More Than 300,000 Millionaires Would Go Off Fiscal Cliff

[dmcowen674]

12-4-2012

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/more-300-000-millionaires-off-162426734.html

More Than 300,000 Millionaires Would Go Off 'Cliff'



The population of millionaires in the United States would fall by 315,000, or 6 percent, next year if the country goes over the fiscal cliff



If the threat of the cliff didn't exist at all, the millionaire population would grow by 443,000 and their fortunes would grow by $1.6 trillion.

 

[dmcowen674]

I bet a lot of the rich Republicans in here would be in this group as evidenced by how vocal they are about it in here.

Welcome back down to Earth.

 

[Zivic]

those damn millionaires... nobody should be allowed to make that kind of money.

Good thing we have a govt that will literally be taxing them out of existence...

 

[Pr0d1gy]

those damn millionaires... nobody should be allowed to make that kind of money.

Good thing we have a govt that will literally be taxing them out of existence...

It would be better if the private sector actually showed some shred of loyalty to this country, instead of constantly selling out the little guy in America in the search for the next penny of profit they can squeeze out of their continually record-setting profits. I mean God forbid we actually kept the American middle class alive since they basically drive the world economy. But hey, what do I know? It's not like I can't do simple math like every idiot CEO in this country. The profit motive should not be more important than the country and it's workers.

 

[Exterous]

It would be better if the private sector actually showed some shred of loyalty to this country, instead of constantly selling out the little guy in America in the search for the next penny of profit they can squeeze out of their continually record-setting profits. I mean God forbid we actually kept the American middle class alive since they basically drive the world economy. But hey, what do I know? It's not like I can't do simple math like every idiot CEO in this country. The profit motive should not be more important than the country and it's workers.

You mean like the loyalty the country showed towards the small business owners that had Made in USA products when the nearest Megamart opened up with its super cheap Made in China crap? Or was it the loyalty of the country when foreign car manufacturers were making cars cheaper and selling them here in the US? How about when the country showed loyalty to the Made in USA clothing manufacturers when they ran out to buy the cheap Chinese clothes? I mean - look at all the outrage over the outsourcing of most of Apple's manufacturing.

For many companies the motive wasn't about profit - it was about staying alive while everyone else was cutting costs and prices through outsourcing. Americans voted with their wallet - preferring cheaper Chinese crap to American crap. What good would outsourcing have been if Americans shunned the product? The very Americans you cry out in support of were immensely culpable in their own demise

While I agree that loyalty would be better for us it only works if both sides agree to pay the price. This is not to say that businesses do not have their share of blame but the American consumer had much to do with the divergence of interests and loyalty.

I don't think we will see much change until the job market recovers and employers are forced to pay more attention to retention

 

[FerrelGeek]

You mean like the loyalty the country showed towards the small business owners that had Made in USA products when the nearest Megamart opened up with its super cheap Made in China crap? Or was it the loyalty of the country when foreign car manufacturers were making cars cheaper and selling them here in the US? How about when the country showed loyalty to the Made in USA clothing manufacturers when they ran out to buy the cheap Chinese clothes? I mean - look at all the outrage over the outsourcing of most of Apple's manufacturing.

For many companies the motive wasn't about profit - it was about staying alive while everyone else was cutting costs and prices through outsourcing. Americans voted with their wallet - preferring cheaper Chinese crap to American crap. What good would outsourcing have been if Americans shunned the product? The very Americans you cry out in support of were immensely culpable in their own demise

Yep. The drive for profit is also pushed by the owners of the companies, i.e., the stockholders. These days, stock is mostly held in various funds, not by evil miserly grasping sneering old white guys. Corporations need to maintain profits to satisfy the fund managers. These funds, btw, are what we invest in for our IRAs, 401ks, college savings, and pensions. So, are you willing to take a lower rate of return on your retirement savings so that corporations can give up some profit? Not saying that there isn't greed in corporations, but the situation is not how the average lib paints them either. Corporations have a fiduciary responsibility to their stockholders

While I agree that loyalty would be better for us it only works if both sides agree to pay the price. This is not to say that businesses do not have their share of blame but the American consumer had much to do with the divergence of interests and loyalty.

I don't think we will see much change until the job market recovers and employers are forced to pay more attention to retention

This. And as I've said multiple times, Obama has no plan to help the private sector recover, even though it would be in his best interest to do so. He's never spent a meaningful day of his life in private business and has no clue how it works. Nor does he want to have a clue.

 

[ichy]

OP, your envy/jealousy is really quite pathetic. Sort of like everything else about you.

