#Tax the Rich. Problem Solved
6127 Dead, 1270 since 1/20/09
carl-gibson-tax-the-rich-problem-solved
Carl Gibson
Carl Gibson is co-founder of USUncut, a grassroots movements to stop
budget cuts by getting corporations to pay their fair share.
7 Comments Print Share
July 10th, 2011 11:33 AM
Tax the Rich. Problem Solved
By Carl Gibson
What if there was a group of terrorists holding your family hostage with
a gun pointed at themselves, demanding the account number to your pension
fund? Would you negotiate with the terrorists by allowing them access to
your savings, or would you let them shoot themselves and keep your
retirement money intact?
Congressional Republicans are threatening to default on the debt unless
President Obama caves to their demands to cut Medicare, Medicaid and
Social Security spending. Regardless of the market-crashing consequences
of a debt default, actually doing so would be unconstitutional. Section 4
of the 14th Amendment clearly states that “The validity of the public
debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred
for payment of pensions…shall not be questioned.” Republicans are
violating the constitution by threatening a debt default. End of
discussion.
Credible economists and lawmakers on both sides generally agree that
raising the debt ceiling is an essential part of governing, and that a
large deficit can pose a danger to economic security. But if Speaker
Boehner genuinely cares about deficit reduction, he need only look to
ending his own party’s policies and shifting the tax burden. Swearing
allegiance to Grover Norquist’s no-new-taxes pledge, the GOP will only
allow room for $4 trillion in cuts, arguing this is a spending problem,
not a revenue problem. However, their budget would collect exactly $4
trillion less over the next decade through even more tax cuts for
corporations and the wealthy.
Contrary to Republican claims, the United States is one of the lowest-tax
countries in the world– U.S. corporations and wealthy citizens pay far
less in taxes than other developed nations. Since 1950, capital gains
taxes have dropped 10 percent, tax rates for million-dollar households
have decreased 10 percent since the mid-nineties, and the estate tax has
virtually disappeared for those with the largest fortunes since the onset
of the Bush presidency. Four simple solutions would close that $4
trillion budget gap in the next decade, without even touching Social
Security or Medicare.
By passing laws like Sen. Carl Levin’s Stop Tax Haven Abuse Act, we could
generate over $100 billion in new revenue from closing loopholes that
allow corporations to shift profits to overseas bank accounts. Through
modest taxation of speculative Wall Street trading, we could bring in
another $150 billion per year. With higher income tax brackets for
households earning over $1 million annually, as Rep. Jan Schakowsky has
proposed, we would gain another $100 billion. And progressively taxing
estates worth $5 million or more would mean an extra $45 billion in tax
revenue.
A truly principled leader would refuse to negotiate with terrorists, and
allow them to turn the gun on themselves. Our President needs to stand
firmly behind these common-sense proposals, and remove from the table any
cuts to the programs we’ve spent our lives funding from our own
paychecks. No exceptions.
Steve
1/20/09" <de...@gone.com> wrote:
>http://www.readersupportednews.org/off-site-opinion-section/83-83/6568-
>carl-gibson-tax-the-rich-problem-solved
>
>Carl Gibson
>
>Carl Gibson is co-founder of USUncut, a grassroots movements to stop
>budget cuts by getting corporations to pay their fair share.
Corporations can't pay any taxes... all they can do is collect it
from their customers...
--
Leftists do not understand the simple notion that one
person's rights end where another's begin. Being
chronically immature, they tend to want to live by
the same rules that their mommies laid down to them
when they were preschool age, e.g... "you should share
your toys, you should play with little Billie even
if he still wets his pants, it's not nice to make
little Johnny cry."
"الصِّرَاطَ الْمُسْتَقِيم:-╠☼╣Ǚ∑§â€Ð;-:
Problem: please define Rich
Problem Solved.
Perhaps, but
Good Morning,
Having reposted to facebook one of your replies re: Human effect on
Freak weather conditions; with particular intent that my 23 year son,
an avid Alex Jones "drone" would read a very intelligent and well
articulated response to the "corporate lackies" and their "i am
alright jack, let fuck another abdul" attitudes.....
IN short it is with utmost respect for U that facilitates this
"interruption".
As a strategist of sorts; the Problems of the world do of course
originate in Washington and New York and get amplified in London,
Paris and ever so increasingly in Bonn. And after 800,000 dead Tutsies
and Huties dead Africans subjected to a Belgium Eugenic Experiment
that went wrong, the Belgians get to HAVE BRUSSELS as the SEAT OF ALL
EUROPEAN POWERS
any how.....The problem with the US of A
First of all your nation is due to have a massive revolution; It is
almost 300 years since your nation was born and now you are becoming
ready to Arise from the SAVAGERY. A ***MUST*** for all GREAT NATION
BUILDING and ESPECIALLY "EMPIRE BUILDING" exercises that nations must
go through.
Your nation is managed by a few Genetic Strands. The "old" money lot.
They have become "very few in numbers" and as with all "old families"
that "keep it within their very close genetic relatives".....in time
they of course their off springs become genetic freaks and
degenerates.
Those who marry their first cousins, like what the Jews do, in order
to keep their "old" money and rise to very powerful positions; then
try to use that power and implement their mad visions for "WORLD
DOMINATION" :-(
If you take the time to read my articles on "The Global Revolution -
The Hour-Glass"....The Hour Glass analogy seem to fit the pattern that
most nations go through.
Yours is simply just another nation.
So the above gives a bit of a background to defining the Rich and The
Problem of $lavery to a small group of degenerate and mad strands of
DNA that have combined to call themselves "families".
Now lets see, the Murdochs, The Rockefellers, The Rothchilds......
There....your problem and in the end, we look forward to "YOUR
COLLECTIVE" solutions...
"old Money" sometimes simply becomes just that "A VERY OLD AND DIRTY
AND BLOODSTAINED" money!
Most Respectfully,
Saeid
On Jul 11, 4:58 am, "6127 Dead, 1270 since 1/20/09" <d...@gone.com>
wrote:
6127 Dead, 1270 since 1/20/09
الْمُسْتَقِيم:-╠☼╣Ǚ∑§â€Ð;-: wrote:
> Tax the Rich.
>
> Problem: please define Rich
The progressive budget does just that. Two new tax brackets would be
instituted. One, of 42%, would kick in on income over one million
dollars a year (two million for joint returns), and another, 45%, on
income over a billion.
The CBO estimates that would bring in between $250 and $300 billion a
year.
wy
> On Mon, 11 Jul 2011 03:58:29 +0000 (UTC), "6127 Dead, 1270 since
>
> >http://www.readersupportednews.org/off-site-opinion-section/83-83/6568-
> >carl-gibson-tax-the-rich-problem-solved
>
> >Carl Gibson
>
> >Carl Gibson is co-founder of USUncut, a grassroots movements to stop
> >budget cuts by getting corporations to pay their fair share.
>
> Corporations can't pay any taxes... all they can do is collect it
> from their customers...
How much would they include in the cost of their product if they don't
know how much tax they'll have to pay themselves at the end of the
year because they also won't know how much earnings and profits they
will have made by then? Is it 6%. But what if their earnings and
profits, as well as deductions, necessitate they pay 9%? Then they're
out by 3 percentage points. So what do they do then for the following
year? Add 12% to their products to make up the difference over the
previous year? How would that make their product competitive with
similar other products? You see how stoopidly you think?
