributed to by corporations from 60 years ago until now, you will see a rapid decline. Sure corporations contribute more "money" to the tax pool. I referenced how much I pay in taxes to make a point. As I said, I pay what I said I pay and some years north of that. But my effective tax rate to me was sub 20%. I know guys making and effectively paying more than me but their effective tax rates are below 10%. You said it yourself, you are a single male and you take no deductions (which is a bit contradictory in itself since you also said you paid a mortgage) so if you think that its far that I pay a lower tax percentage than you, then ok. But what you fail to understand is that I dont actually mind paying more taxes so long as systems are put in place. How can that be a bad thing? How can me as a 1% earner in this nation that wants to contribute more to my society (so long as other 1%'ers are equally contributing) to fund not just welfare but other government things...how can that be bad for you?
post 1453556633 07-19-2016, 07:47 PM
-
#247
  1. sif
  2. OG of the Amazon
  1. sif
  2. OG of the Amazon
  3. Join Date: Mar 2008
  4. Location: Canada
  5. Age: 41
  6. Posts: 6,763
  7. Rep Power: 11530
Originally Posted By BearTactics⏩
You're obviously not able to think critically or without being overwhelmed by your feelings and emotions. Get your estrogen levels checked

Here is a pretty dynamic write up on entitlement abuse from deloitte university:

http://dupress.com/articles/fraud-wa...enefits-fraud/

" The Government Accountability Office recently announced it found $137 billion in improper payments in 2015, an increase of $31 billion in just two years." AND LIBERALS ARE COMPLAINING ABOUT AT $10B BORDER WALL LOL
Unemployment Insurance is 3B of that. See Figure 2 in your own link.

It's really hard to continue this conversation because you're not willing to have an actual debate but are resorting to insults and are providing leading information. I don't know if you think I'm not going to read the study that you link or what, but it's clear that you're just googling things and linking absentmindedly. Additionally, you sound like you don't have an open mind so there is really no point in wasting any more time on you.

Anyway, for a 28 year old who laughs at others misfortune and circumstance, who doesn't know what corporate welfare refers to and thinks that he could never fall from grace, you're in for a lot of disappointment in your future. Good luck to you. You'll need it.
I think I'm Malcom X, Martin Luther
Add a King, add a Junior
Some bible verses, couple suras
An AK-47 that's a revolution
post 1453558533 07-19-2016, 08:00 PM
-
#248
  1. BearTactics
  2. Habitual line stepper
  1. BearTactics
  2. Habitual line stepper
  3. Join Date: Feb 2015
  4. Posts: 5,270
  5. Rep Power: 26467
Originally Posted By donblaximus⏩
If you look at how much federal income tax has been contributed to by corporations from 60 years ago until now, you will see a rapid decline. Sure corporations contribute more "money" to the tax pool. I referenced how much I pay in taxes to make a point. As I said, I pay what I said I pay and some years north of that. But my effective tax rate to me was sub 20%. I know guys making and effectively paying more than me but their effective tax rates are below 10%. You said it yourself, you are a single male and you take no deductions (which is a bit contradictory in itself since you also said you paid a mortgage) so if you think that its far that I pay a lower tax percentage than you, then ok. But what you fail to understand is that I dont actually mind paying more taxes so long as systems are put in place. How can that be a bad thing? How can me as a 1% earner in this nation that wants to contribute more to my society (so long as other 1%'ers are equally contributing) to fund not just welfare but other government things...how can that be bad for you?
I bought my house last year so, i couldn't take a deduction on it until this year. That being said, your effective tax rate cannot be 20% if you make the money you say you do, unless you are taking the deductions through a business or some other shelter of some kind. If so, then you are no better than the corporations your a villianizing for doing the same thing. If you make 250k and are married, your obligation just to the federal government (this doesn't include social security, medicare, or state withholdings) is 57k before any deductions. That is 22%. Add 7.6% for SS (if self employed then 15.2%), and another lets just say modest 10% for state and medicare with holdings gives us about 40%. I have no problem with people or corporations sheltering their money from the government through any legal means. Corporations are getting tax breaks, along with citizens because our economy is in the gutter and in theory tax cuts boost the economy. It's not because they are bribing people, the federal reserve and the government set the tax code in a way that will most benefit the economy.
Bald head scallywag
post 1453558993 07-19-2016, 08:02 PM
-
#249
  1. second2noneBrah
  2. Registered User
  1. second2noneBrah
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Oct 2012
  4. Location: Florida, United States
  5. Posts: 8,335
  6. Rep Power: 8149
Originally Posted By BearTactics⏩
Damn brah. Same age. Sorry to hear that. That's tough. Hopefully you find something soon. Might have to look for a temporary different line of work. I've been there before.



