What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

Business, Economics, and Taxes: Capitalism. Yay? >=(

Status
Not open for further replies.
FadeToBlack&Gold said:
That's easy for people like you and I to say. People who make six-figure salaries in high-demand fields and are likely to remain employed, or be quickly re-employed.
​​​​​​
Make that proposal to anyone living on a fixed income, or working for an employer who isn't so generous with annual raises and bonuses for its grunt workers, and see how far you get.
Click to expand...

Fair, but the point is the more we value employment over inflation, the better worker salaries and benefits.
 
FadeToBlack&Gold said:
That's easy for people like you and I to say. People who make six-figure salaries in high-demand fields and are likely to remain employed, or be quickly re-employed.
​​​​​​
Make that proposal to anyone living on a fixed income, or working for an employer who isn't so generous with annual raises and bonuses for its grunt workers, and see how far you get.
Click to expand...

I'm not in your boat and I agree with him. Inflation is killing me and my SO (as are property values, insurance...etc) and we both agree with dx. It's better that everyone who wants a job has one than it is to have a high percentage of people on public assistance because they are unemployed.

And let's stop acting like we don't all know the truth...if the job market tanked tomorrow and next quarter unemployment spiked at 8-9% there would be almost no change in price. We have seen this game before. Many of the top retailers have overstock going back to the friggin pandemic and almost none of them are discounting like they normally would or if they are it's not a deep enough discount to get people to buy. They want to maximize every dollar...everything is treated now like it is oil and you can just set a market and people will go for it! Well people arent doing that...and the more people se how ridiculous the wage gap is the less inclined they are to do it.

We as a country need to friggin break out of this old school economic mentality. Remember the recession that was supposed to hit every week since Biden took office? Must be hanging out with Trumps Infrastructure Week cause it just isn't happening. That is because, for once, we have been putting money in the hands of the people...and we are spending it. We get less for it, but the economy only flows if people have something to spend. Sure we can't buy new houses or cars every few years but we can pay our bills and save a bit. It's not as fun but it's a heckuva lot better in the long run.

That is why the strengthening of the Unions is huge. Wages are so far behind that we need the Unions clawing back what Management has been denying them. We need jobs created so the worker for once has power. For my whole life people have had to work crap jobs, be underpaid and just deal with it. Now those jobs are the ones vacant because people value their time more because they have choices. Sorry Applebee's better up your wages if you want to get people to stick around!

Look I'm being laid off from my primary job after this semester...and I'm already teaching half time so my dollar is stretched thin. I'm working jobs now I don't necessarily like but pay well to make up the difference. If Unemployment in Minnesota went up I would be way better off! (I would get a full salary of classes plus extra) but that isn't how you rebuild a Middle Class. We have been conditioned to believe this crap and since 2020 everything we have been taught about how this all works has been proven wrong. This country is 40 years behind the times.
 
Last edited:
Just parked on campus for the gopher- Michigan game. Seeing stickers all over that say “tax the rich” and “abort the Supreme Court” next to Barrett’s face and this is the happiest I’ll be all game
 
FadeToBlack&Gold said:
That's easy for people like you and I to say. People who make six-figure salaries in high-demand fields and are likely to remain employed, or be quickly re-employed.
​​​​​​
Make that proposal to anyone living on a fixed income, or working for an employer who isn't so generous with annual raises and bonuses for its grunt workers, and see how far you get.
Click to expand...


Three things:
1 - Generous annual raises aren't universal. I think the vast majority of even high-demand field workers still don't get generous raises every year. My employer has offered 2-3% COLAs for the last decade. Anything above that is for people who get a higher than average rating or those who are under the average salary for our field. I don't think generous raises are common.

2 - I understand that people on a fixed income get fucked in high inflation scenarios. The problem is the vast majority of them (the olds) still vote GOP at a significant clip relative to those trying to fix the problems. So I'm not immediately sympathetic to their concerns. I am sympathetic to those on fixed incomes who may be disabled, retired and had their pensions ruined by corporations, etc. Like, I get it. But all of that is (to some extent) fixable with appropriate payroll taxes and social programs. We've just chosen to not do that.

3 - So I think that Kepler and Handy have covered most of the rest of the points I would have made. However, I'll add one more. Being out of work in prime age can be insanely more destructive than high inflation. Especially with health insurance tied to employment. Imagine having a single income and losing that source of income. YOu could be facing loss of housing, debating between paying for food or necessary medical treatments, loss of transportation, etc. All of a sudden, you may be out of a job and unable to get to interviews because you don't have a car or you don't have a stable housing situation.

When you have an environment where everyone who wants a job has a job, you shift bargaining power from the employers to the employees. Which is better than the alternative.
 
The morans living/working in Louisville, Kentucky have walked off the job at Ford’s most profitable auto plant as UAW expands its fight against the bigger morans in Ford’s leadership.
 