6127 Dead, 1270 since 1/20/09
He doesn't think. He's just a mindless troll, endlessly repeating things
he thinks might provoke a response from liberals.
Steve
1/20/09" <de...@gone.com> wrote:
>On Mon, 11 Jul 2011 08:17:46 -0700, wy wrote:
>
>> On Jul 11, 5:19 am, Steve <stevencan...@yahooooo.com> wrote:
>>> On Mon, 11 Jul 2011 03:58:29 +0000 (UTC), "6127 Dead, 1270 since
>>>
>>> 1/20/09" <d...@gone.com> wrote:
>>> >http://www.readersupportednews.org/off-site-opinion-
>section/83-83/6568-
>>> >carl-gibson-tax-the-rich-problem-solved
>>>
>>> >Carl Gibson
>>>
>>> >Carl Gibson is co-founder of USUncut, a grassroots movements to stop
>>> >budget cuts by getting corporations to pay their fair share.
>>>
>>> Corporations can't pay any taxes... all they can do is collect it from
>>> their customers...
>>
>> How much would they include in the cost of their product if they don't
It's all built into their pricing structure, Dummy.. as are all the
taxes all their suppliers paid built into their prices...
>> know how much tax they'll have to pay themselves at the end of the year
>> because they also won't know how much earnings and profits they will
>> have made by then? Is it 6%. But what if their earnings and profits,
>> as well as deductions, necessitate they pay 9%? Then they're out by 3
>> percentage points. So what do they do then for the following year? Add
>> 12% to their products to make up the difference over the previous year?
>> How would that make their product competitive with similar other
>> products? You see how stoopidly you think?
Their competitors pass along their taxes too, you pathetic moron.
>He doesn't think. He's just a mindless troll, endlessly repeating things
>he thinks might provoke a response from liberals.
That's from David (Zepp) Jamieson who thinks people with wealth have
taken money out of circulation.
--
"Well, that's the funny thing about terrorists. If they get what they
want, they stop being terrorists."
--Zepp Jamieson
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=q5sc50lf1id03ms1i9truk78v2dk6052f5%404ax.com
"The South couldn't taken any more of the Missouri Compromise,
sensing (correctly) that it would kill slavery in the end,
and Lincoln planned to uphold it."
--Zepp Jamieson
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=9j2n5vsqfga7l2fsrt0polt2eg6lqs71hv%404ax.com
"The first amendment means that you are protected by law from haters."
--Zepp Jamieson
"http://groups.google.com/groups?oi=djq&selm=an_541474719
If Nevermore tries paying cap gains with a 1040, he'll
be in jail soon enough.
--Zepp Jamieson, Dec 3, 2005
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/msg/30fdaff423e2029b?hl=en&
"I just found out that Condoleezza Rice, [...], the National Security
advisor, spend last evening attending a Broadway play."
--Zepp Jamieson Sep 1, 2005
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.fan.rush-limbaugh/msg/30ffcc5ea6364557?hl=en&
"No plane hit the Pentagon. I don’t know what did,[...]"
-- Zepp Jamieson
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.society.liberalism/msg/39d98c910d32047b?hl=en
"Incidently, the fact that the Constitution specifies that people have
a right to vote in a presidential election pretty much takes the
choice of having [a presidential election] out of the hands of the states."
Zepp Jamieson Sun, Sep 3 2006
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.society.liberalism/msg/efb4fcac7b1561cb?hl=en&
"So you chuckleheads think a GPS is a completely passive receiver, is that correct?"
--DAvid (Zepp) Jamieson
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sixtyplus/msg/b4dc880575948b5d?hl=en
"farms were never subject to inheritance taxes. What sort of
moron are you? "
David (Zepp) Jamieson
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.california/msg/5c59cc2755acd39c?hl=en
liberal
Oh-oh......math!!! You know how any type of logic pisses off
reichtards.
liberal
Starting point: Income taxes are paid on profit, not cost of goods/
services sold.
But in any event, you are arguing businesses must be price setters,
not price takers. Please study a little economics in order to begin
understanding the false argument you're making.
wy
But how can a business anticipate what taxes it'll pay to include it
in the price of their product when that business itself won't even
know that until the end of the year? Hmm? And how does it make them
any more competitive against similar other products if they inject 6%
tax into their price and the other company injects only 1% or none at
all? Come on, goofball, spill the beans. Explain it in minute detail
how all of that is possible.
Oh, you can't. It's just mindless right wingnut feel-good talking
points. I thought so.
wy
My argument is to ridicule Steve's argument that somehow companies
magically factor in the taxes, of which they don't know the total
they'll be paying at the end of any given year, into the cost of their
product so that, in effect, they magically end up paying no taxes at
all, that it's the consumer who's paying not only the sales tax on the
product, but also any tax that that business has to pay itself, even
though that business doesn't have a clue as to what taxes it will pay
at the end of the year. Talk to Steve about this, not me.
6127 Dead, 1270 since 1/20/09
Basically, the only way a business can reduce their taxes is by reducing
their profits. If they were already at demand equilibrium and decide to
raise their prices to cover taxes, their sales drop, their profits fall,
and their taxes drop. So they may as well just keep the same prices.
Matt
There are many ways for a business to reduce taxes. But first, we have
to differentiate between the forms of taxes a business pays/collects:
1. Sales taxes. There is really no way to reduce this one, short of
working out a
deal with the state/feds.
2. Employment taxes. The only way to reduce the amount of employment
taxes
(aside from some sort of federal waiver) is to reduce the amount paid
to employees.
Neither of these are useful to discuss reducing.
So we are discussing taxing profits.
Profits are the total amount taken in, minus the cost of producing and/
or selling
products or services that resulted in that amount.
You can reduce profits by spending more on the corporate
infrastructure.
You can hire more people.
You can reduce the price of goods.
Businesses, of course, do not "simply pass on costs to the consumer".
Only a moron
would believe that. If a company can find a way to build an item for
$10 less per unit,
and sell it for the same price, they are going to do so, every time.
This increases their
profits, and therefore their taxes, yet nothing is being "passed on to
the consumer".
As profits rise, so do bonuses, stock prices, salaries and all the
rest. No company minds
paying more in taxes if the positives outweigh the negatives. What
they seem to mind is
the removal of certain loopholes that allow them to reduce the amount
of tax paid without
doing any of the normal economic things to increase profits.
Too bad. So sad.
Matt
Steve
A business's profits are what's left over from what his customers pay
him after all of his expenses... his expenses include taxes...
Steve
They wouldn't raise their prices to cover taxes...their prices are
already covering their taxes, of course... now if the government
raises their taxes, they'd have to re-evaluate prices, and in that
re-evaluation, they'd also estimate how the taxes effected their
competition.
<LOL> Now I wouldn't imagine that loons like Zepp and wy would have
any idea how to evaluate the factors that go into a business's
prices...
> their sales drop, their profits fall,
>and their taxes drop. So they may as well just keep the same prices.
<LOL> Only an economics ignoramus would think that a business
wouldn't estimate his tax burden when he determines the price fro his
product...
Steve
<chuckle> He estimates his taxes, of course... quarterly... as he's
required to do by the IRS He'd be a fool not to do so anyway...
you wouldn't know that, of course, because you're a fool yourself...
>in the price of their product when that business itself won't even
>know that until the end of the year? Hmm? And how does it make them
>any more competitive against similar other products if they inject 6%
>tax into their price and the other company injects only 1% or none at
>all? Come on, goofball, spill the beans. Explain it in minute detail
>how all of that is possible.
