2016 US Presidential Elections | Trump Wins
- Thread starter Raoul
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik and Imran are here to talk about a frustrating 2 points dropped at Crystal Palace. They then discuss the regeneration of Old Trafford. Finally, Nik is joined by special guest Michael Statham from the Football Oranje podcast - who gives us a more in depth look at our EL opposition FC Twente, and then runs through the (many) Dutch connections currently at United.
- Status
some good posts and links lads. must read when i'm home.
Stockholders would be indifferent between dividends and buybacks, except that there's a 30% tax on dividends for foreign investors in the US, and most hedge funds are in the Cayman Islands or similar. Want to be in on the goodies? Buy stocks. (Actually, if you don't know what you're doing, don't)
Also, wonder if wage and benefit differences had anything to do with GM's woes, and not just "a financial crunch"... from Wiki:
But if you prefer, just union on and complain about Wall Street.
This is a pure inequality metric, not a poverty one:
By this metric some hypothetical desolate country but equally so might be great. We know the US is unequal and I'm not arguing against it, but this is dissimulation.
The big three are responsible for only 3% of our economy and the pension issue was caused by them and not the unions.
$22 000 in US would be the same for someone who brings home $1000 in some country in Africa, everything is more expensive in US than in that country, that's the only way to compare countries.
So you actually think that kids born in the lower 25% in the US today are worse than the median kid born in Romania?
Can someone live in New York city with $22000 and not be just poor but very poor?
Why would someone even try? How does it relate to what I was saying before? There's PPP measurements to adjust GDP per Capita figures, and the US still scores pretty highly.
Yes, and you can continue on with the adolescent Libertarian fantasies and wall street´s cock down your throat and pretend 2008 never happened, nor any crimes or conflicts of interest happened, no bubbles, no manipulation, no loss of so many´s people´s money and saving, no massive unemployment, nor rigged "free" markets and explain the virtues of the vampire high speed trading . . . but wait, who ever was talking about unioning on?
Who would you trust, this guy or Bernie Sanders?? We already know who you would choose.
Last edited:
Seems to me it's more indicative of the wealth gap. Poor Americans are living the life of riley compared to poor people in the likes of Romania. But if you can't afford a house and good food then it's all relative, isn't it?
i really love 'studies indicate that raising the minimum wage will harm small businesses BS' yeah. the entire economy will go down the tubes. I helped close books for small businesses some years back for a brief time and I can tell that even businesses that were coming out of bankruptcies were paying the owners and family members pretty well while paying minimum wage to workers. So lets dispense with this notion about small businesses being harmed by raising the minimum wage to $15.00. btw if that was the wage at MacDonalds, its hardly going to kill the business. So raise a penny on burgers. They would more than make up those wage increases.
Goldman has bought me dinner a few times, so I gotta side with them
. Bernie just wants me to pay three median household incomes worth of taxes, instead of the current one and a half. He'll also smile and say its actually for my benefit when he does.Goldman has bought me dinner a few times, so I gotta side with them
He says it will benefit an average middle class family . If you're paying more in tax than most people make in a year, im going to go ahead and say you're not in the middle class.
I guess we'll just have to do it and find out what happens... I'll bet a beer on it though. FWIW, I'll tell you what I found interesting from a meeting with the CFO of a large US franchise. He mentioned the franchisees were actually having trouble hiring, that there were signs of help wanted on the chain's stores all over.
Now this is a chain where franchisees probably pay min. wage or just above, so not the most interesting jobs in the world. But the franchisees are also very reluctant to pay above the rate, even in the face of high turnover. Corporate would recommend that they do so, but it can only recommend and not order in the existing structure. The franchisees are mostly owners of a few units, not very sophisticated. But its honestly their loss, in that environment I'd be the first to offer higher wages to offset turnover and improve customer experience in my stores. Their non-franchise competitor, that already pays more than min. wage, is probably licking their lips.
Overall from the corporate point of view at least in restaurant business the last 12 months or so has seen very thin supply on the labor side, with many chains, and especially the most successful ones, raising wages to keep turnover down.
Definitely. henry Ford made his products cheap and paid his workers enough that they could afford them. Who else is going to buy goods and services in this country?
Goldman has bought me dinner a few times, so I gotta side with them
I´m assuming if Bernie wants you to pay that much in taxes, you´re making a shit ton of money, and most likely are in reality paying a very low percentage in taxes. And aren´t you one of these recent bushy tailed immigrants who wants to make the libertarian dream come true in the US? How much have you actually paid into this country and its institutions and its infrastructure that´s made it such a great place to make a lot of money in? Wall Street did not build this country. Sounds like you just got here and are cashing in? Sounds ideal.
If anyone wants to be bored (and in some cases maybe angered) by liberal (not the US meaning) economist talk: http://johnhcochrane.blogspot.com/2016/02/sanders-multiplier-magic.html
This was also the philosophy of Mitsubishi I believe. They manufacture almost everything. their own workers buy the same products. Everyone benefits. Just am example. But it can work.
btw Bernie won Maine last night. Big voter turnout.
Never had any illusions about a 40% effective tax rate being the libertarian dream. Cross the 50% barrier and it become egregious.
