As a Canadian how much American tax do YOU pay ASSHOLE? On the dividends I've captured on Canadian oil stocks I pay Canada a tax-which I don't gripe about-but you pay NOTHING to the U.S. You're nothing but a duplicitous leach.
When Bitter Met Stupid: The Story of Pabst Now playing everywhere. Check your local listings for a theater near you.
No, rather I've exposed you for the FRAUD you truly are. You urge higher taxes for Americans. But you ARE NOT an American-you are foreigner. You are a foreigner trading American PRODUCTS yet you pay ZERO in U.S. taxes. Hence you're a duplicitous pos.
Maybe you and the special ed kid can get together and have a party. You can brag to him about your glorious CME days & then whine about how the privileged & spoiled brats have it so tough now. Cause life should be handed on a gold platter, not a silver one. Meanwhile those who are not lazy & ignorant will continue to benefit from the many tax credit & tax shelter products still available. They keep quiet for a reason, don't bite the hand that feeds you.
How fascinating that a charlatan should call me a fraud. I am merely a poster on a web site expressing my opinion on what I believe to be a better course of action in the face of the available alternatives. However little I may know about economics, I know more than you do. And, no, that's not saying much. At least I studied it to the intermediate level at the undergraduate and graduate levels. Again, that's not saying much at all, but it is more than you can say. This is a discussion board. There is no equivalent I am aware of for Canadian content. Besides, I trade a US market so I would be more inclined to drop in here anyway. Meanwhile, you seem to think that only American opinions matter on a DISCUSSION board when such opinions are not similar to your own. Your implicit sense of entitlement is duly noted. And rather than be a hypocrite, I suggest that you never, ever comment on any country other than your own. Only in that way will your comment have any credibility whatsoever.
Surely you don't believe that low taxes will result in low taxes! Have you not heard of inflation, my good man? If you truly want lower taxes you should forget about asking for them and start asking for either less spending or an increase in taxes to the point where the budget is balanced. Either approach will result in a lower total tax bill. Your asking for lower taxes in a climate of deficit spending is like a drowning man calling for more water.
Obama does not have a war on the rich. He just feels that he has the right to determine who is rich and who isn't. Beyond AIG: A bill to let Big Government set your salary By Byron York Chief Political Correspondent 3/31/09 It was nearly two weeks ago that the House of Representatives, acting in a near-frenzy after the disclosure of bonuses paid to executives of AIG, passed a bill that would impose a 90 percent retroactive tax on those bonuses. Despite the overwhelming 328-93 vote, support for the measure began to collapse almost immediately. Within days, the Obama White House backed away from it, as did the Senate Democratic leadership. The bill stalled, and the populist storm that spawned it seemed to pass. But now, in a little-noticed move, the House Financial Services Committee, led by chairman Barney Frank, has approved a measure that would, in some key ways, go beyond the most draconian features of the original AIG bill. The new legislation, the "Pay for Performance Act of 2009," would impose government controls on the pay of all employees -- not just top executives -- of companies that have received a capital investment from the U.S. government. It would, like the tax measure, be retroactive, changing the terms of compensation agreements already in place. And it would give Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner extraordinary power to determine the pay of thousands of employees of American companies. The purpose of the legislation is to "prohibit unreasonable and excessive compensation and compensation not based on performance standards," according to the bill's language. That includes regular pay, bonuses -- everything -- paid to employees of companies in whom the government has a capital stake, including those that have received funds through the Troubled Assets Relief Program, or TARP, as well as Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The measure is not limited just to those firms that received the largest sums of money, or just to the top 25 or 50 executives of those companies. It applies to all employees of all companies involved, for as long as the government is invested. And it would not only apply going forward, but also retroactively to existing contracts and pay arrangements of institutions that have already received funds. In addition, the bill gives Geithner the authority to decide what pay is "unreasonable" or "excessive." And it directs the Treasury Department to come up with a method to evaluate "the performance of the individual executive or employee to whom the payment relates." The bill passed the Financial Services Committee last week, 38 to 22, on a nearly party-line vote. (All Democrats voted for it, and all Republicans, with the exception of Reps. Ed Royce of California and Walter Jones of North Carolina, voted against it.) The legislation is expected to come before the full House for a vote this week, and, just like the AIG bill, its scope and retroactivity trouble a number of Republicans. "It's just a bad reaction to what has been going on with AIG," Rep. Scott Garrett of New Jersey, a committee member, told me. Garrett is particularly concerned with the new powers that would be given to the Treasury Secretary, who just last week proposed giving the government extensive new regulatory authority. "This is a growing concern, that the powers of the Treasury in this area, along with what Geithner was looking for last week, are mind boggling," Garrett said. Rep. Alan Grayson, the Florida Democrat who wrote the bill, told me its basic message is "you should not get rich off public money, and you should not get rich off of abject failure." Grayson expects the bill to pass the House, and as we talked, he framed the issue in a way to suggest that virtuous lawmakers will vote for it, while corrupt lawmakers will vote against it. "This bill will show which Republicans are so much on the take from the financial services industry that they're willing to actually bless compensation that has no bearing on performance and is excessive and unreasonable," Grayson said. "We'll find out who are the people who understand that the public's money needs to be protected, and who are the people who simply want to suck up to their patrons on Wall Street." After the AIG bonus tax bill was passed, some members of the House privately expressed regret for having supported it and were quietly relieved when the White House and Senate leadership sent it to an unceremonious death. But populist rage did not die with it, and now the House is preparing to do it all again.
To Thunderdog and Pabst: Like to see the rhetoric cool a bit. You are both among the more intelligent and interesting posters on ET.
I could not agree with you more, honestly. I want lower taxes, and lower spending. Better yet, no taxes and no spending.
Not till Bill Gates, Buffett etc. are down to their last billion will you see much more action than window dressing ! Joe Sixpack can take a flying jump ?????????????? If you are really serious about ending the present economic crisis then ( hold your breath folks ) let in any immigrants that still want to come that will soak up all the crap housing and send prices up into the stratosphere - end of crisis