|
|
Post by rally2xs on Nov 6, 2015 10:07:23 GMT -5
This (Fox this morning) is the 2nd news outlet I've heard report this, so it just might be true. I think the other was that liberal talker on XM. But anyway, it seems that working class white people 40 - 55 are dying at much higher rates than would otherwise be expected. Alcoholism and suicide seem to be the standouts in the "cause of death" box of the death certificates.
The news programs are having a bit of a time figuring it out. I'm not. After 7 years of lousy economy, with "O" completely clueless of what to do about it, people that were used to working for good money in factories or other things that paid well, that are now working crap-paying jobs in part-time situations are coming to the end of their rope, and offing themselves, or hiding in bottles and so killing themselves. They have plenty of reason to react that way, since there doesn't seem to be much hope on the horizon, especially with so many being "down" with the idea that the only way to prosperity is "go to college." Used to be, you didn't have to go to college to have a reasonably good life. Now you do, and those that can't, or don't want to, are screwed. They know it thoroughly now, and have decided that life as a working homeless person isn't worth living, or is at least worth the high risk of alcoholism.
Want to accelerate the deaths? Elect some damned socialist that will tax the economy into an even bigger depression. Homeless as far as the eye can see.
|
|
|
|
Post by bobathon on Nov 6, 2015 10:29:29 GMT -5
It's a problem with their life-hating culture. You know, the ones that think it's fine to go blow up other people around the world + karma's a bitch = die you shitheel.
|
|
|
|
Post by minx on Nov 6, 2015 11:35:51 GMT -5
I would be interested in seeing how many of those working class men had served time in the military, specifically in Iraq or Afghanistan. It's been fairly well-documented that the suicide rate among veteran has increased - I wonder if that has something to do with these figures.
|
|
|
|
Post by bobathon on Nov 6, 2015 11:56:16 GMT -5
Soldiers and civilians there were also exposed to some various chemical nasties.
Really, you just KNOW it's because they all KNOW TOO MUCH, so Obama Clinton is having them silenced. Dead men tell no tales.
|
|
|
|
Post by pastafari on Nov 6, 2015 12:58:42 GMT -5
Used to be, you didn't have to go to college to have a reasonably good life. It also used to be that wages kept pace with productivity. Maybe if we can correct that...  |
|
|
|
Post by rally2xs on Nov 7, 2015 5:39:16 GMT -5
Used to be, you didn't have to go to college to have a reasonably good life. It also used to be that wages kept pace with productivity. Maybe if we can correct that... We absolutely can correct that, as soon as we understand the cause of it. The cause of it is, like Bernie Sanders has been shouting, 60,000 factories have moved out of the country since year 2000. The reason they moved out of the country is our highest-on-the-planet corporate income taxes that makes doing manufacturing here a moronic proposition. Even Bernie doesn't seem to realize this. The cure for it, then, is to abolish the income taxes. All those factories, plus additional foreign factories, will come flying back into the USA, to manufacture things in the newest, bestest manufacturing tax haven on the planet. As a by-product, they will create millions of good-paying factory jobs, and greatly diminish poverty by making those in it rise to the level of middle class. After that, the "wage gap" will greatly diminish, not because the CEO's are making less, but because the workers are making dramatically more. Yeah, we can fix it, and that is how you do it. |
|
|
|
Post by pastafari on Nov 7, 2015 10:33:50 GMT -5
Yeah, no. Your magic solution isn't practiced anywhere. Show me someone doing it successfully, and I'll consider it. Until then, it's just "tax breaks for the rich", like any other right winger.