The business isn't "injecting" anything you pathetic moron, his
revenue model already contains his tax estimates.. it has from the
start... and all his competitors have done the same thing...
"As you develop your business plan, you’ll need to estimate the taxes
you will owe."
Read more:
http://articles.bplans.com/growing-a-business/tax-planning-in-a-loss-situation/129#ixzz1RpqFr2eB
>Oh, you can't. It's just mindless right wingnut feel-good talking
>points. I thought so.
As if anyone is expecting an ignoramus like wy to understand a
business plan?
Oh BTW, I renewed my Sam's card today.. it's a business card, of
course, so it's <LOL> deductible...
Steve
<chuckle> All costs are passed along to the customer... including
taxes...
wy
I see. You can't explain the process of how exactly it's done. I
thought so.
>
> >in the price of their product when that business itself won't even
> >know that until the end of the year? Hmm? And how does it make them
> >any more competitive against similar other products if they inject 6%
> >tax into their price and the other company injects only 1% or none at
> >all? Come on, goofball, spill the beans. Explain it in minute detail
> >how all of that is possible.
>
> The business isn't "injecting" anything you pathetic moron, his
> revenue model already contains his tax estimates.. it has from the
> start... and all his competitors have done the same thing...
>
> "As you develop your business plan, you’ll need to estimate the taxes
> you will owe."
>
> Read more:http://articles.bplans.com/growing-a-business/tax-planning-in-a-loss-...
From your very own source: Do you see any taxes paid by consumers
listed?
http://www.bplans.com/common/gifs/qa/bplans/negativetaxes2003.gif
I thought not.
Steve
I've done estimated taxes many times...
>> >in the price of their product when that business itself won't even
>> >know that until the end of the year? Hmm? And how does it make them
>> >any more competitive against similar other products if they inject 6%
>> >tax into their price and the other company injects only 1% or none at
>> >all? Come on, goofball, spill the beans. Explain it in minute detail
>> >how all of that is possible.
>>
>> The business isn't "injecting" anything you pathetic moron, his
>> revenue model already contains his tax estimates.. it has from the
>> start... and all his competitors have done the same thing...
>>
>> "As you develop your business plan, you’ll need to estimate the taxes
>> you will owe."
>>
>> Read more:http://articles.bplans.com/growing-a-business/tax-planning-in-a-loss-...
>
>From your very own source: Do you see any taxes paid by consumers
>listed?
>
>http://www.bplans.com/common/gifs/qa/bplans/negativetaxes2003.gif
>
>I thought not.
>
SNICKER.. I wonder where the ignoramus wy thinks the business gets
the money to pay it's taxes...
Matt
<smile>
Economics 001, given to us by Lentil Boy. Where all costs are known
up front, prices never change, and the total number of sales for next
year are know this year.
Guess they still teach that in third grade. Lentil Boy has shown how
far he got. He probably thinks static forces exist on objects too.
<grin>
Matt
wy
And he's been trying to bluff me into believing he knows what he's
talking about. He still hasn't been able to explain in detail the
whole process as he hallucinates it to be, which alone should say
something right there. I bet all he does is look up a bunch of sites
on the net to seek out stuff that, which in some remote and vague way,
supports what he wants to feverishly believe, contriving a patchwork
argument without understanding what he has read to begin with. It's
like his bluffing of the Roth IRA and thinking he's actually going to
stand to make any money on that when he's already losing money on
whatever tax deductions he could be claiming but can't because of it,
not to mention that he'll never live long enough to realize any real
savings out of it.
Steve
Did somebody say prices were going to change, Dummy? Prices have
always been high enough to include the seller's taxes...
"As the wattage increases, the loss decreases.
I didn't quite believe this either, but was pointed
at some good evidence of this.
In fact, it makes sense to a certain degree, the
lossage becomes insignificant quickly."
--mattt...@sprynet.com Apr 29, 2008
http://groups.google.com/group/talk.politics.misc/msg/d8ff3e51e76c1f45
Canyon note: See what "makes sense" to a moron? Matt is
not only not the sharpest knife in the drawer, he's apparently
had some nasty encounters with the disposal..
Steve
<SHAKING MY HEAD AND SMILING> Estimating your taxes is remarkably
simple.. you simply estimate your receipts and expenses and apply
the tax code...
as he hallucinates it to be, which alone should say
>something right there. I bet all he does is look up a bunch of sites
>on the net to seek out stuff that, which in some remote and vague way,
>supports what he wants to feverishly believe, contriving a patchwork
>argument without understanding what he has read to begin with. It's
>like his bluffing of the Roth IRA and thinking he's actually going to
>stand to make any money on that when he's already losing money on
>whatever tax deductions he could be claiming but can't because of it,
>not to mention that he'll never live long enough to realize any real
>savings out of it.
<SNICKER> My Roth transfers have absolutely nothing to do with any
deductions I had, you pathetic moron...
wy
That still explains Zero about the process. Try again. And keep
trying till you finally get it.
>
> as he hallucinates it to be, which alone should say
>
> >something right there. I bet all he does is look up a bunch of sites
> >on the net to seek out stuff that, which in some remote and vague way,
> >supports what he wants to feverishly believe, contriving a patchwork
> >argument without understanding what he has read to begin with. It's
> >like his bluffing of the Roth IRA and thinking he's actually going to
> >stand to make any money on that when he's already losing money on
> >whatever tax deductions he could be claiming but can't because of it,
> >not to mention that he'll never live long enough to realize any real
> >savings out of it.
>
> <SNICKER> My Roth transfers have absolutely nothing to do with any
> deductions I had, you pathetic moron...
Clearly, you're failing miserably at understanding Roth. You deserve
to lose all your money in it.
Matt
<smile>
Yes, the corporation makes profits. So they are taxed. And that gets
passed along to the consumer, but profits go up. So taxes go up. So
prices go up ...
<laugh>
And infinite prices exist within a few years. Which, of course,
happens
ALL the time.
He's amusing, this Lentil Boy. Stupid, and completely ignorant, but
amusing.
Matt
Matt
Bingo. Lentil Boy's other name is "Google Scholar". He doesn't have
any
real education, he's admitted it several times. Just a moron that
searches
web sites, finds something he understands, and reposts it as if he
knew
something.
What he's talking about is such a tiny, closed-system, version of
micro
economics that it isn't even funny. We were taught stuff like that
back
in grade school, I think.
Let it go, he's a fool.
Matt
Steve
That is the process, you pathetic fool...
>> as he hallucinates it to be, which alone should say
>>
>> >something right there. I bet all he does is look up a bunch of sites
>> >on the net to seek out stuff that, which in some remote and vague way,
>> >supports what he wants to feverishly believe, contriving a patchwork
>> >argument without understanding what he has read to begin with. It's
>> >like his bluffing of the Roth IRA and thinking he's actually going to
>> >stand to make any money on that when he's already losing money on
>> >whatever tax deductions he could be claiming but can't because of it,
>> >not to mention that he'll never live long enough to realize any real
>> >savings out of it.
>>
>> <SNICKER> My Roth transfers have absolutely nothing to do with any
>> deductions I had, you pathetic moron...
>
>Clearly, you're failing miserably at understanding Roth. You deserve
>to lose all your money in it.
