Posts by wearytrucker22

dustyscout53 said:Man, I’d start by slashing Congressional salaries by 20% and nixing those sweet pension perks. Not even about the money—it's just about sending a message to the people, you know?

Then comes the shock treatment:

- grab an IMF loan to tackle our internal debt once and for all

- bring in a property tax

- privatize 49% of state-run giants—think forestry, water, Amtrak, or Duke Energy—under an American banner

- overhaul labor laws to be more flexible, basically sidelining unions by showing how they protect slackers instead of actual workers

- administrative cleanup—first step would be reverting to the number of cities and counties we had back in the America days. The current setup makes zero sense since we're financially centralized but totally decentralized administratively—counties and towns don't mean much when they aren't getting any budget flow anyway

- give those extra bureaucrats some severance pay and push them toward training so they can help pull in more EU funds

- fix the whole government pay scale so it's based on performance rather than just how long you've been sitting in the chair

- a massive wave of privatization—sell off majority stakes in companies like Končar, Kraft Heinz, or Dow Chemical (since we clearly haven't mastered running them)

- actually fix the judicial system and get the courts on track—honestly, there are more judges here than in England

- tighten the leash on agricultural subsidies

- take out an IMF loan to digitize land registries (but only after we scrub the corruption out of the IT sector)

- find a way to finally put all that abandoned military property to good use

But who’s actually going to pull that off? It’s much easier to stick to the old ways: just open at least 2,000 new government agencies. Only this time, don't put them in Washington, D.C.; spread them across the rest of America so you can employ maybe 100,000 to 200,000 new bureaucrats and non-profits dedicated to "social development"—you know, things like protecting ants, counting swallows, or monitoring grains of sand on beaches.
Basically, just complicate everything until it breaks.
Allow people to buy back their years of service so everyone can retire whenever they feel like it.

Mostly, we should just take out loans wherever we can find them—the bigger and longer the term, the better. That way, we won't be the ones paying them back; someone else will. Our kids, or if we're lucky, our grandkids.
Did we even finish paying off that last loan our people spent 60 or 70 years settling?

The only real way to handle the US Federal Budget and the economy is to just keep selling bonds and piling on the debt like we’ve always done. Then, at the very end, you just declare default and wipe the slate clean—either write off everything or buy back the debt for maybe 5-10% of its value.

The Federal Reserve actually managed to catch me off guard. Just check out this clip from a major news network—one that usually goes all in supporting the right wing and those billionaire elites.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=S9tNVxm1y84

brightfalcon66 said:It’s never that simple... everything is tied together in this messy web, and we’re all just sitting here waiting to see who actually comes out on top in this high-stakes chess match between the USA and China...

The whole thing really hinges on the value of the dollar... and honestly, the way Americans manipulate its value isn't some deep conspiracy, it's been common knowledge for ages. I mean, other countries mess with their currencies all the time to shave down debt or juice up exports, but if the dollar loses its status as the world's reserve currency, the US is in huge trouble because they won't be able to just print money and export their inflation to everyone else anymore—not since the US is already sliding into a recession in all but name...

China is currently sitting on a surplus with the USA... so to keep that balance, they have to keep buying up those Treasury bonds, even though most of them are basically worth nothing at this point... They've "bought" into a chunk of American debt just so they can have some leverage and a reason to call out the USA for controlling the world's trade currency. It doesn't suit them to let the USA dictate terms whenever they feel like it...

Even if it looks like China is folding, I highly doubt they’d buy those bonds without backing them up with physical assets like gold or water rights... Their economic philosophy has always been about the long game rather than quick wins, because when a Chinese person makes a deal, they aren't looking at immediate profits—they're looking at what happens ten or twenty years down the road...

The Chinese have already signaled that if their savings become too vulnerable, they will move to annex Taiwan and, in a direct countermove, nationalize private American investments held in China.

Anthony Booth4 said:Who actually owns all that American debt, and how much does the US end up paying in interest alone every year just to service it? Who's getting that money?

And what would happen if the USA just announced they couldn't pay it back anymore?

