Is a complete collapse imminent?

[ScottBot]

Um, the military's job is being prepared to fight.

Go figure. I'm guessing that people don't realize that the only time a ship doesn't have live ammo and a crew available to man weapons stations within a moments notice is when it is dry dock or in overhaul.

 

[Joachim]

What??!

They won't develop them adequately and send the money back to the states, and right now those jobs are probably reserved for Canadians. As Americans, it is our duty to help Canadians see the light on this issue.

 

[LUColt27]

The huge budgets and govt spending seem to be doing it's share in scaring investors and hampering a recovery. The market plummeted after Obama announced his multi-trillion dollar budget. And with increases in capital gains tax it probably won't recover anytime soon. He plans to raise capital gains to 28%, nearly twice the current rate.

The stimulus is doing a lot of good, isn't it? The economy is collapsing faster than the proverbial house of cards in a Category 5 hurricane, but Obama apparently thinks that it just needs more money. I wonder what drugs he has to be taking, because to be that out of touch, it's something that I've never heard of.

 

[Steve Petersen]

The stimulus is doing a lot of good, isn't it? The economy is collapsing faster than the proverbial house of cards in a Category 5 hurricane, but Obama apparently thinks that it just needs more money. I wonder what drugs he has to be taking, because to be that out of touch, it's something that I've never heard of.

That is Jim Cramer's take.

 

[LightHorseman]

Um, the military's job is being prepared to fight.

Gee, d'ya think?

 

[MerchantofMenace]

The US had for years been goading the Japanese into attacking through diplomatic and media channels, even so far as suggesting our weak spot at pearl harbor.

No, actually, it was the Japanese that had been goading the US. Through attacks on US diplomats, and engaging in hostile action against US military forces nearly half a decade before they attacked Pearl Harbor.

Not to mention covert and proxy military action against the Japanese... Flying Tigers anyone?

Umm, actually, the AVG didn't see action until after Pearl Harbor.

Fail.

 

[LightHorseman]

No, actually, it was the Japanese that had been goading the US. Through attacks on US diplomats, and engaging in hostile action against US military forces nearly half a decade before they attacked Pearl Harbor.

For example?

Umm, actually, the AVG didn't see action until after Pearl Harbor.

Fail.

I admit I thought they had been in operation for some time previous to Pearl harbour. However, since they first flew in action only 12 days after Pearl Harbour, it is obvious that they had been deploying, training, and engaged in non-offensive operations some time previously. One does not go from nothing to combat ready air force in a mere twelve days.

The group first saw combat on 20 December 1941, 12 days after Pearl Harbor (local time). It achieved notable success during the lowest period of the war for U.S. and Allied Forces, giving hope to Americans that they would eventually succeed against the Japanese. The Tigers were paid combat bonuses for destroying nearly 300 enemy aircraft while losing only 14 pilots on combat missions. In July 1942, the AVG was replaced by the U.S. Army 23rd Fighter Group, which was later absorbed into the U.S. 14th Air Force with General Chennault as commander. The 23rd FG went on to achieve similar combat success, while retaining the nose art and nickname of the group.

 

[TheNewWorldMan]

The huge budgets and govt spending seem to be doing it's share in scaring investors and hampering a recovery. The market plummeted after Obama announced his multi-trillion dollar budget. And with increases in capital gains tax it probably won't recover anytime soon. He plans to raise capital gains to 28%, nearly twice the current rate.

So the capital gains tax is going up. This will mostly impact the same people and entities that caused this colossal screw-up in the first place by gambling. Yes, arbitrageurs and the big-time stock traders who end up paying the most in capital gains are GAMBLERS.

The people in these two photographs are doing the exact same thing: placing bets on the outcome of future events while producing nothing of value. So I see nothing wrong with taxing them heavily.

These people on the other hand are actually doing real work that produces wealth and goods of value:

So I say keep taxes on the working class and other people who actually produce wealth low.

We can survive without casinos and stock markets. We would have a much harder time maintaining an industrial civilization without farmers, carpenters, doctors and engineers.

 

[MarkSB]

So the capital gains tax is going up. This will mostly impact the same people and entities that caused this colossal screw-up in the first place by gambling. Yes, arbitrageurs and the big-time stock traders who end up paying the most in capital gains are GAMBLERS.

We can survive without casinos and stock markets. We would have a much harder time maintaining an industrial civilization without farmers, carpenters, doctors and engineers.

We could survive without the stock market but nearly everybody benefits from it somehow. It's an excellent way to save/ invest for retirement. It also frees up capital so companies can invest in R&D and develop new technologies.

Taxing the crap (30% ?!) out of capital gains will probably just slow investment and hamper a recovery. What does the government need with that much money? Odds are they'll just keep wasting it and throwing it away.

 

[MarkSB]

Although, interesting fact, the first shot of the Pearl Harbour action was actually a US ship firing on, and sinking, a Japanese submarine. Yes, the sneak attack was already underway at the time, the Japanese planes were already inbound (though as yet undetected) but its still interesting that, to say the least, the Americans were already prepared to fight, the "sneak attack against a peaceful, non-beligerent innocent nation" is a bit of a myth.

