Show Me The Money!

Wingnut blog post from the near future:
"Left wing blogger Matt Yglesias endorses a 90% marginal tax rate"
Disclaimers like "for illustrative purposes" mean nothing to dishonest people.

My impression is that no one actually paid the top marginal rates back in the day. One of the big goals the 1986 Tax Reform Act was to make sure people who actually had an income in the top bracket actually paid the top bracket, or something close to it.

But yes, the point stands.

No, actually, the point doesn't stand. There wasn't a tremendous amount of difference between the top rate then and the top rate now. Pre-'86, people lowered the nominal tax rate through endless loopholes and write-offs. '86 simplifed the tax code but did not tremendously change what people paid.

I think one of the big parts of Reagan's '81 tax cut was to collapse the top 3 or 4 brackets into one, all at the lowest of those rates, around 50% or so. The fact that people were using various loopholes to get around the highest rates at that point, i.e. in excess of 50%, just supports the argument that there wasn't much reason for keeping the top rates that high.

Ah, what a nice surprise!

Cthomas, yours is an unusually verifiable assertion. You are hereby formally requested to verify that sucker. Please, I insist. Take those who in, say, 1959 were in the highest marginal bracket and compare them with those who were in the highest marginal bracket in 1999 (among them, me). Please prove that, dollar amounts adjusted for inflation of course, the federal taxes paid by the 1959 cohort, per capita, was no more than, say, 10% different than the 1999.

The fact that people were using various loopholes to get around the highest rates at that point, i.e. in excess of 50%, just supports the argument that there wasn't much reason for keeping the top rates that high.

Probably the top rates shouldn't be that high. It was, as I said, for illustrative purposes. The effect still exists, however, at the margin. Changing the top marginal rate from 31 percent (I think that's where it is) to something like 40 or 45 percent would make a difference, I contend, to the pre-tax distribution of income. The fact that investment income is very lightly taxed may also be relevant here.

I, like Keith, would like to see evidence for Cthomas's claim. Recall that Bush likes to argue that his tax cut was good for middle class people because it lowered their taxes, and rich people don't pay taxes anyway thanks to all the loopholes. Win-win, if you believe the "rich don't pay taxes" argument (or the "rich pay constant taxes regardless of the tax code" argument).

Also, remember that accountants aren't free. If you reduce your tax burden by $10,000 but pay an accountant $9,000, the tax is still having a pretty big impact on you even if the government doesn't get the revenue.

Finally, remember that we're talking about marginal rates. A loophole that saves you a flat $5,000 doesn't reduce your marginal rate.

I hear a lot about these loopholes, and don't doubt that they existed, but can somebody tell me what they were?

The effective tax rate -- the total amount of what the Federal gov't actually hauls into their coffers -- has bobbed between a high of 20.9% of GDP (1944) and a low of 14.4 (1950) since the Feds became the modern Federal gov't at the end of WW2. Despite all the propaganda and hollaring and bellyaching the effective federal tax rate has stayed in that range pretty constantly. In Reagan's years, for example, the rate was (consecutively) 19.6, 19.1, 17.5, 17.4, 17.7, 17.5, 18.4, 18.1. During Clinton's years the rates were (consecutively) 17.6, 18.1, 18.5, 18.9, 19.3, 19.9, 20, and 20.6.

Smoke, mirrors, and malarkey.

Yes, but that's not relevant to this discussion.

I think the commenters need to slow down and think a little more about how the tax structure works. 'Loopholes' don't do very much to reduce the marginal tax rate, they affect the average tax rate a lot more.

Simple example. $100,000 in income, $70,000 in basic allowance and 'loopholes', 50% tax rate. This tax payer will pay 15% of total income in taxes, but 50% at the margin.

Let's apply the Reagan 1986 deal - reducing allowances and rates. $100,000 in income, $40,000 in basic allowance and loopholes, 25% tax rate. This tax payer still pays 15% of total income, but the marginal rate is halved.

In this case, we're looking at a revenue-neutral change, but much stronger incentives to hire the super-stars that Matt is focusing on. They get to keep a lot more of what's left after the allowances are factored out.

And let's drop the loaded term 'loopholes'. With the exception of a few overly-complicated corporate shelters, we're really talking about a deliberately constructed inducement in the tax code to drive behavior. Whether those inducements are smart is something one needs to analyze in each specific case, but they are created with the intent that they be used.

