The Obamanation

[TheMercenary]

I can invest. The more I have, the more I can invest. Dividends are in proportion to the amount I already have.

This is quite true. I do that with all of my investments.

If you can build up a down payment, purchasing property causes housing payments to add rather than detract from your net worth.

But the long term investment is what pays off in real estate, unless of course you got in during the recent bubble. But even with that you should come out ahead in the long run. Smart buyers can really make this work to your advantage. Simply paying an extra payment a year makes a significant difference. Real estate becomes your real nest egg over time. If you move frequently it will never likely pay off. But if you are settled down, like me, I will make more than 50% back on my house sale if I sold it in 5 years (because it will be nearly paid off). I would disagree, real estate can be a real money maker.

If you have money, it's much easier to get loans of more money if you wish to start a business.

That is very true. And if you don’t have any assets you will find it hard to get any kind of financing. And you would then be truly at the bottom of the economic scale.

And that's at my middle-class level. At the ultrarich level, it is hugely exaggerated. Bill Gates could get his next million a bit quicker than I could get

Again, ultra and uber rich is not an accurate or fair comparison in any of these scenarios. That is a whole class of people and situations which few to none of us will ever experience.

[Happy Monkey]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

But the long term investment is what pays off in real estate, unless of course you got in during the recent bubble. But even with that you should come out ahead in the long run. Smart buyers can really make this work to your advantage. Simply paying an extra payment a year makes a significant difference. Real estate becomes your real nest egg over time. If you move frequently it will never likely pay off. But if you are settled down, like me, I will make more than 50% back on my house sale if I sold it in 5 years (because it will be nearly paid off). I would disagree, real estate can be a real money maker.

Sounds like you are agreeing with me, not disagreeing. If you can afford to buy, you will make more than if you can't.

[TheMercenary]

I agree with some of your examples, but not all of them.

[Happy Monkey]

The only "disagreement" I see is that the raise improvement isn't huge, and you don't think Bill Gates should count. You're not disagreeing with the examples, just about how much they factor in.

Even ignoring those examples, my point stands. It's easier to make more money if you have more money.

[OnyxCougar]

It seems to me that it doesn't matter who is in charge, the Federal Reserve is calling the shots. Doesn't matter who sits in the big chair.

[TheMercenary]

Who needs to read the bill? Holy fucking shit! You people are so drunk on the koolaid that this does not bother you!?!?!

WTF?

Guys this is so telling of how the Demoncrats are taking care of your future...

During his speech at a National Press Club luncheon, House Judiciary Chairman John Conyers (D-Mich.), questioned the point of lawmakers reading the health care bill.


“I love these members, they get up and say, ‘Read the bill,’” said Conyers.


“What good is reading the bill if it’s a thousand pages and you don’t have two days and two lawyers to find out what it means after you read the bill?”

And you trust your future to these people?????????????

http://cnsnews.com/public/content/ar...51610&print=on

[Shawnee123]

And you trust your future to these people?????????????

Thank FSM I'm not entrusting my future to your ilk. Not right now.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Shawnee123

Thank FSM I'm not entrusting my future to your ilk. Not right now.

What is my "ilk??"

Describe it to the rest of us.

[Shawnee123]

Closed-minded. Always right. Never any real reasons for being so except for what you've been spoon-fed, which satisfies your hunger for being a power. Oh, and using too many question marks.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Shawnee123

Closed-minded. Always right. Never any real reasons for being so except for what you've been spoon-fed, which satisfies your hunger for being a power.

Damm, you talking about Redux again?

Spoon fed?

A pile of shit from the Demoncrats maybe.

8 years of Republickin Bull shit and now a shit sandwhich of Demoncratic Bull shit. Yea, the American public is getting a huge dose of it. I can't agree more.

[Urbane Guerrilla]

Originally Posted by Shawnee123

Closed-minded. Always right. Never any real reasons for being so except for what you've been spoon-fed, which satisfies your hunger for being a power. Oh, and using too many question marks.

Actually, Shawnee, it is less that we're always right, than that you are so often so consistently wrong.

Capitalism's the way of the future, basically because the future goes to the money, not to the poverty. Our reasons are realer than any reason you can muster up, and we stand ready to demonstrate that over and over and over and over and over and over ad infinitum until even the worst, most economically illiterate fanatic Socialist must be convinced. Or else left isolated in his own cyst, walled away from the body politic by his own opinions. This eternal willingness is because what is true doesn't change... and it's more truth than you've ever possessed. Here's a teachable moment. Will it teach Shawnee enlightenment, or teach the enlightened that Shawnee has the brains of a planarian?

Originally Posted by Urbane Guerrilla

Actually, Shawnee, it is less that we're always right, than that you are so often so consistently wrong.

Capitalism's the way of the future, basically because the future goes to the money, not to the poverty. Our reasons are realer than any reason you can muster up, and we stand ready to demonstrate that over and over and over and over and over and over ad infinitum until even the worst, most economically illiterate fanatic Socialist must be convinced. Or else left isolated in his own cyst, walled away from the body politic by his own opinions. This eternal willingness is because what is true doesn't change... and it's more truth than you've ever possessed. Here's a teachable moment. Will it teach Shawnee enlightenment, or teach the enlightened that Shawnee has the brains of a planarian?

I would suggest that the so called drift to socialism is, in fact, simply a series of short term measures to correct the economy that was broken and heading towards collapse as a result of drifting away from any government regulation....to be followed by the restoration of reasonable regulations to keep the free marketeers from returning to those excesses.

[Shawnee123]

You change it. Good luck.

I need to sleep. Damn, merc, I stayed up this late to argue with you? haggis!

[TheMercenary]

Good point. Again.

A waste of time.

[TheMercenary]

Who pays the majority of taxes in this country?

The Democrats war on successful people continues unabated. Nancy Pelosi's choice comments yesterday, referring to insurance companies as "villains" is only the latest in what has been a series of statements and actions from Obama on down that show the Democrats aren't only anti-business; they're anti-businessman.

Now comes new data from the IRS that put to rest the myth that the rich don't pay enough in taxes. In fact, the data shows that the top 1% of taxpayers pay considerably more of their income as a percentage of the whole than the bottom 95% of taxpayers.

Scott Hodge writing on the Tax Policy Blog:


Newly released data from the IRS clearly debunks the conventional Beltway rhetoric that the "rich" are not paying their fair share of taxes.

Indeed, the IRS data shows that in 2007-the most recent data available-the top 1 percent of taxpayers paid 40.4 percent of the total income taxes collected by the federal government. This is the highest percentage in modern history. By contrast, the top 1 percent paid 24.8 percent of the income tax burden in 1987, the year following the 1986 tax reform act.

Remarkably, the share of the tax burden borne by the top 1 percent now exceeds the share paid by the bottom 95 percent of taxpayers combined. In 2007, the bottom 95 percent paid 39.4 percent of the income tax burden. This is down from the 58 percent of the total income tax burden they paid twenty years ago.

To put this in perspective, the top 1 percent is comprised of just 1.4 million taxpayers and they pay a larger share of the income tax burden now than the bottom 134 million taxpayers combined.


This has all taken place under the evil Bush regime that, as everyone knows, favored rich people and stuck it to the middle class.

In fact, a study done last year showed that it wasn't France, or Sweden, or any European country that had the most "progressive" tax system in the developed world. It was the good old USA.

Don't expect any change in the Democrat's tactics of attacking the rich. They have to have a scapegoat for their own failures and the rich fill the bill nicely.

by Rick Moran

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/...crats_who.html