The Poor Pay More than their fair share in taxes.

The poor and the middle class pay more in tax than the rich.

2012-01-25T13:13:00.001-08:00

The poor pay much more than there fair share in federal taxes. To state otherwise displays ignorance, stupidity, or a lack of integrity.

Federal income tax generates less than 50 percent of all federal revenue combined. Where then does the other 50 plus percent of federal revenue come from?

We all know the answers, but few are willing to expose the hidden taxes that the overwhelming majority at the bottom and the middle pay to the federal government.

What are some of the hidden taxes that the masses in middle and the poor must pay?

Sin tax
Gas tax
Federal payroll tax
Utility tax
Lotto tax
Import tariffs

There are many others, but ill save the “best” and the most pernicious tax for last. This stealth tax destroys the poor and the middle class, because they bear the brunt of it.

Lest I forget, we can’t forget about the sales tax which falls on the majority of the populace which includes both the poor and the middle class. As the poor and the middle purchase goods and services on trillions of transactions the nation’s tax coffers are filled.

Also worth remembering; while federal income taxes are avoided by the poor, State and City taxes may still be collected.

So, what is this silent deadly tax you ask?

Anyone that knows how the Federal Reserve works, knows exactly what this hidden tax is, and who it affects the most.

The inflation tax!

The poor pay an unconscionable percentage of their incomes on too many flat taxes, which include sales, gas, import and inflation. If you look at the entire picture, it’s no wonder why this forces the government to refund a small amount of that money back in the form of a refund.

To argue that the federal income tax that is paid by wealthiest Americans is worse, or less fair than the inflation tax that is paid by the poor, and the middle is a piece of dung.

Simple math.
Do 99% of the US population purchase and consume more than the top 1%? If so, who bears the brunt of the inflation and consumption taxes?

There is no contest on which class of American pays a larger percentage of their income on taxes, and which class of American has been able to enrich themselves because of minuscule tax rates.

An important fact to remember is that most of the top 10% aren't rich.

One could make an argument that only the top 1% to 2% are affluent but the other 8% fall into the lower middle class strata. Once the remaining 8% lose 60% of their incomes to taxes while the rest goes to living expenses- whats left? The bottom 8% of the top 10% that pay federal income tax are probably just a handful of paychecks away from financial devastation.

As far as sin taxes go.

While it is true that sin and the lotto taxes can be avoided, the fact remains that the lotto has generated over 100billion over the past decade for education.
If the lotto did not exist, that money that is voluntarily given would have to be taken (taxed) from all of our pockets.

The lotto has also generated tens of billions in federal income over that same decade in taxed winnings.

Please, do the math and do not dismiss what i have written so quickly.

Federal income tax only accounts for 45% of all federal revenue. Where does the rest come from? Part of that remaining 55% is mostly hidden, and it doesn't include inflation. The remaining 55% of federal income is paid for in part by poor, and middle class Americans when they purchase goods and services on a daily basis.

Inflation is a hidden tax that isn't reported as federal revenue, so it isn't as easy to ascertain what the rate is and who it affects the most.
Inflation isn't easy to understand at first, but it is one of the most egregious and draconian of taxes once you wrap your head around what it does to the purchasing power of our dollars.

Commodity inflation without wage inflation is what this country has had to endure for the past decade. Inflation has destroyed the middle class and has murdered the poor.

Examine over multiple years and you will find non existent wage growth, compare that to the CPI index, price out what gas, food have done over the same time span.

When was the last time they gave a cost of living increase to Social Security recipients?

The government has borrowed money from the FED and dumped it all over the world. A large part of our debt went to the richest bankers but all US citizens have to pay for that monetary creation in the form of a diluted anemic dollar.

Do you homework on inflation, the poor and the middle class pay dearly for it. The poor pay more in total taxes than the rich do. They pay more in total revenue and in total percentage.

Next time someone tells you that the poor pay no tax and the rich pay 50% of all federal income taxes- yell at them and tell them the truth!

Buy Gas just in case the Strait of Hormuz, and the Iranian Threat might be more than bluster.