Wouldn't that depend on the elasticity of demand for different types of labor?

For example, suppose superstar CEOs were extremely valuable - if you don't have one, you go out of business. Then raising the tax rates on CEOs would just force companies to shell out even MORE money to keep the same CEOs, because inelastic labor demand would force the companies to pay most of the tax increase...meaning they'd have much less left over to pay their workers and would end up having to hire Chinese workers instead.

But if high-end labor demand is very elastic - if it's easy to replace a CEO with two cheaper people, as Matt suggests - then raising taxes would lower those high salaries, because the high-paid employees themselves would be bearing most of the cost of the tax.

So it all depends on how much companies need their top-earning employees. If top-earning employees aren't that essential, you very well might be able to equalize income by making taxes more progressive. But if top-earning employees are very essential, raising taxes on those employees could just make the income distribution more unequal.

Does that make sense, or am I out to lunch?

I don't remember exactly what the top federal marginal rate is but I am pretty sure it is more than 31%.

According to this table on the IRS website the top rate in 2005 was 35%. Note this is a nominal rate, the actual top marginal rate will be higher because of the exemption phase out.

In some cities $400k is not a lot of money. It certainly doesn't make anyone rich; and, after mortgage, school tuition, property taxes, personal taxes, there isn't a ton of money. The best perk is being able to eat really high quality food and ordering a lot of take out, because, when you earn $400k a year, most of what you do is work. These aren't the people jetting off to Paris to see the fashion shows on weekends. The trend is that that the richest one percent of one percent are making the sloppy flithy money. Raising the taxes on them is where the money is.

"The effective tax rate -- the total amount of what the Federal gov't actually hauls into their coffers -- has bobbed between a high of 20.9% of GDP (1944) and a low of 14.4 (1950) since the Feds became the modern Federal gov't at the end of WW2. Despite all the propaganda and hollaring and bellyaching the effective federal tax rate has stayed in that range pretty constantly. In Reagan's years, for example, the rate was (consecutively) 19.6, 19.1, 17.5, 17.4, 17.7, 17.5, 18.4, 18.1. During Clinton's years the rates were (consecutively) 17.6, 18.1, 18.5, 18.9, 19.3, 19.9, 20, and 20.6.

Smoke, mirrors, and malarkey."

Posted by: Jeffrey Davis

I'd like to point out that 1% of a $7 trillion GNP/GDP is $70 billion. Reagan's highest defict was a bit over $200 billion, IIRC, or 3% of the GNP/GDP. So the ammounts we're talking about are significant.

Trivia - this was the subject of a beautiful example of 'how to lie with graphs'in the WSJ Editorial page, way back when. They used a vertical scale of 0-100% of GDP, so 2-3% changes looked trivial.

I actually emailed Greg Mankiw with this question and he agreed that it would come down to the elasticities...i.e. how much corporations can afford to replace those high-paid workers.

But then again, he did work for the Bush administration...

Much as I would like to believe that the lack of wage growth could be fixed by raising tax rates on high incomes, it does not fit with the evidence. Much of the changes in the personal incomes of the rich represents a shifting of income from sheltered to unshelered. If instead you look look at the income of the non-rich, there is a slow steady decline of the GDP share since the mid 1970's, and a median wage that is unchanged after inflation adjustment. Look at the long time series graphs at

http://www.visualizingeconomics.com/category/graph/

The jumps in the incomes of the top 1 .1 and .01 % are not mirrored in the income of the everybody else as % of gdp, but is only seen in the % of reported income. What ever is wrong went wrong in the 70's. Given the timing, the suspects are the relativly high unemployment rates, tight fed policy, number worker entering the labor force, the increase in trade, or a combination of them. What it is not, is the returns to education, since the bottom 99% include most of the well educated, or benefits because health cost are not up enough so that the employers share can account for more than a small fraction.

400K not alot of money in some cities? Maybe if you are living in Tokyo, London or Zurich and getting paid in dollars. An income of 400K puts an American in the top 1%. Cal must be a left handed pitcher or an NBA power forward if he thinks pocketing $400,000 a year doesn't mean you are rich.

yglesias in comments:

to something like 40 or 45 percent would make a difference, I contend, to the pre-tax distribution of income.