 

[dmcowen674]

OP, your envy/jealousy is really quite pathetic.

Sort of like everything else about you.

I drive you crazy with Jealousy of me, it's awesome. :thumbsup:

 

[FerrelGeek]

I drive you crazy with Jealousy of me, it's awesome. :thumbsup:

Nobody envies you. Not even the libs on this board.

 

[Matt1970]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pr0d1gy
It would be better if the private sector actually showed some shred of loyalty to this country, instead of constantly selling out the little guy in America in the search for the next penny of profit they can squeeze out of their continually record-setting profits. I mean God forbid we actually kept the American middle class alive since they basically drive the world economy. But hey, what do I know? It's not like I can't do simple math like every idiot CEO in this country. The profit motive should not be more important than the country and it's workers.

You mean like the loyalty the country showed towards the small business owners that had Made in USA products when the nearest Megamart opened up with its super cheap Made in China crap? Or was it the loyalty of the country when foreign car manufacturers were making cars cheaper and selling them here in the US? How about when the country showed loyalty to the Made in USA clothing manufacturers when they ran out to buy the cheap Chinese clothes? I mean - look at all the outrage over the outsourcing of most of Apple's manufacturing.

For many companies the motive wasn't about profit - it was about staying alive while everyone else was cutting costs and prices through outsourcing. Americans voted with their wallet - preferring cheaper Chinese crap to American crap. What good would outsourcing have been if Americans shunned the product? The very Americans you cry out in support of were immensely culpable in their own demise

While I agree that loyalty would be better for us it only works if both sides agree to pay the price. This is not to say that businesses do not have their share of blame but the American consumer had much to do with the divergence of interests and loyalty.

I don't think we will see much change until the job market recovers and employers are forced to pay more attention to retention

I have been saying that all along.

 

[dmcowen674]

Nobody envies you. Not even the libs on this board.

Your post says otherwise

 

[FerrelGeek]

I have been saying that all along.

But it doesn't play well with the class warfare crowd.

 

[Matt1970]

But it doesn't play well with the class warfare crowd.

No it doesn't. They need someone to blame rather than accept the fact that they were warned of the consequences of buying that imported crap.

 

[DucatiMonster696]

Basically the OP is relishing in the fact that less people would be able to climb the ladder of success in life under Obama's administration if he takes us over that "Fiscal Cliff". In other words he epitomises the Winston Churchill quote in my signature below.

 

[zsdersw]

Basically the OP is relishing in the fact that less people are able to climb the ladder of success in life under Obama's administration.

... and a GOP-controlled House.

You can't, objectively, lay the fiscal cliff entirely at Obama's feet.

 

[DucatiMonster696]

... and a GOP-controlled House.

You can't, objectively, lay the fiscal cliff entirely at Obama's feet.

They had control of both houses for 2 years in Obama's first term. And nowhere did Democrats actually engage in meaningful budget talks which dealt with an issue everyone knew was going to arrive soon. Nowhere did they propose cuts on spending that were discussing real cuts not the phony bullshit of cutting programs an spending that has not even been finalized.

When the Democrats lost Congress but still held the Senate they still did not want to deal with the issue as was seen in the lack of credible budget proposals which included only token cuts to far off and unrealized spending and added more spending to the budget itself.

When they went to the table to discuss the issue of the debt ceiling they stymied any proposal which they did not agree with and played class warfare politics because they did not even want to discuss the issue of making real cuts. All of these actions were lead by dem's like Harry Reid and and Nancy Pelosi and Obama at the top, all of whom have total disdain and contempt toward anyone proposing realistic ideas for budgets which involved dealing with and reigning in spending.

 

[zsdersw]

They had control of both houses for 2 years in Obama's first term. And nowhere did Democrats actually engage in meaningful budget talks which dealt with an issue everyone knew was going to arrive soon. Nowhere did they propose cuts on spending that were discussing real cuts not the phony bullshit of cutting programs an spending that has not even been finalized.

When the Democrats lost Congress but still held the Senate they still did not want to deal with the issue as was seen in the lack of credible budget proposals which included only token cuts to far off and unrealized spending and added more spending to the budget itself.

When they went to the table to discuss the issue of the debt ceiling they stymied any proposal which they did not agree with and played class warfare politics because they did not even want to discuss the issue of making real cuts. All of these actions were lead by dem's like Harry Reid and and Nancy Pelosi and Obama at the top, all of whom have total disdain and contempt toward anyone proposing realistic ideas for budgets which involved dealing with and reigning in spending.

