okie
 
  0  
Fri 20 Feb, 2009 06:17 pm
@genoves,
genoves wrote:

Okie- You appear to be well read-Perhaps you can help. I am looking for any articles or essays which explain why the Dow Jones is at such a low point>

Not that well read, just observant of events. I think it can be explained by the market running scared of Obama. Why invest into business, if profits are going to confiscated, that is if you can even make a profit after satisfying all the rules and regulations. Read this article:

"The Market Is Shorting Obama's 'Stimulus'"
http://www.realclearmarkets.com/articles/2009/02/the_market_is_shorting_obamas.html

Quote:
I can,of course, quote from many left wing sources to show that the coming of the Messiah-Obama,would bring manna to all--that "change" would bring security and peace after the horrendous deficits and war mongering of the last president. I have read that Obama had such charisma and such talent that the citizens of the USA would be heartened and lifted up by his succession to the presidency.

But, I can't find out why his massive stimulus plan and his large infusion of money to help the housing market has met with a PLUNGE in the Stock Market>

I fear for the Presidency of B.H.Obama. When the MILLIONS of ORDINARY CITIZENS open their 401 K's after the first quarter and find that their holdings have gone down even further, despite the fact that the Messiah promised to lead them out of the financial desert, it doesn't look good for the left wing Democrats in the elections of Nov. 2001.

I can say one thing without fear of contradiction--Roland Burris will not be re-elected Senator of Illinois in 2010 especially since both major Chicago Newspapers have urged that he resign.

I think the markets just need a president that has full faith and confidence in the free markets, and business. We don't have one, plain and simple. If McCain had been elected, we would be having problems, but I would bet the markets would be significantly higher than they currently are, and people would be more enthusiastic about paying taxes, working, etc. As it is, why work, why pay taxes, after all, the administration doesn't, and they are going to rob the producers and give it to the non-producers. Instead of doing something productive, Obama is instead talking to the mayors, promising them everything, after all he is a Chicago community organizer, so what more can we expect. Anybody not in favor of giving money to the inner cities and cities that are in econ0mic shambles through their own doing are going to be accused of racism. Anybody that thought racism would disappear because of Obama being elected is living in la la land, as it is only going to get worse, because they have found out that the country can be intimidated into capitulating. But the government has no money, and it hasn't dawned on Obama yet, perhaps it has, and they will just print all that they need, thus devaluing all the savings and wealth earned by hard working people, so that it can be redistributed to the poor, in the name of fairness. Essentially, Washington is now run by thugs.

For what its worth, this is the Dow Jones since Obama began to beat Clinton in May of 2008, when it was about 13,000. It has lost almost half its value since then:

http://fairlyconservative.com/wp-content/storage/2009/02/obama-djia-feb-2009.jpg
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Fri 20 Feb, 2009 06:27 pm
@okie,
Nice graph, Okie. Here's another one for you:

http://www.americanthinker.com/piratesarecool4.jpg

As you can see, perfectly consistent with your logic, it is obviously the decline in pirates which has led to a rise in global warming.

Cycloptichorn
Advocate
 
  1  
Fri 20 Feb, 2009 06:30 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Well said! There is a definite correlation there.
cicerone imposter
 
  2  
Fri 20 Feb, 2009 06:53 pm
@Advocate,
The biggest problem okie has is he is not aware of economics or politics. In the area of economics, no stimulus plan will turn around this economy in short order - whether we spend one trillion or two trillion dollars. It's because okie doesn't understand economics - in its simplest form. Obama has been in office just one month, and okie expects miracles. Since okie is so smart, he should be running the country, and forget all the experts Obama recruited to try to help America and Americans. I'm sure okie has better solutions that will result in a very quick recovery of our economy, and turn around the hundreds of thousands of jobs being lost every day.

Come on, okie; show us the way!
0 Replies
 
realjohnboy
 
  2  
Fri 20 Feb, 2009 06:54 pm
There is, it seems to me, to be some confusion about Federal tax returns and the notion of paying no tax and getting a refund.
Here is my employee "Aaron" and his tax return:
$17,142 in income (he would rather paint then work)
Single with no dependents, so he gets the standard deduction of
$ 5,450
$11,692 is his taxable income

$ 1,350 is his tax, but he had withheld from his wages for Fed Income Tax
$ 1,356. So he gets a refund of
$ 6.
It is just plain wrong to argue that people pay no taxes AND get a refund. He paid $1,350.
7.9% of his wages.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Fri 20 Feb, 2009 06:56 pm
@realjohnboy,
Please inform okie of this fact; he keeps telling us many workers don't pay taxes, but get a refund. I wonder who okie is talking about?
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Fri 20 Feb, 2009 07:25 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Quote:
Please inform okie of this fact; he keeps telling us many workers don't pay taxes, but get a refund. I wonder who okie is talking about?