2012-01-13T10:42:00.001-08:00

If you can buy a few gallons, and store them away, that might be the ideal solution. This is certainly not the safest option or the most convenient for the vast majority.

For the rest of us, buying options is probably the way to go on Gasoline.

Take a look at (UGA) United States Gasoline Fund.

The United States Gasoline Fund, LP ("UGA") is a new way for investors and hedgers to manage their exposure to energy.

The United States Gasoline Fund LP (UGA) is an exchange traded security that is designed to track in percentage terms the movements of gasoline prices. UGA issues units that may be purchased and sold on the NYSE Arca.

I am not recommending you go out and bet it all on this. But, it might be prudent to hedge your gas costs against headline risk- just a little.

You can buy out of the money calls on UGA- take a look at the Feb 18 2012 with 51 Days to Expiration.

The 65.0 strike Call can be purchased for .10 cents.

If the Iranian scenario does go bad, gas is going to double, and those calls will be worth $2 to $3 bucks- each.

Spending $100 on these calls to protect your short term fuel costs is a modest proposal that could potentially pay off for the long haul.

That hundred you wagered could be worth a few grand if things go to hell in hand basket.

Ladies and gentlemen, we can always change things for the better. Just look at SOPA vs godaady.

2012-01-13T10:42:00.000-08:00

Close to 40,000 customers have left godaddy in the last two days because of their support of that disgusting bill named SOPA.

Officially, close to 100,000 sites have moved, the whisper number however is over one million.

Godaddy was staunch and unapologetic in their support of SOPA, up until a few weeks ago that is, today they seem very contrite.

They are actually reaching out to customers that have moved their business elsewhere or those that might. While they have reversed their public position on SOPA- many internet users remain skeptical on their true motives.

Wikipedia is in opposition to SOPA, they threatened to move off of godaddy on this issue. Throughout it all, Godaddy remained belligerent on its support of SOPA. Almost 40,000 paying customers decided they were right and that godaddy was on the wrong side of the aisle- Godaddy has since reconsidered their position.

I'm proud to say i moved my sites off of godaddy, and i convinced many of my friends to do the same.

Do you know what makes this story just a little bit sweeter? Bob Parsons Ex CEO and founder of godaddy is a vile Grinch- he is a proud member of the extreme right wing.

Collectively, we all make a positive difference, and we do it by shouting the truth from the rooftops. Expressing our opinions on what's on the right side of morality, and what's wrong with with the other side, that's one of the best gifts we can give to humanity.

Happy Holidays!

Must watch video on SOPA.

want to help out?

2012-01-04T16:01:00.000-08:00

Shop Amazon's New Kindle Fire

Buy anything by visiting Amazon through the above links, and we receive a commission at no additional cost to you.

Donate now to keep blogging alive.

If you own physical gold and silver you may want to hedge it with options.

2012-01-04T15:47:00.000-08:00

There are plenty of investors that don’t trust ETFs for as a substitute for owning the physical metal in hand.

While this is completely understandable, it doesn’t’ mean that you can’t hedge what you own by using options on the GLD and SLV ETFs.

If you own thousands of dollars in precious metals, you are completely unhedged against severe market fluctuations.

Silver in particular displayed a lot of volatility in 2011, it had multiple 30% swings to both the upside and the downside.

The roller coaster ride was enough to make most owners a little bit squeamish.

The solution: Options.

If we take SLV as an example. We can purchase an (otm) out of the money put with 100 days till expiration, for .15 cents.

The catch: the put Is 30% out of the money.

That means you have unhedged for a 30% drop in the next 100 days, however, if silver were to drop precipitously the put would increase in value. The put would increase in value even if the spot price of silver didn’t fall below the strike price.

The reason, increased volitilty would make the put worth more than you paid for it. And at .15 cents, its pretty cheap protection for the next 100 days.

Hedging Gold (gld) is a little different. Gold hasn’t been as volatile as silver but you can still purchase a put that is 25% Out of the money for .20 cents. The question is though; with gold’s drop from 2000 does anyone expect it to drop another 25% this year? Either way- purchasing one put for 20 dollars, can protect your expensive gold holdings from a catastrophic drop.