SNICKER I understand it well while you no clue.. By the way, I
chalked up about 75 miles today for a business trip. That's a $37.50
deduction... on top of the new $35.00 Sam's club card. I suspect
those two deductions together amounted to more than you got paid for
your work in the fast food today.
Steve
Exactly...
"Capital gains taxes used to be higher AND require longer lock in.
This reducing the number of trades made, which reduced the volatility
of the investments. This made things MORE valuable, Steve, not less
so."
-- mattt...@sprynet.com
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.politics.republicans/msg/4d7debf9a1e32539
Steve
"Removing you from Yahoo is fairly easy, getting rid of your other
account for ToS violations isn't going to take much longer. "
-- mattt...@sprynet.com May 5 2007
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.society.liberalism/msg/a709a141b6d0fdd1
wy
I wonder where you think it gets it, since you haven't yet explained
the mechanism involved. Step by detailed step, explain it. I'm still
waiting. The longer I have to wait, the more you're clueless.
First Post
wrote:
I drove 140 miles today for my job and it is going to result in $42.80
in the form of an expense reimbursement to me which is TAX FREE.
Considering the actual cost to me of using my vehicle, I end up making
around a $15 profit. Plus I get a $12 per day vehicle reimbursement
to cover general maintenence, again, tax free.
Today was a low mileage day on average. Typically my weekly expense
reimbursement puts roughly another $150 to $200 in my pocket that is
non taxable.
If the price of gas rises dramatically and maintains more than a 50�
per gallon increase then my reimbursement will also be increased.
I haven't had to pay for gasoline out of my own pocket in well over 10
years. And I haven't had to spend very much at all on repairs or
maintenence.
And all that is possible because of the trip surcharge that is figured
in on the work order. My customers fork out $150 for me to show up.
Then it's $75 an hour plus parts. The first hour includes the trip
surcharge which covers insurance, mileage and average maintenence and
repair. My hourly rate covers payroll, all insurance, and all
estimated taxes. If any of the above increase by any considerable
amount then my rates will also be adjusted in order to cover the
additional costs.
Been in business since 1975. I have no intention of closing down
anytime soon. I learned how to run such a company from working for
several others in the same trade. Everyone uses the same basic
formula. But according to wy my company shouldn't even exist. And he
expects anyone to take his business lessons seriously? ROFL
Steve
I just did.. <SNICKER> I knew it was way over your low brow.. and
now you admit it yourself...
> I'm still
>waiting. The longer I have to wait, the more you're clueless.
This from the moron "wy" who doesn't have the slightest clue... he
thinks a ROTH is a deferred account....
>> >> >Oh, you can't. It's just mindless right wingnut feel-good talking
>> >> >points. I thought so.
>>
>> >> As if anyone is expecting an ignoramus like wy to understand a
>> >> business plan?
>>
>> >> Oh BTW, I renewed my Sam's card today.. it's a business card, of
>> >> course, so it's <LOL> deductible...
Matt
<laugh>
No, Lentil Boy, you haven't explained anything. So, we'll break it
down for
you.
1. How many widgets will you sell next year, and how much will it cost
to make them. Please explain where the costs came from, given that
others
must supply the material.
2. How much will you pay in taxes next year? Please be precise based
on
the number of widgets and the tax rate, which hasn't been established
yet.
3. How many widgets will be wasted, lost or stolen? Give us an exact
number.
4. Now, given all the numbers listed above, how much must you sell
each
widget for? Oh, account for health care increases, employee loss and
retirement, changes in cost of materials due to weather and other
changes.
5. Give us an exact number.
>
> > I'm still
> >waiting. The longer I have to wait, the more you're clueless.
>
> This from the moron "wy" who doesn't have the slightest clue... he
> thinks a ROTH is a deferred account....
So, you pay taxes on the money that is earned in your Roth account
each year?
Wow, you really ARE stupid. Wy is quite right on that one.
<chuckle>
Now, watch Lentil Boy start with the insults and refuse to answer
a single question.
Matt
David Hartung
One wonders what Wy does for a living.
One also wonders where he got his business education.
wy
> On Mon, 11 Jul 2011 20:55:18 -0400, Steve <stevencan...@yahooooo.com>
That's another $42.80 that the government will have to borrow, with
interest, to make up the difference in its budget just so that it
could subsidize your drive. Multiply that by about a million of you
who do it probably 5 times a month on average and before you know it,
the government is out $214,000,000 per month, or $2,568,000,000 for
the year, that it'll now have to go begging to China for. Thanks for
doing part in adding to the debt of the nation.
> Considering the actual cost to me of using my vehicle, I end up making
> around a $15 profit. Plus I get a $12 per day vehicle reimbursement
> to cover general maintenence, again, tax free.
There's no such thing as tax free, as taxes will inevitably have to be
raised, if not now, then next year or the year after, for all the
imaginary freebies you've had, and the longer the delay, the harder
you will be hit. But go on deluding yourself in the meantime, you
might as well enjoy your "freebies" while you can, before you start
getting suicidal in a few years from the tax crush that will
inevitably come.
>
> Today was a low mileage day on average. Typically my weekly expense
> reimbursement puts roughly another $150 to $200 in my pocket that is
> non taxable.
>
> If the price of gas rises dramatically and maintains more than a 50
> per gallon increase then my reimbursement will also be increased.
>
> I haven't had to pay for gasoline out of my own pocket in well over 10
> years. And I haven't had to spend very much at all on repairs or
> maintenence.
And it's people like you that should be banned from ever working again
and living in America. To think that you're the first to complain
about people on welfare or Medicare or Social Security or any other
government handout. You're probably the biggest leech there is.
>
> And all that is possible because of the trip surcharge that is figured
> in on the work order. My customers fork out $150 for me to show up.
> Then it's $75 an hour plus parts. The first hour includes the trip
> surcharge which covers insurance, mileage and average maintenence and
> repair. My hourly rate covers payroll, all insurance, and all
> estimated taxes. If any of the above increase by any considerable
> amount then my rates will also be adjusted in order to cover the
> additional costs.
>
> Been in business since 1975. I have no intention of closing down
> anytime soon. I learned how to run such a company from working for
> several others in the same trade. Everyone uses the same basic
> formula. But according to wy my company shouldn't even exist. And he
> expects anyone to take his business lessons seriously? ROFL
So, in other words, your business is an utter failure for the last 36
years because it can't survive without government subsidies. Some
capitalist you are. The more I hear people like you, the more I'm
convinced you're all just dying to be socialists.
JaxKayaker
I cannot believe that ANYONE would be stupid enough to believe that a
corporation o4r business does not figure taxes into its cost
of doing business and therfore its bottom line.
wy
Let's all have a good, hearty laugh on you:
http://www.helium.com/items/1048211-roth-ira-and-interest-rates
Steve
<HUGE CHUCKLE> Your source is incorrect, the ROTH is not a deferred
account. The money you put into it is post tax, The growth is tax
free.
"wy" has a habit of believing anything that fits in with his own
twisted view of reality and is obviously too stupid to check out the
source...
I checked out the guy that wrote that article... <LOL> He's a high
school English teacher.
Try using a source that knows what its talking about... here are a
few..
http://www.topicologist.com/search.php?query=what+is+roth+ira
Steve
I've understood for years that far lefters are pretty much all dumb as
a box or rocks...
Steve
<GUFFAW> Another keeper from Matt the moron... who demonstrates his
ignorance one more time
A ROTH's earnings are tax free, Dummy....
