• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

New York's Wealthiest Are Moving Out

Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. I know the lefty propaganda talking points frontwards and backwards. No need to tell them to me for the one millionth time.

Yep anything with substance and numbers and facts is all propaganda while someone's opinion is the absolute truth. No need to tell you anything because you know it all. Kind of like the average 19 year old.
 
Nice story, yet many seem to retire (as you indicate is the likely option) and then move to lower taxed states. Texas makes a considerable amount of tax money from snowbirds and other retirees as they spend their money here tipping our state and local governments at about 8%.

Nice of you to ignore the results for the GDP. Do you really think Texas can compensate for the loss to the nation?

Most of those Texas snowbirds migrate from midwestern northern states and Canada. NY snowbirder's tend to head to Florida, the Carolinas, and the Caribbean, not Texas. More than 70% of NYC retirees stay put in NYC. It's a family and cultural thing.
 
iPhone 8 Plus costs Apple $295.44 to build. The 8 Plus costs $799. iPhone X costs Apple around $357.50 to make. The X costs $999. Now factor in all other costs, parts inventory, wholesaling, retailing, advertising, shipping costs, research and development, software costs, administration costs, and so on. With your numbers being so out of whack as to be ridiculous, how do you think that effects your credulity and that of your arguments?

I wasn’t using actual umbers but making a point about price being a function of demand. The point being is that Apple isn’t dropping prices if it gets a tax break.
 
You and the GOP can't have it both ways. The objective of the tax plan was to give corporations and rich GOP donors massive tax-cuts. To do so with *only* a trillion to a trillion and a half increase in the debt, they had to increase taxes on the middle class in 2025. So, if future Congress' make the 2018 tax cuts permanent, then the debt balloons. It will also give future Congress' the excuse to cut programs like Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, etc., because of the debt that the Congress created by starving revenue.

Actually everyone gets tax cuts. I am going to be saving quite a bit on my payroll deductions and I am going to be saving more on my income tax. This gives me more money to spend with.

So in order to help you will be sending your part of the cut back to Washington right?
You seem to be avoiding this question for some reason.

Why is that? Ol yea you have no intention of returning your saving back.
Hypocrisy reigns supreme.
 
What is interesting, is that wages in the US have gone up at all, considering the foreign price of competitive labor at every level.

Right now is a job seeker market.
Positions are in demand and companies need positions filled socto get the people they need they are paying more money.
 
Too simplistic. Which, coming from you, is no surprise.

I.E. He defeated what I stated with 2 articles and I can't admit that NY governemnt employee
Pay is out of control.
 
I wasn’t using actual umbers but making a point about price being a function of demand. The point being is that Apple isn’t dropping prices if it gets a tax break.

Apple will expand into other areas that it might not do.
 
I wasn’t using actual umbers but making a point about price being a function of demand. The point being is that Apple isn’t dropping prices if it gets a tax break.

The quality of an argument can make or break that argument.

Never underestimate any company, especially when it comes pricing. Apple is currently updating its bottom end iPhone SE. to be released when the tax cut is finalized. Simultaneously, it will be upgrading its low end iMac at a lower price.

Apple's hedge fund, showing on its books valued at its original $10 bil investment, is now worth $117 bil, above Apple's cash hoard, responsible for managing Apple's assets (meaning its cash is actually in investment grade securities) Braeburn Capital, the world's largest hedge fund, and its sole client is Apple, just filed for a Federal Banking license, in anticipation of managing the funds earned overseas when they are brought to the US at the lower tax rate from the new law. That would make Apple Inc. owner of one of the largest federally licensed banks in the nation, if not the largest. The potential effects upon the nation's economic structures is mind boggling. Wall Street analysts can't see the forest for the trees, however banking analysts are shaking in their boots.

Few recall, Warren Buffet advised Steve Jobs, he would not invest in tech, but he would invest in a tech company that converted itself into a bank. Jobs always said Apple's stocks would take care of itself, in time. I'm saying this tax "reform" has just played into Jobs' hands. Those concerned about the wealth disparity in this nation, now have a new worry.