that would be the earned income credit, which costs those of us those who do pay taxes over $40 billion a year.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Fri 20 Feb, 2009 07:35 pm
@hawkeye10,
Oh, you mean this:

Quote:
EITC Thresholds and Tax Law Updates

Tax Year 2008

Earned income and adjusted gross income (AGI) must each be less than:
*
$38,646 ($41,646 married filing jointly) with two or more qualifying children;
*
$33,995 ($36,995 married filing jointly) with one qualifying child;
*
$12,880 ($15,880 married filing jointly) with no qualifying children.

Tax Year 2008 maximum credit:

*
$4,824 with two or more qualifying children;
*
$2,917 with one qualifying child;
*
$438 with no qualifying children.

Investment income must be $2,950 or less for the year.

The maximum Advance Earned Income Tax Credit (Advance EITC) for 2008 an employer is allowed to provide to employee's pay is $1,750.
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Fri 20 Feb, 2009 07:44 pm
@cicerone imposter,
yes, and some people have $0 tax paid AND get a refund check due to this tax credit.
0 Replies
 
okie
 
  0  
Fri 20 Feb, 2009 08:16 pm
@realjohnboy,
realjohnboy wrote:

There is, it seems to me, to be some confusion about Federal tax returns and the notion of paying no tax and getting a refund.
Here is my employee "Aaron" and his tax return:
$17,142 in income (he would rather paint then work)
Single with no dependents, so he gets the standard deduction of
$ 5,450
$11,692 is his taxable income

$ 1,350 is his tax, but he had withheld from his wages for Fed Income Tax
$ 1,356. So he gets a refund of
$ 6.
It is just plain wrong to argue that people pay no taxes AND get a refund. He paid $1,350.
7.9% of his wages.

Not just plain wrong at all. Use instead a married couple with two or three children, earning around 20,000 or so, and see what you end up with. Clearly, a large number of people receive more money than they pay in. This is common knowledge, or should be.

Also, check your example again, I think you may have left something out?
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Fri 20 Feb, 2009 08:26 pm
@okie,
Okay, okie, how many American families are you talking about?

This is from Wiki on 2007 average family income:

Quote:
In 2007, the median annual household income rose 1.3% to $50,233.00 according to the Census Bureau.[3]The real median earnings of men who worked full time, year-round climbed between 2006 and 2007, from $43,460 to $45,113. For women, the corresponding increase was from $33,437 to $35,102. The median income per household member (including all working and non-working members above the age of 14) was $26,036 in 2006.[4] In 2006, there were approximately 116,011,000 households in the United States. 1.93% of all households had annual incomes exceeding $250,000 ,[5] 12.3% fell below the federal poverty threshold[6] and the bottom 20% earned less than $19,178.[7] The aggregate income distribution is highly concentrated towards the top, with the top 6.37% earning roughly one third of all income, and those with upper-middle incomes control a large, though declining, share of the total earned income.[8][2] Income inequality in the United States, which had decreased slowly after World War II until 1970, began to increase in the 1970s until reaching a peak in 2006. It declined a little in 2007.[9] Households in the top quintile, 77% of which had two or more income earners, had incomes exceeding $91,705. Households in the mid quintile, with a mean of approximately one income earner per household had incomes between $36,000 and $57,657. Households in the lowest quintile had incomes less than $19,178 and the majority had no income earner.[10]
0 Replies
 
realjohnboy
 
  1  
Fri 20 Feb, 2009 08:27 pm
@okie,
Tell me, Okie, where the numbers are wrong or why they may might be in this example. You have access to the same IRS 1040 Forms & Instructions that I have. I am sticking by my "Aaron" numbers until you show me what error I might have made. Thanks. IRS forms are confusing. I look forward to your analysis.
okie
 
  0  
Fri 20 Feb, 2009 09:00 pm
@realjohnboy,
rjb, in addition to my previous post that asserted that I believe you are wrong, I entered a fictitious John Doe into my Turbo Tax 2008, and used a married couple with 2 children, no tax deducted from W-2, earning 20,000. The result was a tidy sum of $7,478 dollars. This of course would give the couple an income of $27,478.00. Assuming the employer deducted about 7.5% of the $20,000 for Social Security and Medicare, that would amount to $1500.00. Even including that deduction of $1500, the couple still receives close to $6,000 dollars over and above anything paid in.