"Roth IRA
Any earnings are tax-free if withdrawn at or after age 59½ and the
account has been open five years or more1 "
http://www.merrilledge.com/m/pages/retirement/ira.aspx
>Wow, you really ARE stupid. Wy is quite right on that one.
More Irony from Matt the moron..
><chuckle>
>
>Now, watch Lentil Boy start with the insults and refuse to answer
>a single question.
>
>Matt
Matt
How much will IBM pay in taxes in 2012. Be specific, to the penny.
Cite your sources.
Great, another Lentil Boy.
Matt
Matt
Now, he'll simply say your source is "wrong", because the Lentil Boy
Google Scholar knows all, and shares his 'wisdom'.
<laugh>
Note that he didn't answer any of the questions, simply laughed and
waved his hands some more.
He's an idiot.
Matt
Matt
<chuckle>
Yes, Lentil Boy, generally Roth Ira money is tax free. You put money
into
it POST tax, hence a deferred account.
Are you stupid, Lentil Boy, or just senile?
Why don't you answer the questions, Lentil Boy? You've been shown to
be stupid so many times it isn't even worth counting.
C'mon Lentil Boy, answer.
Matt
Steve
It is wrong, Dummy.. it was written by a high school English
teacher...' A ROTH's earning are tax free, not deferred...
Try using a qualified source... such as...
http://www.edwardjones.com/en_US/products/retire/individual_plans/roth_ira/index.html?
"A Roth IRA is designed to help you save for retirement. It allows
after-tax contributions in exchange for the potential for tax-free
income in retirement."
><laugh>
<LOL> Indeed...
>Note that he didn't answer any of the questions, simply laughed and
>waved his hands some more.
>
>He's an idiot.
>
>Matt
Steve
Why on Earth would IBM need to know that? A simple estimate would
suffice...
Matt's ignorance is beyond entertaining...
"The total number of acres of crop land in the US is: 2,655,382 acres."
--mattt...@sprynet.com
http://groups.google.com/group/talk.politics.misc/msg/61f7f3da22b98987?hl=en
Canyon Note:
Total cropland used for crops in the USA (2002) was
340 million acres, not <LOL> 2.6 million acres...
http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/EIB14/eib14d.pdf
Matt says the total cropland is about 250 sq ft per person when
it's actually well over 32,000 sq feet per person...
Steve
What I said was ROTH "earnings " are tax free... and they are...
>You put money
>into
>it POST tax, hence a deferred account.
<LOL> Another keeper from Matt the moron who apparently doesn't even
know what "deferred" means..
Look it up, Matt.. and then explain what has been deferred...
Here's a clue..
Putting money into a ROTH post tax means that you've already paid
whatever taxes you owe... nothing has been deferred...
>Are you stupid, Lentil Boy, or just senile?
Irony anyone...
>Why don't you answer the questions, Lentil Boy? You've been shown to
>be stupid so many times it isn't even worth counting.
>
>C'mon Lentil Boy, answer.
<shaking my head and smiling at Matt the moron>
Matt
Really, Lentil Boy. You are such a brilliant Google Scholar.
Tell us, Lentil Boy, how your "tax free" account works when you remove
money at age 58.
Tell us, Lentil Boy, how your "tax free" account works if you put
money
in this year at your age, and remove it next year.
Tell us, Lentil Boy, how your estate pays no tax on inherited Roth
Iras.
Then answer the questions you were asked about predicting the future
and
paying taxes, Lentil Boy.
C'mon Lentil Boy. Put up or shut up. I've had enough of your
stupidity.
Answer the questions or admit you are nothing but a Lentil Boy Google
Scholar.
Matt
David Hartung
> Really, Lentil Boy. You are such a brilliant Google Scholar.
>
> Tell us, Lentil Boy, how your "tax free" account works when you remove
> money at age 58.
> Tell us, Lentil Boy, how your "tax free" account works if you put
> money
> in this year at your age, and remove it next year.
> Tell us, Lentil Boy, how your estate pays no tax on inherited Roth
> Iras.
>
> Then answer the questions you were asked about predicting the future
> and
> paying taxes, Lentil Boy.
>
> C'mon Lentil Boy. Put up or shut up. I've had enough of your
> stupidity.
> Answer the questions or admit you are nothing but a Lentil Boy Google
> Scholar.
>
> Matt
Are you truly the buffoon your posts indicate you to be?
Matt
David, you were once an intelligent man who looked at the facts.
Lentil Boy is an idiot, who posts Google searches without
understanding a
thing about them.
Tell me, David, how is something 'tax free' if there are a dozen ways
of having
to pay taxes on it?
Matt
Matt
> On Tue, 12 Jul 2011 04:19:14 -0700 (PDT), Matt
>
>
>
>
>
Why on earth won't you answer the questions, Lentil Boy?
Because you don't know the answers.
Matt
Matt
And yet, they are not. I gave you quite a few scenarios under which
you
pay taxes. How is that tax free, Lentil Boy? Be precise. C'mon, fire
up
that Google.
>
> >You put money
> >into
> >it POST tax, hence a deferred account.
>
> <LOL> Another keeper from Matt the moron who apparently doesn't even
> know what "deferred" means..
>
> Look it up, Matt.. and then explain what has been deferred...
Here's a clue, Lentil Boy. You were wrong. Admit it and move on.
Tax free means NO taxes. Explain how it is that you can pay taxes on
Roth IRA earnings.
Matt
Steve
That's from Matty the moron who relied on a cite from an English
teacher as to how a Roth Account worked..
You know, its just that I'm so much smarter than you, Matty..
>Tell us, Lentil Boy, how your "tax free" account works when you remove
>money at age 58.
Why would I remove it at 58? <LOL> I'm 67..
>Tell us, Lentil Boy, how your "tax free" account works if you put
>money
>in this year at your age, and remove it next year.
In my case, a converted account, what I initially put in would not be
taxed because it was already taxed, not <LOL> deferred. Its called a
return of basis. (look it up, Dummies) The earnings will also be tax
free after 5.5 years...
>Tell us, Lentil Boy, how your estate pays no tax on inherited Roth
>Iras.
<snicker> Estate taxes don't apply if the estate is under the limit
amount.. What is it now.. oh yeah, $3.5 million..
>Then answer the questions you were asked about predicting the future
>and
>paying taxes, Lentil Boy.
>
>C'mon Lentil Boy. Put up or shut up. I've had enough of your
>stupidity.
Irony anyone? see below:
More ignorance from Matt the moron..
"generally Roth Ira money is tax free. You put money
into it POST tax, hence a deferred account. "
--mattt...@sprynet.com
http://groups.google.com/group/talk.politics.misc/msg/eb129594eea307c7?hl=en
Canyon Note:
A deferred IRA is where you put money in PRE tax. On
the other hand, you Put money into a ROTH post tax
meaning that you've already paid
whatever taxes you owe... nothing has been deferred
and the earnings are tax free.
Matt
> On Tue, 12 Jul 2011 05:34:09 -0700 (PDT), Matt
>
>
>
>
>
Oh, dear, Lentil Boy. Just WALKED into that one, didn't you?
http://www.schwab.com/public/schwab/home/account_types/ira_retirement/roth
Enjoy tax-deferred growth and tax-free withdrawals; contributions are
made with after-tax dollars.
Open mouth, Lentil Boy.
Insert foot.
or do you think that Charles Schwab knows nothing about taxes and
retirement?