Seems to me you were implying that it was wrong for a US ship to be prepared to fight. Like they should've been deep sea fishing instead.

Originally Posted by MarkSB

Um, the military's job is being prepared to fight.
​

Gee, d'ya think?

 

[Steve Petersen]

Nobody here pays capital gains on mutual funds? What about when you die and leave your home to the kids? They sell it to pay your nursing home bills and funeral costs: capital gains.

 

[Saving Hawaii]

Nobody here pays capital gains on mutual funds? What about when you die and leave your home to the kids? They sell it to pay your nursing home bills and funeral costs: capital gains.

When you die and leave your home to the kids, it's protected from the estate tax under the unified credit... unless you're giving them a $4 million dollar home, it's not taxed. The first $3,500,000 of taxable estate is protected under the credit.

 

[LightHorseman]

Seems to me you were implying that it was wrong for a US ship to be prepared to fight. Like they should've been deep sea fishing instead.

Maybe you need to take of the defensiveness blinkers so many Americans seem to be wearing these days.

I am on record as openly criticising the US for not getting stuck in in 1939, like the rest of the civilised world, so no, I am not saying it was wrong of any military unit to be prepared for a fight. My point is that the idea that Pearl harbour was a completely unprovoked suprise attack against an unarmed and unprepared oblivious nation at complete peace is a myth.

 

[MarkSB]

Maybe you need to take of the defensiveness blinkers so many Americans seem to be wearing these days.

I am on record as openly criticising the US for not getting stuck in in 1939, like the rest of the civilised world, so no, I am not saying it was wrong of any military unit to be prepared for a fight. My point is that the idea that Pearl harbour was a completely unprovoked suprise attack against an unarmed and unprepared oblivious nation at complete peace is a myth.

So you're saying the US should have just sat and twittled their thumbs while the Japanese engaged in an aggressive military campaign?

 

[TheNewWorldMan]

As far as the stock market and capital gains, I'm not saying do away with the stock market or tax capital gains at 80% or anything like that. Nor do I cite the 70 to 90% marginal tax rate that existed decades ago to advocate a return to such nosebleed tax rates. There are several reasons I believe such high taxes would be undesirable, not the least of which is that I believe the current government is extravagantly wasteful. The system is broken, and pouring more money and resources into what doesn't work will only give us more "doesn't work." One need only look at the bailout, giving money to the very institutions that failed and by all rights should be swept aside to free up resources for better business models.

The point I am making is that making the rich share their wealth with those who were less fortunate is not a kiss of death to a society. And those who prattle on about how people should just pull themselves up by their bootstraps should first check to see if the people they speak of can afford a pair of boots.

 

[rosenherman]

So you're saying the US should have just sat and twittled their thumbs while the Japanese engaged in an aggressive military campaign?

Sounds like it.

 

[rosenherman]

As far as the stock market and capital gains, I'm not saying do away with the stock market or tax capital gains at 80% or anything like that. Nor do I cite the 70 to 90% marginal tax rate that existed decades ago to advocate a return to such nosebleed tax rates. There are several reasons I believe such high taxes would be undesirable, not the least of which is that I believe the current government is extravagantly wasteful. The system is broken, and pouring more money and resources into what doesn't work will only give us more "doesn't work." One need only look at the bailout, giving money to the very institutions that failed and by all rights should be swept aside to free up resources for better business models.

The point I am making is that making the rich share their wealth with those who were less fortunate is not a kiss of death to a society. And those who prattle on about how people should just pull themselves up by their bootstraps should first check to see if the people they speak of can afford a pair of boots.

If they can't afford boots, provide them with a pair of shoes that will enable them to work to earn money to buy those much vaunted boots. Giving them the boots won't give them either the pride of ownership or the satisfaction of earning them.

 

[c71clark]

Heh

 

[ACougar]

At the very least Capital Gains taxes should be the same as taxes earned at a regular job. My Wages are curently taxed at 25-28%, capital gains taxes should be at the same rate as earned income. Not at 10 or 15% but at the same rate as income earned working.

The dirty secret here is that people with money, don't earn most of thier money via wages but via capital gains... thier being taxed at 15% while middle class Americans are paying 25-28% income tax on thier earnings. Not to mention the 14% paid into social security and medicare creating an effictive tax rate of roughly 40%....

So the capital gains tax is going up. This will mostly impact the same people and entities that caused this colossal screw-up in the first place by gambling. Yes, arbitrageurs and the big-time stock traders who end up paying the most in capital gains are GAMBLERS.

The people in these two photographs are doing the exact same thing: placing bets on the outcome of future events while producing nothing of value. So I see nothing wrong with taxing them heavily.

These people on the other hand are actually doing real work that produces wealth and goods of value:

So I say keep taxes on the working class and other people who actually produce wealth low.

We can survive without casinos and stock markets. We would have a much harder time maintaining an industrial civilization without farmers, carpenters, doctors and engineers.

 

[TheNewWorldMan]

If they can't afford boots, provide them with a pair of shoes that will enable them to work to earn money to buy those much vaunted boots. Giving them the boots won't give them either the pride of ownership or the satisfaction of earning them.

Yep...give them just enough so they can survive and toil to enrich the elite, but not enough to become actual stakeholders in the society in which they live.