I don’t favor purchasing puts less than 100 days before they expire, and I don’t believe the premium you have to pay for at (ATM) at the money put is worth it.

You are long term bullish on the metal, so it makes little sense to spend a ton of money to marry puts to your position at all times.

But, when the market is uncertain- owning a put is akin to owning insurance.

You insure all of your most precious assets, your precious metals must be thought of the same way.

If silver were to fall, you can sell the put for a profit, and purchase even more silver with it at the cheaper price point.

If the option expires worthless, as most do, then it would be the same as the premium you pay in your insurance policy- even if you never use it.

For bullish investors, I don’t calls work the same way. Instead of paying the premium for a call, you could just buy the physical. Most options expire worthless, so instead of wasting money on a call- you could own the metal in hand.

Its important to remember:

These puts are 30% out of the money. That means if gold or silver drop 15% your puts aren’t going to be worth much. The 15 dollar puts might be worth 100 bucks. Expectations need to correctly set.

Wages as a percentage of corporate profits.

2011-12-29T09:39:00.000-08:00

This chart paints an ugly picture.

Corporate profits are at an all time high, personal income and salary for the 99% is at an all time low.

Why the disconnect?

The top 1% which include the CEO's directors, and upper level managers are siphoning more of the salary pie than they used to receive as compensation.

What's left after the executives take the lions share is a tiny fraction. The small crumbs that are left are split amongst offshore workers that make pennies a day, and the American laborers that are forced to work for salaries that are barely above minimum wage.

Before the Ronald Reagan revolution- that was the beginning of the destruction of the middle class, executives in the 1% took 10% of the salary pie, now they take 40% of all wages. The middle class in the 99% now has 30% less of that salary pie to divided between themselves. Its even worse when you consider anther 20% of that income pie goes to workers in India and China.

If you thought Bloomberg even had one shred of decency- think again.

2011-12-28T08:44:00.000-08:00

A Living Wage, Long Overdue
Published: December 25, 2011
Published in The New York Times.

New York City provides hundreds of millions of dollars a year in taxpayer-financed subsidies to private developers. It is only right that the jobs created by those projects pay a decent wage. The Fair Wages for New Yorkers Act, widely known as the living-wage bill, would nudge these employers in the right direction.

Get that- middle class NYC taxpayers provide kickbacks to developers so that they can build fancy buildings for wall street big shots and others.

The bill now before the City Council would require future development projects that receive $1 million or more in discretionary financial assistance from the city to pay $10 an hour plus benefits for full-time workers and $11.50 an hour without benefits for at least 10 years. That may not be much, but it is an improvement over the minimum wage of $7. 25 an hour.

The benefits sound fair.

Mayor Michael Bloomberg is fighting this change, arguing that a wage increase might scare off new developments and cost the city thousands of lower-paying jobs. That has not been the experience elsewhere.

First off, $7.25 isn't a living wage in New York City, it hasn't been for years. Meanwhile, on the left coast, the other expensive city, San Francisco, just raised their minimum wage for ALL workers to $10.24 an hour.

Once again Bloombito is talking his book:
"But, if we don't give these fancy billionaire developers millions in kickbacks, they will build those penthouses that sell for 30 million in Cincinnati!
We can't make these job creators pay another 3 bucks an hour to poor people- that would cut into their tens of millions in profits."

Disgusting!

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/26/opinion/a-living-wage-long-overdue.html

Donate now.

2011-12-27T17:43:00.000-08:00

My stock pick for 2011.

2011-12-02T11:55:00.000-08:00

I like sprint, a lot.
The reason:
Apple is gonna save their asses

For the first time in years they have added new subscribers, and they are the only player that offers unlimited data at such a cheap price.

unlimited sprint

I bought the 2013 JAN 2.50 strike.
Why not just own it outright?

You can get more for your money with the 2.50 LEAPS, they go for around .80 cents, but you can put in an order limit for .60 cents and hope for a fill.