Yes, and Mitch McConnell said his top priority was to make Obama a one-term president.. and got Republicans to just say no to everything Obama proposed, whether it was a cut in spending or not. They also signed on to that which imposed the fiscal cliff in the first place.

Stop being a Republican shill. They have plenty of blame in this mess, too.

 

[DucatiMonster696]

Yes, and Mitch McConnell said his top priority was to make Obama a one-term president.. and got Republicans to just say no to everything Obama proposed, whether it was a cut in spending or not. They also signed on to that which imposed the fiscal cliff in the first place.

Stop being a Republican shill. They have plenty of blame in this mess, too.

When those "spending cuts" also include tax raises on the segment of Americans the Dem's have declared war on or spending increases for the future in other areas why wouldn't they vote no? See this is were you completely ignore the fact that Democrats are refusing to compromise on tax hikes and their so called "spending cuts" which aren't even real spending cuts.

 

[piasabird]

So how many of these Millionaires make any income? Probably most are stock market millionaires with nothing but capital gains or mostly earn money from stocks.

How much in new taxes will you be paying under Obammacare?

 

[zsdersw]

When those "spending cuts" also include tax raises on the segment of Americans the Dem's have declared war on or spending increases for the future in other areas why wouldn't they vote no? See this is were you completely ignore the fact that Democrats are refusing to compromise on tax hikes and their so called "spending cuts" which aren't even real spending cuts.

Sort of like how the Republicans refused to compromise all this time, too.

Sorry, the fact of the matter is that Republicans have plenty of blame for the fiscal cliff.

 

[blackangst1]

Good! They have too much money anyway! They wont miss it!

(did I do that right?)

 

[MooseNSquirrel]

Yep. The drive for profit is also pushed by the owners of the companies, i.e., the stockholders. These days, stock is mostly held in various funds, not by evil miserly grasping sneering old white guys. Corporations need to maintain profits to satisfy the fund managers. These funds, btw, are what we invest in for our IRAs, 401ks, college savings, and pensions. So, are you willing to take a lower rate of return on your retirement savings so that corporations can give up some profit? Not saying that there isn't greed in corporations, but the situation is not how the average lib paints them either. Corporations have a fiduciary responsibility to their stockholders



This. And as I've said multiple times, Obama has no plan to help the private sector recover, even though it would be in his best interest to do so. He's never spent a meaningful day of his life in private business and has no clue how it works. Nor does he want to have a clue.

Wait, if its a free market, shouldn't it recover on its own? Why does Obama need to intervene?

Someone wants it both ways.

Also, you conveniently left out that part about boards and ceo's having their salary tied to short term stock performance.

 

[FerrelGeek]

Wait, if its a free market, shouldn't it recover on its own? Why does Obama need to intervene?

Someone wants it both ways.

Also, you conveniently left out that part about boards and ceo's having their salary tied to short term stock performance.

Never said he needs to intervene. What needs to be done is to make it easier to start / grow businesses. The Obama admin's love of regulations won't help this. So no, I don't want it both ways.

As to your third point, I agree. I've been in the professional world for over 30 years and I've made comments most of that time that our corporate / investment structure is too 'short term' focused.

 

[werepossum]

You mean like the loyalty the country showed towards the small business owners that had Made in USA products when the nearest Megamart opened up with its super cheap Made in China crap? Or was it the loyalty of the country when foreign car manufacturers were making cars cheaper and selling them here in the US? How about when the country showed loyalty to the Made in USA clothing manufacturers when they ran out to buy the cheap Chinese clothes? I mean - look at all the outrage over the outsourcing of most of Apple's manufacturing.

For many companies the motive wasn't about profit - it was about staying alive while everyone else was cutting costs and prices through outsourcing. Americans voted with their wallet - preferring cheaper Chinese crap to American crap. What good would outsourcing have been if Americans shunned the product? The very Americans you cry out in support of were immensely culpable in their own demise

While I agree that loyalty would be better for us it only works if both sides agree to pay the price. This is not to say that businesses do not have their share of blame but the American consumer had much to do with the divergence of interests and loyalty.

I don't think we will see much change until the job market recovers and employers are forced to pay more attention to retention

Very well said.

I also find it ironic that so many who hate capitalism and outsourcing want to further empower the federal government - the very entity that makes the regulations which make outsourcing compelling and the laws which make outsourcing practical. What could go wrong with that?

I also wonder how many of these same people drive Hondas or Toyotas. Loyalty is indeed a two-way street.

 

[Doppel]

YADMRIOMT Yet Another Dave Mcowen Reveling In Others' Misfortune Thread