I really want one poster to explain in detail what they mean by "corporate welfare". Corporations pay tons of taxes and do society a favor by providing jobs. I'm interested to hear someone actually explain with some logic/facts what the problem with corporations are
http://americasmarkets.usatoday.com/...ay-no-u-s-tax/
post 1453559673 07-19-2016, 08:07 PM
-
#250
  1. BearTactics
  2. Habitual line stepper
  1. BearTactics
  2. Habitual line stepper
  3. Join Date: Feb 2015
  4. Posts: 5,270
  5. Rep Power: 26467
Originally Posted By sif⏩
Unemployment Insurance is 3B of that. See Figure 2 in your own link.

It's really hard to continue this conversation because you're not willing to have an actual debate but are resorting to insults and are providing leading information. I don't know if you think I'm not going to read the study that you link or what, but it's clear that you're just googling things and linking absentmindedly. Additionally, you sound like you don't have an open mind so there is really no point in wasting any more time on you.

Anyway, for a 28 year old who laughs at others misfortune and circumstance, who doesn't know what corporate welfare refers to and thinks that he could never fall from grace, you're in for a lot of disappointment in your future. Good luck to you. You'll need it.
You seriously going to act like i tried to mislead you, because 3B of over 100B was Unemployment Insurance? I know what people refer to when they say corporate welfare, I just wanted one of you to explain how you thought it was equivalent to entitlement/welfare abuse, which we have seen that there is no comparison whatsoever. I have had ups and downs just like anyone else, but I didn't abuse the welfare system, I did what I had to do. My career now has nothing to do with what I went to college for and it's because I lost a job and I ended up going in a different direction.

And when did i "laugh at people on welfare"? Again, you're disingenuous and overwhelmed with emotion and you're appealing to emotion rather than to reason with the paragraph you just wrote.
Originally Posted By second2noneBrah⏩
http://americasmarkets.usatoday.com/...ay-no-u-s-tax/
That is 11 Corporations out of literally thousands. The article clearly stated the avg tax rate by corporations was 36% and it also gave reasons why Goodyear had a TEMPORARY tax credit. You can bet that there is a reason this small handful of companies are getting a credit.
Bald head scallywag
post 1453561103 07-19-2016, 08:15 PM
-
#251
  1. BigPoppaPumpin
  2. Bish Be Humble
  1. BigPoppaPumpin
  2. Bish Be Humble
  3. Join Date: Oct 2015
  4. Posts: 2,562
  5. Rep Power: 804
The conservative elite has brainwashed the average conservatives into supporting stances completely against their interest.


Brb I'm going to support a tax cut for millionaires even though I make 40K a year
Brb I'm going to support a tax cut for corporations even though I make 40K a year
Brb I'm against the estate tax on the wealthy (5Million) even though my net assets barely total 20K
Brb I'm against universal healthcare even though I'm broke as chit and don't have healthcare
Brb I'm for deregulating wallstreet, even though the banks are largely the reason why you're in massive debt, with a home not worth chit, and a retirement plan in the gutter


These people are firmly in the lower middle class, yet they vote as if they're in the top 0.01%, defending the corporations and the super rich, when they couldn't scrounge together $400 if an emergency hit. Their whole existence is predicated in joining an elite class they'll never be part of.
Bish Don't Kill my Vibe
post 1453562523 07-19-2016, 08:23 PM
-
#252
  1. ChalkyWhiteX
  2. Banned
  1. ChalkyWhiteX
  2. Banned
  3. Join Date: Mar 2016
  4. Age: 39
  5. Posts: 1,702
  6. Rep Power: 0
Originally Posted By BigPoppaPumpin⏩
The conservative elite has brainwashed the average conservatives into supporting stances completely against their interest.


