We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
How nice. Back to the 1970s, or the 1930s. Reagan wanted everybody to get wealthy. The old way is to reduce prosperity. It's very easy to do: just take their money away from them, take the gummint cut, and hand it to somebody else.
The history of the United States economy over the last 70 years can be roughly divided into two periods: the decades immediately after World War II, when inequality plummeted, and the past three decades, when global economic forces and government policies caused it to soar. Mr. Obama is setting out to begin a third period that looks more like the first than the second.
That agenda starts with taxes. Over the last three decades, the pretax incomes of the wealthiest households have risen far more than they have for other households, while the tax rates for top earners have fallen more than they have for others, according to the Congressional Budget Office.
She Who Must Be Obeyed has already warned me: If this goes through, I am working 4 days a week, not five. She would prefer my company to my working at 50 cents on the dollar (with CT income tax) for the government - and she mostly handles the financial affairs. Fortunately for me, I enjoy her company too. I can easily help to reduce income inequality by being less productive. I love to work, but I love to have fun too. And there is nothing I wish to buy...besides vacations and trips.
After nearly 40 years of work, 20 of it in the Army, I was finally getting to the point where I thought I might be getting to the financial success part, at least in a very small way. Not wealth, just a degree of comfort beyond not having to stretch the payments too far between paychecks.
Now though, my wife and I have begun to talk about how we can reduce our income and be less successful if all this redistribution crap comes to pass - as it looks like it will. I don't intend to work myself into the grave to pay for anyone's grandiose notions of socialism. I just don't know what I'll do at my age and still with a mortgage (that I'm paying, thank you) and teenagers in the house.
BTW, I have been listening to CPAC while I work today. Newt Gingrich was brilliant and may have the best idea going on how to beat this progressive BS. If you didn't listen to him, Townhall has the videos saved: http://www.ustream.tv/flash/video/1193502
Gee, thud ... What a great offer! I've been to England once, in the 1980s and I adored it. I've always been an Anglophile, and so has my husband, who is a history buff [me too]. If we can bestir our aged bodies, and get ourselves through Airport Security, we may take you up on it.
Merrill hat nun vor dem obersten Gericht des Staates New York Klage eingereicht. Eric Heaton habe am 3. Februar bei Merrill gekündigt und noch am selben Tag bei der Deutschen Bank angefangen. Er habe damit Konkurrenzschutzklauseln verletzt, erst nach Ablauf eines Jahres hätte er bei einem Wettbewerber beginnen können. Außerdem breche die Deutsche Bank den Schutz von Firmengeheimnissen, Heaton habe Kenntnisse über sensible Informationen wie Kunden und Geldquellen von Merrill Lynch. Die Bank will nach Angaben ihres Anwalts 100 Millionen Dollar Schadenersatz.
Die Deutsche Bank wollte sich zu dem Streit nicht äußern. Aus ihrer Abwerbestrategie macht sie allerdings keinen Hehl. Bei der Bilanzpressekonferenz Anfang Februar hatte Vorstandschef Josef Ackermann angekündigt, die Bank wolle die Krise nutzen, um Talente von schwächeren Konkurrenten zu locken. Er deutete damals an, er könne sich vorstellen, dass vor allem Mitarbeiter von Banken unter Staatseinfluss gerne zu einem Institut wechseln, das frei von politischen Einflüssen sei. Die amerikanische Regierung hat die Bank of America, die Merrill Lynch im Herbst übernommen hatte, mit 25 Milliarden Dollar gestützt. In Bankenkreisen heißt es, angeschlagene Häuser wie Merrill wehrten sich auch deswegen so aggressiv gegen Abwerbeversuche, weil sie fürchteten, dadurch weiter geschwächt zu werden.