Frank and Jesse James were correct when assessing the banks control this country.

Obtaining a Federal Banking license requires $250k cash reserves, an address, and no felony convictions by named principals and empowered managers.

The president of Blackberry said, "They (Apple) know nothing of phones." Jaime Dimon recently said "They (Apple) know nothing of banking." Warren Buffet's Berkshire Hathaway is an investment banking company. He may have place personal monies in the William and Melinda Gates Foundation," but he hasn't purchased Microsoft equities.

While other tech companies are playing catchup with Applepay, none realize Applepay is a trojan horse play into the banking industry.

Teacher's Annuity, the single largest pension fund and wealthiest in the nation, invest in commercial real property (long term high end mortgages). It holds seven equities. Apple Inc is its largest position. The others are investment banks it uses to front its commercial real estate investments and manage those investments.

Now, who is this "tax reform" really aiding and abetting? Three of the companies with the largest amount of funds overseas are General Foods, GE, and JP Morgan Chase.
 
Actually everyone gets tax cuts. I am going to be saving quite a bit on my payroll deductions and I am going to be saving more on my income tax. This gives me more money to spend with.

So in order to help you will be sending your part of the cut back to Washington right?
You seem to be avoiding this question for some reason.

Why is that? Ol yea you have no intention of returning your saving back.
Hypocrisy reigns supreme.

My savings is a 20% increase in Federal taxes.
 
My savings is a 20% increase in Federal taxes.

Depends on where you live and fall.
If you in the upper income then you should be happy to be paying your fair share.

Me being a middle income worker who takes the standard deduction I am going to
Lower my tax bill quite a bit.

Here I thought this was a tax cut for the rich.
 
Last edited:
Depends on where you live and fall.
If you in the upper income then you should be happy to be paying your fair share.

Me being a middle income worker who takes the standard deduction I am going to
Lower my tax bill quite a bit.

Here I thought this was a tax cut for the rich.

I've paid my fair share many times over. The results of this bill are egregious for folk in my position. It will translate as less generosity for philanthropies.
 
Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. I know the lefty propaganda talking points frontwards and backwards. No need to tell them to me for the one millionth time.
many lefties believe companies exist mainly to pay taxes so Democrats can buy the votes of those who get the handouts. When companies try to avoid taxes many on the left are upset
 
What does a ceo making have anything to do with productivity? Or workers pay?

Now you are moving the goal posts

Let’s stick to one thing....computers, and automation make your chart in the prior post absolutely worthless....agree or disagree

And if you disagree, please tell me why....not tell me ceos are being paid way more than they should be

I think the point is that computers and automation are what caused productivity to skyrocket. Allowing corporations to continue to make ever-increasing profits while employing fewer and/or lower-paid employees.
 
I realize you guys are in denial about companies moving overseas due to taxes. It's easier for you to try claiming it is the cheap labor. Sure, many companies do move overseas due to cheap labor BUT many other companies also move overseas to avoid the US high tax rates.

No offense but companies are not "moving overseas because of taxes". They are moving their headquarters to play tax games to take advantage of differing tax structures and how things are taxed in different countries. the US has among the lowest tax burdens on businesses. We just tax differently.

So people scream.. look at how high our corporate income tax is... sure.. but then again.. we don't have to pay all sorts of other taxes that get paid in these other countries.
 
I think the point is that computers and automation are what caused productivity to skyrocket. Allowing corporations to continue to make ever-increasing profits while employing fewer and/or lower-paid employees.

i agree with the fewer part

not sure i agree with the lower paying part....at least in general

going back to my office as a prime example....i have much fewer employees today doing work...but producing far more

but they are higher paid than the same type of employee that i had in office in say the early 90's

they are specialized, have more skills, and make more because of it

is it like that everywhere? dunno

my entry level clerks in the DC area were at $ 16 hr....and went up from there

here in the Cleveland area it is around $ 14....
 
i agree with the fewer part

not sure i agree with the lower paying part....at least in general

going back to my office as a prime example....i have much fewer employees today doing work...but producing far more

but they are higher paid than the same type of employee that i had in office in say the early 90's

they are specialized, have more skills, and make more because of it

is it like that everywhere? dunno

my entry level clerks in the DC area were at $ 16 hr....and went up from there

here in the Cleveland area it is around $ 14....

