Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Bob on March 13, 2009 at 3:25

I agree that the last ten to twelve years of thirty to one hedging and an insane obsessive claim of right to credit, from those at the top to those at the bottom of earning levels, artifically inflated values. A car for $50,000? NUTS! Once credit was unleashed, prices skyrocketed--not reflecting "value," but simply reflecting the "risk" the banking affiliate of the particular shopkeeper (home depot, GM, Dillard's, etc) was willing to take in lending money to facilitate a purchase.
But, strip everything back to its value 15 years ago. {Oh, wait; that's just what happened! The market simply corrected itself to a real value!} Yes, we have actually experienced true growth since the Depression, and, thus, real growth in value of assets. There are families who have skillfully amassed great wealth without earnings. It is that to which the estate tax is directed. It is irresponsible, in my view, to suggest anything else.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jay Murrell on March 13, 2009 at 3:42

[edit] Envy (Latin, invidia)
Main article: Envy
Like greed, envy may be characterized by an insatiable desire; they differ, however, for two main reasons. First, greed is largely associated with material goods, whereas envy may apply more generally. Second, those who commit the sin of envy resent that another person has something they perceive themselves as lacking, and wish the other person to be deprived of it. Dante defined this as "love of one's own good perverted to a desire to deprive other men of theirs." In Dante's Purgatory, the punishment for the envious is to have their eyes sewn shut with wire because they have gained sinful pleasure from seeing others brought low. Aquinas described envy as "sorrow for another's good".[5]


If Dante has it right there are gonna be some folks (mainly Democrats) with "wired eyes" in the great beyond...:-)

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Bob on March 13, 2009 at 3:59

Interesting perspective that you bring. Borrowing from a philosopher who also wrote ""The hottest places in hell are reserved for those who, in time of great moral crisis, maintain their neutrality" and who himself ultimately was charged with public financial corruption and condemned to death.
It is not a function of envy to seek fairness. If you believe that wealth results from work, i.e., is earned, then should it not be taxed as fairly as earnings are? If you believe that everyone deserves the opportunity to rise to the top, financially and otherwise, why lay the burdens of earnings taxation on those who actually labor but not on those whose "earnings" are passive? Indeed, doesn't the O&G industry allow those who earn passively to benefit from tax credits that for every other industry are available only to those who actively generate income?
The thought process reflected by your written word doesn't seem fully functioning, but rather, is a culled cut and paste version of logic, facts, and systems. ANd, it seems your "relationship" to the world and those around you, particularly those different than you in thought and belief, are identical to quintessential existentalist subject of Albert Camus' "The Stranger."

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jay Murrell on March 13, 2009 at 4:12

Bob:

I see you don't like Dante, how about Thomas Aqunias? Aquninas described envy as "sorrow for another's good".

Do you think envy is healthy?

You are certainly free to think anything you choose about my thought process, I think you are a pretty sharp guy and I have enjoyed our discussion here. I look forward to more of the same.

Best regards,

Jay

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jay Murrell on March 13, 2009 at 4:24

Jim:

That’s an excellent definition of moral relativism. May I use it?

BTW, anybody who made their bones in our business in 1982 has to be pretty sharp. Therefore, I wish to amend my prior judgements re your intellect...:-) I respect you. Don't agree with you much, but you are sure no dummy.

Best,

Jay

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by RAZORBACK on March 13, 2009 at 4:29

JUST ONE EXAMPLE OF HOW THIS TROJAN HORSE PRESIDENT IS OUT TO DESTROY THE ECONOMY OF THE COUNTRY!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Grillin' - MmmMmm on March 13, 2009 at 4:23

All good arguments to get away from income taxes and death taxes. Go to a consumption tax. That way earners aren't penalized for earning. And we also get to tax people who are running under the radar screen, like illegal's who don't pay income tax.

Won't ever happen, but it would be nice!

And why not put Bernie Madoff in charge of Social Security? biggest ponzi scheme there is. And quickly approaching unsustainability. Madoff doesn't have a lot to do these days so his time will be available and we'll already be paying for his room and board!

BTW, I fully disagree with your premise that "wealth results from work". Wealth can also result from investment, both money and sweat and brainpower. If I invest $100,000 in to a biz venture that someone has set up, they go out and hire 10 people thus creating 10 new jobs, and 5 years later my investment in the biz is worth $500,000, I have generated wealth as well as jobs for others. So, how should we confiscate some of that for the government? I would propose that we leave it alone, let it be invested in other companies so that they can continue to hire people and provide jobs. Versus letting government take the money and "you know, spread it around".

Yes, our government needs some money to carry out its basic functions but it has since grown well beyond its basic functions and is running out of control. And still not doing some of its most basic functions, like protecting our borders. I'd gladly pay more in taxes if they would send a force to protect our border. Tanks, blackhawks, boots on the ground, etc.

Whooooaaaaa.....way off topic! Back to death and taxes!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Grillin' - MmmMmm on March 13, 2009 at 6:16

Not all of them! When you fill out your forms, you can claim large number of withholding allowances or just right "Exempt" and then no FIT is withheld. Yeah, we get 'em on FICA but only if they aren't paying cash.

And yes, writing "Exempt" means you are supposed to be saying you are exempt, but why would a law breaking illegal worry about more laws? They break one, they break them all.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by RAZORBACK on March 13, 2009 at 5:07

JIM,
YOU HAVE YOUR OPINION AND I HAVE MINE.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jay Murrell on March 13, 2009 at 10:14

Don't just sit there, do something!

http://www.batonrougeteaparty.net/

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• Next ›
• Page