I think that's going towards pushing it over the limit where you start to get diminishing returns in all kinds of ways, including income and compliance.

Bill Clinton held the top bracket steady at 39.6%. It was not chosen for the hell of it or at random. I recall that was carefully studied and applied from the first days before inauguration, trying to fulfill promise #1: "it's the economy, stupid." And one great effect was you rarely heard complaints about it being too high, people paid it happily as long as the budget got balanced and economic opportunity abounded. But don't believe me, do a little research on that yourself.

Also I think your argument is simplistic in that people pay things like state and city income taxes (check out New York City costs!) which often are "make-up" for low Fed taxes or Fed funding to the community in question.

I remember higher bracket days early in the Reagan years and seeing what the well-off people I interacted with in my work did to avoid paying: anything. One contingent that benefits greatly is accountants and tax attorneys, if you care about helping them.

Perhaps your idea, though, could go the way of thinking about what effect raising the income limit where SSI & FICA payments stop, raising it way higher. That's something that, for some reason, in my experience, well-off people do not equate with taxation by the Feds to be avoided, it's like it's "separate" in their mind. Maybe it's that they feel it's like paying for an actual service rather than into the grand maw of Federal corruption? (and when time comes to collect Medicare and SS, they rarely refuse it, piddling tho it may be. :-)) But remember, the employer pays a matching half--so many who have never been self-employed forget that.

Better yet, if you want challenging thought on the topic, think about taking it out of the relationship to income all together and going towards VAT. I am no big fan of that for many reasons, but it's certainly throws a completely different light. Is the fact that many countries that rely on it have high unemployment related?

BTW, I agree with those that mention that putting a figure of 90% tax rate into a post, even as a theoretical example, is a killer. You have more than a few start mentioning that figure, you will lose any upper class you may have in your political party; you enact it, you will actually lose citizens or at least any tax income from them or indeed any income from them into the economy at all. (I seem to recall reading that JFK had something to say about that all, an early version of Clintonomics as it were.) Ask any successful English rock star from the 60's or 70's. Or many bankers in certain small Caribbean countries. It's a very dangerous thing to say and may be misquoted for eternity.

Good comment.Thanks admin.

Thanks
Best regards
mirc
mirç
mırc
mırç
mircturk
turkmirc
mirc indir
mirc yukle
forum
forum
mirc
turkmirc
turkmirc
turkforum
sohbet

Thanks
Best regards
mirc
mirç
mırc
mırç
mircturk
turkmirc
mirc indir
mirc yukle
mirch
mırch
mirc turk
turk mirc
mırcturk
turkmırc
mırc turk
turk mırc
turkiyemirc
türkiyemirc
turkiye mirc
türkiye mirc
mircturkiye
mirctürkiye
mirc turkiye
mircturk
turkmırc
muhabbet
forum
forum
turkforum
turkiyeforum
mirc
turkmirc
toplist
site ekle
pagerank
turkmirc
turkforum
sohbet
chat
sohbet odaları
bedava sohbet
bedava chat
türk
karar

thanksss

slm

sex
hikaye
porno
sex
porno
videohikaye.com
sex
sex
sex

perde

temizlik

stor perde

ip perde

jaluzi perde

dikey perde

ofis temizliği

ilaçlama

açılış organizasyon

perdeci

perde modelleri

organizasyon

http://www.ekmekmusafcarpsin.com/

Amazing. The first ever global depression will go down in history horribly misunderstood. What a pathetic bunch of ignorant fools we have become. Consumer junkie credit card morons. Perfect little victims. Say that reminds me.