|
|
|
|
Post by rally2xs on Nov 7, 2015 11:27:35 GMT -5
I would be interested in seeing how many of those working class men had served time in the military, specifically in Iraq or Afghanistan. It's been fairly well-documented that the suicide rate among veteran has increased - I wonder if that has something to do with these figures. So, just WHITE men 40 - 55 years old are committing suicide or drinking themselves to death and not blacks or hispanics? The military has a lot of blacks and hispanics, too. So, why just WHITE and why just men? How's that correlate with military service? |
|
|
|
Post by rally2xs on Nov 7, 2015 11:43:06 GMT -5
Yeah, no. Your magic solution isn't practiced anywhere. Show me someone doing it successfully, and I'll consider it. Until then, it's just "tax breaks for the rich", like any other right winger. Florida and Texas. Neither has income taxes. I think it was the Texas governor that said that due to his state not having an income tax, Texas was creating 62% of all new jobs in the whole country. Here's a reference: www.politifact.com/texas/statements/2015/jun/08/rick-perry/rick-perry-says-texas-gained-15-million-jobs-over-/That was a claim of 1/3rd of all jobs, but I've seen 62% as well, don't remember where. Here's an observation about the income taxes only 50 years after its enactment, when a far-sighted President called them out for harming our economy: "“The largest single barrier to full employment of our manpower and resources and to a higher rate of economic growth is the unrealistically heavy drag of federal income taxes on private purchasing power, initiative and incentive.” John F. Kennedy, Jan. 24, 1963 " Detractors (Lefty Wash Po) tries giving this 2 Pinnochios, but admits in the last paragraph, "One-quarter of American jobs is nothing to sneeze at. Dallas saw the largest job growth among large metropolitan areas in 2014. Texas ranks in the top five among states with the biggest percentage increases in jobs." Lefties are in love with the income taxes for the power it gives the gov't to tell people what to do and how to live (Don't do any politics from the pulpit or we'll revoke your tax breaks) (No, you can't have a tax exemption because you're a Tea Party Believer, which was actually illegal for them to do, but will go unprosecuted by the lefty, lawless President we have now, and his injustice departmen) and attempt to sabotage the idea of getting rid of it at every opportunity, but the facts are that income taxes are absolute poison to the economy, even in the tiniest dosages. It is a medicine with no beneficial dosage, a tax on prosperity essentially, and you know what they say about taxes in general: "If you want less of something, tax it." Well, we've taxed ourselves right out of prosperity for about 15 years now. I think we should stop poking ourselves in the eyes, and abolish the income taxes. |
|
|
|
Post by rally2xs on Nov 7, 2015 11:54:51 GMT -5
Yeah, no. Your magic solution isn't practiced anywhere. Show me someone doing it successfully, and I'll consider it. Until then, it's just "tax breaks for the rich", like any other right winger. Oh, and how about countries with very, very low corporate income taxes? Like Ireland? What do you supposed Facebook is doing having a lot of its financial operations located in Ireland? Hmmmm? There's lotsa Americans over there, I hear, avoiding our egregious income taxes. And "inversion" in corporate world, where companies pull up stakes in this country and go to some other country to manufacture, is fueled by... our income tax bite as compared to _any_ other country. Here's an explanation of how the Irish tax avoidance works: visualeconomics.creditloan.com/double-irish-deception-how-google-apple-facebook-avoid-paying-taxes/That wouldn't happen if we had zero income taxes. |
|
|
|
Post by pastafari on Nov 7, 2015 21:22:04 GMT -5
That wouldn't happen if we had zero income taxes. Or if we closed that loophole. |
|
|
|
Post by pastafari on Nov 7, 2015 21:26:54 GMT -5
How does Donald Trump avoid paying $250,000.00 in taxes? By spending $249,000.00 hiring lawyers and accountants to avoid it. Right?
|
|
|
|
Post by rally2xs on Nov 7, 2015 23:59:05 GMT -5
How does Donald Trump avoid paying $250,000.00 in taxes? By spending $249,000.00 hiring lawyers and accountants to avoid it. Right? Exactly. IOW, the income tax, in addition to being as burden on industry and the people alike, is ineffective in raising maximum revenue. That's ANOTHER reason to abolish it. The $249,000 damages Trump's organization, the US gov't gets no $$$$, and America suffers. |
|
|
|
Post by rally2xs on Nov 8, 2015 0:01:05 GMT -5
That wouldn't happen if we had zero income taxes. Or if we closed that loophole. Do that, and they'll find another way, maybe just move the entire company HQ to Ireland, then it will be a foreign company, over which the US Gov't has even less control, and from which the US Gov't cant collect taxes due to the WTO agreements on no Tariffs. |
|
|
|
Post by pastafari on Nov 9, 2015 11:50:01 GMT -5