Well, look at the breakdown. American funds and private citizens hold about $1,000 trillion...
China holds 1,160, Japan has 882, the UK has 272, OPEC nations have 212, Brazil has 186, offshore accounts account for 168, Taiwan has 155, Russia has 152, and even smaller players might hold around 11 billion, bringing the total toward that $4,440 trillion mark.

The US will only declare they can't pay if they literally run out of paper for the printing presses. Theoretically speaking, the US can never stop paying its debts because they borrowed in dollars—and they control the mint, not the creditors. Plus, they're sitting on massive gold reserves.

Jerry Martinez5 said:I’m not reading all five pages: has anyone actually secured a loan from an Austrian bank, or are you all just victims of a scam?

I successfully landed a loan and I’ve already paid it back, thank God. The whole process took maybe 5 to 10 minutes before the cash was in hand, and I made quarterly payments. It moved that fast because my collateral was rock solid. I had my own Star 20 life insurance policy sitting right there with them, plus a German citizen acting as my guarantor (he's my cousin's husband) with a fresh policy.
When I went to settle the debt, they even mentioned they handle mortgage loans for coastal properties without any issues.
Just so nobody thinks I'm crazy or that I was somehow helping some German guy buy an apartment in Regensburg by acting as his guarantor—I backed him by securing a mortgage lien in the land registry.

Justin Walker24 said:So, I’m thinking about finally biting the bullet and starting my own small business, and honestly, my head is kind of spinning with all the moving parts! Does anyone know what the actual deal is with getting a loan—like, am I even eligible, what kind of interest rates are we looking at, and how much of a headache is the whole application process? Also, does anyone have a ballpark figure on what it actually costs just to get the company registered? And oh! Is there still money on the table for hiring employees through those government subsidies, or has that dried up? (Seriously, if there's anything else I should be worrying about right now, please, please let me know!)

Since I’m based out of Indianapolis, is there any way I can qualify for those special economic development zones or rural revitalization programs, and if so, what kind of perks am I looking at?

Thanks a million in advance!

😍😂😂 You’ve got me laughing my head off here. You'd probably be out there demanding "rights" to a loan from big Austrian or French investment banks. You'd probably expect zero interest and a ten-year grace period, too.😂

Just a bit of satire to lighten the mood. Mystic, let's be real: you don't have an inherent "right" to a loan when you're just starting out with zero collateral. Honestly, someone working a minimum-wage government job is more likely to get approved than a brand-new entrepreneur—unless, of course, you happen to be a high-ranking member of the Republican Party and snag a grant from a local postal bank.
After you've been running things successfully for maybe three or four years, you might finally qualify for credit based on your revenue (though don't hold your breath), adjusted upward by about 30%.

brightlynx11 said:Next time, before you swallow the garbage being spewed by local news outlets (or just lazy hacks rewriting foreign reports), maybe try reading the full report yourself.

http://www.kpmg.com/Global/en/Issues...x-oct-2010.pdf

Our broader analysis comparing both effective income tax and social security rates on USD100,000 and USD300,000 of gross income emphasizes the point that other taxes and the impact of deductions clearly need to be considered. Effective rates were derived by taking total taxes over gross income prior to any deductions (which may include social security) to allow for better comparison as deductions can vary greatly across countries. While Sweden is clearly at the higher end of each scenario, it does not actually have the top rate. Using a USD100,000 basis for example, America, Canada and Greece All have higher combined effective rates ranging from approximately 45 to 52 percent. The primary difference here is social security.Whether social security is a true tax may be debated but in terms of cost, it can be material and should not be forgotten. We have, therefore, again included a review of both the employee and employer contributions for completeness. Social security components can vary significantly including by country, employer and employee type. For ease of comparison across countries, we have therefore again restricted the review to recognized core contribution requirements for employees earning gross income of USD100,000 and USD300,000. The results show France has the highest combined rate at approximately 60 percent under either scenario followed by Belgium at 48 percent.

