Why give Wall Street or Banks one penny?

[SleepWalkerX]

Originally posted by: GTKeeper

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: eleison

Originally posted by: sportage

Why give them one penny?

Because when you need it, they have you one penny. When they can't give you one penny, because you refused to help them, then you don't get one penny either.

WHAT??? :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

makes no sense... so banks want the penny that I have so that banks can pay me back my penny which I may or may not have?

Actually, this isn't about just one penny, its about 700 billion * 100 pennies. They want to take a ton of pennies from the us citizens and give them back their own pennies which the american people, may or may not have? Its raining pennies from heaven!!! ohh noes!!!

Do you understand how the capital markets work?

In order to lend money, banks have to have money. Nobody has money they are willing to lend, even if they have it. The rescue plan is an attempt to allow them to lend money again.

Without freeing up money, it'll be stuck. Liquidity is equivalent to oil in an engine. Without it, the engine seizes up. Putting a drop of oil (a penny) gets the system going again, producing many more pennies (power).

I am starting to think it'll be too late for people to realize this.

They should start reading up on 1929.

Its ironic that people don't realize that the Great Depression was triggered by a sudden siezing of credit and a mass panic. In addition to massive government debt.

This is exactly the same situation we are in now.

Actually you're wrong. We had a surplus during the Great Depression because the government spent it all on social programs.

But I guess you're right, its no different from today. The national debt is 10 trillion and we still think we can spend our way out of it.

 

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: eleison

If its truly about the sudden "seizing of credit". Why not let these bad banks fail, and pump money into the economy by providing funds to banks that are doing well? I'm sure the US government can also find other ways of pumping money into the US economy OTHER than a bailout of financial firms. What I see here is not the "helping of the US economy" to avoid a recession/depression. What I see here is the pleas of wall street trying to save its money, lousy investments and its high paiding jobs by fear mongering.

If it is truly about trying to get more money into the system, let the government do it. It can lower the rate in which it lends money to financial institutions -- the financial institutions that have keep "their noses clean".

Exactly. If the government is the only entity that can save us in this situation, let the government set up an agency to make short term loans to companies and let these greedy mother fuckers whither and die.

 

[Linux23]

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: eleison

Originally posted by: GTKeeper

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: eleison

Originally posted by: sportage

Why give them one penny?

Because when you need it, they have you one penny. When they can't give you one penny, because you refused to help them, then you don't get one penny either.

WHAT??? :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

makes no sense... so banks want the penny that I have so that banks can pay me back my penny which I may or may not have?

Actually, this isn't about just one penny, its about 700 billion * 100 pennies. They want to take a ton of pennies from the us citizens and give them back their own pennies which the american people, may or may not have? Its raining pennies from heaven!!! ohh noes!!!

Do you understand how the capital markets work?

In order to lend money, banks have to have money. Nobody has money they are willing to lend, even if they have it. The rescue plan is an attempt to allow them to lend money again.

Without freeing up money, it'll be stuck. Liquidity is equivalent to oil in an engine. Without it, the engine seizes up. Putting a drop of oil (a penny) gets the system going again, producing many more pennies (power).

I am starting to think it'll be too late for people to realize this.

They should start reading up on 1929.

Its ironic that people don't realize that the Great Depression was triggered by a sudden siezing of credit and a mass panic. In addition to massive government debt.

This is exactly the same situation we are in now.

If its truly about the sudden "seizing of credit". Why not let these bad banks fail, and pump money into the economy by providing funds to banks that are doing well? I'm sure the US government can also find other ways of pumping money into the US economy OTHER than a bailout of financial firms.

Letting the banks fail will cause even more problems. The people who had funding at those banks (or deposits) will go running to them, inundating their systems of lending, or borrowing.

The US Government let hundreds of banks fail in 1929+, the same thought occured to them. What they didn't realize is that in the enusing chaos bred more chaos, completely disrupting the system. Before anybody could figure out which banks were more solid, they were all shaky. At that point nobody trusted any banks and no banks trusted depositors or borrowers.