Now if the couple only has one child, they still come out nicely, with over $4,000 back, and I don't know what happens with 3 children or more?

Just looking at this, I would not be the least bit surprised to learn that this whole issue is susceptible to tax fraud. After all, just claim a few children, maybe somebody else's child or anybody, and you can make thousands. Obama's administration probably has a bunch of people that do this on a routine basis.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Fri 20 Feb, 2009 09:07 pm
@okie,
okie, Here you go again assuming there are tax cheaters out there. Who in the hell trained your brain? Do you really believe there are more tax fraud than there are honest folks out there? I'm sure there are applicable adjectives for people like you, but all the words I can think of are all too mild.
0 Replies
 
roger
 
  1  
Fri 20 Feb, 2009 09:12 pm
@genoves,
Really? I wouldn't call myself well read, but I try to keep up, and I find myself asking myself the exact opposite question. Why is the Dow 30 at such a high level.?
0 Replies
 
okie
 
  0  
Fri 20 Feb, 2009 09:12 pm
@realjohnboy,
realjohnboy wrote:

Tell me, Okie, where the numbers are wrong or why they may might be in this example. You have access to the same IRS 1040 Forms & Instructions that I have. I am sticking by my "Aaron" numbers until you show me what error I might have made. Thanks. IRS forms are confusing. I look forward to your analysis.

I came up with Aaron owing $225 total tax. I think you may have forgotten the deduction for one dependent, which is different than the standard deduction. Total deduction is $8950 leaving a taxable income of $8192.00

That according to Turbo Tax. I don't have any paper forms to look at.

The trick to receiving money back is through the earned income childs credit, which provides a real big bonus for lower income wage earners. Single people like Aaron don't pay much tax, but they don't get huge bonuses.
realjohnboy
 
  1  
Fri 20 Feb, 2009 09:12 pm
@okie,
We are not talking about the same thing, Okie. I am talking about someone who adheres to the rules. You are talking about tax fraud: no tax deducted from earnings (how is that possible?) More children claimed as dependents than exist?
Are you suggesting that the poor cheat on their tax returns while the rich are pure?
okie
 
  0  
Fri 20 Feb, 2009 09:23 pm
@realjohnboy,
No, no, no, I just used the 0 tax paid in to make my Turbo tax software do the math for example purposes. I could have entered whatever would be deducted, but the program would still return the same answer as the final balance of money paid in. I am not talking about anyone breaking the rules. Your Aaron example, I think you did not include enough deductions. In my family of four example, including two children, that is totally legitimate. I only made the observation as a sidelight that it would be easy to game the system, by adding a child or two, but cheating is not necessary to get alot of money back. I showed you how the family of four gets over $7000 back. If you can prove it wrong, go ahead. I know its pretty much right because I know people that do this, that is their situtation, and they don't cheat, a tax preparer does it for them, and this year they are receiving thousands back again, which again is similar to past years.

I am not suggesting anything about rich or poor cheating, I am sure both do. I simply made the observation that claiming another child would be an easy way to gain alot of money, easier than claiming alot of fictitious expenses, and probably would be easier to slip through the system. I am sure rich cheat just as much, just look at Obama's administration if you need examples.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  2  
Fri 20 Feb, 2009 09:25 pm
@okie,
Isn't it nice that Newsmax can get facts wrong and you don't care about it okie?
0 Replies
 
okie
 
  0  
Fri 20 Feb, 2009 09:32 pm
@realjohnboy,
realjohnboy wrote:

We are not talking about the same thing, Okie. I am talking about someone who adheres to the rules. You are talking about tax fraud: no tax deducted from earnings (how is that possible?) More children claimed as dependents than exist?
Are you suggesting that the poor cheat on their tax returns while the rich are pure?

Again, in case you missed it, perhaps I confused you with the family of four. If you consider just Aaron, he pays $225 in tax. You did not include all of his deductions.

If Aaron had a couple of children, he would get alot of money back.
 

Related Topics

So....Will Biden Be VP? - Question by blueveinedthrobber
My view on Obama - Discussion by McGentrix
Obama/ Love Him or Hate Him, We've Got Him - Discussion by Phoenix32890
Obama fumbles at Faith Forum - Discussion by slkshock7
Expert: Obama is not the antichrist - Discussion by joefromchicago
Obama's State of the Union - Discussion by maxdancona
Obama 2012? - Discussion by snood
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Obama '08?
  3. » Page 1175
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.18 seconds on 03/28/2025 at 05:56:44