Don’t believe one optimistic word from any public figure about the economy or humanity in general. They are all part of the problem. Its like a game of Monopoly. In America, the richest 1% now hold ALMOST 1/2 OF ALL UNITED STATES WEALTH. Unlike ‘lesser’ estimates, this includes all stocks, bonds, cash, offshore accounts, and material assets held by America’s richest 1%. Even that filthy pig Oprah acknowledged that it was at about 50% in 2006. Naturally, she put her own ‘humanitarian’ spin on it. Calling attention to her own ‘good will’. WHAT A DISGUSTING HYPOCRITE SLOB. THE RICHEST ONE PERCENT HAVE LITERALLY MADE WORLD PROSPERITY ABSOLUTELY IMPOSSIBLE. Don’t fall for any of their ‘humanitarian’ CRAP. ITS A SHAM. THESE PEOPLE ARE CAUSING THE SAME PROBLEMS THEY PRETEND TO CARE ABOUT. Ask any professor of economics. Money does not grow on trees. The government can’t just print up more on a whim. At any given time, there is a relative limit to the wealth within ANY economy of ANY size. So when too much wealth accumulates at the top, the middle class slip further into debt and the lower class further into poverty. A similar rule applies worldwide. The world’s richest 1% now own over 40% of ALL WORLD WEALTH. This is EVEN AFTER you account for all of this ‘good will’ ‘humanitarian’ BS from celebrities and executives. ITS A SHAM. As they get richer and richer, less wealth is left circulating beneath them. This is the single greatest underlying cause for the current US recession. The middle class can no longer afford to sustain their share of the economy. Their wealth has been gradually transfered to the richest 1%. One way or another, we suffer because of their incredible greed. We are talking about TRILLIONS of dollars which have been transfered FROM US TO THEM. All over a period of about 27 years. Thats Reaganomics for you. The wealth does not ‘trickle down’ as we were told it would. It just accumulates at the top. Shrinking the middle class and expanding the lower class. Causing a domino effect of socio-economic problems. But the rich will never stop. They just keep getting richer. Leaving even less of the pie for the other 99% of us to share. At the same time, they throw back a few tax deductible crumbs and call themselves ‘humanitarians’. Cashing in on the PR and getting even richer the following year. IT CAN’T WORK THIS WAY. Their bogus efforts to make the world a better place can not possibly succeed. Any ‘humanitarian’ progress made in one area will be lost in another. EVERY SINGLE TIME. IT ABSOLUTELY CAN NOT WORK THIS WAY. This is going to end just like a game of Monopoly. The current US recession will drag on for years and lead into the worst US depression of all time. The richest 1% will live like royalty while the rest of us fight over jobs, food, and gasoline. So don’t fall for any of this PR CRAP from Hollywood, Pro Sports, and Wall Street PIGS. ITS A SHAM. Remember: They are filthy rich EVEN AFTER their tax deductible contributions. Greedy pigs. Now, we are headed for the worst economic and cultural crisis of all time. Crime, poverty, and suicide will skyrocket. SEND A “THANK YOU” NOTE TO YOUR FAVORITE MILLIONAIRE. ITS THEIR FAULT. I’m not discounting other factors like China, sub-prime, or gas prices. But all of those factors combined still pale in comparison to that HUGE transfer of wealth to the rich. Anyway, those other factors are all related and further aggrivated because of GREED. If it weren’t for the OBSCENE distribution of wealth within our country, there never would have been such a market for sub-prime to begin with. IF IT WEREN’T FOR THE OBSCENE, UNREASONABLE, AND UNJUST DISTRIBUTION OF UNITED STATES WEALTH, THERE NEVER WOULD HAVE BEEN SUCH A MARKET FOR SUB-PRIME AND THERE NEVER WOULD HAVE BEEN A COLLAPSE IN THE HOUSING MARKET. Sub-prime did not cause the problem. It only accelerated the outcome. Which by the way, was another trick whipped up by greedy bankers and executives. IT MAKES THEM RICHER. The credit industry has been ENDORSED by people like Oprah Winfrey, Ellen DeGeneres, Dr Phil, and many other celebrities. IT MAKES THEM RICHER. In fact, they specifically endorsed Countrywide by name. The same Countrywide widely responsible for predatory adjustable rate sub-prime lending and the accelerated collapse of the housing market. ENDORSED BY OPRAH WINFREY, ELLEN DEGENERES, AND DR PHIL. Now, there are commercial ties between nearly every industry and every public figure. IT MAKES THEM RICHER. It also drives up the cost for nearly every product and service on the market. So don’t fall for their ‘good will’ BS. ITS A LIE. If you fall for it, then you’re a fool. If you see any real difference between the moral character of a celebrity, politician, attorney, or executive, then you’re a fool. No offense fellow citizens. But we have been mislead by nearly every public figure. We still are. Even now, they claim to be ‘hurting’ right along with the rest of us. As if gas prices actually effect the lifestyle of a millionaire. ITS A LIE. IN 2007, THE RICHEST 1% INCREASED THEIR AVERAGE BOTTOM LINE WEALTH AGAIN. On average, they are now worth over $4,000,000 each. Thats an all time high. As a group, they are now worth well over $17,000,000,000,000. THATS WELL OVER SEVENTEEN TRILLION DOLLARS. Another all time high. Which by the way, is much more than the entire middle and lower classes combined. Also more than enough to pay off our national debt, fund the Iraq war for a decade, repair our infrastructure, and bail out the US housing market. Still think that our biggest problem is China? Think again. Its the 1% club. That means every big name celebrity, athlete, executive, entrepreneur, developer, banker, and lottery winner. Along with many attorneys, doctors, and politicians. If they are rich, then they are part of the problem. Their incredible wealth was not ‘created’, ‘generated’, grown in their back yard, or printed up on their command. It was transfered FROM US TO THEM. Directly and indirectly. Its become near impossible to spend a dollar without making some greedy pig even richer. Don’t be fooled by the occasional loss of a millionaire’s fortune. Overall, they just keep getting richer. They absolutely will not stop. Still, they have the nerve to pretend as if they care about ordinary people. ITS A LIE. NOTHING BUT CALCULATED PR CRAP. WAKE UP PEOPLE. THEIR GOAL IS TO WIN THE GAME. The 1% club will always say or do whatever it takes to get as rich as possible. Without the slightest regard for anything or anyone but themselves. Reaganomics. Their idea. Loans from China. Their idea. NAFTA. Their