Business, Economics & Tax Policy 6.0: Nope, it only found woven strands

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Business, Economics & Tax Policy 6.0: Nope, it only found woven strands

You do know the Fed is really just the largest banks, right? Jekyll Island and all that?

But yes, this is one of those moments when you and I and Rover and joe are all on one side and I honestly can't imagine who is on the other side unless it's just Goldman and their paid stooges in Congress.

And every farmer from New York to California.

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: Business, Economics & Tax Policy 6.0: Nope, it only found woven strands

You do know the Fed is really just the largest banks, right? Jekyll Island and all that?

But yes, this is one of those moments when you and I and Rover and joe are all on one side and I honestly can't imagine who is on the other side unless it's just Goldman and their paid stooges in Congress.

If Dump was actually his own man instead of a drooling mentally deficient fraud wiping his adult diaper on the Constitution, he'd make the Fed completely transparent and end the conspiracy one way (exposure) or the other (proof that it is just the benign accountancy service we were all taught about in Civics).

The last President that made word about not letting the Fed have their way was assassinated. i.e. Kennedy. As much as some may think Trump's crazy, he's not stupid.

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: Business, Economics & Tax Policy 6.0: Nope, it only found woven strands

Add Hostess. http://thehill.com/policy/finance/37...r-gop-tax-cuts

[Kepler]

Re: Business, Economics & Tax Policy 6.0: Nope, it only found woven strands

The last President that made word about not letting the Fed have their way was assassinated. i.e. Kennedy. As much as some may think Trump's crazy, he's not stupid.

To be honest he is stupid, too. But still, he could do something. He could alert the public to The Awful Truth. I get the Bill Hicks Hypothesis and obviously I'm more than a little sympathetic to it. But if nothing else I'd assume Dump would have blurted out the truth by now just by accident.

Your opinions on finance are giving me whiplash. You hate the Fed, OK, that makes sense from the sovereign citizen gun nut thing and is very much an InfoWars staple. Presumably you hate most of the (((banking))) leadership, if you follow my meaning.

But. You also hate regulating the banks and you seem to have a hard-on for 19th century unconstrained capitalism, and rather than worry about inequality you seem to celebrate it as some sort of meritocratic triumph. And IINM you work for one of them and do finance-adjacent stuff.

Are you a bit of a 21st century schizoid man on financial institutions or am I missing the connecting principle?

[trixR4kids]

Re: Business, Economics & Tax Policy 6.0: Nope, it only found woven strands

To be honest he is stupid, too. But still, he could do something. He could alert the public to The Awful Truth. I get the Bill Hicks Hypothesis and obviously I'm more than a little sympathetic to it. But if nothing else I'd assume Dump would have blurted out the truth by now just by accident.

Your opinions on finance are giving me whiplash. You hate the Fed, OK, that makes sense from the sovereign citizen gun nut thing and is very much an InfoWars staple. Presumably you hate most of the (((banking))) leadership, if you follow my meaning.

But. You also hate regulating the banks and you seem to have a hard-on for 19th century unconstrained capitalism, and rather than worry about inequality you seem to celebrate it as some sort of meritocratic triumph. And IINM you work for one of them and do finance-adjacent stuff.

Are you a bit of a 21st century schizoid man on financial institutions or am I missing the connecting principle?

He's an authoritarian who parrots whatever Alex Jones wants. And Alex Jones wants what Trump wants.

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: Business, Economics & Tax Policy 6.0: Nope, it only found woven strands

To be honest he is stupid, too. But still, he could do something. He could alert the public to The Awful Truth. I get the Bill Hicks Hypothesis and obviously I'm more than a little sympathetic to it. But if nothing else I'd assume Dump would have blurted out the truth by now just by accident.

Your opinions on finance are giving me whiplash. You hate the Fed, OK, that makes sense from the sovereign citizen gun nut thing and is very much an InfoWars staple. Presumably you hate most of the (((banking))) leadership, if you follow my meaning.

But. You also hate regulating the banks and you seem to have a hard-on for 19th century unconstrained capitalism, and rather than worry about inequality you seem to celebrate it as some sort of meritocratic triumph. And IINM you work for one of them and do finance-adjacent stuff.

Are you a bit of a 21st century schizoid man on financial institutions or am I missing the connecting principle?

First off, I don't work for a bank. So you might want to re-think the whole 3rd paragraph, and maybe also dump the preconceived notions, because that's the biggest turnoff if you would like to have reasonable discourse.

Secondly, the truth is available in its pristine glory. Best not judge based on either the desire of people to witness it, nor the specific party from which it is told. With freedom of thought comes the responsibility of research.

The biggest issue I see is the power given to the Federal Reserve, a private corporation, to create "money" out of thin air and sell it to our government to pay debts. Since 1913, the purchasing power of the dollar has decreased over 99%. And when the backing of gold was removed, the issue became even worse, resulting in the stagflation of the 70's. Tack onto this the insistence to have inflation every year at 2%, the manipulation of borrowing rates to cause bubbles and crashes, and you have the economic problems that we see today. Whenever the discussion of "living wages" and that sort of thing comes up, I've always been of the position that the costs of living are what need to be addressed, as the raising of wages is just a trap to precipitate the same problem, only with larger numbers.