How does Donald Trump avoid paying $250,000.00 in taxes? By spending $249,000.00 hiring lawyers and accountants to avoid it. Right? Exactly. IOW, the income tax, in addition to being as burden on industry and the people alike, is ineffective in raising maximum revenue. That's ANOTHER reason to abolish it. The $249,000 damages Trump's organization, the US gov't gets no $$$$, and America suffers. And you don't see any immorality in that at all? You don't see the giant middle finger he's waving at our country when he does that? He's so focused on saving that $1000 that he's willing to screw his own country out of the other $249K. He's losing $249K either way, and he's got the choice to send it to other rich people or to send it to help his country. The cost to this billionaire to send it to help is country is a paltry (to him) $1,000. You've just admitted that the US gets no money and America suffers when he does this. He makes that choice. And you think this guy should be the leader of the country that he works so hard to stiff? How is he, in any way, on Team America? |
|
|
|
Post by rally2xs on Nov 9, 2015 11:57:11 GMT -5
Exactly. IOW, the income tax, in addition to being as burden on industry and the people alike, is ineffective in raising maximum revenue. That's ANOTHER reason to abolish it. The $249,000 damages Trump's organization, the US gov't gets no $$$$, and America suffers. And you don't see any immorality in that at all? You don't see the giant middle finger he's waving at our country when he does that? He's so focused on saving that $1000 that he's willing to screw his own country out of the other $249K. He's losing $249K either way, and he's got the choice to send it to other rich people or to send it to help his country. The cost to this billionaire to send it to help is country is a paltry (to him) $1,000. You've just admitted that the US gets no money and America suffers when he does this. He makes that choice. And you think this guy should be the leader of the country that he works so hard to stiff? How is he, in any way, on Team America? Its not immoral, its in the tax code. The Gov't is in complete control of the tax code, so if they didn't want people to be dodging these taxes, they would engineer the tax code so that it couldn't be done (like in the Fair Tax - 131 pages, 1 notable exemption is no tax on tuition, which really isn't an exemption, because it's simply treating it like it is, an investment, not a purchase.) $249,000 vs. $250,000 - Trump saves $1000. Sure, you're going to save $1000, and, BTW, furnish employment from a number of lawyers and accountants who work on not paying that money. Don't like it? Change the tax system so it doesn't happen. Anyone paying tax that he doesn't absolutely have to is a moron, BTW. |
|
|
|
Post by pastafari on Nov 9, 2015 12:09:02 GMT -5
At that scale, I absolutely disagree. Scale that to your taxes, and you're talking about a nickel, maybe, in difference. $2000 to help your country, or $1,999.95 to lawyers and accountants? You're just an asshole if that minuscule difference causes you to say, "fuck you, America."
|
|
|
|
Post by bobathon on Nov 9, 2015 12:29:14 GMT -5
Never pay it forward.
|
|
|
|
Post by rally2xs on Nov 9, 2015 13:44:50 GMT -5
At that scale, I absolutely disagree. Scale that to your taxes, and you're talking about a nickel, maybe, in difference. $2000 to help your country, or $1,999.95 to lawyers and accountants? You're just an asshole if that minuscule difference causes you to say, "fuck you, America." Look, COMPANIES shouldn't be taxed anyway. THEY don't pay the tax, they have to raise their prices, screw their employees' wages, and lower their dividends in order to be able to pay the tax. IOW, they COLLECT taxes, they DON'T PAY taxes. Plus, corporate taxes are only 9% of the entire revenue stream for the US Gov't. Considering the damage they do to American competitiveness, its insane NOT to abolish them. You want immoral? Screwing over AMERICAN business just because you've got a hate-thing going for succesful (rich) people, now that's immoral. Millions suffer in poverty because of it. Abolish income taxes completely and the economy will roar, people will have good jobs again, and we can relegate "the poor" to a much smaller segment of the economy. |
|
|
|
Post by bobathon on Nov 9, 2015 13:51:27 GMT -5
Yeah, millions suffer in poverty because businesses are taxed. I guess the only solution is to reduce the tax burden until the rate is 0%, and magically everyone will be well paid and out of poverty!
In Bizarrotopia.
Why don't you learn some history about American tax rates, wealth and rewards, and history? We were far more productive and with a much more equitable wealth distribution prior to Reagan's tinkering with the system (explicitly designed to benefit the rich, so they could trickle down on the rest of us, and we have not recovered). We HAD that supercharged economy, but you assholes threw it away.
Let me guess at your response: "Facts, hell, who needs 'em? I gots the teevee on Fucks Snooze.".
|
|
|
|
Post by pastafari on Nov 9, 2015 14:00:03 GMT -5
My point here is his decision within the framework of the current system. He makes the immoral and unpatriotic choice to screw over the country that provides him the very opportunity to make billions. All over a pittance.