idea. Outsourcing. Their idea. Sub-prime. Their idea. High energy prices. Their idea. Oil ‘futures’. Their idea. Obscene health care charges. Their idea. The commercial lobbyist. Their idea. The multi-million dollar lawsuit. Their idea. The multi-million dollar endorsement deal. Their idea. $200 cell phone bills. Their idea. $200 basketball shoes. Their idea. $30 late fees. Their idea. $30 NSF fees. Their idea. $20 DVDs. Their idea. Subliminal advertising. Their idea. Brainwash plots on TV. Their idea. Vioxx, and Celebrex. Their idea. Excessive medical testing. Their idea. The MASSIVE campaign to turn every American into a brainwashed, credit card, pharmaceutical, medical testing, love-sick, celebrity junkie. Their idea. All of the above drive up the cost of living, shrink the middle class, concentrate the world’s wealth and resources, create a dominoe effect of socio-economic problems, and wreak havok on society. All of which have been CREATED AND ENDORSED by celebrities, athletes, executives, entrepreneurs, attorneys, and politicians. IT MAKES THEM RICHER. So don’t fall for any of their ‘good will’ ‘humanitarian’ BS. ITS A SHAM. NOTHING BUT TAX DEDUCTIBLE PR CRAP. In many cases, the ‘charitable’ contribution is almost entirely offset. Not to mention the opportunity to plug their name, image, product, and ‘good will’ all at once. Which is usually done just before or after the release of their latest commercial project. IT MAKES THEM RICHER. These filthy pigs even have the nerve to throw a fit and spin up a misleading defense with regard to ‘federal tax revenue’. ITS A SHAM. THEY SCREWED UP THE EQUATION TO BEGIN WITH. If the middle and lower classes had a greater share of the pie, they could easily cover a greater share of the federal tax revenue. They are held down in many ways because of greed. Wages remain stagnant for millions because the executives, celebrities, athletes, attorneys, and entrepreneurs, are paid millions. They over-sell, over-charge, under-pay, outsource, cut jobs, and benefits to increase their bottom line. As their profits rise, so do the stock values. Which are owned primarily by the richest 5%. As more United States wealth rises to the top, the middle and lower classes inevitably suffer. This reduces the potential tax reveue drawn from those brackets. At the same time, it wreaks havok on middle and lower class communities and increases the need for financial aid. Not to mention the spike in crime because of it. There is a dominoe effect to consider. IT CAN’T WORK THIS WAY. But our leaders refuse to acknowledge this. Instead they come up with one trick after another to milk the system and screw the majority. These decisions are heavily influensed by the 1% club. Every year, billions of federal tax dollars are diverted behind the scenes back to the rich and their respective industries. Loans from China have been necessary to compensate in part, for the red ink and multi-trillion dollar transfer of wealth to the rich. At the same time, the feds have been pushing more financial burden onto the states who push them lower onto the cities. Again, the hardship is felt more by the majority and less by the 1% club. The rich prefer to live in exclusive areas or upper class communities. They get the best of everything. Reliable city services, new schools, freshly paved roads, upscale parks, ect. The middle and lower class communities get little or nothing without a local tax increase. Which, they usually can’t afford. So the red ink flows followed by service cuts and lay-offs. All because of the OBSCENE distribution of bottom line wealth in this country. Anyway, when you account for all federal, state, and local taxes, the middle class actually pay about the same rate as the rich. The devil is in the details. So when people forgive the rich for their incredible greed and then praise them for paying a greater share of the FEDERAL income taxes, its like nails on a chalk board. I can not accept any theory that our economy would suffer in any way with a more reasonable distribution of wealth. Afterall, it was more reasonable 30 years ago. Before Reaganomics came along. Before GREED became such an epidemic. Before we had an army of over-paid executives, bankers, celebrities, athletes, attorneys, doctors, investors, entrepreneurs, developers, and sold-out politicians to kiss their asses. As a nation, we were in much better shape. Strong middle class, free and clear assets, lower crime rate, more widespread prosperity, stable job market, lower deficit, ect. Our economy as a whole was much more stable and prosperous for the majority. WITHOUT LOANS FROM CHINA. Now, we have a more obscene distribution of bottom line wealth than ever before. We have a sold-out government, crumbling infrastructure, energy crisis, home forclosure epidemic, credit crunch, weak US dollar, 13 figure national deficit, and 12 figure annual shortfall. The cost of living is higher than ever before. Most people can’t even afford basic health care. ALL BECAUSE OF GREED. I really don’t blame the 2nd -5th percentiles in general. No economy could ever function without some reasonable scale of personal wealth and income. But it can’t be allowed to run wild like a mad dog. ALBERT EINSTEIN TRIED TO MAKE PEOPLE UNDERSTAND. UNBRIDLED CAPITALISM ABSOLUTELY CAN NOT WORK. TOP HEAVY ECONOMIES ALWAYS COLLAPSE. Bottom line: The richest 1% will soon tank the largest economy in the world. It will be like nothing we’ve ever seen before. The American dream will be shattered. and thats just the beginning. Greed will eventually tank every major economy in the world. Causing millions to suffer and die. Oprah, Angelina, Brad, Bono, and Bill are not part of the solution. They are part of the problem. THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A MULTI-MILLIONAIRE HUMANITARIAN. EXTREME WEALTH MAKES WORLD PROSPERITY ABSOLUTELY IMPOSSIBLE. WITHOUT WORLD PROSPERITY, THERE WILL NEVER BE WORLD PEACE OR ANYTHING EVEN CLOSE. GREED KILLS. IT WILL BE OUR DOWNFALL. Of course, the rich will throw a fit and call me a madman. Of course, they will jump to small minded conclusions about ‘jealousy’, ‘envy’, or ’socialism’. Of course, their ignorant fans will do the same. You have to expect that. But I speak the truth. If you don’t believe me, then copy this entry and run it by any professor of economics or socio-economics. Then tell a friend. Call the local radio station. Re-post this entry or put it in your own words. Be one of the first to predict the worst economic and cultural crisis of all time and explain its cause. WE ARE IN BIG TROUBLE.