<LAUGH>
Matt
Matt
> On Tue, 12 Jul 2011 05:34:09 -0700 (PDT), Matt
>
>
>
>
>
Well, that was one stupid comment, as shown.
>
> You know, its just that I'm so much smarter than you, Matty..
You know, its amazing how stupid you are, Lentil Boy.
>
> >Tell us, Lentil Boy, how your "tax free" account works when you remove
> >money at age 58.
>
> Why would I remove it at 58? <LOL> I'm 67..
Oh really, so you think the rules don't apply to you? Put money in
today,
Lentil Boy. Take it out tomorrow. See what the IRS says.
>
> >Tell us, Lentil Boy, how your "tax free" account works if you put
> >money
> >in this year at your age, and remove it next year.
>
> In my case, a converted account, what I initially put in would not be
> taxed because it was already taxed, not <LOL> deferred. Its called a
> return of basis. (look it up, Dummies) The earnings will also be tax
> free after 5.5 years...
Ohhh, now it is tax free after 5.5 years.
ROFLMAO.
Gee, Lentil Boy, what happens if you take it out now? it isn't "tax
free"
is it?
ROFLMAO.
Thanks for proving yourself wrong, Lentil Boy.
>
> >Tell us, Lentil Boy, how your estate pays no tax on inherited Roth
> >Iras.
>
> <snicker> Estate taxes don't apply if the estate is under the limit
> amount.. What is it now.. oh yeah, $3.5 million..
Oh God, this is JUST TOO GOOD.
Hey, Lentil Boy!! Guess what? There are STATE taxes too.
ROFLMAO.
Hey boys and girls, listen to Lentil Boy. Go to prison.
ROFLAMO.
C'mon Lentil Boy, keep going, this is GREAT.
>
> >Then answer the questions you were asked about predicting the future
> >and
> >paying taxes, Lentil Boy.
>
> >C'mon Lentil Boy. Put up or shut up. I've had enough of your
> >stupidity.
>
> Irony anyone? see below:
Note:
No answers.
Lentil Boy got pwned. C'mon, Lentil Boy, come back, I'll school you
some more.
ROFLMAO.
Matt
Steve
It's probably because most ROTH earnings WILL be tax free.. Mine for
example...
>Matt
Steve
wrote:
You'd think Matty the moron would learn not to challenge me.. He
might not be completely sane given that not quite sane people do tend
to do the same thing over and over expecting the results to be
different.
Steve
<LOL> I doubt anyone but the accountants at IBM could estimate it,
Matty Moron...
Steve
"the Roth offers tax-exempt rather than simply tax-deferred savings"
http://www.fool.com/money/allaboutiras/allaboutiras03.htm
<MAJOR CHUCKLES> I explained how my ROTH earnings will be 100% tax
free.
More ignorance from Matt the moron..
"generally Roth Ira money is tax free. You put money
into it POST tax, hence a deferred account. "
Matt
>
> Canyon Note:
>
> A deferred IRA is where you put money in PRE tax. On
> the other hand, you Put money into a ROTH post tax
> meaning that you've already paid
> whatever taxes you owe... nothing has been deferred
> and the earnings are tax free
Thanks, Lentil Boy. I'll be laughing over this one for YEARS.
Matt
Steve
Matty, Matty, Matty... look at your cite.. see where it says "
tax-free withdrawals?"
ROTH IRA = "Federal tax-free growth, tax-free withdrawals"
https://www.fidelity.com/ira/roth-ira
>Open mouth, Lentil Boy.
>Insert foot.
>
>or do you think that Charles Schwab knows nothing about taxes and
>retirement?
I think that Charles Schwab is talking about the withdrawals being tax
free.. so what exactly is deferred, Matty? ...and when is it being
deferred to?
Lets see if Matty the moron can explain how something is tax deferred
when the withdrawals are tax free....
><LAUGH>
Indeed...
>Matt
Steve
No, Matty, there are always rule to follow.. However my ROTH earnings
will be 100% tax free...
>ROFLMAO.
>
>Thanks for proving yourself wrong, Lentil Boy.
>
>
>>
>> >Tell us, Lentil Boy, how your estate pays no tax on inherited Roth
>> >Iras.
>>
>> <snicker> Estate taxes don't apply if the estate is under the limit
>> amount.. What is it now.. oh yeah, $3.5 million..
>
>Oh God, this is JUST TOO GOOD.
Indeed.. So very good for me...
>Hey, Lentil Boy!! Guess what? There are STATE taxes too.
Not here in Florida...
>ROFLMAO.
>
>Hey boys and girls, listen to Lentil Boy. Go to prison.
<shaking my head and smiling>
>ROFLAMO.
>
>C'mon Lentil Boy, keep going, this is GREAT.
Indeed..
>> >Then answer the questions you were asked about predicting the future
>> >and
>> >paying taxes, Lentil Boy.
>>
>> >C'mon Lentil Boy. Put up or shut up. I've had enough of your
>> >stupidity.
>>
>> Irony anyone? see below:
>
>Note:
>
>No answers.
>
>Lentil Boy got pwned. C'mon, Lentil Boy, come back, I'll school you
>some more.
>
>ROFLMAO.
>
>Matt
More ignorance from Matt the moron..
Steve
I understand that a irresponsible moron like Matty the moron has no
use for any knowledge about investments...
More ignorance from Matt the moron..
"generally Roth Ira money is tax free. You put money
into it POST tax, hence a deferred account. "
--mattt...@sprynet.com
http://groups.google.com/group/talk.politics.misc/msg/eb129594eea307c7?hl=en
Canyon Note:
A deferred IRA is where you put money in PRE tax. On
the other hand, you Put money into a ROTH post tax
meaning that you've already paid
whatever taxes you owe... nothing has been deferred
and the earnings are tax free.
Matt
> On Tue, 12 Jul 2011 06:30:41 -0700 (PDT), Matt
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >Enjoy tax-deferred growth and tax-free withdrawals; contributions are
> >made with after-tax dollars.
>
> Matty, Matty, Matty... look at your cite.. see where it says "
> tax-free withdrawals?"
Lentil Boy, Lentil Boy, Lentil Boy.
Run RUN RUN!
The FACTS are going to get you.
So, Lentil Boy, Schwab doesn't know anything about Roth IRA's, but you
and
your Google Scholarhood do.
<chuckle>
yeah, I think we are done here. You've been pwned again.
Matt
David Hartung
Sorry Matt, but on this Steve seems to be correct. You only pay taxes on
the income fro a Roth account if you do not play by the rules. It is you
who needs to admit his mistake and move on.
matt....@gmail.com
What Lentil Boy said was "Roth IRA's are tax free". They are not, they
CAN
be. And "playing by the rules" has nothing to do with it. In Lentil
Boy's case,
he is over 65, and can still contribute to a Roth. However,
contributions made
at this stage which are removed are subject to tax. Likewise, although
Lentil
Boy has no restricted his criteria to himself and Florida, people in
the OTHER
49 states may be subject to estate taxes, which is a deferred tax on
the income.
Sorry, David, it isn't black and white, which is what we've been
trying to say. Lentil
Boy can't deal with gray, or areas that require some actual knowledge
of what you
are talking about. He's a Google Scholar.
Matt
wy
> account. The money you put into it is post tax, The growth is tax
> free.
>
> "wy" has a habit of believing anything that fits in with his own
> twisted view of reality and is obviously too stupid to check out the
> source...
>
> I checked out the guy that wrote that article... <LOL> He's a high
> school English teacher.