If you want to bring housing prices down, ban anybody from buying a second* home. You get one, period. Force me to pick between my houses. Don't let anybody use rents as a commodity, and don't allow private investment purchasing of housing. A builder finds somebody to buy a start, that person owns it and the builder builds it but only gets paid when it is completed and approved

* It might have to be third, because I guess if you pay for a new house to be built while you own your current house you gotta live somewhere.
 
Last edited:
You should start that trend and sell your second home! I think you kind of volunteered that below

something needs to be done. I’d start with banning investment companies for starters
 
Kepler said:
If you want to bring housing prices down, ban anybody from buying a second* home. You get one, period. Force me to pick between my houses. Don't let anybody use rents as a commodity, and don't allow private investment purchasing of housing. A builder finds somebody to buy a start, that person owns it and the builder builds it but only gets paid when it is completed and approved

* It might have to be third, because I guess if you pay for a new house to be built while you own your current house you gotta live somewhere.
Click to expand...

I strongly agree with this. There should be a disincentive on building houses over a certain size too. It’s such a massive waste of resources.
 
I'd be onboard with a ban on large investors squatting on properties, trying to speculate, and thereby keeping supply artificially low. What really needs to happen is we need to start properly taxing additional homeownership. If you can afford to own a second or third or fourth home, then perhaps you shouldn't get to deduct any mortgage interest from your annual income taxes. Also, stop allowing people to put second and third homes in trusts and shell corps to skirt inheritance taxes when the matriarch/patriarch die.
 
FadeToBlack&Gold said:
I'd be onboard with a ban on large investors squatting on properties, trying to speculate, and thereby keeping supply artificially low. What really needs to happen is we need to start properly taxing additional homeownership. If you can afford to own a second or third or fourth home, then perhaps you shouldn't get to deduct any mortgage interest from your annual income taxes. Also, stop allowing people to put second and third homes in trusts and shell corps to skirt inheritance taxes when the matriarch/patriarch die.
Click to expand...

I can’t even get a homestead credit on the one house I own because the county and city say the value is too high. I def think any additional home should come with a large tax penalty
 
Deutsche Gopher Fan said:
You should start that trend and sell your second home! I think you kind of volunteered that below

something needs to be done. I’d start with banning investment companies for starters
Click to expand...

Unless I'm forced to, I won't be helping people. I've met them.

I never promised you justice. I only promised you the truth.
 
FadeToBlack&Gold said:
I'd be onboard with a ban on large investors squatting on properties, trying to speculate, and thereby keeping supply artificially low. What really needs to happen is we need to start properly taxing additional homeownership. If you can afford to own a second or third or fourth home, then perhaps you shouldn't get to deduct any mortgage interest from your annual income taxes. Also, stop allowing people to put second and third homes in trusts and shell corps to skirt inheritance taxes when the matriarch/patriarch die.
Click to expand...

I agree with this completely. If you tax my second home insanely I will sell it.

Or, actually, I will retire, move to Arizona, and sell my first home. So, everybody wins.

I need to pass this law so I have an excuse ready for my wife.
 
Deutsche Gopher Fan said:
I can’t even get a homestead credit on the one house I own because the county and city say the value is too high. I def think any additional home should come with a large tax penalty
Click to expand...

Yikes. With what I pay in taxes on a fairly modest property in a city of ~12,000 residents that is 2.2 sq mi, yet has its own school district, PD, FD, etc., I would hate to see what a non-homesteaded tax bill would look like. I felt pretty bent over after our county re-assessment last year.
 
FadeToBlack&Gold said:
Yikes. With what I pay in taxes on a fairly modest property in a city of ~12,000 residents that is 2.2 sq mi, yet has its own school district, PD, FD, etc., I would hate to see what a non-homesteaded tax bill would look like. I felt pretty bent over after our county re-assessment last year.
Click to expand...

I may have to sell. I put more down on this house to brace for rising taxes but I didn’t forsee 26% jumps in one year. And I’m in Hennepin county so we’re probably going to get absolutely reamed for the light rail debacle. Next year county has already approved a 6.5% raise and city a 9% raise. Add that on to my ever rising home value. It’s gone up 300k in five years and I’ve done nothing outside basic maintenance
 
Deutsche Gopher Fan said:
Add that on to my ever rising home value. It’s gone up 300k in five years and I’ve done nothing outside basic maintenance
Click to expand...

I don't really see how $300k in free money is a bad thing, but to each his own. I agree that you should probably sell, however. I think for any profit over about $250k you have capital gains tax. It would be nice to book that win, mostly tax free.
 
SJHovey said:
I don't really see how $300k in free money is a bad thing, but to each his own. I agree that you should probably sell, however. I think for any profit over about $250k you have capital gains tax. It would be nice to book that win, mostly tax free.
Click to expand...

I mean, the taxes and insurance just make the monthly payment uncomfortable and …I liked living here. Add to that - I can’t really buy a place in twice cities for $300k or less so I’m going to be paying more for something at a higher interest rate.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top