[b]NEW VOTE ON "BAILOUT" It MUST be stopped!

[LEADDRAFT]

Pay Special attention to Section 112

SEC. 112. COORDINATION WITH FOREIGN AUTHORITIES
4 AND CENTRAL BANKS.
5 The Secretary shall coordinate, as appropriate, with
6 foreign financial authorities and central banks to work to7
ward the establishment of similar programs by such au8
thorities and central banks. To the extent that such for9
eign financial authorities or banks hold troubled assets as
10 a result of extending financing to financial institutions
11 that have failed or defaulted on such financing, such trou12
bled assets qualify for purchase under section 101.

This is what a AFP Artical came across the wire a couple hours ago..

LONDON (AFP) — The United States has a responsibility to the world and not just itself to sort out its teetering economy, Prime Minister Gordon Brown said Tuesday.

But Brown, disappointed that US lawmakers have rejected a 700-billion-dollar Wall Street bailout plan, said it was not yet time to apportion blame for the global crisis.

"What people want to know is, on top of these problems, can we get under control ... these problems in the financial system," Brown told Sky News and BBC television.

"They started in America, they've got to be sorted out. I believe that the Americans have come to realise that they have a responsibility to the rest of the world as well as to themselves.

"In Britain, we will do whatever is necessary; however it is necessary to sort out the problems in the system."

He added: "There will be a time for sorting out the blame and clearly what happened in America has got to be analysed for it's effect on Britain but this is the time to roll up our sleeves and sort out the system."

FOLKS THIS "BAILOUT BILL" was never meant for "Main Street" nor America, it's to bail out FOREIGN BANKS!!!!

The video, (linked below), is the Proof!
CALL!!!!!
fax!!
E-mail!
your elected REPS (Senators)Tomorrow!


http://www.cnbc.com/id/15840232?video=873682522&play=1

[LEADDRAFT]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GqIFoBXGizc

[surfsidesativa]

Dodd, Barney Frank, Pelosi, Boehner, McConnel and a bunch of sissies that get offended by a speach have pieced together this bill. Heck, even george bush is trying to cram this down our throats. With so many great minds behind this thing, how could it possibly fail?:--|

[wolfva]

The origenal bill was called a 'crap sandwich'. It failed. So, the Senate (switching around the rules a bit) shoveled a bunch of pork onto it and passed it, then sent it to Congress for a vote. Ok, let's get serious here. If you take a crap sandwich and sprinkle truffle oil, put on a few slices of Wagyu beef, maybe a little fois gras, then what do you have? You STILL HAVE A CRAP SANDWICH!!!! Just one that costs a LOT more. And THAT is what we have here. They loaded that bill with so much effing pork it should be oinking. And here's the funny thing...they want 700 BILLION dollars. So, to get it...they PROMISE TAX CUTS??? Ok, maybe I'm wrong here, but if you dish out a bunch of money while not taking in as much, that usually isn't considered a good thing, right? Hell, the government can barely pay its bills as it is and now they're going to throw us 700 billion bucks further into the hole and expect us to believe we're getting tax cuts to?

Btw, just how much is 700 billion? Well, lessee...an aircraft carrier costs something like 8 billion dollars to build. You do the math.

I'm just praying that Congress votes down this bill.

[J_Lannon]

The origenal bill was called a 'crap sandwich'. It failed. So, the Senate (switching around the rules a bit) shoveled a bunch of pork onto it and passed it, then sent it to Congress for a vote. Ok, let's get serious here. If you take a crap sandwich and sprinkle truffle oil, put on a few slices of Wagyu beef, maybe a little fois gras, then what do you have? You STILL HAVE A CRAP SANDWICH!!!! Just one that costs a LOT more. And THAT is what we have here. They loaded that bill with so much effing pork it should be oinking. And here's the funny thing...they want 700 BILLION dollars. So, to get it...they PROMISE TAX CUTS??? Ok, maybe I'm wrong here, but if you dish out a bunch of money while not taking in as much, that usually isn't considered a good thing, right? Hell, the government can barely pay its bills as it is and now they're going to throw us 700 billion bucks further into the hole and expect us to believe we're getting tax cuts to?

Btw, just how much is 700 billion? Well, lessee...an aircraft carrier costs something like 8 billion dollars to build. You do the math.