So what can we do about it? Well, not much. Unfortunately, we are stuck on a runaway train. The problem has gone unchecked for too many years. The US/global depression is comming thanks to the 1% club. It would take a massive effort by the vast majority to prevent it. Along with a voluntary sacrifice by the rich. THATS NOT GOING TO HAPPEN. But if you believe in miracles, then spend your money as wisely as possible. Especially in middle and lower class communities. Check the Fortune 500 list and limit your support of high profit/low labor industries (Hollywood, pro sports, energy, credit, pharmaceutical, cable, satelite, internet advertising, cell phone, high fashion, jewelry, ect.). Cancel all but one credit card for emergencies only. If you need a cell phone, then do your homework and find the best deal on a local pre-pay. If you want home internet access, then use the least expensive provider, and share accounts whenever possible. If you need to search, then use the less popular search engines. They usually produce the same results anyway. Don’t click on any internet ad. If you need the product or service, then look up the phone number or address and contact that business directly. Don’t pay to see any blockbuster movie. Instead, wait a few months and rent the DVD from a local store or buy it USED. If you want to see a big name game or event, then watch it in a local bar, club, or at home on network TV. Don’t buy any high end official merchendise and don’t support the high end sponsors. If its endorsed by a big name celebrity, then don’t buy it. If you can afford a new car, then make an exception for GM, Ford, and Dodge. If they don’t increase their market share soon, then a lot more people are going to get screwed out of their pensions and/or benefits. Of course, you must know by now to avoid those big trucks and SUVs unless you truly need one for its intended purpose. Don’t be ashamed to buy a foreign car if you prefer it. Afterall, those with the most fuel efficient vehicles consume a lot less foreign oil. Which accounts for a pretty big chunk of our trade deficit. Anyway, the global economy is worth supporting to some extent. Its the obscene profit margins, trade deficits, and BS from OPEC that get us into trouble. Otherwise, the global economy would be a good thing for everyone. Just keep in mind that the big 3 are struggling and they do produce a few smaller reliable cars. Don’t frequent any high end department store or any business in a newly developed upper class community. By doing so, you make developers richer and draw support away from industrial areas and away from the middle class communities. Instead, support the local retailer and the less popular shopping centers. Especially in lower or middle class communities. If you can afford to buy a home, then do so. But go smaller and less expensive. Don’t get yourself in too deep and don’t buy into the newly developed condos or gated communities. Instead, find a modest home in a building or neighborhood at least 20 years old. If you live in one of the poorer states, then try to support its economy first and foremost. Be on the lookout for commercial brainwash plots on TV. They are written into nearly every scene of nearly every show. Most cater to network sponsors and parent companies. Especially commercial health care. Big business is fine on occasion depending on the profit margins and profit sharing. Do your homework. If you want to support any legitimate charity, then do so directly. Never support any celebrity foundation. They spend most of their funding on PR campaigns, travel, and high end accomodations for themselves. Instead, go to Charitywatch.org and look up a top rated charity to support your favorite cause. In general, support the little guy as much as possible and the big guy as little as possible. Do your part to reverse the transfer of wealth away from the rich and back to the middle and lower classes. Unfortunately, there is no perfect answer. Jobs will be lost either way. Innocent children will starve and die either way. But we need to support the largest group of workers with the most reasonable profit margins. We also need to support LEGITIMATE charities (Check that list at Charitywatch.org). This is our only chance to limit the severity and/or duration of the comming US/global depression. In the meantime, don’t listen to Bernanke, Paulson, Bartiromo, Orman, Dobbs, Kramer, OReiley, or any other public figure with regard to the economy. They are all plenty smart but I swear to you that they will lie right through their rotten teeth. IT MAKES THEM RICHER. These people work for big business. The ‘experts’ they cite also work for big business. They are all motivated by their desire to accumulate more wealth. THEY WILL LIE RIGHT THROUGH THEIR ROTTEN TEETH. So don’t fall for their tricks. Instead, look at the big picture. The economic problems we face have been mounting for well over 20 years. All of them caused or aggrivated by a constant transfer of wealth from poorer to richer. Soon, it will cause the first ever GLOBAL DEPRESION. Its not brain surgery. Its simple math. Like I said, you are welcome to run this by any professor of economics or socio-economics. If thats not good enough, then look up what Einstein had to say about greed, extreme wealth, and its horrible concequences. I speak the truth. GREED KILLS. IT WILL BE OUR DOWNFALL.