As for your first paragraph, they don't have to raise their prices and screw their employees, but they choose to out of greed.
And it is in no way, shape, or form, immoral to expect businesses to pay for their opportunities here.
|
|
|
|
Post by rally2xs on Nov 9, 2015 20:00:26 GMT -5
My point here is his decision within the framework of the current system. He makes the immoral and unpatriotic choice to screw over the country that provides him the very opportunity to make billions. All over a pittance. As for your first paragraph, they don't have to raise their prices and screw their employees, but they choose to out of greed. And it is in no way, shape, or form, immoral to expect businesses to pay for their opportunities here. They _do_ have to raise prices, lower wages, and reduce dividends to pay taxes, where else do you think they get their money, a money tree? They don't have no freakin' money tree! |
|
|
|
Post by pastafari on Nov 9, 2015 20:46:12 GMT -5
No, they could just decrease what they're taking, and act like citizens. Maybe take two weeks in Tahiti instead of three. Maybe just one Bentley, instead of one for every day of the week. But no, instead, they think the right thing to do is to make their employees decide between health care and food. Or between rent and running water.
|
|
|
|
Post by rally2xs on Nov 9, 2015 21:06:11 GMT -5
No, they could just decrease what they're taking, and act like citizens. Maybe take two weeks in Tahiti instead of three. Maybe just one Bentley, instead of one for every day of the week. But no, instead, they think the right thing to do is to make their employees decide between health care and food. Or between rent and running water. Who the hell are "they?" These are corporations, so if you're talking about CEOs or board members, they are just more employees. Then you would be agreeing with me that the company would have to be lowering wages / salaries to pay the tax. But of course the CEO of GM is only getting $10M, and the profits at GM are likely in the $100M area, making the tax to be$39M. Is the CEO going to come up with $39M all by himself? Nope, He's going to raise the price of each car by maybe $500 and COLLECT the money to pay the tax. That's how it works. A company is a "closed box", so you're not going to magically get more money out of it than (other people, usually) put into it. That's why wages and dividends go down, and prices go up to pay the damned tax, and why we'd have much more saleable cars in face of foreign competition if the taxes went away - they'd all be able to get cheaper. Buy a $35K FJ Cruiser or a $31K Jeep Cherokee? Simple choice when the US Gov't isn't hindering our own manufacturers. |
|
|
|
Post by pastafari on Nov 9, 2015 21:55:35 GMT -5
the CEO of GM is only getting $10M Only ten million dollars? ONLY? How silly of me to think that he might survive on merely one of those millions. How silly of me to think that the company should be happy with $70 million in profits, after paying back the the country for the privilege of being able to even acquire $70 million in the first place. How silly of me to think that there's something more important in this world than profits. |
|
|
|
Post by rally2xs on Nov 9, 2015 23:50:24 GMT -5
the CEO of GM is only getting $10M Only ten million dollars? ONLY? How silly of me to think that he might survive on merely one of those millions. How silly of me to think that the company should be happy with $70 million in profits, after paying back the the country for the privilege of being able to even acquire $70 million in the first place. How silly of me to think that there's something more important in this world than profits. Profits are how dividends are paid. Its not a law, but it is expected that companies selling stocks work as hard as they can and do everything they can to be able to pay as much in dividends as possible. If that means screwing the employees, and raising prices to customers, that's what they'll do - and they'll still be able to pay less dividends than they could if they didn't have to pay the tax. Again, COMPANIES don't pay taxes, PEOPLE pay taxes. You want to eliminate the USA as the land of opportunity where you can work hard and get rich, but I don't. If someone gets good enough to convince a BoD that he's worth $10M or whatever, more power to him. I want him to be able to do it so I can be able to do it if I decide to actually get married to a job, and get good enough to do it too. You could do it too, if you wanted to concentrate on it and learn everything you need to know about business and fianace and such, and, oh yeah, spend years developing "connections" with others who can make it easier to make more money. But if it is cheaper to close a US plant and construct one in Mexico, and that will produce a higher dividend, then the management team is expected to do exactly that. Its how business works. Don't like it? Change the damned tax laws so that businesses have no reason to move out of the country, and every reason to move into it. Again, the gov't is in control, but this gov't has decided to abuse business at every opportunity, so its no surprise to anyone but the morons in Washington that we've lost 60,000 factories since year 2000. |
|
|
|
Post by bobathon on Nov 10, 2015 6:45:44 GMT -5
|
|
