A friend sent me this article from the Atlantic:
http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200909/health-care
It is a good, if not long, read on the author's take regarding the real issue within the current healthcare debate. I can't say that 2outof4 disagrees. There is a lot in the article that's been said on this site before. What is being discussed at present is by no means real reform!
Enjoy the start to your week.
-2outof4
Sunday, August 23, 2009
Thursday, August 20, 2009
Cash for You Name It...
Hello! I'm back from one of the most phenomenal, albeit short, vacations of my life. I highly recommend checking out the frontier-like Arizona Strip. In the vicinity are the northern rim of the Grand Canyon, Bryce Canyon and Zion National Park. Truly an amazing area of the country.
While I was traveling I thought about the idea of posting the occasional video message in the future. Would that liven things up?
In the meantime, I realize this money was essentially pre-authorized, but how slippery a slope is this?:
http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20090819-713704.html
I read today that Democratic Party approval has dropped below 50% for the first time since President Obama entered office. This is neither a good nor bad thing in my mind per se, but it seems to suggest that the populace is not ignorant to what is going on around it. Why would you want your taxes to fund Joe Bob's new dishwasher?
When I was out in AZ I picked a bumper sticker for my friend who would rather go back to the '80s than try any dramatic change such as the FairTax. It reads: "I'll keep my guns, freedom, and money. You can keep the change!" Seems like that might be tough.
-2outof4
While I was traveling I thought about the idea of posting the occasional video message in the future. Would that liven things up?
In the meantime, I realize this money was essentially pre-authorized, but how slippery a slope is this?:
http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20090819-713704.html
I read today that Democratic Party approval has dropped below 50% for the first time since President Obama entered office. This is neither a good nor bad thing in my mind per se, but it seems to suggest that the populace is not ignorant to what is going on around it. Why would you want your taxes to fund Joe Bob's new dishwasher?
When I was out in AZ I picked a bumper sticker for my friend who would rather go back to the '80s than try any dramatic change such as the FairTax. It reads: "I'll keep my guns, freedom, and money. You can keep the change!" Seems like that might be tough.
-2outof4
Friday, August 14, 2009
Savings Question
My mind is not really on money or politics as I get ready to go out to AZ tomorrow morning. However, can anyone explain the different pricing (rates) on these CD's from HSBC Direct?
https://www.hsbcdirect.com/1/2/1/default/learn-more/ocd?code=CSM0000630&WT.ac=HBUS_CSM0000630
To me the 12 month one sticks out as a no-brainer. Are they just trying to reel you in or is there a reason I'm not considering that the 12 month offer seems mispriced?
Compare the above to ING Direct:
http://home.ingdirect.com/products/products.asp?s=OrangeCD
I know the absolute return is laughable, but that 12 month HSBC CD seems like a relative deal.
I assume neither of the above banks believes that anyone is going to sign up for a CD of greater duration than 12 months in today's environment, so maybe HSBC is only planning on shorter duration customers and therefore use the longer dated CD's as marketing for that 12 monther. It made me curious.
Have a great weekend!
-2outof4
https://www.hsbcdirect.com/1/2/1/default/learn-more/ocd?code=CSM0000630&WT.ac=HBUS_CSM0000630
To me the 12 month one sticks out as a no-brainer. Are they just trying to reel you in or is there a reason I'm not considering that the 12 month offer seems mispriced?
Compare the above to ING Direct:
http://home.ingdirect.com/products/products.asp?s=OrangeCD
I know the absolute return is laughable, but that 12 month HSBC CD seems like a relative deal.
I assume neither of the above banks believes that anyone is going to sign up for a CD of greater duration than 12 months in today's environment, so maybe HSBC is only planning on shorter duration customers and therefore use the longer dated CD's as marketing for that 12 monther. It made me curious.
Have a great weekend!
-2outof4
Wednesday, August 12, 2009
Whole Health
The CEO of Whole Foods has done some wacky things, see posting on investing Internet sites pushing the merger of Whole Foods and Wild Oats. However, he's got some interesting points re Healthcare:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204251404574342170072865070.html
-2outof4
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204251404574342170072865070.html
-2outof4
Sunday, August 9, 2009
Commuter Blues
I drove into work on Tuesday because I had to go to PT afterward (BTW, I actually ran two minutes a couple of times last week) and it was a miserable commute.
