Current or modern politics in the United States - Page 269

**ballyhoo** · December 14th, 2017, 08:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bowlinggreen

They just killed net neutrality. Shit.

...

I’m so disgusted right now, I can barely... type.

3 to 2; right down the party line. the whole “hearing” (just like everything else
with our ‘pay to play’ govt.) was just a mere formality. I’m so fekkin’ sick of it.

I don’t give a shite if they have a D or an R by their given name. they don’t care
one bit about anybody but their donors. especially the R’s, and 98% of the D’s.

this is really true transparency at it’s finest. woo hoo! hot damn son of a gun.

wish I didn’t have to work here shortly. I’d like to drink ‘til my shoes fell off!

**Rogerbh** · December 14th, 2017, 08:22 PM

Hey, for all you conspiracy buffs - another Clinton accuser shows up dead - http://yournewswire.com/surgeon-clinton-haiti-dead/ surgeon commits suicide by stabbing himself in the chest and bleeding out.

**Arturo2nd** · December 14th, 2017, 09:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bowlinggreen

They just killed net neutrality. Shit.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/techno...net/ar-BBGJMoz

Hardly a peep from the MSM on this until they achieved "victory".

Anybody from the USA got any thought on how this will affect us? Are we going to see file hosts blocked?

Well let's see now, Trump's FCC commissioner Ajit Pai was employed by Verizon before Mitch McConnell recommended him for the FCC. Good luck for all of us wishing to use Internet streaming services to escape the monopoly price gouging. The ISPs can now block those services or slow them to a crawl.

So far Pai has been very consistent in allowing carriers to gouge consumers. Our recourse will be in the courts busily being packed with corporate lawyers. Perhaps, I will live long enough to see the little bastard dancing on the end of a rope. Who was it in "Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy" that were the first ones up against the wall when the whip came down?

Jenny48549 · December 15th, 2017, 02:58 AM

New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman is after them for this.

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/12/14/new-...eutrality.html

He's usually not one that you want to mess with so stay tuned....

**bowlinggreen** · December 15th, 2017, 06:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LV Gas

How will this effect Netflix and others like them?, maybe instead of home broadband/mobile data downloading from their(netflix example) servers, they could send the files to the consumer?.

Will the various companies running telephone/broadband connections from your house to where ever the server is located ,want a fee for using their infrastructure, cost a f***ing fortune.

I bet we will see trouble in the matter of streaming hi-def video, at the very least, since that is a bandwidth eater.

They've gotta know a lot of people use the internet for looking at porn, and blocking porn sites is going to cause a lot of rage over a wide portion of their customer base, right? We can only hope so.

I'm glad I am not hooked up to a Bible Belt ISP, however.

But I am now dreading the day when I open the mailbox and see a letter like this:

Quote:

FROM: Sodomy Internet Corporation

Dear helpless ready-for-shearing sheep (oops, we meant valued customer!)

To better serve you, we have restructured our internet service packages. Your basic package will still be available at the rate of $55.99 per month, though in order to better serve our even more valued customers, we regretfully must drop your bandwidth speeds to half of their current levels. But you can restore your current speed for a premium of only $9.99 per month! And if you want the speeds we promised you on your original contract but shamelessly lied about, that will only cost you an additional $21.99 per month!

And premium service that lets you stream HD video will now be available for only $129.99 per month! And if you are a gamer, you can still download those big games, for a very modest fee of only $5.99 per download! No monthly fee required!

Thank you for the continued opportunity to fuck you (oops, we meant serve you!)

Sincerely,

Dick Z. Buttfucker, VP for Customer Relations.

**tsunamiSD** · December 28th, 2017, 06:29 PM

I'd like to hear from those of you who are up more on economic and tax matters than me - what's written in this article makes sense to me, and I wonder why it isn't something shouted from the roof tops by lots of economists...

Suddenly, America's Trade Deficit Isn't So Awful

**Rogerbh** · December 28th, 2017, 11:27 PM

So there is approximately 2 to 3 trillion dollars US multinationals hold offshore that they want to bring back into the US. The new tax rate is supposedly 15% for cash and 8% for "liquid" assets. I doubt if much of it will be in cash. The 8% rate is close to the 5% rate they got in the 2005 repatriation law that was roundly criticized. There doesn't seem to be the same restrictions that the 2005 law was suppose to impose that didn't seem to be followed anyway. Far better than the 35% corporate tax rate that use to be imposed (but seldom paid).