Its already underway. A massive campaign to divert our attention. Trump, Buffet, OReiley, Dobbs, Pickens, Norris, and several other well known filthy rich public figures have been running their mouths about the economy. Finally admitting a hint of severity after almost 2 years of denial. They even have the nerve to acknowledge the possibility of a US/global depression. Still, they refuse to acknowledge the single greatest underlying cause. Instead, they focus on policies, procedures, and circumstances that were born FROM the underlying cause. Dancing their way around the big picture. DON'T FALL FOR IT. Remember: Our national debt was way up BEFORE sub-prime. Consumer debt was way up BEFORE sub-prime. The cost of living was up BEFORE sub-prime. Wall Street profits were obscene BEFORE sub-prime. The middle class were loosing free and clear assets BEFORE sub-prime. Our infrastructure was in bad shape BEFORE sub-prime. Loans from China were taken out BEFORE sub-prime. The dollar was loosing value BEFORE sub-prime. So don’t let these cowardly filthy rich public figures divert your attention or limit your range of thought. THE CURRENT ECONOMIC CRISIS WAS NOT CAUSED BY A SINGLE POLICY OR PROCEDURE. IT WAS CAUSED PRIMARILY BY A MASSIVE TRANSFER OF WEALTH FROM POOR TO RICH. THIS ALSO REPRESENTS A MASSIVE CONCENTRATION OF CAPITAL WORLDWIDE. OTHERWISE, THERE WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN SUCH A MARKET FOR SUB-PRIME AND THERE WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN A GLOBAL CREDIT CRUNCH. MONEY DOES NOT GROW ON TREES AND IT DOES NOT JUST FLOAT AWAY. IT ONLY TRANSFERS FROM ONE PARTY TO ANOTHER. ALBERT EINSTEIN TRIED TO MAKE PEOPLE UNDERSTAND. GREED KILLS. IT WILL BE OUR DOWNFALL.