>
> Try using a source that knows what its talking about... here are a
> few..
>
> http://www.topicologist.com/search.php?query=what+is+roth+ira
>
They all say the same thing. Deferred.
Matt
> On Tue, 12 Jul 2011 06:34:03 -0700 (PDT), Matt
>
>
>
>
>
Ohh, now it is JUST FOR YOU.
<laugh> Yes, Lentil Boy, the tax code exists only for you.
Here're some hints, Lentil Boy.
Roth is a name, it isn't an acronym.
Roth earnings are NOT always 100% tax free, as you were shown.
Sometimes,
they are tax-deferred.
You haven't a clue and you are scrambling.
>
> >ROFLMAO.
>
> >Thanks for proving yourself wrong, Lentil Boy.
>
> >> >Tell us, Lentil Boy, how your estate pays no tax on inherited Roth
> >> >Iras.
>
> >> <snicker> Estate taxes don't apply if the estate is under the limit
> >> amount.. What is it now.. oh yeah, $3.5 million..
>
> >Oh God, this is JUST TOO GOOD.
>
> Indeed.. So very good for me...
>
> >Hey, Lentil Boy!! Guess what? There are STATE taxes too.
>
> Not here in Florida...
Ohhhh, now we are restricting it to FLORIDA.
<laugh>
Yeah, ok. RUN LENTIL BOY RUN!
Matt
wy
wrote:
What? Lentil Boy is over 65? Gee, that means he hasn't made any
money at all on his Roth since it takes 24 years to double one's
investment and Roths have only been around half that time. Like I
told him, he won't even live long enough to realize what money he made
out of it.
matt....@gmail.com
Whatever you say, Lentil Boy.
Lentil Boy seems to be ignorant of most basics of accounting,
particularly
for publically traded companies. All of the information I asked for is
in their
disclosed data.
Of course, that would involve something beyond Lentil Boy's Google
Scholarship.
<grin>
Matt
6127 Dead, 1270 since 1/20/09
>> And infinite prices exist within a few years. Which, of course, happens
>> ALL the time.
>>
>> He's amusing, this Lentil Boy. Stupid, and completely ignorant, but
>> amusing.
>>
>> Matt
>
> I cannot believe that ANYONE would be stupid enough to believe that a
> corporation o4r business does not figure taxes into its cost of doing
> business and therfore its bottom line.
So how many businesses deliberately reduce their profits in order to
reduce their taxes?
Steve
Of course that's not true at all...
Steve
wrote:
Matt can't do that... Whenever I correct Matt, as I have done here,
he immediately turns into a four year old, as he has done here...
Steve
<chuckle> Obviously "wy" hasn't even looked at the stock market over
the past few years... You could have bought stock in March of 2009
and have it doubled already... and there's lots of stock that have
doubled since 1995 1996
and Roths have only been around half that time. Like I
>told him, he won't even live long enough to realize what money he made
>out of it.
I suspect I'll never withdraw a penny from it... that's the plan
anyway.
Steve
So what part of my roth do you imagine is going to get "deferred" and
to what and to where is it going to be deferred, Dummy?
Steve
well Matty moron, you could have a 100% tax free Roth too.. but then
you'd first have to be responsible enough to save money to invest and
smart enough to invest it... You're obviously not or you wouldn't be
franticly googling "ROTH"
><laugh> Yes, Lentil Boy, the tax code exists only for you.
<LOL> As far as I'm concerned it does..
>Here're some hints, Lentil Boy.
>
>Roth is a name, it isn't an acronym.
>Roth earnings are NOT always 100% tax free, as you were shown.
Mine are..
>Sometimes,
>they are tax-deferred.
Mine aren't
>You haven't a clue and you are scrambling.
<chuckles> see below...
Steve
So Matty the moron can't explain what part of my ROTH is tax deferred
and where and when its deferred to...
Steve
None... why would they do that?
--
"Well, that's the funny thing about terrorists. If they get what they
want, they stop being terrorists."
--Zepp Jamieson
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=q5sc50lf1id03ms1i9truk78v2dk6052f5%404ax.com
"The South couldn't taken any more of the Missouri Compromise,
sensing (correctly) that it would kill slavery in the end,
and Lincoln planned to uphold it."
--Zepp Jamieson
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=9j2n5vsqfga7l2fsrt0polt2eg6lqs71hv%404ax.com
"The first amendment means that you are protected by law from haters."
--Zepp Jamieson
"http://groups.google.com/groups?oi=djq&selm=an_541474719
If Nevermore tries paying cap gains with a 1040, he'll
be in jail soon enough.
--Zepp Jamieson, Dec 3, 2005
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/msg/30fdaff423e2029b?hl=en&
"I just found out that Condoleezza Rice, [...], the National Security
advisor, spend last evening attending a Broadway play."
--Zepp Jamieson Sep 1, 2005
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.fan.rush-limbaugh/msg/30ffcc5ea6364557?hl=en&
"No plane hit the Pentagon. I don�t know what did,[...]"
-- Zepp Jamieson
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.society.liberalism/msg/39d98c910d32047b?hl=en
"Incidently, the fact that the Constitution specifies that people have
a right to vote in a presidential election pretty much takes the
choice of having [a presidential election] out of the hands of the states."
Zepp Jamieson Sun, Sep 3 2006
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.society.liberalism/msg/efb4fcac7b1561cb?hl=en&
"So you chuckleheads think a GPS is a completely passive receiver, is that correct?"
--DAvid (Zepp) Jamieson
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sixtyplus/msg/b4dc880575948b5d?hl=en
"farms were never subject to inheritance taxes. What sort of
moron are you? "
David (Zepp) Jamieson
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.california/msg/5c59cc2755acd39c?hl=en
wy
Depends on how you got it set up. Read the rules. It's not my
problem.
wy
Roth doesn't work that way, you're a fool to think if it does.
Steve
<LOL> So "wy" has not a clue.... tell you what, though.. all of my
roths will be 100% tax free....
Steve
<ROTFL> I didn't say that it did, dummy, I was just pointing out how
the market moves... It was very possible to double one's money
lately...
Some of my Roth has tripled since I converted it...
wy
Meanwhile, you still have to pay income tax. So what are you saving
and what are you really earning?
Here's a little bit of fun for you. Say your principal is $5,000 and
you invest $3,000 a year for 30 years at 3% per year. Don't delude
yourself into believing it'll ever average out to much more than 3%
over 30 years. What will that get you? $159,144.35. How much did
you have to put in to get that amount? $95,000. The difference is
about $65,000, nowhere near to doubling your money, and that's over 30
years. That's pretty sad, especially since you still have to pay
income taxes for those 30 years. And then you're hoping that the
government doesn't change the rules in mid-stream to rob you more of
your earnings on the Roth, and that you'll even live long enough to
collect that $159,144.35, which would only last you about 7 years at
about $22,000 a year if you're going to live frugally on your own -
actually, make that 3-4 years, since half of it will be gone on
medical costs for all the old age problems you'll get. Not only that,
but look how it compares to a deductible IRA:
http://www.moneychimp.com/articles/rothira/rothcontribs.htm
Doesn't look that appetizing, does it? But maybe you're the type
that goes for scraps. Enjoy your illusion of poor man's riches.
wy
Now this is where I know you're totally bullshitting. I knew you were
bullshitting all along, but this is real bullshitting coming from you
now.
Steve
Errrrr, no, not on the ROTH... It's tax free...