I'm just praying that Congress votes down this bill.


Congress votes on it today?

[wolfva]

Yep. Which is a reverse of how things are supposed to be, mainly the House passes a bill up to the Senate, not the other way around. But the Lords of the Senate decided to revese that rule in the hopes that, by passing it, they'll convince those little people in the House of Representatives to toe the line like good little servants. Meanwhile, Lord Dokku sets the next pieces into play....

[sprtsracer]

Congress votes on it today?

Actually, the House MAY vote on it Friday (tomorrow). The House can only consider the EXACT bill as sent by the Senate....no changes. If enough people call their Reps, there is a good chance it won't pass. Then, they'll have to start from scratch.

[Too Busy]

Here is what to do.
1. go to Dave Ramsey's web site www.daveramsey.com
2. click on the TAKE ACTION NOW link
3. READ the COMMON SENSE FIX
3.A. If you agree with the idea, follow the instructions and send the common sense fix to your Representatives.
4. Let them know that as a taxpayer you will not forget how they voted on this TURD.

If you don't agree with the plan, feel free to bash me here on forum.

[hic-lock]

Bump - Too Busy's post

[Mark G]

Here is what to do.
1. go to Dave Ramsey's web site www.daveramsey.com
2. click on the TAKE ACTION NOW link
3. READ the COMMON SENSE FIX
3.A. If you agree with the idea, follow the instructions and send the common sense fix to your Representatives.
4. Let them know that as a taxpayer you will not forget how they voted on this TURD.

If you don't agree with the plan, feel free to bash me here on forum.

Not bashing (well maybe a little :D )
Dave's right about one thing- eliminating the capital gains tax is a great idea- if you're rich enough to let your money earn your "income".

I'm not about to sign onto anything that allows a pass to those wealthy enough to let their money be their income provider, and then allowing them a pass on taxes on top of it.

If I have to pay taxes on the income I earn thru hardwork and sweat, why should someone sitting around letting their money do the work get a pass?

[Too Busy]

Not bashing (well maybe a little :D )
Dave's right about one thing- eliminating the capital gains tax is a great idea- if you're rich enough to let your money earn your "income".

I'm not about to sign onto anything that allows a pass to those wealthy enough to let their money be their income provider, and then allowing them a pass on taxes on top of it.

If I have to pay taxes on the income I earn thru hardwork and sweat, why should someone sitting around letting their money do the work get a pass?

Eliminate the capital gains tax and you won't be able to keep money out of the stock market. You won't be able to keep money out of small businesses. It would be the single biggest economic boost you can imagine.

You don't have to be rich to benefit. Don't get me wrong, the rich will benfit from this, but so will you and I.

I don't mind the bashing. I wouldn't post my opinions if I did.;)

[Mark G]

Eliminate the capital gains tax and you won't be able to keep money out of the stock market. You won't be able to keep money out of small businesses. It would be the single biggest economic boost you can imagine.

You don't have to be rich to benefit. Don't get me wrong, the rich will benfit from this, but so will you and I.

I don't mind the bashing. I wouldn't post my opinions if I did.;)

Call me skeptical, but I see a lot of folks giving up their "regular" jobs to become day traders, folks ill-equipped to run businesses giving it a go (hey, tax free money over here, come n get it :D), and of course financial institutions lending out more "easy money" only this time it won't be for home loans ;). You give people incentive to avoid "income" taxes, and there will certainly be a number of them that "attempt" to take you up on that offer.

BTW- Credit crunch ?? , what credit crunch?? I just go off the phone with Citifinancial, who called practically begging me to take out a loan. I indicated I didn't think this was the right "time" considering everything going on, they assured me everything was fine (they just picked up the failed Wachovia) and wouldn't I please, please, reconsider. :popcorn:

[Too Busy]

Call me skeptical, but I see a lot of folks giving up their "regular" jobs to become day traders, folks ill-equipped to run businesses giving it a go (hey, tax free money over here, come n get it :D), and of course financial institutions lending out more "easy money" only this time it won't be for home loans ;). You give people incentive to avoid "income" taxes, and there will certainly be a number of them that "attempt" to take you up on that offer.