Goldman has bought me dinner a few times, so I gotta side with them
When someone pays so much taxes I'm sure they can deduct a lot more than the middle class, they may own more than 1 house and they can go on vacation masked as a business trip, so yes they pay more because they made more but they deduct way more than a normal soul. I'm leaning to the right and always did which started in Portugal when I saw the left destroying the country but I believe in a fair world for people who work or wants to work, I'm not against rich people because we need them and they need us I just want all the loopholes closed and I don't care if they tax everybody the same rate because the country would get more money in taxes.
P.S. I bet you Goldman's dinner was added to his expenses.
Warren Buffett paid 17.4%
http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin...-class-pays-higher-tax-rates-millionaires-se/
Having read this... he was pathetic in the debate last night. Her biggest hit, and he didn't bother to defend himself - with the truth!
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...nders-debate-over-the-auto-bailout-explained/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...nders-debate-over-the-auto-bailout-explained/
I don't even own a house!Joking aside, there's a reason why investment income is taxed lower, and it benefits the middle class too. The money they make working one year gets taxed 20-30%, if they intelligently choose to save some of that and invest it, do you want to tax the yield of that the 2nd go around at 20-30% again? Don't you think the tax rate on investment yield, which affects net return, influences their decision to save vs. spend? Most countries in the world have lower rates for investment income.
I'm not entirely against some level of inheritance tax though, just needs to have some thought put into it, since there are both economic and moral aspects. The answer for the tax system is not simply 'more from the 1%', the how matters greatly.
P.S. In a sense the US government was a 40% partner in everything GS or any other IB ever bought for me or their thousands of other clients on thousands of occasions, because its booked as a cost and comes out of their bottom line, therefore reduces their tax burden in $ terms. (Or maybe GS somehow runs a P&L loss, not bothered to check)
One sticking point makes his debate performance pathetic?
In Michigan and Ohio that one line would be enough to turn of hundreds of thousands of motors*. Remember "Osama is dead and GM is alive"? It was Obama's main campaign slogan in Ohio.
Having seen his answer it wasn't at all clear that he supported the auto bailout when it was separate from the wall street bailout. And by painting him as an opponent of auto workers, she can dent the blue collar support he really needs.
EDIT: *voters
In Michigan and Ohio that one line would be enough to turn of hundreds of thousands of motors*. Remember "Osama is dead and GM is alive"? It was Obama's main campaign slogan in Ohio.
Having seen his answer it wasn't at all clear that he supported the auto bailout when it was separate from the wall street bailout. And by painting him as an opponent of auto workers, she can dent the blue collar support he really needs.
EDIT: *voters
Never heard that one. Pithy one-liner, that.
I know it's a major point to Michigan, but I hardly think a two hour debate (or however long it went on) can be summarised as pathetic off the back of that alone.
Joking aside, there's a reason why investment income is taxed lower, and it benefits the middle class too. The money they make working one year gets taxed 20-30%, if they intelligently choose to save some of that and invest it, do you want to tax the yield of that the 2nd go around at 20-30% again? Don't you think the tax rate on investment yield, which affects net return, influences their decision to save vs. spend? Most countries in the world have lower rates for investment income.
I'm not entirely against some level of inheritance tax though, just needs to have some thought put into it, since there are both economic and moral aspects. The answer for the tax system is not simply 'more from the 1%', the how matters greatly.
P.S. In a sense the US government was a 40% partner in everything GS or any other IB ever bought for me or their thousands of other clients on thousands of occasions, because its booked as a cost and comes out of their bottom line, therefore reduces their tax burden in $ terms. (Or maybe GS somehow runs a P&L loss, not bothered to check)
Thats a tax I'm against.
In Michigan and Ohio that one line would be enough to turn of hundreds of thousands of motors*. Remember "Osama is dead and GM is alive"? It was Obama's main campaign slogan in Ohio.
Having seen his answer it wasn't at all clear that he supported the auto bailout when it was separate from the wall street bailout. And by painting him as an opponent of auto workers, she can dent the blue collar support he really needs.
EDIT: *voters
Don't think it'll change the final result much though.
Potential numbers & scenarios -
Bloomberg just announced he won't be running for Prez.
It's the kind of thing that makes me doubt him as a candidate. Yes, your opponent will lie. But you can't let them get away!
Yup, even winning 52% of the remaining is a tough ask, though if he's clearly ahead of 2nd place by the convention I don't think there's much they could do to stop him being nominated. Another Florida poll also out saying that Trump has an 8 point lead in voting intention but Rubio is banking an actual lead from early votes - if Trump has another poor period between now and the 15th, Rubio could still pull it off.
War has rules, mud wrestling has rules.
Politics has no rules.
That wasn't even a lie by Clinton, just half-truth. Imagine what will happen with him on the debate stage against the GOP nominee, who will repeatedly smear him while he helplessly keeps trying to pivot to his Wall Street stump speech. It's going to be a massacre.
I have felt that he has got better with every appearance and in fact this debate she was the one looking desparate to pivot to Obama/Republicans, but this mistake is unforgivable.
I also think that it might be different with Trump in that it will be a lot more shout-y and Trump will be doing personal insults while Bernie repeats his stump lines, which should help him. Still, this is scary.
Well, thankfully not
- Status