How high could this stock could go?
S&P has a 5 dollar price target for the next 12 months- I believe it could go higher. Sprint got the 4s exactly when jobs died, and if the iPhone was going to sell before his death, you know that after he passed, people have put this product on their short must have list that for xmas.

You can hear the cash registers working overtime once S got the iPhone, think of all those new contracts.

“The launch of this iconic device resulted in Sprint’s best ever day of sales in retail, web and telesales for a device family in Sprint history. The response to this device by current and new customers has surpassed initial expectations. The iPhone is expected to be accretive for Sprint, and iPhone users are expected to be among Sprint’s most profitable customers.”

The money is rolling in!

The problem with S; before the iPhone there was zero subscriber growth, and too much debt. They still have a lot of debt, but- soon, they are going to have a lot of cash to pay it down.

Another caveat, if the iPhone 5 is garbage, If no one buys the iPhone 5, sprint goes bankrupt.

I also like Sprint as a cheap and indirect way to gain some exposure to Apple stock.

Since Sprint had to commit 20billion on Apple- the two company’s fates are intertwined for the time being.
Give Apple credit, they were like- you want the iPhone- that will be 20B please. Damn!
If S sells all of those phones the incurred debt will be paid back.

Once Sprint finally got the iPhone, customers began to voluntarily switch from At&t and Verizion- the Sprint unlimited data plan is a steal.
If they can take market share from At&t and Verizon, S can become a big player and a real rival.

They bet it all on the iPhone, to put this in the proper perspective, the 20billion they committed to this deal is worth almost triple Sprint’s current market cap.

Illinois workers pay taxes to their employers, not to the state. read on.

2011-11-28T10:12:00.000-08:00

If that headline had you confused- here it is again.
Some companies in Illinois have convinced the government to let them pocket their workers taxes.

In other words, if you work for one of these companies, the taxes that are deduced from every paycheck don’t go into the governments coffers- they go to the company you work for.

Tax dollars that would normally flow into the state treasury to pay for education and other necessary state services never make it there- instead these taxes go towards CEO bonuses. The corporations that get these sweet deals get to keep the money from their employees that would normally go to the state free and clear.

Why would the government agree to this?

The Illinois government was desperate to keep companies in state, so they went looking for a solution that could reward the job creators.

Usually states offer tax incentives, to entice companies to stay, trouble is- these companies either pay zero state taxes, or the minimal amount they pay on taxes weren't enough of an incentive to stick around.

The Illinois government knew that if it had to write a large check to these companies to stay in state, it would look ugly. Some might call it a kickback, others might say it was extortion.

Either way, the solution was to let the businesses retain worker paid for taxes as they were generated.

Sounds like the people that work for these companies, aren't getting necessary services for their tax dollars. You know, little things, like police, fire departments, roads, schools. Oh well, who needs the police anyway. Better that those tax dollars contribute to the corporations profits. Call me cynical, but it sounds like the workers are actually paying their employers for the privilege of having a job.

funny that, i thought the job creators were supposed to pay employees.
call this what you will, but this isn't capitalism, it isn't a free market.

If this continues- you need to know that it isn't a zero sum game.
As the federal government cuts back financial aid and subsidies to states, it will starve the states of revenue.

Every single republican running for president wants to eliminate capitals gains taxes, and corporate taxes.
If they do that, the states will have to raise tax rates on corporations. Businesses will threaten to move from one state with high taxes, to a state with lower taxes. Finally, when the tax rate is zero in every single state, the job creators will still demand larger and larger kickbacks.

When that isn't enough if an incentive- what then?

read more here.
you can view the story here.

Paying the corporate overseers for the privilege of having a job, sounds like feudalism doesn't it?

Admittedly, I was slow to catch on; but if you look at those on the far right, namely the Koch brothers, Cain, Perry, Bachman, and Paul Ryan, they all pay lip service the Constitution, to freedom, but- what they really want- is to make us all serfs!

If we are the serfs, who would the feudal lords be?

Call what the far right believe in- feudalism, corporatism, fascism- it doesn't matter, what does matter is that they do not believe in democracy.