BTW- Credit crunch ?? , what credit crunch?? I just go off the phone with Citifinancial, who called practically begging me to take out a loan. I indicated I didn't think this was the right "time" considering everything going on, they assured me everything was fine (they just picked up the failed Wachovia) and wouldn't I please, please, reconsider. :popcorn:

I don't doubt that quite a few people would give it a go. Hopefully they'd stop before losing their ...... well you know what I mean.

It's okay by me either way. If they flood business with capital and make money in the process, then cool. If they make bad picks and lose money, well tough titty said the kitty.

I don't mind if stupid people lose money. I don't mind if stupid companies go bankrupt.... It's kind of an incentive to make good choices and turn a profit. What I mind is Uncle Sam taking money from me to prop up stupid companies instead of letting them fail. When that happens we have given up on our way of life and become another socialist state.

As for the credit crunch; I'm with you. I got home yesterday and there were either five or 6 offers for easy money in my mailbox. 2 from Citibank, 1 from Bank of America. I don't remember where the others originated. There isn't a credit crunch for people with the means to repay the loan.

GWB getting on the TV and telling us all that there won't be money available to take out a student loan or buy a car is NOTHING but fear mongering. Sorry, I don't want this to become an attack on GWB.... that's not my intent. That was just a calculated move to convince people to swallow this insane package. Last week >90% of the phone calls and e-mails to our elected officials on both sides of the aisle were telling them that if they voted for the bailout bill, they would be sent home the next time they came up for re-election.

After that ridiculous speech the numbers got closer to 50-50 for and against.

[Too Busy]

To ALL
Sorry about the rant. I'm just so PO'd about the bailout, errrr I mean "financial rescue plan".

Evidently, according to the Senate if you attach enough PORK to a TURD, it becomes easier to swallow. GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR

[Mark G]

Some good points there Too Busy.


Hmm, wonder if I could convince my employer that I don't work for them, but rather I "invest" my time with them, and any payment rendered should be considered "capital gains" on my investment. :D

[hic-lock]

If you’re rich enough to let your money earn your income. Come on, that sounds like class envy to me.

How about if you’re smart enough to let your money earn your income?

I wont rant on, I’ll just repost this www.daveramsey.com (http://www.daveramsey.com)

[Mark G]

Come on, that sounds like class envy to me.

How about if you’re smart enough to let your money earn your income?

I wont rant on, I’ll just repost this www.daveramsey.com (http://www.daveramsey.com)


No- if you want me to be more direct- it's nothing more than a proposed tax cut for the rich. It's about being fair, not envy.

Now if you would, say, offer tax cuts on all income, not just capital gains, I would be more on board.

One person has a decent job and makes $100,000/yr for his hard work.

Someone else let's his cash earn him the same $100,000/yr. - but, let me understand this- the guy who doesn't actually work pays no taxes, while the employed fellow does ???

BS :--|

[Too Busy]

No- if you want me to be more direct- it's nothing more than a proposed tax cut for the rich. It's about being fair, not envy.

Now if you would, say, offer tax cuts on all income, not just capital gains, I would be more on board.

One person has a decent job and makes $100,000/yr for his hard work.

Someone else let's his cash earn him the same $100,000/yr. - but, let me understand this- the guy who doesn't actually work pays no taxes, while the employed fellow does ???

BS :--|


It depends on how his $100k makes money for him.

If he's investing ie buying and selling stock he is in essence placing his already earned cash at risk. He did pay income tax on the money when he earned it. Eliminating the capital gains tax would provide an incentive to investthat money instead of placing it in a CD (certificate of depression), money market account, or a mattress.

If his money is sitting in a CD or money market or sitting idle in stocks that pay dividens, he would add the dividends to his earned income. That part isn't in the proposed changes. We would all keep paying taxes on our dividends.

Right now one of my mutual funds likes to make portfolio changes frequently. They are giving me a really good return on my investment, but I get hit hard on capital gains taxes on that fund investment.

[hic-lock]

Actually it’s a proposed tax cut for anyone making a gain on capital. You could legitimately have a gain or a loss on any capital.

Lets see here, If someone makes money from selling a bond, or a tackle shop they don’t deserve a tax cut? This kind of thing should not be frowned upon. These “cuts” make wealth more reachable for all of us. Also, I’d like to be one of those evil rich some day…:D

Is it really about being “fair” or about everyone being equal?:cool:

[Mark G]

Actually it’s a proposed tax cut for anyone making a gain on capital. You could legitimately have a gain or a loss on any capital.