A word for those who respond with the usual ‘I know more than you. Look how smart, knowledgable, and articulate I am’ crap. Let me say this in advance. I don’t claim to be an expert in this field. But I did go on record with these predictions long before any public figure uttered the word ‘recession’. If you search long enough, you will find my early postings from ‘05′ and ‘06′. Including the first draft of this rant. Since then, I’ve gone on record against people like Greenspan, Bernanke, and Paulson. So far, my predictions have been accurate. Like I said. This is not brain surgery. For the mostpart, its simple math. When you concentrate the world’s wealth, you also concentrate its capital and shrink the middle class along with the potential market for every major industry. Homes go unsold. Bills go unpaid. Banks fail. More products go unsold. Jobs are lost. More banks fail. and so on. and so on. It happened 80 years ago. It will happen again. This time on a global scale. Throughout the cycle, the rich will tighten their grip. Concentrating the world’s wealth and resources even further and ensuring the collapse of every major economy worldwide. Think it can’t happen? Think again. GREED KILLS. IT WILL BE OUR DOWNFALL.

Another thing. I don’t want credit for any of this. Otherwise, I would have given my full name a long time ago. As far as I’m concerned, you can put this rant in your own words and take credit for all of it. I don’t care. Just spread the word. Otherwise, the greatest injustice of all time will go down in history unchecked.

By the way. The bailout won’t work. IT WON’T WORK. The plan fails to address the fundamental problem. The middle class don’t need more credit. They need a reasonable share of the economic pie. They also need a lower cost of living and a chance to catch their breath. They need a break from all of the psychological marketing tricks and mass market BS. Most of all, they need to wake up and see the truth. GREED KILLS. IT WILL BE OUR DOWNFALL.

To my surprise, two public figures have found the courage to acknowledge this problem to some degree. On 11.07.07 former presidential candidate Ron Paul mentioned the massive transfer of wealth from poor to rich. He also hinted at the possibility of economic collapse. He did so on 'Face the Nation'. He was blacklisted almost immediately for doing so. On 9.28.08 former secretary of labor Robert Reich refered to the obscene levels of income inequality as part of a "recipe for disaster". He mentioned the richest one percent in particular. He did so on 'Late Night With Conan OBrien'. As far as I know, Albert Einstein was the first to explain the link between extreme wealth and economic instability. He did so in 1949. He explained how the first Great Depression was actually caused by a massive transfer of wealth from poor to rich. He predicted that it would happen again. We are about to witness the first ever GLOBAL DEPRESSION. Amazing. The prosperity of an entire world is about to be compromised. Almost entirely because of greed. IT WILL BE OUR DOWNFALL.

The point about our government printing up more money was that it can't be done "on a whim" and that there are serious concequences for doing so (weak dollar, higher gas prices, inflation). I never said that it can't be or hasn't been done at all. Afterall, those loans from china weren't infused in the form of Chinese currency. They were infused in the form of our own. Not given to the middle class but instead to the banks in the form of credit. Its done nothing but perpetuate the problem. It never has been and never will be the answer. Sorry if I wasn't explicit enough the first time. The original draft was written 2 years ago and intended to fit within 300 characters. Anyway, I'm no English major. So if any of you want to re-word this post, feel free to do so. Whatever it takes to make people understand.