CNBC: Is this Michelle Caruso Cabrera? Happier days.

2011-11-28T10:09:00.000-08:00

Many people seem to think this is her- I'm not so sure.
I report- you decide.

Fall Reading and Cookbooks.

Just a little PSA, As far as Michelle Bachman goes.

2011-11-21T13:30:00.000-08:00

Is there anyone that lies more than Michelle Bachman?
Every time Bachman opens her mouth, I am amazed at the veracity of lies that spew from the bowels of GOPSatan.

Take a look at her stats from politifact.

Egads, at least fifty percent of all of her statements are either mostly false, or entirely false.
Keep in mind; this is with a generous splattering of mostly true’s from a site with an obvious rightwing bent. Many believe politifact has to distort facts in order to grade republicans with some “mostly true” statements.

When it comes to the left however, they really go out of their way to find a minor technicality when they check a democratic quote they grade as a “mostly false” talking point.

Newt could potentially destroy Obama at the debates.

2011-11-21T13:27:00.000-08:00

Newt is an obnoxious bully and he would dismantle Obama.

Out of all the potential matchups, I think Newt is the only one that is going to throw Obama off his game in the debates.

If you think I’m wrong, ask yourself this: Is Obama Milquetoast, or does he bring the heat?
Now image him arguing with a cantankerous, lying, bullying, blowhard.
Newt would eat Obama’s lunch, and what’s Obama gonna do about it?
No one else running for pres would present a challenge to Obama in the debates, but Newt is dangerous.

Before you dismiss this outright- consider this.

Many consider Newt to be a carbon copy of Cheney or McCain, this isn't true, they both had uncontrollable rage, but they were unable to express that rage in a cogent way.

Newt is a much bigger and polished bully than most.

McCain would just snarl, and grumble. Newt is much more lucid with his lies, he will be able bash Obama with his snake oil bottle in the fox news tradition.

Don't get me wrong, i despise Newt, but if you watch him at the debates, you will see that he will be able to go after Obama's weak points.

No one else on that stage would get the better of Obama, but Newt gives me pause.

They all lie, but they don't have the oratory skills that Newt has. Neither Cheney nor McCain posses the ability to convince millions of Americans that the BS they spew is intellectually driven- Newt has this ability .

Newt is Full of BS, but he can sell it by pretending his is an intellectual.

Newt is a lying thug and a bully with oratory skill, Obama has no defense against someone with this skill set.

Does newt bully the moderators? Do they back off when he does?
Does Obama stand up to bullies or does he capitulate?
Did Obama earn his Compromiser-in-Chief moniker?

Ask yourself this: if you had face-down a bully, would you take Newt or Obama?

Make no mistake, Newt is slime, but Obama can't debate with a snakelike bully.

Say what you will, if it makes you feel any better, shoot the messenger (me) if you will. None of this will change the facts.
Has Obama taken on the Tea Party bully on his own? Has he put the Tea Party in its place?
If it wasn’t for auxiliary support from Elizabeth Warren and the Occupy movement, Obama would be flailing even worse than he was during the debt ceiling fiasco.
This man doesn’t know how to deal with bullies. Newt, unlike Bush / Cheney / McCain / Perry can intimidate, while he gets his Fox news talking point across. Obama can’t counter a petite Fox news talking point with a 4 paragraph refutation, which cites stats, figures and facts in its defense.

One last note.
Just because Obama did well in the democratic debates, that doesn't mean he will be able to hold his own against Newt.

Just remember, Hilary Clinton and Edwards were saintly truth tellers compared to the current crop of GOP candidates.

Hilary and Edwards kept it civilized and the democratic debates were intellectual at their core.

Obama's weakness is Fox News / tea party talking points. and no one at the GOP debates is better at conveying those lies than Newt.

Mittens is a wimp, Bachman is possessed, Cain / Perry, sigh... can they even remember those three line talking points?
Newt is the only one that can effectively bash Obama with lies.

Fed chair Alan Greenspan Recommends, cutting taxes on the rich- to grow the debt.