Lets see here, If someone makes money from selling a bond, or a tackle shop they don’t deserve a tax cut? This kind of thing should not be frowned upon. These “cuts” make wealth more reachable for all of us. Also, I’d like to be one of those evil rich some day…:D

Is it really about being “fair” or about everyone being equal?:cool:

In the analogy I laid out both individuals had increased their disposable "wealth" by $100,000. Essentially that already indicates that they are operating from a level or "equal" playing field.

I can't see forcing the individual that is "employed" to fork over $28,000 + of his earnings in "income tax", while telling the investor he can have a pass on his entire $100,000 of earnings. That's a huge difference in final "spendable" earnings. Hardly "fair" I would say.



He did pay income tax on the money when he earned it.

Only if he in fact "earned" it ;)

I think it is semantics to argue one should recieve a pass on taxes because of the method employed to increase wealth.

Nor should one be allowed a pass because they are taking "risks" with their money. That is why it's called capital gains (loss).

The Internal Revenue Code defines gross income broadly (with exceptions) as "income from whatever source derived" and note that this includes income derived from gains from investments- however does not include "unrealized" gains.

To specifically eliminate certain types of income from taxation (in this case capital gains) would be to introduce obvious favortism to the specific group that is capable of earning their sole "income" from said source.


This is about fairness not equality. If a CEO earns a salary of $500,000, he should not be treated worse (or better) than the investor who earns the same amount of money by other means.

[kingfish]

All income is taxed. The capital gains tax is less than that of ordinary income tax. The reason being, to give those with wealth, incentive to invest that wealth, so it can benifit more people, ie. by way of jobs, small business ventures, etc.

Less than 1 percent control 90% of the wealth, give them no incentive and their would be no reason to risk their position. Now us poor broke slobs, got to go to work or starve, assuming you want to improve. Now you can just sign up fo govment benifits, and get on the big tit. You want more after tax income, get rid of gov pork, waste, what ever you prefer to call it. Back to that one percent of the population controlling the wealth, give all their wealth to every tax payer, divide it among them evenly, in five years that one percent will have all the money back.

We could just go socialist, but i would rather the chance at the big enchilada. Wonder why so many people want a piece of the good ole USA? The simple answer, you can get rewarded for your work efforts here, more fairly than anywhere else in the world.

One of the greatest vehicles to economic security in this country, is for a homeowner to recieve a tax bye on his personal home, if and when a sale is ever made. You work your lifetime pouring a huge percentage of your income into home ownership. At some point, the sale of your home is not taxed except on the capital gain. Your dollar is worth half or a quarter of what it was, while paying for your residence. So in reality, you are just keeping up with inflation, but you have a sizable amount of money to retire with.

The incentive to work and pay for your home is huge in promoting the average Joe to work his ass off, and get ahead, here again assuming you want to be productive.

Capital Gains tax encentives are necessary, for our system. Consider this, income tax has existed in this country for less than 100 years. How was it possible to run this country for the first couple of hundred years with out the income tax? Pure and simple, government is wasteful, and big government is, well........

As far as the bailout goes, the money is to purchase mortgages. Those mortgages are tied to land and homes. The majority of those mortgages will work as planned and some will be forclosed on, but the colateral will be sold and the losses minimumized by the private sector. Loosers and winners in our capitalistic society. Where i see the problem, give the politicos a trillion dollar check, they will skim half for their special interest, before it ever benifits the system.

[Mark G]

Some fair statements Wayne, but I'll add a couple of clarifications.

The capital gains tax rate an individual pays is usually (depends on short or long term classification) less than the rate related to the specific individual's ordinary income tax rate.

It isn't black and white enough to say capital gains rates are always lower than oridnary income rates, and that statement is only an applicable comparison to the indiviual's rates, not the rates other individuals may pay.

I don't have an issue with incentives to encourage investment, but a lot of plans that want to simply eliminate the capital gains tax altogether are not necessarily in everyones' best interest.

[Too Busy]

Doesn't matter anymore. The house just voted to sell our future..... I mean saves us from ourselves.... I mean approve a financial rescue plan that will save the whole US economy.

PFFFFFT