Gene Frenkle Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 Do you think it is cool Soros does much the same (although perhaps to a lesser scale, not sure)? I'm not a big fan of any of these types. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bishop Hedd Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 Wow. I like em. Thanks for posting. Hey, they may be corporatist polluters but as long as they support the ballet... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 Hey, they may be corporatist polluters but as long as they support the ballet... Now you're into the ballet, are you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
....lybob Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 Bill Koch says that his brother Charles made a fortune stealing oil. Much of it from beneath Indian reservations and federal lands - places like national forests. Oil under federal lands belongs to the public. Koch Industries was the middleman – buying oil from the government at the well - then selling it to refineries. Bill Koch says that the company took more oil than it paid for by cheating on measurements. link Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bishop Hedd Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 link "Indian reservations"? No kidding? Then these pompous celibates owe me too. They are evil...a pair of Monty Burns' if you will. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
....lybob Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 "Indian reservations"? No kidding? Then these pompous celibates owe me too. They are evil...a pair of Monty Burns' if you will. Don't call them evil, except for theft, their continuous campaign against worker rights and their dumping of many different toxic wastes I'm sure they are swell fellows I mean they have obviously worked hard from a young age to stay in their fathers will. “Nobody talks more of free enterprise and competition and of the best man winning than the man who inherited his father’s store or farm.” – C. Wright Mills Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Booster4324 Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 So your thoughts are that because a few people, and I'm talking a very small percentage, may abuse the power that comes with money we should excessively tax all of the super affluent? How about we punish the ones that abuse the power. Soros and the two Koch brothers are 3 of the top 36. You may not remember, but I was talking about an estate tax to help prevent a rich daddy or mommy from creating someone like ohh the Koch brothers. Better question: the federal government takes in some two trillion a year. Why aren't they evil? Well, at least theoretically we can vote them all out. Not saying you are wrong, but it is probably even more difficult to take down a billionaire, unless there is a massive boycott. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted March 4, 2011 Share Posted March 4, 2011 Well, at least theoretically we can vote them all out. Not saying you are wrong, but it is probably even more difficult to take down a billionaire, unless there is a massive boycott. Can we vote out somebody like Alan Greenspan or The Benbernank? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Booster4324 Posted March 4, 2011 Share Posted March 4, 2011 Can we vote out somebody like Alan Greenspan or The Benbernank? Don't those appointments come from the President and coincide with the election? So, I guess in theory you could by tying it to the Presidential election. Mind you, I wish we could, but with our voters we would be more likely to get Madoff in charge... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted March 4, 2011 Share Posted March 4, 2011 Don't those appointments come from the President and coincide with the election? So, I guess in theory you could by tying it to the Presidential election. Mind you, I wish we could, but with our voters we would be more likely to get Madoff in charge... So what you're saying is that after the 1992 election, by voting for Bill Clinton Americans voted out Reagan/Bush I's Fed Chair Alan Greenspan and voted in Bill Clinton's Fed Chair Alan Greenspan? And after the 2000 election, Americans voted out Bill Clinton's Fed Chair Alan Greenspan and voted in George W Bush's Fed Chair Alan Greenspan? Then after Greenspan retired, W nominated The Benbernank. Did the 2008 election replace W's Benbernank with Obama's Benbernank? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted March 4, 2011 Share Posted March 4, 2011 Soros and the two Koch brothers are 3 of the top 36. You may not remember, but I was talking about an estate tax to help prevent a rich daddy or mommy from creating someone like ohh the Koch brothers. Oh I remember. You want to tax everyone to prevent something from happening that typically doesn't happen. I say do away with the estate tax. Much of that is wealthy that has already been taxed. However I think they should also do away with the step up in basis for certain levels. That way gains will be taxed that have not yet been taxed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Booster4324 Posted March 4, 2011 Share Posted March 4, 2011 (edited) Oh I remember. You want to tax everyone to prevent something from happening that typically doesn't happen. I say do away with the estate tax. Much of that is wealthy that has already been taxed. However I think they should also do away with the step up in basis for certain levels. That way gains will be taxed that have not yet been taxed. It is happening is the point. Are you saying increased capital gains tax? Edited March 4, 2011 by Booster4324 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted March 4, 2011 Share Posted March 4, 2011 It is