2011-11-19T08:28:00.000-08:00

Greenspan Suggested Cutting Taxes on the Wealthy to Increase Debt so the Fed Wouldn’t “Lose Control of Monetary Policy”

Back in January 2001, just as George W. Bush was entering office, Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan was worrying; If the U.S. totally paid off its debt, it would no longer need to sell off Treasury bonds to borrow money. To avoid that scenario, Greenspan ended up endorsing tax cuts as a way of reducing surpluses. The Bush administration happily obliged

read the entire story on NPR.

life after debt, secret fed document on the debt.
Don't let anyone tell you taxes on the rich won't help to pay down the debt. Greenspan favored Tax Cuts To Reduce the Surplus and increase the debt. If we tax the rich, we can restore fiscal sanity.

Opponents of tax cuts are dismayed that Federal Reserve Board Chairman Alan Greenspan supports reductions in the federal tax burden. His reasoning implies that paying off the national debt is not a good idea.

read more here.

max baucus is not a democrat- stop calling him one.

2011-11-15T12:37:00.000-08:00

The mainstream media loves to denigrate the democratic party- they castigate the dems as ineffectual and weak, they cite high disapproval numbers for dems as proof that this is a conservative country.

That’s only one side of the story.

The popular narrative is that Obama had democratic majorities in the house and the senate, but with max baucus, joe Lieberman, and ben nelson on your side, who needs enemies.

There were 54 blue dogs in the house, after the 2010 elections the blue dogs got shellacked and only 26 were left standing.

The voters mistakenly thought the blue dogs and the party they were pretending to represent were the problem, so they replaced them with tea party zealots.
Ironically, they hated the republican ideology that the blue dogs practiced, yet they replaced them with people that were even more to the right!

On this site people have become despondent to the Democratic Party. And one of the main reasons is the blue dog congress members and the DINO senators that have sabotaged the party and this country.

The media is all too happy to pretend that Baucus and Nelson represent the Democratic Party; nothing could be further from the truth.
Putting Baucus on the super committee was an affront to all liberals- but when he compromises or when he pretends to bow to republican demands because he had no choice, the media will spin the tale of democratic weakness that ultimately lead to entitlement cuts.

If DINO’s go for cuts to entitlements, and no taxes on the rich, voters will ask:
“What’s the point of the democratic party?- they are just as bad, maybe worse than the republicans.”

The blue dogs / DINO’s have sabotaged and diminished the party; it’s time we called them out for it.

We can make a difference, since Erin Burnet made a mockery of Occupy, her ratings have plummeted.
David Gergory, is a shill, the sooner we get the mainstream to understand that, the better.

DINO’s aren’t democrats- next time they screw the dems over- it has to be understood that they are right wing extremists in disguise.

Compare and contrast.

2011-11-10T09:50:00.000-08:00

this clip speaks for itself- it makes a sharp point.

How can an American watching the republican candidates not weep for the country.
The republican debates are a race to the bottom- they spout meaningless, mindless, soundbites wrapped in a vitriolic wrapper meant to appeal to baser instincts.

There isn't even one republican at the debates that can compare to ANY of the democratic nominees back in 08.

Politics aside, the entire democratic field wipes the floor with these republican baboons.

Who really owns the debt?

2011-11-08T10:54:00.000-08:00

Spiegel

Time to put another republican lie to bed.
As you can see from this chart, the bulk of debt and deficit load belongs to Bush.

Take note, The Federal fiscal year runs from OCT 1 to Sept 30.
The day Obama took office, he was running on the Bush budget from Oct 1 2010 (the previous year), till Sept 20 2011. The debt accumulation during this first year in office belongs to the prior congress and president.

Further, it’s important to remember that a large portion of the debt Obama inherited can be blamed on the recession.

How much of this debt is due to the recession? It’s hard to quantify, but it’s a significant amount.
No matter who inherited the White House in 2009, the debt was going to go parabolic.

If you look at the debt with a critical eye, the facts are what matter, just the facts.
The deficit and the debt were going to explode during this massive recession.
You can’t rip the housing sector out of the economy without a colossal hit to collected tax revenues.