Brb I'm going to support a tax cut for millionaires even though I make 40K a year
Brb I'm going to support a tax cut for corporations even though I make 40K a year
Brb I'm against the estate tax on the wealthy (5Million) even though my net assets barely total 20K
Brb I'm against universal healthcare even though I'm broke as chit and don't have healthcare


These people are firmly in the lower middle class, yet they vote as if they're in the top 0.01%, defending the corporations and the super rich, when they couldn't scrounge together $400 if an emergency hit. Their whole existence is predicated in joining an elite class they'll never be part of.
Divide and conquer. Pin the lower classes against each other, like opie here who looks down on people on welfare. Meanwhile the real wealthy making money off his mortgage and slave labor laugh all the way to the bank
post 1453562613 07-19-2016, 08:24 PM
-
#253
  1. donblaximus
  2. Registered User
  1. donblaximus
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Jul 2010
  4. Age: 50
  5. Posts: 12,396
  6. Rep Power: 70954
Originally Posted By BearTactics⏩
I bought my house last year so, i couldn't take a deduction on it until this year. That being said, your effective tax rate cannot be 20% if you make the money you say you do, unless you are taking the deductions through a business or some other shelter of some kind. If so, then you are no better than the corporations your a villianizing for doing the same thing. If you make 250k and are married, your obligation just to the federal government (this doesn't include social security, medicare, or state withholdings) is 57k before any deductions. That is 22%. Add 7.6% for SS (if self employed then 15.2%), and another lets just say modest 10% for state and medicare with holdings gives us about 40%. I have no problem with people or corporations sheltering their money from the government through any legal means. Corporations are getting tax breaks, along with citizens because our economy is in the gutter and in theory tax cuts boost the economy. It's not because they are bribing people, the federal reserve and the government set the tax code in a way that will most benefit the economy.
So me paying less % in taxes than you do boost the economy in theory. Am I understanding your answer to my question correctly? I can guarantee you I dont spend exponentially more because of it. Im pretty sure folks making more than me are just stockpiling the money and investing in more money making assets.
post 1453562713 07-19-2016, 08:24 PM
-
#254
  1. BearTactics
  2. Habitual line stepper
  1. BearTactics
  2. Habitual line stepper
  3. Join Date: Feb 2015
  4. Posts: 5,270
  5. Rep Power: 26467
Originally Posted By BigPoppaPumpin⏩
The conservative elite has brainwashed the average conservatives into supporting stances completely against their interest.


Brb I'm going to support a tax cut for millionaires even though I make 40K a year
Brb I'm going to support a tax cut for corporations even though I make 40K a year
Brb I'm against the estate tax on the wealthy (5Million) even though my net assets barely total 20K
Brb I'm against universal healthcare even though I'm broke as chit and don't have healthcare


These people are firmly in the lower middle class, yet they vote as if they're in the top 0.01%, defending the corporations and the super rich, when they couldn't scrounge together $400 if an emergency hit. Their whole existence is predicated in joining an elite class they'll never be part of.
You forgot the other option. Some of us don't care because we don't use government entitlements/funds and carry our own weight. I wouldn't mind if the government had no involvement in our lives and we didn't pay taxes at all and everything was privatized. Things would be much more efficient that way. I don't feel entitled to other peoples money so estate taxes, and millionaires keeping their money is no bother to me. I can make my own way. I don't care if corporations get a tax cut because they contribute far more than any other entity or individual that pays taxes monetarily and through job creation, community support, ect. If the government didn't waste so much of the tax revenue and let it get abused there would be a surplus every year.
Bald head scallywag
post 1453563543 07-19-2016, 08:29 PM
-
#255
  1. BearTactics
  2. Habitual line stepper
  1. BearTactics
  2. Habitual line stepper
  3. Join Date: Feb 2015
  4. Posts: 5,270
  5. Rep Power: 26467
Originally Posted By donblaximus⏩
So me paying less % in taxes than you do boost the economy in theory. Am I understanding your answer to my question correctly? I can guarantee you I dont spend exponentially more because of it. Im pretty sure folks making more than me are just stockpiling the money and investing in more money making assets.
Yes, in theory it boosts the economy. You even said why in your argument. You are investing it into productive assets. Whether that be stock market or anything else, you are contributing to growth/productivity. By letting you keep your tax dollars, in theory, this is a beneficial deployment of funds and it is something the government doesn't have to subsidize because you are willing to take the risk for a return on your investment. It's not necessarily proven that this is the case, but theoretically its correct.
Bald head scallywag
post 1453563743 07-19-2016, 08:30 PM
-
#256
  1. donblaximus
  2. Registered User
  1. donblaximus
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Jul 2010
  4. Age: 50
  5. Posts: 12,396
  6. Rep Power: 70954
Originally Posted By BigPoppaPumpin⏩
The conservative elite has brainwashed the average conservatives into supporting stances completely against their interest.