People think that this system can just fail and then pick itself back up in a few months. It doesn't work like that. It is a very complex system that has a very simple premise. Order creates calm which creates liquidity. With a lack of order and calm, the system rips itself apart.

All the government would be doing is creating calm by letting the banks recapitalize over time. The assets they have aren't truly worth .20 on the dollar, but are worth more, but the current chaos is valuing them at that much. As a result, the banks' capital position was destroyed from the marks to market. As mark to market destroyed capital it created more chaos, which resulted in more write-downs. It was a vicious circle that depleated capital for no good reason.

If the government were to step in and calm the markets by recapitalizing the banks, the markets would start working far better than they are now.

That is in *everybody's* best interest.

People don't realize the sh!t we're in. It's really a lose/lose situation.

 

[zephyrprime]

Originally posted by: Arkaign
^^ In a nutshell, yes. It's proven that profit is more important than any other aspect of life, and that if risk can be put off to tomorrow, next week, next year, that people will generally do *ANY*thing for money today. There is no long-term planning, no honor or stabilizing philosophy, just gimme more more more now now now and fuck everyone else.

This is exactly the problem. The thing that people need to realize is that everyone that created this problem was acting totally logically and rationally from his point of view when considering only his interest. People need to realize that free markets are fundamentally unstable.

 

[imported_Infidel]

This is just pure awesomeness....

Dear Wall Street,
Hi, this is the lobbyist for a group called The Taxpayers, Debtors, and Insured People of the United States. Now that we've rejected the first bailout plan, I'm sure that in the spirit of tough, free market capitalism, and spirited negotiations, you'll consider our second offer. Here are some terms that I'm SURE you will find reasonable:

1) We are willing to loan you money at a very low, introductory rate of 8.9%. If you are even one nanosecond late on your payment, your rate will go from 8.9% to 32.9% instantly. You will have no right to appeal this. The interest rate increase will be retroactive. None of this "but I mailed it out Friday" nonsense. We must get it, and the check must clear, for your payment to count. A reminder: transactions that occur after 2pm are not credited until the next business day, so be sure to make your payments before then.

2) If you are late on any of your other payments to your other creditors, your rate will also be spiked to 32.9%. I know it has nothing to do with us, but if you are late paying someone else, then OBVIOUSLY you are a bigger credit risk to us.

3) We will send you onerous terms and conditions 148,000,000 pages long in 6 point font. Of course, those terms can change on a whim, at any time, so we'll be sending you hourly updates to the contract, which we expect you to read and keep up with. Sorry, we will be the only ones that can amend the contract; you cannot.

4) You will have a predetermined credit line, and if you go over it by even $1, your interest rate will spike to 54.9%. Sorry, it's in the contract on page 109,209,392.

5) The bankruptcy laws have now changed. If you get into a bind, I'm afraid you won't find much sympathy; no more silly excuses will be accepted. We are going to have the titles to all of your buildings and physical assets put in our name, so when the inevitable time comes and you trip up, we'll simply take everything from you. There will be no court hearing.

6) We'll be conducting a background check, driving records check, drug test, and disease risk check of all of the top executives of your firm. After all, you're a riskier loan if you have any of those afflictions, aren't you? Well, if we find ANYTHING wrong, your interest rate will skyrocket, instantly, and without notice.

7) If your business is located in a "bad neighborhood", or a "poor city", or a "hurricane zone", or "flood plane", or "terrorist targeted city", as defined by us, we can raise your interest rates at any time, to any rate we choose.

For the last quarter century or so, you've imposed these terms, or some variation of them on us, when loaning us money or insuring us... arguing every single time that it's "necessary" and that these sorts of changes "will result in more profitable companies that will pass the savings along to consumers". Well, now that we're in the role of lender, and you're in the role of borrower, we're sure that you'll find these same terms fair. Wall Street, prove the cynics wrong and accept our new plan. Prove to everyone that you're not the hypocrites that everyone thinks you are.