[mookie1995]

Re: Business, Economics & Tax Policy 6.0: Nope, it only found woven strands

"Julia Ketchum, a secretary at a public high school in Lancaster, Pennsylvania, said she was pleasantly surprised her pay went up $1.50 a week. She didn’t think her pay would go up at all, let alone this soon. That adds up to $78 a year, which she said will more than cover her Costco membership for the year."

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: Business, Economics & Tax Policy 6.0: Nope, it only found woven strands

"Julia Ketchum, a secretary at a public high school in Lancaster, Pennsylvania, said she was pleasantly surprised her pay went up $1.50 a week. She didn’t think her pay would go up at all, let alone this soon. That adds up to $78 a year, which she said will more than cover her Costco membership for the year."

A penny saved is a penny earned. I wonder how much her union dues went up, along with the cost of her benefit packages.

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Business, Economics & Tax Policy 6.0: Nope, it only found woven strands

"Julia Ketchum, a secretary at a public high school in Lancaster, Pennsylvania, said she was pleasantly surprised her pay went up $1.50 a week. She didn’t think her pay would go up at all, let alone this soon. That adds up to $78 a year, which she said will more than cover her Costco membership for the year."

She's just another sucker.

[GrinCDXX]

Re: Business, Economics & Tax Policy 6.0: Nope, it only found woven strands

"Julia Ketchum, a secretary at a public high school in Lancaster, Pennsylvania, said she was pleasantly surprised her pay went up $1.50 a week. She didn’t think her pay would go up at all, let alone this soon. That adds up to $78 a year, which she said will more than cover her Costco membership for the year."

Wow, is that for real?

Just saw the change in withholding in my paycheck today and it was a substantial amount lower. I'm very suspicious. I had estimated the new law wasn't going to lower my taxes a substantial amount--maybe a little. Are there games being played with the withholdings?

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: Business, Economics & Tax Policy 6.0: Nope, it only found woven strands

Wow, is that for real?

Just saw the change in withholding in my paycheck today and it was a substantial amount lower. I'm very suspicious. I had estimated the new law wasn't going to lower my taxes a substantial amount--maybe a little. Are there games being played with the withholdings?

I was thinking the same thing, too. I saw my federal withholding went down, however I needed to get a more expensive benefit package to suit the needs of my family, so although I did not see the specific amount touted as a net, I do know exactly where the money is going, and am satisfied as such.

One other thing to take under consideration: Is that the withholding change, or is this a change to her base pay?

[GrinCDXX]

Re: Business, Economics & Tax Policy 6.0: Nope, it only found woven strands

I was thinking the same thing, too. I saw my federal withholding went down, however I needed to get a more expensive benefit package to suit the needs of my family, so although I did not see the specific amount touted as a net, I do know exactly where the money is going, and am satisfied as such.

One other thing to take under consideration: Is that the withholding change, or is this a change to her base pay?

Yeah, I did confirm the change was from federal withholding.

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: Business, Economics & Tax Policy 6.0: Nope, it only found woven strands

Yeah, I did confirm the change was from federal withholding.

Assuming the person gets paid weekly, 1.50/week would amount to about $78, and although working in a school, secretaries must be there all year. However, how much was being withheld originally? What sort of exemptions is she claiming? Has she instructed her employer to take out a specific amount for taxes instead of having the W-4 calculate it for her, similar to what my uncle did when he was employed (probably not if it changed this week, but you never know)? Does she have a husband who is working, and withholds more to account for the both of them, meaning not as much is withheld from her? All of these things affect how much is withheld, so it's best not to fall for the trap of limited information.

[GrinCDXX]

Re: Business, Economics & Tax Policy 6.0: Nope, it only found woven strands

Assuming the person gets paid weekly, 1.50/week would amount to about $78, and although working in a school, secretaries must be there all year. However, how much was being withheld originally? What sort of exemptions is she claiming? Has she instructed her employer to take out a specific amount for taxes instead of having the W-4 calculate it for her, similar to what my uncle did when he was employed (probably not if it changed this week, but you never know)? Does she have a husband who is working, and withholds more to account for the both of them, meaning not as much is withheld from her? All of these things affect how much is withheld, so it's best not to fall for the trap of limited information.

Oh I see...I was referring to myself, not the woman that was excited about $1.50.

[BassAle]

Re: Business, Economics & Tax Policy 6.0: Nope, it only found woven strands

Wow, is that for real?

Just saw the change in withholding in my paycheck today and it was a substantial amount lower. I'm very suspicious. I had estimated the new law wasn't going to lower my taxes a substantial amount--maybe a little. Are there games being played with the withholdings?

based on my last paycheck my federal withholding went down about $2600 a year, I'm not sure about my wife's (I saw the amount of her direct deposit change, but I think a COLA and the withholding change hit at the same time for her)

we'll see how much I owe when I file my taxes next year...