Brb I'm going to support a tax cut for millionaires even though I make 40K a year
Brb I'm going to support a tax cut for corporations even though I make 40K a year
Brb I'm against the estate tax on the wealthy (5Million) even though my net assets barely total 20K
Brb I'm against universal healthcare even though I'm broke as chit and don't have healthcare
Brb I'm for deregulating wallstreet, even though the banks are largely the reason why you're in massive debt, with a home not worth chit, and a retirement plan in the gutter


These people are firmly in the lower middle class, yet they vote as if they're in the top 0.01%, defending the corporations and the super rich, when they couldn't scrounge together $400 if an emergency hit. Their whole existence is predicated in joining an elite class they'll never be part of.
Bingo. They successfully make the middle class believe "those people" are stealing your money so you should vote to cut taxes so "those people" cant abuse the system.
Oh and by the way, once taxes are cut, use the money on consuming "our products" to "spur the economy" instead of actually maxing out your retirement accounts and investing in yourself.
Im all for cleaning up abuse in the system. Thats where we should end the argument. But when this guy is arguing with me because I HAVE NO PROBLEM paying more taxes and a good contributor to this society, im kind of left scratching my head.
post 1453564003 07-19-2016, 08:32 PM
-
#257
  1. donblaximus
  2. Registered User
  1. donblaximus
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Jul 2010
  4. Age: 50
  5. Posts: 12,396
  6. Rep Power: 70954
Originally Posted By BearTactics⏩
You forgot the other option. Some of us don't care because we don't use government entitlements/funds and carry our own weight. I wouldn't mind if the government had no involvement in our lives and we didn't pay taxes at all and everything was privatized. Things would be much more efficient that way. I don't feel entitled to other peoples money so estate taxes, and millionaires keeping their money is no bother to me. I can make my own way. I don't care if corporations get a tax cut because they contribute far more than any other entity or individual that pays taxes monetarily and through job creation, community support, ect. If the government didn't waste so much of the tax revenue and let it get abused there would be a surplus every year.
So when you got laid off you didn't collect unemployment?
post 1453564663 07-19-2016, 08:36 PM
-
#258
  1. donblaximus
  2. Registered User
  1. donblaximus
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Jul 2010
  4. Age: 50
  5. Posts: 12,396
  6. Rep Power: 70954
Originally Posted By BearTactics⏩
Yes, in theory it boosts the economy. You even said why in your argument. You are investing it into productive assets. Whether that be stock market or anything else, you are contributing to growth/productivity. By letting you keep your tax dollars, in theory, this is a beneficial deployment of funds and it is something the government doesn't have to subsidize because you are willing to take the risk for a return on your investment. It's not necessarily proven that this is the case, but theoretically its correct.
Im glad you have studied theory, I am getting caught up. I speak from the real world, where I see people that are hard working paying more taxes than me from a percentage perspective and they get caught in a zone where they are barely treading water and any windfall will cause them to really be in deep crap. Thats a large majority of America and they are just hamsters in a wheel. If me buying more real estate and assets to make more money in theory "helps them" them okie dokie, but I can assure you that Im pretty positive the seperation between the middle class and the upper CLASSES (there are many distinctions) is getting wider and wider.
post 1453564713 07-19-2016, 08:37 PM
-
#259
  1. ScubaStevo
  2. One Of Our Top Posters!
  1. ScubaStevo
  2. One Of Our Top Posters!
  3. Join Date: Nov 2009
  4. Posts: 35,061
  5. Rep Power: 34572
Think of this, libs, the next time you vote Democrat (especially for Shillary this fall).