Best regards, THE TAXPAYERS, DEBTORS, AND INSURED PEOPLES OF THE USA

Offer not valid in all 50 states. Terms, conditions, and interest rates subject to change at any time without notice. Borrower subject to intrusive credit, background, education, and criminal checks before issuance of loan. Upon any dispute, arbitration will be decided by someone tilted to rule in favor of taxpayers, and not by any indepedant or otherwise objective authority.

Yeah, I'm bitter

 

[JS80]

Originally posted by: sportage
You're right on the banks! And you have not began to cover the issue.

Remember these:

Banks got 80% on foreclosures from fannie and freddie for each and every
foreclosed home. PLUS whatever the home owner had paid until they stopped.
THAT is EXACYLY why they NEVER wanted to work with the home owner to
avoid foreclosure. They wanted that guaranteed 80%. Screw the owner.

Banks at one time tried to close down PAY DAY LOAN companies
through congress with lobbyist, suggesting
these loan companies charged outrageous payback rates.
When all the time the banks were charging $30+ for a bounced check,
and now most banks have their own PAY DAY LOAN options built into
their direct deposit checking accounts.
Look at your bank account online, there will most likely be a PAY DAY LOAN
option available thru the bank. Rates just like the PAY DAY LOAN stores.

Yes, the banks are VERY greedy. Not to mention their CEO compensations.

Wrong. Bank payday loan = 18%. Pay day store loan = 300%+

 

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: zephyrprime

Originally posted by: Arkaign
^^ In a nutshell, yes. It's proven that profit is more important than any other aspect of life, and that if risk can be put off to tomorrow, next week, next year, that people will generally do *ANY*thing for money today. There is no long-term planning, no honor or stabilizing philosophy, just gimme more more more now now now and fuck everyone else.

This is exactly the problem. The thing that people need to realize is that everyone that created this problem was acting totally logically and rationally from his point of view when considering only his interest. People need to realize that free markets are fundamentally unstable.

Unstable perhaps, but not unsustainable. A free market doesn't let you lend out more than you have. If I have $100 bill I can't deposit it in two banks.

Why should those same banks be allowed to lend the same $100 I gave them numerous times to people who have no ability to pay it back, and then cry for a bailout when I ask to have MY $100 back?

 

[BeauJangles]

Originally posted by: TheDoc9
Why not create 10 trillion? Give money to everyone.

BeauJangles, GTkeeper, LegendKiller, you guys have been lied to. Sorry.

I've been lied to? Because I have a basic understanding of what is going on in the market?

This IS NOT rocket science.

Banks keep money on hand to lend to others, that's how they make money. These loans come in all sorts of forms -- mortgages, small business loans, personal loans, credit cards, student loans, loans to other banks, loans to companies to pay payroll, investments into the market, etc, etc.

If we allow them to continue without any sort of bailout, the banks will fail. That has two major implications. First, it means that you and I won't be getting much in the way of any credit for years. Second, it means that you and I will be paying billions of dollars anyway. Each day that the government has delayed passing this legislation, thus far, has seen the collapse of one national bank. Wachovia will cost US a few hundred billion dollars. Just think about what five or ten more failures means: trillions out the window with nothing gained.

By buying loans from banks, we are essentially injecting money into their systems AND we (the people) are getting something in return. With this money, the banks can continue to function. Without it, they will fail and we all pay for it tenfold more than if we just passed the bailout. Plus, there's a good chance we'll see nearly a good chunk of the money back.

So, sir, I'd contend that you're lying to yourself. The economy needs help and, for once, the government needs to step in and do what is necessary. Otherwise, this credit crunch will get worse. Right now, I think the crunch is estimated at 40% as bad as the Great Depression. Without action it will get worse and drag the whole economy down.

 

[her209]

Why don't the banks just borrow the money from the Feds?

 

[jman19]

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: eleison

If its truly about the sudden "seizing of credit". Why not let these bad banks fail, and pump money into the economy by providing funds to banks that are doing well? I'm sure the US government can also find other ways of pumping money into the US economy OTHER than a bailout of financial firms. What I see here is not the "helping of the US economy" to avoid a recession/depression. What I see here is the pleas of wall street trying to save its money, lousy investments and its high paiding jobs by fear mongering.

If it is truly about trying to get more money into the system, let the government do it. It can lower the rate in which it lends money to financial institutions -- the financial institutions that have keep "their noses clean".

Exactly. If the government is the only entity that can save us in this situation, let the government set up an agency to make short term loans to companies and let these greedy mother fuckers whither and die.

Mr. Small Gov't's solution to the problem is making the US Gov't an even bigger lender? Holy crap.

 

[JS80]

It's so funny most of you lower and middle class peons don't even pay shit into the federal revenue system and you act like they are stealing money from you. Newsflash - if you're not part of top 5% of earners you don't pay shit and your opinion is worthless. And it's ironic that you are the ones most against this because you'll be the first to get axed when unemployment skyrockets.

 

[eleison]

Originally posted by: BeauJangles

Originally posted by: TheDoc9
Why not create 10 trillion? Give money to everyone.

BeauJangles, GTkeeper, LegendKiller, you guys have been lied to. Sorry.

I've been lied to? Because I have a basic understanding of what is going on in the market?

This IS NOT rocket science.

Banks keep money on hand to lend to others, that's how they make money. These loans come in all sorts of forms -- mortgages, small business loans, personal loans, credit cards, student loans, loans to other banks, loans to companies to pay payroll, investments into the market, etc, etc.

If we allow them to continue without any sort of bailout, the banks will fail. That has two major implications. First, it means that you and I won't be getting much in the way of any credit for years. Second, it means that you and I will be paying billions of dollars anyway. Each day that the government has delayed passing this legislation, thus far, has seen the collapse of one national bank. Wachovia will cost US a few hundred billion dollars. Just think about what five or ten more failures means: trillions out the window with nothing gained.

By buying loans from banks, we are essentially injecting money into their systems AND we (the people) are getting something in return. With this money, the banks can continue to function. Without it, they will fail and we all pay for it tenfold more than if we just passed the bailout. Plus, there's a good chance we'll see nearly a good chunk of the money back.

So, sir, I'd contend that you're lying to yourself. The economy needs help and, for once, the government needs to step in and do what is necessary. Otherwise, this credit crunch will get worse. Right now, I think the crunch is estimated at 40% as bad as the Great Depression. Without action it will get worse and drag the whole economy down.

Screw the bailout. Don't give money to banks that are doing bad. Give them to banks that are doing better:

(http://forums.anandtech.com/me...key=y&keyword1=chase+)

JP/Morgan Chase 2 year chart - business as usual

Citi 2 year - close to alltime low but bouncing back with Wachovia buyout

Bank of America 2 year - already bounced back.

Wells Fargo 2 year - AT AN ALL TIME HIGH

Suntrust 2 year - Business as usual.

HSBC 2 year - bouncing back.

This will avoid the "credit crunch" and help the economy...

 

[Arkaign]

*deleted*

 

[LegendKiller]

Originally posted by: eleison

Originally posted by: BeauJangles

Originally posted by: TheDoc9
Why not create 10 trillion? Give money to everyone.

BeauJangles, GTkeeper, LegendKiller, you guys have been lied to. Sorry.

I've been lied to? Because I have a basic understanding of what is going on in the market?

This IS NOT rocket science.

Banks keep money on hand to lend to others, that's how they make money. These loans come in all sorts of forms -- mortgages, small business loans, personal loans, credit cards, student loans, loans to other banks, loans to companies to pay payroll, investments into the market, etc, etc.

If we allow them to continue without any sort of bailout, the banks will fail. That has two major implications. First, it means that you and I won't be getting much in the way of any credit for years. Second, it means that you and I will be paying billions of dollars anyway. Each day that the government has delayed passing this legislation, thus far, has seen the collapse of one national bank. Wachovia will cost US a few hundred billion dollars. Just think about what five or ten more failures means: trillions out the window with nothing gained.

By buying loans from banks, we are essentially injecting money into their systems AND we (the people) are getting something in return. With this money, the banks can continue to function. Without it, they will fail and we all pay for it tenfold more than if we just passed the bailout. Plus, there's a good chance we'll see nearly a good chunk of the money back.

So, sir, I'd contend that you're lying to yourself. The economy needs help and, for once, the government needs to step in and do what is necessary. Otherwise, this credit crunch will get worse. Right now, I think the crunch is estimated at 40% as bad as the Great Depression. Without action it will get worse and drag the whole economy down.

Screw the bailout. Don't give money to banks that are doing bad. Give them to banks that are doing better:

(http://forums.anandtech.com/me...key=y&keyword1=chase+)

JP/Morgan Chase 2 year chart - business as usual

Citi 2 year - close to alltime low but bouncing back with Wachovia buyout

Bank of America 2 year - already bounced back.

Wells Fargo 2 year - AT AN ALL TIME HIGH

Suntrust 2 year - Business as usual.

HSBC 2 year - bouncing back.

This will avoid the "credit crunch" and help the economy...

Stock prices are such a great metric of the bank's real health. That's why BSC and LEH lost such huge amounts of wealth within a day.

Stupid posts like this are the reason why we are in this mess to begin with.

 

[JS80]

Originally posted by: Arkaign

Originally posted by: JS80
It's so funny most of you lower and middle class peons don't even pay shit into the federal revenue system and you act like they are stealing money from you. Newsflash - if you're not part of top 5% of earners you don't pay shit and your opinion is worthless. And it's ironic that you are the ones most against this because you'll be the first to get axed when unemployment skyrockets.

^^ Motherfucking condescending idiot FTL.

http://www.moneychimp.com/features/tax_brackets.htm

"If you're not in the top 5% of earners you don't pay shit and your opinion is worthless"? How about you go suck some more diseased cock, asswipe. I have news for you, Americans pay PLENTY in fucking income taxes. Too much, IMHO, and the middle class is already getting a big federal dick up the ass.

Top 10% pays 71% of the burden

 

[TechAZ]

Originally posted by: Arkaign

Originally posted by: JS80
It's so funny most of you lower and middle class peons don't even pay shit into the federal revenue system and you act like they are stealing money from you. Newsflash - if you're not part of top 5% of earners you don't pay shit and your opinion is worthless. And it's ironic that you are the ones most against this because you'll be the first to get axed when unemployment skyrockets.

^^ Motherfucking condescending idiot FTL.

http://www.moneychimp.com/features/tax_brackets.htm

"If you're not in the top 5% of earners you don't pay shit and your opinion is worthless"? How about you go suck some more diseased cock, asswipe. I have news for you, Americans pay PLENTY in fucking income taxes. Too much, IMHO, and the middle class is already getting a big federal dick up the ass.

lol

I think we all just figured out Arkaign is in the 10% bracket.

 

[LegendKiller]

Originally posted by: JS80

Originally posted by: Arkaign

Originally posted by: JS80
It's so funny most of you lower and middle class peons don't even pay shit into the federal revenue system and you act like they are stealing money from you. Newsflash - if you're not part of top 5% of earners you don't pay shit and your opinion is worthless. And it's ironic that you are the ones most against this because you'll be the first to get axed when unemployment skyrockets.

^^ Motherfucking condescending idiot FTL.

http://www.moneychimp.com/features/tax_brackets.htm

"If you're not in the top 5% of earners you don't pay shit and your opinion is worthless"? How about you go suck some more diseased cock, asswipe. I have news for you, Americans pay PLENTY in fucking income taxes. Too much, IMHO, and the middle class is already getting a big federal dick up the ass.

Top 10% pays 71% of the burden

this is one thing I find a bit humorous. My dad was bitching about "rich people" getting bailed out by the "taxpayers". I asked him how much he's ever paid in taxes. The answer I got was about 1/2 of what my wife and I paid in last year.