happening is the point. Those three wield undue influence over the political process IMO. I would prefer they not pass that down to the next generation, but kudos for your approval of Soro's freedom to influence elections. So by limiting Soros' ability to influence elections you will be limiting many more from doing good things with their money. Kudos for you thinking the government knows better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Booster4324 Posted March 4, 2011 Share Posted March 4, 2011 (edited) So by limiting Soros' ability to influence elections you will be limiting many more from doing good things with their money. Kudos for you thinking the government knows better. Many more? I edited my post btw. I am curious what you mean about the gains bit. I am not limiting Soros' ability to wield his power, I am limiting his children's ability to do so. Edited March 4, 2011 by Booster4324 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted March 4, 2011 Share Posted March 4, 2011 It is happening is the point. Are you saying increased capital gains tax? No eliminate the step up in cost basis on inherited assets for certain levels. Right now my father could have an asset he purchased many decades ago for $500m that is now worth $1b. He passes that on to me. My cost basis is now $1b and I can turn around and sell it for $1b and pay not cap gains. And if that were a real estate asset that grew "tax deferred" all those years there would have been zero taxes paid on all those gains. Many more? I edited my post btw. I am curious what you mean about the gains bit. Yes, many more. For every George Soros there are many Bill Gates. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Booster4324 Posted March 4, 2011 Share Posted March 4, 2011 (edited) No eliminate the step up in cost basis on inherited assets for certain levels. Right now my father could have an asset he purchased many decades ago for $500m that is now worth $1b. He passes that on to me. My cost basis is now $1b and I can turn around and sell it for $1b and pay not cap gains. And if that were a real estate asset that grew "tax deferred" all those years there would have been zero taxes paid on all those gains. Yes, many more. For every George Soros there are many Bill Gates. I think I followed that. If you think that is the best method to prevent institutional wealth I am all for it. GG at one point alluded to a ladder, the lower middle class family struggling to make sure their next generation would have a step up. With the huge advantages that come with a leg up where your name alone carries weight with people of importance, yeah let's limit them a little. You are the finance guy, you pick the method. Bolded - quit exaggerating Edited March 4, 2011 by Booster4324 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted March 4, 2011 Share Posted March 4, 2011 Bolded - quit exaggerating $260b was given to charities in 2005 while $4b was spent on the 2010 mid term elections. So no I will not stop exaggerating because I'm not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Booster4324 Posted March 4, 2011 Share Posted March 4, 2011 $260b was given to charities in 2005 while $4b was spent on the 2010 mid term elections. So no I will not stop exaggerating because I'm not. Which has what to do with your contention there is many more Bill Gates than Soros when There are only 35 ahead of him and at least 2 others seem fairly evil. Are all the other 33 lily white? Of course you have yet to address my point, but we have come to expect that of you Chef, at least I have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted March 4, 2011 Share Posted March 4, 2011 Which has what to do with your contention there is many more Bill Gates than Soros when There are only 35 ahead of him and at least 2 others seem fairly evil. Are all the other 33 lily white? Of course you have yet to address my point, but we have come to expect that of you Chef, at least I have. Well seeing you were not clear regarding what you were referring to when you mentioned the top 36 I'm not sure what point I was to address. Top 36 what? 35 ahead of "him" who are you referring to. Koch, Soros, Gates. See, you're stoned again. My contention is that there is a lot more money moving to good things than being moved to try an influence elections. By a wide margin. So once again your solution is to punish everyone just in case they have a bad apple in their family tree. Once again I'll say the same thing. I have faith in people with money will do the right thing and if they feel they have a bad apple they'll restrict the amount of money that heir gets. That it NOT the government's job Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Booster4324 Posted March 4, 2011 Share Posted March 4, 2011 Well seeing you were not clear regarding what you were referring to when you mentioned the top 36 I'm not sure what point I was to address. Top 36 what? 35 ahead of "him" who are you referring to. Koch, Soros, Gates. See, you're stoned again. My contention is that there is a lot more money moving to good things than being moved to try an influence elections. By a wide margin. So once again your solution is to punish everyone just in case they have a bad apple in their family tree. Once again I'll say the same thing. I have faith in people with money will do the right thing and if they feel they have a bad apple they'll restrict the amount of money that heir gets. That it NOT the government's job Well, top 36 billionaires should be fairly clear. So 1 in 12, don't you work with numbers? In any case, I am going to stop discussing this with you as I am sure you will insult my mother by calling her a whore next. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts