Quote from Ricter:
You could go back to Canada.
Quote from piezoe:
I have to seriously question this: "...then lenders were forced to loan to people that were high risk..."
Though you are not claiming this, it is a common misconception that the CRA had something to do with the recent financial crisis. It didn't. For all practical purposes the law had no teeth and there were no penalties for non-compliance other than a poor CRA rating.
see for example, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community_Reinvestment_Act from which the following is quoted
"[t]he law,... emphasizes that an institution's CRA activities should be undertaken in a safe and sound manner, and does not require institutions to make high-risk loans that may bring losses to the institution. ... An institution's CRA compliance record is taken into account by the banking regulatory agencies when the institution seeks to expand through merger, acquisition or branching. The law does not mandate any other penalties for non-compliance with the CRA."
I'm equally puzzled by this remark:
"The government guaranteed those loans even though we were barely out of the crisis caused by guaranteeing Savings and Loans. That effort to help the poor resulted in the whole country's working class being pushed towards poverty. "
Which does not seem to follow from any of your preceding remarks.
You are surely aware that the extreme income disparity in the U.S. today that has resulted in some of those at the low end of the middle class falling back into poverty, according to data, had its genesis in the 1970's but then grew dramatically afterward, and was particularly influenced by fiscal policy in the 1980's during the Reagan years.
(From 1981-89, after the final revenue adjustments were made in 1986, those at the top saw a 42% reduction in the highest bracket rate, although those at the bottom saw their rate go from 11 to 15%. The net effect of the two income tax bracket adjustments during Reagan's time was to eliminate much of the "progressive nature" of the income tax and make it flatter, though not entirely flat. What I find especially curious about the Reagan presidency was that on top of the income tax tinkering came the largest peacetime tax increase ever, so far at least as I am aware. That was TEFRA , but that wasn't about income tax rates. That was about closing loopholes and increasing excise taxes. In the end, overall government revenues during Reagan's time almost perfectly matched those of prior decades at near 18.2% of GDP, but the source of revenues was significantly altered. )
Quote from Max E. Pad:
If/when canada or any other country provides me with a more beneficial situation from a taxation standpoint, you can bet your ass that both me, and my 6 figures i pay in taxes will leave the country.
I take nothing from the government, i am a single male, with no kids, and have never used any of the services from the government besides roads, tell me something wise ass, when people like me all decide to leave, who do you think will shoulder the bill for the losers who think the government should pay for them to go to the emergency room every time they have a hiccup?
Yeah yeah yeah, you've got it so rough yet you've got it all mastered. Etc.Quote from Max E. Pad:
If/when canada or any other country provides me with a more beneficial situation from a taxation standpoint, you can bet your ass that both me, and my 6 figures i pay in taxes will leave the country.
Quote from Ricter:
Yeah yeah yeah, you've got it so rough yet you've got it all mastered. Etc.
Lol. Ok, look, you can focus on the taxes you pay and be sore about it, or you can focus on the money you get to keep and be happy. In your case it sounds like complaining about taxes is quite unnecessary.Quote from Max E. Pad:
Dont make it out as if to sy i dont face the same every day struggles, .... the pump on my hot tub broke last night, and by the time the repairman made it there, i had ran out of cocaine and alcohol. I have been tough times my friend.....![]()