LMFAO
░░░░░░░░▄▄▄▄░░░░░░░░
░░░░░▄███░░███▄░░░░░
░░░▄█████▄▄█████▄░░░
░░░██████░░██████░░░
░░█░█▀░░▀██▀░░▀█░█░░
░░█░█░░██░░██░░█░█░░
░░░▀█░░▄▄▄▄▄▄░░█▀░░░
░░░░░▀▄▄▀▀▀▀▄▄▀░░░░░

---------MAGA MAN---------
post 1453565533 07-19-2016, 08:43 PM
-
#260
  1. BearTactics
  2. Habitual line stepper
  1. BearTactics
  2. Habitual line stepper
  3. Join Date: Feb 2015
  4. Posts: 5,270
  5. Rep Power: 26467
Originally Posted By donblaximus⏩
So when you got laid off you didn't collect unemployment?
No. I worked 2 part time jobs until I found another career. It took me 6-7 months, but I was selective about it since I was already out of work anyway. I lived below my means and it wasn't fun, but whatever.

I've said that I have no problem with a temporary use of these "safety nets" anyway. I just think its dumb that people are justifying welfare abuse, arguably the biggest drain on the annual tax revenue, by comparing it to "corporate welfare" which is just a term created by the left that implies a negative connotation to tax breaks in a down economy. It's funny that the word welfare can have a negative connotation when associated with corporations, but when talking about individuals it shouldn't be a negative association. The hypocrisy is astounding
Originally Posted By donblaximus⏩
Im glad you have studied theory, I am getting caught up. I speak from the real world, where I see people that are hard working paying more taxes than me from a percentage perspective and they get caught in a zone where they are barely treading water and any windfall will cause them to really be in deep crap. Thats a large majority of America and they are just hamsters in a wheel. If me buying more real estate and assets to make more money in theory "helps them" them okie dokie, but I can assure you that Im pretty positive the seperation between the middle class and the upper CLASSES (there are many distinctions) is getting wider and wider.
the separation is getting wider and wider because more people have ascended to upper middle/ upper class. It's not because americans are getting poorer. The lower class looks about the same as it historically has by percentage, but the middle class is shrinking slightly because more people are becoming wealthier.

Dude how do you make so much money anyway. Never seen a rich guy this lost
Bald head scallywag
post 1453565633 07-19-2016, 08:43 PM
-
#261
  1. NYPat
  2. Registered User
  1. NYPat
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Dec 2010
  4. Posts: 43,432
  5. Rep Power: 198579
Originally Posted By BearTactics⏩
I really want one poster to explain in detail what they mean by "corporate welfare". Corporations pay tons of taxes and do society a favor by providing jobs. I'm interested to hear someone actually explain with some logic/facts what the problem with corporations are
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_welfare

The biggest corporations that generate the largest amount of profit, pay little to nothing in taxes.
post 1453566083 07-19-2016, 08:46 PM
-
#262
  1. iceypain
  2. Registered User
  1. iceypain
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Jan 2007
  4. Age: 35
  5. Posts: 9,278
  6. Rep Power: 28507
Originally Posted By BearTactics⏩
Yes, in theory it boosts the economy. You even said why in your argument. You are investing it into productive assets. Whether that be stock market or anything else, you are contributing to growth/productivity. By letting you keep your tax dollars, in theory, this is a beneficial deployment of funds and it is something the government doesn't have to subsidize because you are willing to take the risk for a return on your investment. It's not necessarily proven that this is the case, but theoretically its correct.
we don't really need more money plowed back into financial assets. Sure, investment in productive assets is key to long term growth, but aggregate demand (mostly driven by consumption in the US) is equally important if not more. Savings/investment and consumption need to be balanced for optimal economic growth. if you look at recent trends in financial asset prices vs real inflation (CPI/PCE), it's pretty clear that there will be a larger marginal benefit to the economy with a boost to consumption/demand than assets; so every dollar that goes to someone with a larger marginal propensity to spend will be more productive than one that goes to someone with a greater marginal propensity to save it.
post 1453566633 07-19-2016, 08:50 PM
-
#263
  1. donblaximus
  2. Registered User
  1. donblaximus
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Jul 2010
  4. Age: 50
  5. Posts: 12,396
  6. Rep Power: 70954
Originally Posted By BearTactics⏩
No. I worked 2 part time jobs until I found another career. It took me 6-7 months, but I was selective about it since I was already out of work anyway. I lived below my means and it wasn't fun, but whatever.

I've said that I have no problem with a temporary use of these "safety nets" anyway. I just think its dumb that people are justifying welfare abuse, arguably the biggest drain on the annual tax revenue, by comparing it to "corporate welfare" which is just a term created by the left that implies a negative connotation to tax breaks in a down economy. It's funny that the word welfare can have a negative connotation when associated with corporations, but when talking about individuals it shouldn't be a negative association. The hypocrisy is astounding



the separation is getting wider and wider because more people have ascended to upper middle/ upper class. It's not because americans are getting poorer. The lower class looks about the same as it historically has by percentage, but the middle class is shrinking slightly because more people are becoming wealthier.
You worked 2 part time jobs and what did you do for health insurance during that 2 part time job stint?

I dont see anyone arguing with you about welfare abuse? Im all for putting systems in place to put checks and balances in place to stop ALL ABUSE, welfare, military spending, health, etc
In one topic you talk about "corporate welfare" boosting the economy while in another post you talk about being all for no subsidy from the government which means those VERY LARGE corporations would fail and thus send our economy down even worse. So which one is it again?
post 1453567223 07-19-2016, 08:55 PM
-
#264
  1. ChalkyWhiteX
  2. Banned
  1. ChalkyWhiteX
  2. Banned
  3. Join Date: Mar 2016
  4. Age: 39
  5. Posts: 1,702
  6. Rep Power: 0
Originally Posted By BearTactics⏩
I really want one poster to explain in detail what they mean by "corporate welfare". Corporations pay tons of taxes and do society a favor by providing jobs. I'm interested to hear someone actually explain with some logic/facts what the problem with corporations are
Farm Subsidies
To this day, to be treated as a farmer in America doesnt necessarily require you to grow any crops. According to the Government Accountability Office,between 2007 and 2011 Uncle Sam paid some $3m in subsidies to 2,300 farms where no crop of any sort was grown. Between 2008 and 2012, $10.6m was paid to farmers who had been dead for over a year. Such payments explain why Tom Vilsack, the agriculture secretary, is promoting a rule to attempt to crack down on payments to non-farming folk. But with crop prices now falling, taxpayers are braced to be fleeced again.

American farm subsidies are egregiously expensive, harvesting $20 billion a year from taxpayers pockets. Most of the money goes to big, rich farmers producing staple commodities such as corn and soyabeans in states such as Iowa.

Few politicians are inclined to vote against farm subsidies
http://www.economist.com/news/united...king-taxpayers
post 1453569063 07-19-2016, 09:07 PM
-
#265
  1. BearTactics
  2. Habitual line stepper
  1. BearTactics
  2. Habitual line stepper
  3. Join Date: Feb 2015
  4. Posts: 5,270
  5. Rep Power: 26467
Originally Posted By iceypain⏩
we don't really need more money plowed back into financial assets. Sure, investment in productive assets is key to long term growth, but aggregate demand (mostly driven by consumption in the US) is equally important if not more. Savings/investment and consumption need to be balanced for optimal economic growth. if you look at recent trends in financial asset prices vs real inflation (CPI/PCE), it's pretty clear that there will be a larger marginal benefit to the economy with a boost to consumption/demand than assets; so every dollar that goes to someone with a larger marginal propensity to spend will be more productive than one that goes to someone with a greater marginal propensity to save it.
Yes. You are right about that, but the problem that is never considered here is Americans are overspent already. When they gave stimulus checks in '08 it didn't have the desired effect because people used it to pay bills they were behind on. In essence, paid for things that were already consumed.
Originally Posted By donblaximus⏩
You worked 2 part time jobs and what did you do for health insurance during that 2 part time job stint?