The new law says foreign income from foreign affiliates will not be taxed. US corporate tax income will be at a 21% tax rate. It is not clear to me what will happen if they just keep reporting the bulk of their income offshore and pay zero US tax on it and use it in the US when they have need of it. I am sure they are planning on it right now, I would. So paying zero is much better on the bottom line than paying 21%. 8% is much better on the bottom line than 35%.

Pretty much expect Multinationals to pay less than they do now and the middle class to have to cover the deficits that do occur.

To expect the wealthy (who of course run the legislature and the executive branches) to do something else would to be believing in Santa Claus.

As to the "awful" US trade deficit, if it really was that awful, the US dollar would have lost value a long time ago. If and when that does happen and foreign money is not interested in anything American, then the US will truly suffer. Right now, the Chinese still seem to be investing in the US. https://www.cnbc.com/2017/06/16/chin...ing-spree.html

**Arturo2nd** · December 29th, 2017, 09:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rogerbh

So there is approximately 2 to 3 trillion dollars US multinationals hold offshore that they want to bring back into the US. The new tax rate is supposedly 15% for cash and 8% for "liquid" assets. I doubt if much of it will be in cash. The 8% rate is close to the 5% rate they got in the 2005 repatriation law that was roundly criticized. There doesn't seem to be the same restrictions that the 2005 law was suppose to impose that didn't seem to be followed anyway. Far better than the 35% corporate tax rate that use to be imposed (but seldom paid).

The new law says foreign income from foreign affiliates will not be taxed. US corporate tax income will be at a 21% tax rate. It is not clear to me what will happen if they just keep reporting the bulk of their income offshore and pay zero US tax on it and use it in the US when they have need of it. I am sure they are planning on it right now, I would. So paying zero is much better on the bottom line than paying 21%. 8% is much better on the bottom line than 35%.

Pretty much expect Multinationals to pay less than they do now and the middle class to have to cover the deficits that do occur.

To expect the wealthy (who of course run the legislature and the executive branches) to do something else would to be believing in Santa Claus.

As to the "awful" US trade deficit, if it really was that awful, the US dollar would have lost value a long time ago. If and when that does happen and foreign money is not interested in anything American, then the US will truly suffer. Right now, the Chinese still seem to be investing in the US. https://www.cnbc.com/2017/06/16/chin...ing-spree.html

What I am reading from corporate press releases is that most of the initial windfall from the tax bill will be used to buy up shares and goose stock prices. Obviously, corporations are embarrassed that the 99% can still buy their shares. Soon only the very wealthy and institutional investors will own shares and pesky shareholder initiatives will disappear. Frankly, with full employment and immigration being cut off investing in the United States except in automation can only drive up wages and inflation. If it were not for the labor shortage, the United States would be a very attractive place to invest.

crinolynne · December 30th, 2017, 03:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brian249x

If it were not for the labor shortage, the United States would be a very attractive place to invest.

Perhaps I'm naive, but I thought that traditional economics says that if there is a shortage in a commodity, prices go up. So, if there is a shortage of labour, then wages should be increasing. They're not. So either traditional economics is wrong or the shortage is artificial, (ie an artifact of way such things are counted or there's a conspiracy. Personally I believe that last, but I'd be very interested in someone with the technical background to have a truly valid opinion commenting.

Else, it's all fake news from the faker in chief...

**Rogerbh** · December 30th, 2017, 04:52 PM

There is not really an overall labor shortage in the US. We have plenty of minimum wage jobs that people do not see long term futures in. The internet has taken many jobs - such as entire accounting departments moved to India for the cheap labor. As have of course telephone support services. Next robotics will be replacing truck drivers. As programming gets better and manufacturing efficiencies get better, other occupations will be going the way of the Dodo. Technical specialties are attracting many of the demands for more work visas - whose limitations are being worked around by major companies. IE, they come to the US for training and overstay their student visas. One of my friends who use to work in computer support said he sees lines of older white, black and Asian employees being laid off. Getting new computers were Indian employees. The internal phone books list them as working in India but he says he is supporting their computers in the US for years. They actually come to his desk and sit there while he fixes their computer problems.