I then asked him how much he thought a CEO making $12MM would pay in taxes. He didn't know. I said at least $4-5M.

People sit around thinking the middle class would bear such a huge portion of this. Or that the rich are getting away with everything. They don't realize that without "rich" people, they'd all be fucked.

Then they don't even realize that $700BN will be repaid by amortizing mortgages.

 

[Arkaign]

Here, have a fucking cookie :

Doesn't mean shit, because the fact remains that middle-class America still pays plenty, and often a higher percentage of their income to the federal government, and their opinions DO matter. When someone suggests that tax-paying middle America has no value, and that their opinion shouldn't matter, it pisses me the fuck off.

Also, in your own fucking link : adjusted gross income of $64,702 or more pays 86% of the Federal Income Tax. Your top 10% includes people who have gross income of $108k or higher. Now if you think about it, $100k with today's inflation is NOT rich. That's middle class, comfortable, but not rich. $100k today is equal to less than half of that in 1980 dollars.

 

[LegendKiller]

Originally posted by: TechAZ

Originally posted by: Arkaign

Originally posted by: JS80
It's so funny most of you lower and middle class peons don't even pay shit into the federal revenue system and you act like they are stealing money from you. Newsflash - if you're not part of top 5% of earners you don't pay shit and your opinion is worthless. And it's ironic that you are the ones most against this because you'll be the first to get axed when unemployment skyrockets.

^^ Motherfucking condescending idiot FTL.

http://www.moneychimp.com/features/tax_brackets.htm

"If you're not in the top 5% of earners you don't pay shit and your opinion is worthless"? How about you go suck some more diseased cock, asswipe. I have news for you, Americans pay PLENTY in fucking income taxes. Too much, IMHO, and the middle class is already getting a big federal dick up the ass.

lol

I think we all just figured out Arkaign is in the 10% bracket.

you mean not in the top 10%.

 

[ericlp]

Originally posted by: LegendKiller
Why give them one penny?

Because when you need it, they have you one penny. When they can't give you one penny, because you refused to help them, then you don't get one penny either.

Wow... That is rich... Ok, tho, I'm gonna give em my penny @ 24% interest, and they will have to buy insurance on it just incase something happens to my investment and if they don't pay me back I'm gonna grill em with late fees and threaten to charge them even more interest on not only my penny but all the rest of the pennies they borrowed.

Sheesh, No thanks, I don't need it. But if I am gonna give it ... can we make it a fair playing field?

 

[Arkaign]

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: JS80

Originally posted by: Arkaign

Originally posted by: JS80
It's so funny most of you lower and middle class peons don't even pay shit into the federal revenue system and you act like they are stealing money from you. Newsflash - if you're not part of top 5% of earners you don't pay shit and your opinion is worthless. And it's ironic that you are the ones most against this because you'll be the first to get axed when unemployment skyrockets.

^^ Motherfucking condescending idiot FTL.

http://www.moneychimp.com/features/tax_brackets.htm

"If you're not in the top 5% of earners you don't pay shit and your opinion is worthless"? How about you go suck some more diseased cock, asswipe. I have news for you, Americans pay PLENTY in fucking income taxes. Too much, IMHO, and the middle class is already getting a big federal dick up the ass.

Top 10% pays 71% of the burden

this is one thing I find a bit humorous. My dad was bitching about "rich people" getting bailed out by the "taxpayers". I asked him how much he's ever paid in taxes. The answer I got was about 1/2 of what my wife and I paid in last year.

I then asked him how much he thought a CEO making $12MM would pay in taxes. He didn't know. I said at least $4-5M.

People sit around thinking the middle class would bear such a huge portion of this. Or that the rich are getting away with everything. They don't realize that without "rich" people, they'd all be fucked.

Then they don't even realize that $700BN will be repaid by amortizing mortgages.

That's a valid point, and one worth remembering. My reply was towards JS80 and his 'if you're not in the top 5% you don't matter' attitude.