I dont see anyone arguing with you about welfare abuse? Im all for putting systems in place to put checks and balances in place to stop ALL ABUSE, welfare, military spending, health, etc
In one topic you talk about "corporate welfare" boosting the economy while in another post you talk about being all for no subsidy from the government which means those VERY LARGE corporations would fail and thus send our economy down even worse. So which one is it again?
Dude.. seriously. I just have to cut it off here
Bald head scallywag
post 1453569183 07-19-2016, 09:09 PM
-
#266
  1. BearTactics
  2. Habitual line stepper
  1. BearTactics
  2. Habitual line stepper
  3. Join Date: Feb 2015
  4. Posts: 5,270
  5. Rep Power: 26467
Originally Posted By ChalkyWhiteX⏩
Farm Subsidies



http://www.economist.com/news/united...king-taxpayers
Not seeing any "corporate welfare" here. Just more subsidy/entitlement abuse.
Bald head scallywag
post 1453569903 07-19-2016, 09:13 PM
-
#267
  1. donblaximus
  2. Registered User
  1. donblaximus
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Jul 2010
  4. Age: 50
  5. Posts: 12,396
  6. Rep Power: 70954
Originally Posted By BearTactics⏩
Yes. You are right about that, but the problem that is never considered here is Americans are overspent already. When they gave stimulus checks in '08 it didn't have the desired effect because people used it to pay bills they were behind on. In essence, paid for things that were already consumed.



Dude.. seriously. I just have to cut it off here
Not all americans are overspent. The ones getting the corporate tax breaks have money to last a few generations
Go ahead and cut it off, im glad, ive upheld my end of the pact with my buddies for the night. I never claimed to be a professional at this.

Im gonna go refocus my time at something that I am a professional at, and something that will be productive for me and my family, vs babble about theoretical BS that wont do me or anyone around me any good. I suggest maybe you look into doing the same.
post 1453570293 07-19-2016, 09:16 PM
-
#268
  1. BigPoppaPumpin
  2. Bish Be Humble
  1. BigPoppaPumpin
  2. Bish Be Humble
  3. Join Date: Oct 2015
  4. Posts: 2,562
  5. Rep Power: 804
The numbers seem to back it up. Americans' average wealth tops $301,000 per adult, enough to rank us fourth on the latest Credit Suisse Global Wealth report.

But that figure doesn't tell you how the middle class American is doing.

Americans' median wealth is a mere $44,900 per adult -- half have more, half have less. That's only good enough for 19th place, below Japan, Canada, Australia and much of Western Europe.

"Americans tend to think of their middle class as being the richest in the world, but it turns out, in terms of wealth, they rank fairly low among major industrialized countries," said Edward Wolff, a New York University economics professor who studies net worth.

Why is there such a big difference between the two measures?

Super rich Americans skew average wealth upwards. The U.S. has 42% of the world's millionaires, and 49% of those with more than $50 million in assets.

This schism secures us the top rank in one net worth measure -- wealth inequality.

There's one main reason why the average Spaniard or Italian has more to his name than the typical American: real estate.

Home ownership rates are higher in many European countries than in the U.S., giving Joe European more assets to his name than his American counterpart. Plus, it's easier for Americans to borrow money, which eats away at their net worth, said Jim Davies, an economics professor at Western University in Ontario, Canada, and co-author of the Credit Suisse report.


Middle class Americans were also hurt greatly by the housing collapse at the end of the last decade. The median wealth of families was $77,300 in 2010, a nearly 40% drop from 2007, according to Federal Reserve statistics.

"Changes in home prices have a big effect on the wealth in the middle," Davies said.

Middle class Australians, by comparison, are leading the pack. The country's residents have the highest median net worth, coming in at $219,500. Australia also has low wealth inequality.

This is in part because Australians have a strong tradition of home ownership, though escalating prices have made it tougher for young adults to secure the Australian Dream. Those down under also have a mandatory retirement savings program, where they must squirrel away more than 9% of their income for their Golden Years, and they carry relatively low credit card and student loan debt.