The recession led to an increase of unprofitable + bankrupt corporations + Job loss = decreased tax receipts.
Couple the above with an increase of unemployment benefits + assistance programs to help larger numbers of out of work citizens= a guaranteed explosion in the debt and the deficit.
Bake in lower consumer spending in 2009 and 2010 to the overall equation = less demand = fewer hires = even less tax revenues.

Blame Obama if you want- but you are being intellectually dishonest if you do. The debt and the deficit were going to increase no matter who was in charge.
The bottom line:
The bipartisan recession owns a very large part of this debt.

If the stimulus created or saved jobs, even temporarily- it cost less than the 800billion price tag.
There is way too much partisanship on issues in this day and age.
We need more logic, not hatred and biased taking points.

Illinois workers pay taxes to their employers, not to the state. read on.

2011-11-08T08:47:00.000-08:00

CNBC: Is this Michelle Caruso Cabrera?

2011-11-04T13:46:00.000-07:00

Many people seem to think this is her- I'm not so sure.
I report- you decide.
Fall Reading and Cookbooks.

Need a balance transfer?

2011-11-04T12:57:00.000-07:00

This is the card for you.

21 Months at zero percent interest is the best deal available, anywhere.
If you don't need a balance transfer, take the cash and invest on some I-bonds which are yielding over 3% at the moment.

Massive income inequity.

2011-11-03T13:19:00.000-07:00

These graphics speak for themselves.

There are two simple ways to fix this attack on the middle class.
Tax the rich- do it right away!
Raise the Minimum wage!

‘Zombie’ Properties coming back to life.

2011-11-03T08:45:00.000-07:00

Is it finally time to buy that vacant property so that it can be rented back out?

Open question to all:

I’m frozen when it comes to RE, do i want to purchase a cheap property to rent, or should i put that same amount of money into a few REIT ETF’s?
Instead of a mortgage, one can purchase a REIT ETF on margin. In lieu of monthly mortgage payments, pay down the margin monthly.

In your opinion- you think a REIT ETF investment purchased today, can outperform purchasing a rental unit over the next 30 years?

What kind of REIT ETF do you favor (equity, mortgage etc)- and do you favor a REIT ETF over an actual property?

What say you?

*I prefer a REIT ETF's over any individual REIT- less risk, more diversification.

Gov cuomo would rather tax the poor instead of taxing the millionaires.

2011-11-01T12:48:00.000-07:00

Anyone that lives in New York City know that the mta is going to jack rates up by at least 30% in the next three years.
The mta needs serious funding for new operations and maintenance over the next few years.

Since the federal government, and the New York state government decided to cut back on funding for the MTA, the MTA had no choice but to raise rates 17% last year. Add that 17% hike with another 30% increase over the next two to three years and that is some serious pain for minimum wage workers.

Instead of taxing millionaires tax one single penny, the Gov is going to tax the poor and the middle class a pound.

These massive MTA hikes are nothing more than painful regressive taxes on the working poor and the middle class.

Cuomo got a lot of good will with his support via the gay marriage issue, but that doesn't forgive his plans on taxing the poor instead of the rich!

I said it before, and i will say it again: millionaires aren't going to leave their Manhattan penthouses and Brooklyn townhouses to move to the suburbs.

New York state and city have become more regressive due to Cuomo and Bloomberg. The Middle class in New York pay the highest state and local taxes as a percentage of their income in the entire nation!

The rich in NY were getting a good deal even with the millionaires tax in place, now they are getting a free ride- courtesy of Cuomo and Bloomberg.

Cuomo needs to be shamed for this disgusting move.

Silver and Gold on the move.

2011-10-28T13:43:00.000-07:00

Gold ended the week at $1747.20 per ounce while silver posted gains of 0.3% to finish at $35.29 per ounce.

On the week, gold rallied for approx $105 or 6.3%, while silver futures surged $3.65 or 11.5%.

Both metals had fallen over 30% during the recent market swoon but they are climbing back, silver especially has had an impressive move.