 

[TechAZ]

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: TechAZ

Originally posted by: Arkaign

Originally posted by: JS80
It's so funny most of you lower and middle class peons don't even pay shit into the federal revenue system and you act like they are stealing money from you. Newsflash - if you're not part of top 5% of earners you don't pay shit and your opinion is worthless. And it's ironic that you are the ones most against this because you'll be the first to get axed when unemployment skyrockets.

^^ Motherfucking condescending idiot FTL.

http://www.moneychimp.com/features/tax_brackets.htm

"If you're not in the top 5% of earners you don't pay shit and your opinion is worthless"? How about you go suck some more diseased cock, asswipe. I have news for you, Americans pay PLENTY in fucking income taxes. Too much, IMHO, and the middle class is already getting a big federal dick up the ass.

lol

I think we all just figured out Arkaign is in the 10% bracket.

you mean not in the top 10%.

I was going by his own chart in the link

 

[Arkaign]

I paid nearly $23k in income taxes last year, which means that I'm not *rich* like those paying millions, but I don't deserve to be discounted just because I'm not in the top 5% or WTF ever. When did citizenship start getting measured by your wealth? Why not just take the vote away from anyone not in the top 5%? Hell, let's start euthanasia clinics for the poor and lower middle class, we don't need them anyway.

 

[Special K]

Originally posted by: Arkaign

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: JS80

Originally posted by: Arkaign

Originally posted by: JS80
It's so funny most of you lower and middle class peons don't even pay shit into the federal revenue system and you act like they are stealing money from you. Newsflash - if you're not part of top 5% of earners you don't pay shit and your opinion is worthless. And it's ironic that you are the ones most against this because you'll be the first to get axed when unemployment skyrockets.

^^ Motherfucking condescending idiot FTL.

http://www.moneychimp.com/features/tax_brackets.htm

"If you're not in the top 5% of earners you don't pay shit and your opinion is worthless"? How about you go suck some more diseased cock, asswipe. I have news for you, Americans pay PLENTY in fucking income taxes. Too much, IMHO, and the middle class is already getting a big federal dick up the ass.

Top 10% pays 71% of the burden

this is one thing I find a bit humorous. My dad was bitching about "rich people" getting bailed out by the "taxpayers". I asked him how much he's ever paid in taxes. The answer I got was about 1/2 of what my wife and I paid in last year.

I then asked him how much he thought a CEO making $12MM would pay in taxes. He didn't know. I said at least $4-5M.

People sit around thinking the middle class would bear such a huge portion of this. Or that the rich are getting away with everything. They don't realize that without "rich" people, they'd all be fucked.

Then they don't even realize that $700BN will be repaid by amortizing mortgages.

That's a valid point, and one worth remembering. My reply was towards JS80 and his 'if you're not in the top 5% you don't matter' attitude.

I think one issue here is the diminishing marginal utility of additional income. The top few percent of earners may pay the lion's share of the taxes, but the amount paid by lower income taxpayers has a much more noticeable effect on their lives. A billionaire CEO who sees a tax increase may not be able to afford his 5th yacht this year. Big deal - is their overall level of happiness likely to decline much because of that? I doubt it. A tax increase to a lower income taxpayer could impact basic needs such as food, gas, etc.

 

[Arkaign]

Originally posted by: Special K
I think one issue here is the diminishing marginal utility of additional income. The top few percent of earners may pay the lion's share of the taxes, but the amount paid by lower income taxpayers has a much more noticeable effect on their lives. A billionaire CEO who sees a tax increase may not be able to afford his 5th yacht this year. Big deal - is their overall level of happiness likely to decline much because of that? I doubt it. A tax increase to a lower income taxpayer could impact basic needs such as food, gas, etc.

Very true. In our consumer-driven economy, further reducing the spending power of the average full-time working American is a bad thing for everyone. We've already seen the effects of sustained high gas prices on consumer spending. People are trying to cut back on driving, but the fact is that every extra dollar that goes into the tank can't be spent on food/clothes/beer/consumer items which circulate within our economy far more than when they vaporize into petrodollars.