At least on the train I can peruse the reading of my choice. All the radio shows talked about were the continued and increasing spending on various programs the government considers necessary. My very own Mayor is lobbying the state legislature to allow for an increased city sales tax for a "limited time" to cover the city's deficit.
My favorite program though is "Cash for Clunkers". How many times has 2outof4 said that if you provide free money, people will spend it! My forensic accountant hat says that this is a huge revenue pull-forward and will only inhibit future revenue growth.
I've been advocating a change to our tax system and highlighting the negatives within the current Withholding structure in regards to government spending, but maybe what we need is an excuse for these pols to limit spending! This articles was sent to me and outlines just that sort of mandate:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203946904574300513655895856.html
Maybe because talking about money in America is taboo from an early age, and there is essentially no education on personal finance as American kids grow up with the exception of what they observe mom and dad doing, we are just uncomfortable confronting each other when spending has to be cut off.
I just went through the unpleasant experience of telling friends I would be unable to make the excursion to Vegas at the end of the month for another friend's bachelor party. But look, am I going to pay for the myriad new insurances that come with being married and a previously planned trip to go and visit Mrs. 2outof4 at her most recent outpost, or am I going to load up the credit card to the tune of another $400 to $600? I certainly would not hang myself out as a model of fiscal restraint over the last year and a half, but in this case the decision was simple, although hard.
We have to start making these kind of harder decisions on the State and Federal levels of government spending. If we cannot really afford Obamacare
(http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203609204574314622075560890.html) or
Cash for Clunkers or Cap and Trade without raising taxes on the Middle Class, then let's figure out another way.
There is no reason to not find innovative, lower cost solutions to the majority of our perceived "necessities" (see prior post on Philadelphia libraries: http://2outof4.blogspot.com/2009/02/hey-mayor-nutter-likes-libraries-too.html), but if the only way to do it is by borrowing from the future, then maybe the only way to control our government spendthrifts is by limiting the amount they can spend!
-2outof4
At least on the train I can peruse the reading of my choice. All the radio shows talked about were the continued and increasing spending on various programs the government considers necessary. My very own Mayor is lobbying the state legislature to allow for an increased city sales tax for a "limited time" to cover the city's deficit.
My favorite program though is "Cash for Clunkers". How many times has 2outof4 said that if you provide free money, people will spend it! My forensic accountant hat says that this is a huge revenue pull-forward and will only inhibit future revenue growth.
I've been advocating a change to our tax system and highlighting the negatives within the current Withholding structure in regards to government spending, but maybe what we need is an excuse for these pols to limit spending! This articles was sent to me and outlines just that sort of mandate:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203946904574300513655895856.html
Maybe because talking about money in America is taboo from an early age, and there is essentially no education on personal finance as American kids grow up with the exception of what they observe mom and dad doing, we are just uncomfortable confronting each other when spending has to be cut off.
I just went through the unpleasant experience of telling friends I would be unable to make the excursion to Vegas at the end of the month for another friend's bachelor party. But look, am I going to pay for the myriad new insurances that come with being married and a previously planned trip to go and visit Mrs. 2outof4 at her most recent outpost, or am I going to load up the credit card to the tune of another $400 to $600? I certainly would not hang myself out as a model of fiscal restraint over the last year and a half, but in this case the decision was simple, although hard.
We have to start making these kind of harder decisions on the State and Federal levels of government spending. If we cannot really afford Obamacare
(http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203609204574314622075560890.html) or
Cash for Clunkers or Cap and Trade without raising taxes on the Middle Class, then let's figure out another way.
There is no reason to not find innovative, lower cost solutions to the majority of our perceived "necessities" (see prior post on Philadelphia libraries: http://2outof4.blogspot.com/2009/02/hey-mayor-nutter-likes-libraries-too.html), but if the only way to do it is by borrowing from the future, then maybe the only way to control our government spendthrifts is by limiting the amount they can spend!
-2outof4
Saturday, August 1, 2009
Dutchman's Quiz
These are my responses to Dutchman's FairTax quiz. What do you think?
(1) HR25 abolishes the IRS and the IRC.False. However, it will greatly reduce both the cost and size of the organizations.
(2) There are 67,000 pages in the Internal Revenue Code and supporting Regulations.False. Although, I have no idea of the exact page count, the number is too high. Can anyone argue that shorter less politically manipulable (I may have just made this word up) code is worse than what we currently have in place?
(3) A sales tax inclusive rate of 23% would be revenue neutral.False.