Steve
Again, <LOL> check out HTC corporation.. I sure wish I'd owned
more....
6129 Dead, 1272 since 1/20/09
Um, yeah.
The sun came up this morning, Newt Gingrich said something stupid, and
Steve is bullshitting.
Life's just fulla surprises, in't it?
Matt
Stunning. Just stunning.
You know what's hysterical though? He's arguing in two different
places
that
a) Companies just pass on taxes to the consumer and
b) Companies have lots of cash reserves.
And doesn't see that there just MIGHT be a slight problem here.
Matt
6129 Dead, 1272 since 1/20/09
>> The sun came up this morning, Newt Gingrich said something stupid, and
>> Steve is bullshitting.
>>
>> Life's just fulla surprises, in't it?-
>
> Stunning. Just stunning.
>
> You know what's hysterical though? He's arguing in two different places
> that
>
> a) Companies just pass on taxes to the consumer and b) Companies have
> lots of cash reserves.
>
> And doesn't see that there just MIGHT be a slight problem here.
>
> Matt
In fairness, he's been claiming they DON'T have cash reserves.
At least he's consistent in that he's getting his ass kicked on both
fronts.
Steve
1/20/09" <de...@gone.com> wrote:
>On Tue, 12 Jul 2011 19:03:13 -0700, Matt wrote:
>
>>> The sun came up this morning, Newt Gingrich said something stupid, and
>>> Steve is bullshitting.
>>>
>>> Life's just fulla surprises, in't it?-
>>
>> Stunning. Just stunning.
>>
>> You know what's hysterical though? He's arguing in two different places
>> that
>>
>> a) Companies just pass on taxes to the consumer and b) Companies have
>> lots of cash reserves.
>>
>> And doesn't see that there just MIGHT be a slight problem here.
>>
>> Matt
>
>In fairness, he's been claiming they DON'T have cash reserves.
Nope.. never made any such claim.. Its just that those cash reserves
have not taken a single penny "out of circulation" as the loons are
claiming...
Steve
Which is what they do..
>b) Companies have lots of cash reserves.
Indeed, but those cash reserves do not take a single penny out of
circulation..
Matt
wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Jul 2011 19:03:13 -0700, Matt wrote:
> >> The sun came up this morning, Newt Gingrich said something stupid, and
> >> Steve is bullshitting.
>
> >> Life's just fulla surprises, in't it?-
>
> > Stunning. Just stunning.
>
> > You know what's hysterical though? He's arguing in two different places
> > that
>
> > a) Companies just pass on taxes to the consumer and b) Companies have
> > lots of cash reserves.
>
> > And doesn't see that there just MIGHT be a slight problem here.
>
> > Matt
>
> In fairness, he's been claiming they DON'T have cash reserves.
Who knows what Lentil Boy claims on any given day. It really is
amusing to watch him squirm.
>
> At least he's consistent in that he's getting his ass kicked on both
> fronts.
Yeah, poor kid. The ego is just too big, and too fragile, to allow him
to gracefully walk away. So he keeps getting beat up.
Matt
Steve
<mattt...@sprynet.com> wrote:
>On Jul 12, 8:45 pm, "6129 Dead, 1272 since 1/20/09" <d...@gone.com>
>wrote:
>> On Tue, 12 Jul 2011 19:03:13 -0700, Matt wrote:
>> >> The sun came up this morning, Newt Gingrich said something stupid, and
>> >> Steve is bullshitting.
>>
>> >> Life's just fulla surprises, in't it?-
>>
>> > Stunning. Just stunning.
>>
>> > You know what's hysterical though? He's arguing in two different places
>> > that
>>
>> > a) Companies just pass on taxes to the consumer and b) Companies have
>> > lots of cash reserves.
>>
>> > And doesn't see that there just MIGHT be a slight problem here.
>>
>> > Matt
>>
>> In fairness, he's been claiming they DON'T have cash reserves.
>
>Who knows what Lentil Boy claims on any given day. It really is
>amusing to watch him squirm.
Amusing to watch Jamieson and Telles build their strawmen... <LOL>
They can't show where I ever claimed that big companies don;t have
cash reserves....
..but they can't back their ridiculous claim that these companies have
taken "money out of circulation" so all they have are the strawmen...
Matt
> On Wed, 13 Jul 2011 05:33:59 -0700 (PDT), Matt
>
>
>
>
>
> <matttel...@sprynet.com> wrote:
> >On Jul 12, 8:45 pm, "6129 Dead, 1272 since 1/20/09" <d...@gone.com>
> >wrote:
> >> On Tue, 12 Jul 2011 19:03:13 -0700, Matt wrote:
> >> >> The sun came up this morning, Newt Gingrich said something stupid, and
> >> >> Steve is bullshitting.
>
> >> >> Life's just fulla surprises, in't it?-
>
> >> > Stunning. Just stunning.
>
> >> > You know what's hysterical though? He's arguing in two different places
> >> > that
>
> >> > a) Companies just pass on taxes to the consumer and b) Companies have
> >> > lots of cash reserves.
>
> >> > And doesn't see that there just MIGHT be a slight problem here.
>
> >> > Matt
>
> >> In fairness, he's been claiming they DON'T have cash reserves.
>
> >Who knows what Lentil Boy claims on any given day. It really is
> >amusing to watch him squirm.
>
> Amusing to watch Jamieson and Telles build their strawmen... <LOL>
<chuckle>
"See how he runs..."
Matt
Steve
Poor Matt has realized his error in challenging me.. now the moron
has to snip.... That's always the clue that Matt knows I've defeated
him once again...
Amusing to watch Jamieson and Telles build their strawmen... <LOL>
They can't show where I ever claimed that big companies don't have
Matt
<chuckle>
"Challenge"
"Defeat"
Note the words from the egotist? He belives this is his "battle" that
he
can "win".
<laugh> Quite amusing, really, and a sure indication of a small mind.
Matt
Steve
I've already won, Dummy.. I won as soon as you realized that only a
total moron like Jamieson would claim that a big corporation would
take their cash reserves "out of circulation." .,..and that you were
defending that ridiculous concept and have to resort to snipping to
run and hide...
"Bubbles, YOU'RE the one saying if we take money out of general
circulation, the economy will improve."
--David (Zepp) Jamieson talking about corporate cash reserves
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.fan.rush-limbaugh/msg/9d77036a53c7a52c?hl=en&dmode=source
><laugh> Quite amusing, really, and a sure indication of a small mind.
>
>Matt
Matt
> On Wed, 13 Jul 2011 07:35:21 -0700 (PDT), Matt
>
>
>
>
>
<smile>
Sure, Lentil Boy. You won. We are all very happy for you.
Want a nice pat on the head?
<laugh>
Matt
Steve
More ignorance from Matt the moron..
First Post
Since when does having some cash in reserve contradict passing costs
on to the consumers?
Neither of you two idiots have produced a single logical argument in
this entire thread.
You lost your argument early on when you began your usual ad hominem
insults without ever offering any kind of logical reasoning for your
arguments.
Steve
Actually, I posted arguments but Matt, as per usual snipped them,
while Zepp just waddled away.
--
"Bubbles, YOU'RE the one saying if we take money out of
general circulation, the economy will improve."
--David (Zepp) Jamieson stupidly claiming that corporate cash reserves "take money out of circulation"
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.fan.rush-limbaugh/msg/9d77036a53c7a52c?hl=en&dmode=source