Tag: tax

Posted on

Robin Hood is a Socialist

Ah wonderful… The wingnuts have found another characterchure to link Obama with and this time an Englishman. Only I don’t know if they fully understand (again) the implications of the link.

Robin Hood, as the legend goes, robbed from the filthy rich and gave to the poor which was generally thought to be a good thing for all the “working” man and “black collar” people out there (riff on blacksmith? no?). Robin Hood was the Hero of the day!

The Tea party peeps have seen through this scam, and they don’t want any of that dirty rich people money (that they paid for through taxes). Right my fellow Englishman! Check out the new campaign Bill Nighy appears in for the English Robin Hood Tax.

Yeah it will never work right? The elitist minority of the Rothschilds, Morgans and Rockerfellers will fund the masses to block it. More socialism….

Even if the banks were to pump £100 billion back into the economy it would wipe out the national debt, fund every major service and ultimately lead to a reduction in the need to tax the citizens. Of course if the citizens have more expendable income in their pockets, they may pay off their debt quicker, get liquid faster, and would have no need for credit cards or loans. That might just fuck over the Banking industry that much more!

Fuck, I just circled my own argument. Ah well, life in debt servitude is just much safer… At least then I have a master to report to daily…

Check out this band of “Merry Men” cleaning the sidewalks in Bryant Park and giving back to the citizens of New York City. City Parks workers paid by the tax dollars of the citizens who live and visit here.

365Project

The Revenge – “Forever In Their Debt”
[audio:http://this.bigstereo.net/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/Forever%20In%20Their%20Debt%20(Original%20Mix).mp3]

Posted on

NY’s latest Enemy: Fat juice

fat juice“Are you pouring on the pounds?” asks the ad, which urges viewers to consider water, seltzer or low-fat milk instead, and warns: “Don’t drink yourself fat.” That’s right folks. Soda, juice drinks and anything that contains sugar are the new enemies of the state. Well not NY State as they just canceled a proposed tax on these drinks but that doesn’t mean Bloomberg and the City of New York can’t do something about the growing fat problem here.

According to the Times, the city is spending $277,000 on a new ad campaign to educate the public on links between high-calorie beverages and your growing waist line. 1,500 subway cars will run for three months which targets those that walk to work… wait… Wouldn’t billboards at the bridges and tunnels for those fat ass commuters be better “targets”?

Of course the ABA objects as Kevin Keane states “The ad campaign is over the top and unfortunately is going to undermine meaningful efforts to educate people about how to maintain a healthy weight by balancing calories consumed from all foods and beverages with calories burned through exercise.”

fatNot a surprise anything that limits the sale of your product is detrimental but this is like a tobacco lobbyist stating that a health dose of pipe smoke and snuff is a good balance between cigarettes.

Personally I think adding a tax to sugar drinks is attacking the problem at the symptom not the solution. The problem in this country is the over subsidization of corn which contributes to an abundance of product that gets converted to corn syrup. This creates a huge surplus of cheap sugar substitutes that go into our cheap processed foods. I urge everyone to rent/download and watch King Corn to get a broader picture of the industry and how Federal subsidies of certain industries are what’s driving the market for cheap, unhealthy products in this country. We should be subsidizing organic, healthy and sustainable farming efforts, not destructive ones.

BTW I still love Tree Top juice, its what Grandma gave me and I’ll continue to suck it down in between Brita filtered water and Soda Xi Muis at home.

Posted on

Is there ever enough “Wealth “?

“The real source of wealth and capital in this new era is not material things.. it is the human mind, the human spirit, the human imagination, and our faith in the future.”

Read that quote again. Fairly profound, you’d think this was said by a leader, a philosopher or some other humanist of our time. No. Steve Forbes said this. I have no idea of context but for some reason, I think what came right after this was the quote “Pppppppfffffffftttttt… If you believe that crap, I have a bridge to sell you…”

Noel Whittaker a financial author and investment advisor said it better: “Becoming wealthy is like playing Monopoly.. the person who can accumulate the most assets wins the game.”

What constitutes as Wealthy or Rich today in Noel’s terms? Is there a bar that you can mark that says, as soon as I have accumulated this percentage of assets, or XYZ capital, or own some number of high profile items with a steady cash flow, that’s a mark for rich. Is an income of $400,000 a year rich?

This presidential political season and subsequent recession has created a climate of concern for many middle class to wealthy Americans that feel their choice for conspicuous consumption is being limited by new tax laws (Obama’s tax plan) and possibly as the Washington Post puts it “social proof”.

The Journal has an article today called Wealth-Less Effect: Earning Well, Feeling Otherwise; where those just over $250,000 income levels are feeling pinched to cut back and even “forced” to curb living habits they feel they deserve at their income levels. As the Journal puts it:

It is a tricky situation in which some Americans find themselves after a long boom: They are by no means struggling, compared with the 98% of Americans who make far less, but depending on where they live and the lifestyle choices they have made, they don’t necessarily feel rich, either. Worse, in their view, they are facing the same tax rates as those making millions. Some of the expenses are self-inflicted — like private-school costs and conspicuous consumption. Others, though, are unavoidable, like child-care costs, larger health-care deductibles and education expenses, especially college.

The reality is that the median income earner in America is just over $50,000:

2.245 Million households in American, had income greater than $250,000 in 2007 which is actually 1.9% of the total household earners in America. These articles try to convey these rich people are saddled with:

Our capitalistic society has created an environment of spenders regardless if those purchases are necessary or warranted. The majority of expenses, our flat screen TVs, luxury cars, designer clothes, immaculate multi-room houses all emulate a personal choice and even social entitlement within the circles of friends and community these people reside.

As Daniel Gross writes in Slate, those that earn $250,000 in Greenwich, CT would certainly look to be poor based on their neighbor’s affluence (median income levels of $231,138, however, income at that level in Mississippi would represent top earners of most towns (median income of $35,971).

I find it interesting that either by choice or social proof, these earners must finally now evaluate their spending habits and re-align them to reality. All Americans have fallen into this trap of spending beyond our means, and we’ve all checked our spending to accommodate an uncertain future. It’s, however, comical to me for those that make a considerable income more than my family must now whine that they no longer can consume as they so desire.

This mentality of entitlement permeates all classes and whether you’re poor or rich, what ever level of income you do have, never seems to be enough. I hope that Steve Forbes is right, and more people take stock in the human mind, spirit, and imagination for our future.