(4) The after tax price of retail purchases will be about the same.False.
(5) The “prebate” is a tax refund paid in advance.I know your answer is False, but I don’t want to play games of semantics. The prebate is money to cover an essential basket of goods for everyone. So whether it’s a refund or in advance, I’m not really concerned. It helps offset the consumption tax for people that the FairTax would otherwise be a regressive form of taxation.
(6) Your dollars will purchase more under the Fairtax.True. My tax dollars will purchase more under the FairTax. I have demonstrated this using your numbers.
(7) You choose when and how much tax to pay.True. Please don’t come back with false on this based on verbiage. Under the FairTax I choose when and how much of a good(s) I purchase.
(8) Everyone will be economically better off under the Fairtax.False. This is from an immediate financial standpoint. Over time though, I believe that the country as a whole will be better off.
(9) Interest bearing investment and debt instruments are not taxed.This needs to be verified. If your read of 801-806 is accurate then the answer is False. That provision of the FairTax would then need to be adjusted!
(10) There is $10-$15 trillion of US owned assets in offshore accounts.This is the viewpoint of the authors of The FairTax Book. I’m not sure how either you or they prove it. It is fair to say there is some percentage of that number at minimum.
(11) Buying “used” goods, (tax previously paid), eliminates the tax costs from the sales price.False. Of course the initial tax is imbedded in the reseller’s mind as part of the COGS.
(12) A national sales tax would have no impact on State and Local governments.False. There will be lots of impacts. My viewpoint is that those impacts would be beneficial and go toward making State and Locals more sensible when it comes to spending their revenues.
(13) FICA payroll deductions are a tax.True. I would prefer non-government run/third party payor insurance programs. It is a tax on me because I could provide for my retirement and long-term care better and at a lower cost than the current programs do.
(14) The Fairtax will save Social Security.False.
(15) The Fairtax is progressive.
False. It is not progressive. However, it is far less regressive than both the current system and a Flat Tax.
-2outof4
(1) HR25 abolishes the IRS and the IRC.False. However, it will greatly reduce both the cost and size of the organizations.
(2) There are 67,000 pages in the Internal Revenue Code and supporting Regulations.False. Although, I have no idea of the exact page count, the number is too high. Can anyone argue that shorter less politically manipulable (I may have just made this word up) code is worse than what we currently have in place?
(3) A sales tax inclusive rate of 23% would be revenue neutral.False.
(4) The after tax price of retail purchases will be about the same.False.
(5) The “prebate” is a tax refund paid in advance.I know your answer is False, but I don’t want to play games of semantics. The prebate is money to cover an essential basket of goods for everyone. So whether it’s a refund or in advance, I’m not really concerned. It helps offset the consumption tax for people that the FairTax would otherwise be a regressive form of taxation.
(6) Your dollars will purchase more under the Fairtax.True. My tax dollars will purchase more under the FairTax. I have demonstrated this using your numbers.
(7) You choose when and how much tax to pay.True. Please don’t come back with false on this based on verbiage. Under the FairTax I choose when and how much of a good(s) I purchase.
(8) Everyone will be economically better off under the Fairtax.False. This is from an immediate financial standpoint. Over time though, I believe that the country as a whole will be better off.
(9) Interest bearing investment and debt instruments are not taxed.This needs to be verified. If your read of 801-806 is accurate then the answer is False. That provision of the FairTax would then need to be adjusted!
(10) There is $10-$15 trillion of US owned assets in offshore accounts.This is the viewpoint of the authors of The FairTax Book. I’m not sure how either you or they prove it. It is fair to say there is some percentage of that number at minimum.
(11) Buying “used” goods, (tax previously paid), eliminates the tax costs from the sales price.False. Of course the initial tax is imbedded in the reseller’s mind as part of the COGS.
(12) A national sales tax would have no impact on State and Local governments.False. There will be lots of impacts. My viewpoint is that those impacts would be beneficial and go toward making State and Locals more sensible when it comes to spending their revenues.
(13) FICA payroll deductions are a tax.True. I would prefer non-government run/third party payor insurance programs. It is a tax on me because I could provide for my retirement and long-term care better and at a lower cost than the current programs do.
(14) The Fairtax will save Social Security.False.
(15) The Fairtax is progressive.
False. It is not progressive. However, it is far less regressive than both the current system and a Flat Tax.
-2outof4
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