So I don't think labor force is that important for investment decision purposes, more like growth in value, stability, protection of the investment, future demand, etc.

I mean, who is looking to invest in New Guinea or North Korea? I await someone digging up some investment opportunity in New Guinea.

December 15th, 2017, 02:58 AM	#2684
Jenny48549 Beloved Sister Mistress of Mayhem Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: The Great Gig In the Sky Posts: 6,668 Thanks: 64,911 Thanked 127,567 Times in 6,475 Posts	New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman is after them for this. https://www.cnbc.com/2017/12/14/new-...eutrality.html He's usually not one that you want to mess with so stay tuned.... __________________ To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

December 28th, 2017, 06:29 PM	#2686
tsunamiSD Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Posts: 53,025 Thanks: 633,290 Thanked 640,295 Times in 53,106 Posts	Trade deficit - A Mirage? I'd like to hear from those of you who are up more on economic and tax matters than me - what's written in this article makes sense to me, and I wonder why it isn't something shouted from the roof tops by lots of economists... Suddenly, America's Trade Deficit Isn't So Awful

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

December 14th, 2017, 08:22 PM	#2682
Rogerbh Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Land of the free within reasonable limitations Posts: 10,903 Thanks: 50,525 Thanked 91,197 Times in 10,751 Posts	Hey, for all you conspiracy buffs - another Clinton accuser shows up dead - http://yournewswire.com/surgeon-clinton-haiti-dead/ surgeon commits suicide by stabbing himself in the chest and bleeding out.

December 28th, 2017, 11:27 PM	#2687
Rogerbh Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Land of the free within reasonable limitations Posts: 10,903 Thanks: 50,525 Thanked 91,197 Times in 10,751 Posts	So there is approximately 2 to 3 trillion dollars US multinationals hold offshore that they want to bring back into the US. The new tax rate is supposedly 15% for cash and 8% for "liquid" assets. I doubt if much of it will be in cash. The 8% rate is close to the 5% rate they got in the 2005 repatriation law that was roundly criticized. There doesn't seem to be the same restrictions that the 2005 law was suppose to impose that didn't seem to be followed anyway. Far better than the 35% corporate tax rate that use to be imposed (but seldom paid). The new law says foreign income from foreign affiliates will not be taxed. US corporate tax income will be at a 21% tax rate. It is not clear to me what will happen if they just keep reporting the bulk of their income offshore and pay zero US tax on it and use it in the US when they have need of it. I am sure they are planning on it right now, I would. So paying zero is much better on the bottom line than paying 21%. 8% is much better on the bottom line than 35%. Pretty much expect Multinationals to pay less than they do now and the middle class to have to cover the deficits that do occur. To expect the wealthy (who of course run the legislature and the executive branches) to do something else would to be believing in Santa Claus. As to the "awful" US trade deficit, if it really was that awful, the US dollar would have lost value a long time ago. If and when that does happen and foreign money is not interested in anything American, then the US will truly suffer. Right now, the Chinese still seem to be investing in the US. https://www.cnbc.com/2017/06/16/chin...ing-spree.html

December 30th, 2017, 04:52 PM	#2690
Rogerbh Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Land of the free within reasonable limitations Posts: 10,903 Thanks: 50,525 Thanked 91,197 Times in 10,751 Posts	There is not really an overall labor shortage in the US. We have plenty of minimum wage jobs that people do not see long term futures in. The internet has taken many jobs - such as entire accounting departments moved to India for the cheap labor. As have of course telephone support services. Next robotics will be replacing truck drivers. As programming gets better and manufacturing efficiencies get better, other occupations will be going the way of the Dodo. Technical specialties are attracting many of the demands for more work visas - whose limitations are being worked around by major companies. IE, they come to the US for training and overstay their student visas. One of my friends who use to work in computer support said he sees lines of older white, black and Asian employees being laid off. Getting new computers were Indian employees. The internal phone books list them as working in India but he says he is supporting their computers in the US for years. They actually come to his desk and sit there while he fixes their computer problems. So I don't think labor force is that important for investment decision purposes, more like growth in value, stability, protection of the investment, future demand, etc. I mean, who is looking to invest in New Guinea or North Korea? I await someone digging up some investment opportunity in New Guinea.