Americans, meanwhile, are having trouble building wealth because wages have stagnated for more than a decade. Median household income was $51,017 in 2012, compared to $56,080 in 1999, according to the Census Bureau's most recent statistics.

There are many reasons why middle class incomes are suffering, including the decline of unions' power, the shift of jobs overseas and the increasing use of technology in the workplace, said Kenneth Thomas, professor of political science at University of Missouri, St. Louis.

Also, Americans have to pay more out of pocket for basics, such as health care and higher education, reducing their ability to build their nest egg.

"Middle class families haven't been able to save anything," Wolff said.
http://money.cnn.com/2014/06/11/news...-class-wealth/



Welfare isn't the problem. The problem is the banks, the wealthy, and the corporations, which have no problem with squeezing out the average American to make an extra buck.
Bish Don't Kill my Vibe
post 1453571663 07-19-2016, 09:25 PM
-
#269
  1. BearTactics
  2. Habitual line stepper
  1. BearTactics
  2. Habitual line stepper
  3. Join Date: Feb 2015
  4. Posts: 5,270
  5. Rep Power: 26467
Originally Posted By donblaximus⏩
Not all americans are overspent. The ones getting the corporate tax breaks have money to last a few generations
Go ahead and cut it off, im glad, ive upheld my end of the pact with my buddies for the night. I never claimed to be a professional at this.

Im gonna go refocus my time at something that I am a professional at, and something that will be productive for me and my family, vs babble about theoretical BS that wont do me or anyone around me any good. I suggest maybe you look into doing the same.
I'm not a professional either, but I did go to college and learned a few things, along with how to think for myself. And I do just fine for myself bro, don't really need your condescending "suggestions". I'm not making what you are, but I'm not 40 either. I've tried to keep the argument as close to the original topic as possible and you continue to make arguments that are not relevant and are mostly incorrect. Anyway, have a good one dude.
Originally Posted By BigPoppaPumpin⏩




http://money.cnn.com/2014/06/11/news...-class-wealth/



Welfare isn't the problem. The problem is the banks, the wealthy, and the corporations, which have no problem with squeezing out the average American to make an extra buck.
Sorry i didn't realize the banks and wealthy people were forcing you to overspend and live beyond your means. Australia sounds like its a better place than America, maybe you should look into moving there.

Surely american's spending habits and culture are not to blame, it's the big greedy banks that force you to climb into debt. It's the corporations getting a tax break that put you in debt and cause you not to succeed. No problems can be our own, there are big banks and corporations holding us back!

**You blame the banks for things like the housing crisis and you fail to mention it was because the democrats pushed legislation, that required them to lift their lending standards. There is usually policy behind any problems you have with a bank, it is highly regulated institution, and most of the poor policies (at least the ones that have negatively effected the economy in the recent past) came down from the Left side of the isle (shocker i know)**
Bald head scallywag
post 1453572353 07-19-2016, 09:31 PM
-
#270
  1. iceypain
  2. Registered User
  1. iceypain
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Jan 2007
  4. Age: 35
  5. Posts: 9,278
  6. Rep Power: 28507
Originally Posted By BearTactics⏩
Yes. You are right about that, but the problem that is never considered here is Americans are overspent already. When they gave stimulus checks in '08 it didn't have the desired effect because people used it to pay bills they were behind on. In essence, paid for things that were already consumed.
i don't think that is true. money is never truly wasted at the aggregate level. if you give someone money and they use it to pay down debt, it frees up future income so the net effect may be lagged but it is still there. i don't know why the stimulus did not have the desired effect but one explanation could be that people don't have the same MPC (marginal propensity to consume) on one-off windfalls as they do with an increase in recurring income. it's not hard to imagine the psychology behind that effect.
Quick Navigation Top Misc
Bookmarks
Digg.com
Digg
del.icio.us
del.icio.us
Stumbleupon.com
StumbleUpon
Google.com
Google
Facebook.com
Facebook
Posting Permissions
  1. You may not post new threads
  2. You may not post replies
  3. You may not post attachments
  4. You may not edit your posts