I remain bullish on both for the foreseeable future and i sell calls or puts on them as the market dictates.

Crude oil futures, closed at $93.32 per barrel.

Finally, Natural gas rallied for 4.1% to close at $3.92.
Natural gas Futures were aided by cold snap that has hit the east coast. I play nat gas with the ETF UNG, I believe natural gas it is a great multi-year play at these cheap prices. Out of all commodities natural gas might be the only one that hasn't rallied, until now that is.

The poor already pay more than their fair share in taxes.

2011-10-28T13:34:00.000-07:00

Over and over we need to hear lies from the right that half of the country doesn’t pay taxes.
Over and over again we need to dispute the tripe that the right-wingers pollute the airwaves with.

-As the federal government has cut back on aid to states, the states have given less to local cities and townships.
-As the federal spigot of tax revenues dries up, and cutbacks are enacted, the states have had to take matters into their own hands for funding.
Here is a simple example of a hidden tax that the poor pay when the government refuses to progressively tax the rich.

Across the nation, funding that would normally come from taxes for mass transit has been severely cutback. The public transit systems have had to raise fares in most of the country to compensate for that lost revenue. Fares have gone up more than 10% in almost every instance.

For someone making the minimum wage, a 10% increase on most major MTA platforms is a 2% tax on their gross paycheck.
Half of the citizens that work in the US make less than 27 grand a year, that same increase in Mass Transit fares is equivalent to 1% tax increase.

The mass transit increase (tax) is highly regressive, the poor and the struggling pay dearly for it.

Sales tax.

Many local cities have raised rates .25 to .50% without much fanfare. For the median wage and minimum wage worker, these seemingly tiny increases can cost 50 to 100 bucks extra every year- To someone making 15k or 20k a year that isn’t chump change.

Local, and state sales taxes, have either gone up recently or they are planning to raise them all across the nation. As the federal government starves the states, the states stave local cities and towns. While it has become almost impossible to raise taxes on the wealthiest citizens on a federal, state or city level, regressive sales and severe hikes are the only places that governments can go to take in revenue.

This is a sick game that the rightwing is playing, as they give tax breaks to the wealthy on the federal or state level, the cities have to raises taxes to make up for the shortfalls. Local municipalities and they aren’t able to change the income tax structure as that usually requires legislation by state senators and governors, many of which are tea party extremists, and they are playing the same games that the GOP is playing in Washington.

Most people have no idea what their state and local tax rates charge. Many, have no idea, how regressive state and local taxes eat away at their purchasing power. Coupled with sales taxes, and hidden taxes such as the mass transit fare increase, and you have a recipe for disaster.

The bottom line:
When the federal government refuses to tax the rich, the states take matters into their own hands by taxing the poor to make up the difference.
For most of the working citizens and the poor- that 20% increase on the bus fare, means you paying 1 to 2% more in taxes on your gross pay, just to get to work.
If the government was able to tax the rich just a tiny bit more, there would be no need to raise fares / taxes on the poor.

I just gave two examples of hidden taxes there are plenty others. While taxes on the rich aren’t raised the states and cities have had to become creative in generation new forms on taxation, the problem is they are all incredibly regressive.

For a minimum wage worker, that 1% tax on mass transit, and that 1% increase in sales tax can break the bank. When you add these surcharges (and others) to state and local taxes, even those that don’t’ directly pay federal income taxes, pay indirect federal taxes. Taken all together, the poor are paying close to 20% of their incomes in taxes. 20% is way too high for a minimum wage worker, especially when you consider the effective top tax rate for a millionaire, falls somewhere between 15 and 35% of their income.

Take that 20% tax rate; couple it with increased costs for rent, food and other necessities- you now know why we have a class of citizen called, -the working poor-, and know you know why their numbers are growing.

One last note:
If the federal government were to impose an income tax of say, 9% on the working poor, they wouldn’t be able to pay their expenses.
Soon, they may not even be able to afford the bus ride that gets them there.
Put another way; why even bother to work if you can’t afford to put a roof over your head?