Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2011/10/16
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Ken, "The Buffet Rule:" Haven't you been following the news? Robert On Oct 16, 2011, at 7:16 PM, Ken Carney wrote: > On 10/16/2011 6:33 PM, George Lottermoser wrote: >> On Oct 16, 2011, at 6:07 PM, Ken Carney<kcarney1 at cox.net> wrote: >> >>> Wonder how all these occupiers were able to get off work for so >>> long? >> Many of the Milwaukee "Occupiers" (a one Saturday event) were >> "laid off" or otherwise unemployed; part of that 9.1% as well as >> the 99%. I spoke with quite a few degreed professionals with 20 >> plus year professional careers who have been unable to find "any" >> work for 4 to 12 months. Others have been forced into early >> retirement. Others are serious students who can no longer finance >> their educations; or find employment. The stories are many and >> sad. Minorities in Milwaukee have more than 4 times that 9% >> unemployment rate. And those rates do not include the people who >> have simply given up on the prospect of finding work. >> >> Regards, George >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Leica Users Group. >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >> > I hear you. It also relates to Richard's comments about > corporations hoarding cash and banks not lending...the reason is > that there aren't as many opportunities for investment now. The > reverse, actually. The question is, what can our government do > about it? The government doesn't create jobs, except in a > temporary and largely wasteful sense. Large CEO salaries and taxes > on the rich are irrelevant - the most draconian measures would not > put a small dent in the debt. What is needed, IMHO, is competent > fiscal administration, something not present now (IMHO). I have > now escalated into a rant, which needs at least a couple of > constructive suggestions. As a tax adviser, I will probably be > excommunicated for this one, but I think the current policies > regarding transfer of intangible assets offshore should be > revisited (Google, Cisco et al.). All that is happening there is > that the income escaping U.S. tax must be reinvested in another > offshore business, else it will become income subject to U.S. tax. > So, the U.S. tax break is building industries and infrastructure in > other countries. A U.S. citizen is taxable on worldwide income, > now matter where earned. Why should it be different for a > corporate business? A second suggestion is to stop U.S. military > intervention in hopeless causes, e.g., Afghanistan. OK, a third > bonus suggestion would be some way to eliminate federal pork > spending, a lost cause I know. > > Lastly, I have numerous clients who have taxable income in excess > of $1 million. They all pay taxes at the highest rate. They are > also usually high charitable givers. Who pays taxes at a lower > rate? Two instances come to mind. One is the risk taker who is > able to take a deduction for intangible drilling costs in the > exploration for oil and natural gas, and that is a temporary > thing. The other is someone who has bitten on a tax shelter, with > blowback potential that will greatly exceed the temporary tax > savings. EOR! > > Ken > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information