But to give it some perspective ... is that pool of "much fewer employees" in your office today earning the same total amount of pay that the (presumably) "many more employees" were earning back in the early 90s? IOW, if there are half as many employees, are they now earning an inflation-adjusted salary of twice what they were earning before? It's a rhetorical question really, because inflation-adjusted wages have remained pretty flat since then, so the salaries that were formerly paid to employees that were lost to productivity attrition are now being paid to the owners, it is not being distributed amongst those remaining employees that are now much more productive. So that company in the 90s had a payroll of (for example) $1 million dollars and 100 employees now has an inflation adjusted payroll of $500,000 and 50 employees. The employees are earning roughly the same amount while producing twice as much, negating the need for half the personnel.
 
But to give it some perspective ... is that pool of "much fewer employees" in your office today earning the same total amount of pay that the (presumably) "many more employees" were earning back in the early 90s? IOW, if there are half as many employees, are they now earning an inflation-adjusted salary of twice what they were earning before? It's a rhetorical question really, because inflation-adjusted wages have remained pretty flat since then, so the salaries that were formerly paid to employees that were lost to productivity attrition are now being paid to the owners, it is not being distributed amongst those remaining employees that are now much more productive. So that company in the 90s had a payroll of (for example) $1 million dollars and 100 employees now has an inflation adjusted payroll of $500,000 and 50 employees. The employees are earning roughly the same amount while producing twice as much, negating the need for half the personnel.

dont disagree with that, but how much of an investment did the owner make to make that happen?

that was his cash that went into computers, automation, and training....to get the better results

why should the employees get any part of that? what investment did they make?

if a company makes advances in systems, procedures, and tech to reduce employees by 100, and therefore save 5 million a year, but it cost a 15 million dollar to accomplish....good for the owner

some other company got a nice boost with his investment, and maybe he will take his extra profits and turn them into another new venture
 
dont disagree with that, but how much of an investment did the owner make to make that happen?

that was his cash that went into computers, automation, and training....to get the better resultswhy should the employees get any part of that? what investment did they make?

if a company makes advances in systems, procedures, and tech to reduce employees by 100, and therefore save 5 million a year, but it cost a 15 million dollar to accomplish....good for the owner

some other company got a nice boost with his investment, and maybe he will take his extra profits and turn them into another new venture

I'm not disagreeing with any of that or saying whether it's good or bad ... just pointing out that it's happening, and that increased productivity is where a lot of the additional income is coming from for the top earners. The employees are getting more done for no increase in wages, the owners are getting more production from their employees for the same wage, while being able to decrease their workforce.
 
Yep anything with substance and numbers and facts is all propaganda while someone's opinion is the absolute truth. No need to tell you anything because you know it all. Kind of like the average 19 year old.

You guys only talk about the facts that you want to talk about while dismissing everyone else's facts. That's the way you play the game.
 
I think the point is that computers and automation are what caused productivity to skyrocket. Allowing corporations to continue to make ever-increasing profits while employing fewer and/or lower-paid employees.

what is the purpose of a corporation

1) to be the source of jobs for employees

2) to make profits for those who own them

and if a corporation no longer needs certain employees to create profit, does the Corporation have a duty to keep them employed?
 
what is the purpose of a corporation

1) to be the source of jobs for employees

2) to make profits for those who own them

and if a corporation no longer needs certain employees to create profit, does the Corporation have a duty to keep them employed?

I was not assigning a moral value to the action I described, only stating that it's happening.
 
back in the 70's they starting hiring guys who went thru companies, weeding out employees that were superfluous

efficiency experts....today, that role belongs to guys like me

my job is to make the company run the most efficient way possible, at the lowest cost possible

my pay is dependent upon how well i perform my job

yes, at times it sucks that good people lose positions that we no longer need

but then and now, i have to think about the health of the total company, not just a few employees

and i think most executives think the same way i do....
 
Back
Top Bottom