Also, who knows if that number even applies to the Republic of America. $100k a year is roughly $103 gross annually, leaving you with $330 net per year. That’s about $111 a month. You can't draw any real conclusions about how the tax is distributed if your analysis only looks at the top 8.5% and ignores everyone else, especially since according to the U.S. Census Bureau, that top 8.5% of workers makes $2667 net or more. So yeah... 🙄

Yeah, right. Like our Republican Party gave us the lowest taxes ever, give me a break.

Next year, the United States is facing a massive wave of foreign debt repayments$11.4 billion
What’s truly depressing is where all that borrowed cash actually went. It was poured into highway construction projects, luxury apartment complexes, and those consumer loans people took out just to afford a car or a house. You see the same pattern with federal and local government spending—a huge chunk of it basically vanished into administrative overhead, salaries, pensions, and social programs. Now, we’re staring down a bill where we have to pay over a billion dollars just in interest on all that borrowed money. Foreign creditors are getting nervous about whether the U.S. can actually stay current on its payments. This debt will eventually be paid back by draining future savings, which means there will be significantly less money left for actual investments down the road. To keep things looking stable, those foreign lenders are breathing down our necks to ramp up foreign exchange reserves.

Steven Lopez20 said:I'm not entirely sure if our taxes are actually the highest, but I do know that a specific car model costs us about 94 $0.00 while in Norway it goes for 200 $0.00. Maybe that's saying something?!

Denmark hits cars with excise taxes of about 200%. Honestly, let Jadranka Kosor just go ahead and slap a 300% tax on new cars, then drop income tax to 15%, corporate tax to 15%, and Sales Tax to 15%.

Emily Nelson4 said:I just stumbled upon this research data point—$100,000 a year. Wow. I mean, wouldn't it be great if they actually conducted a study on people making $15,000 a year? That would probably be way more applicable to about 95% of Americans... I guess in countries with a higher GDP per capita, those larger figures are more commonly viewed as the non-taxable portion.

At $15,000 a year, you’re also getting social security benefits on top of that.

Monthly
Gross Income ,,,, $1,250.00
Taxable Income ,,,, $0.00
Federal tax ,,,, $0.00
social Security ,,,,, $95.63
State Tax ,,,, $0.00
Take Home ,,,, $1,154.38

casuallynx8 said:Where exactly did the income tax go? ☕

Well, you only provided a link regarding payroll deductions, so that's why I answered the way I did.

Steven Lopez20 said:I'm not entirely sure if our taxes are actually the highest, but I do know that a specific car model costs us about 94 $0.00 while in Norway it goes for 200 $0.00. Maybe that's saying something?!

Sure, but in Norway, you get a fully finished, reliable vehicle that actually starts at -40 degrees. The stuff being sold in Eastern Europe or the North America is basically a semi-finished product made with cheap materials—just junk coming out of Europe and Japan. There's zero chance a car bought in America is going to start up in -40 degree weather.

casuallynx8 said:If that’s the case, then the claim that we pay the highest taxes is simply inaccurate. Don't get me wrong—that isn't to say I'm an advocate for our current tax system (those who follow my posts know exactly where I stand on that matter 😁), but there are certainly nations with much heavier burdens. Take Sweden, for instance. Their state income tax can climb as high as 55%, and on top of that, employers have to shell out an additional 31.42% in contributions beyond the base salary 😁 (http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sourc...qANvoQ&cad=rja)

Sweden's employer burdens are brutal
Retirement pension 10.21 %
Survivor’s pension 1.70 %
Health insurance 5.95 %
unknown 0.68 %
unknown 2.20%
unemployment insurance 4.65%
payroll 6.03%
total statutory employer contribution 31.42%
source: IRS

America portion of payroll taxes excluding income tax

Medicare/Social Security Administration: 15.00 %
1st pillar pension: 15.00 %
2nd pillar pension: 5.00 %
Employment contribution: 1.70 %
Workplace injury contribution: 0.50 %

Total AMERICA leads 37.2 %

Damn, we're beating Sweden by a mere 5.78 % when it comes to these levies

Hey politicians, we're clearly tougher than the Swedes—hurry up and hike these taxes by at least 10-20%

And if anyone tries to tell me we have enough untaxed income $600, well, look at Austria: anyone earning less than 999 Euros a month is considered poor and entitled to assistance.
What else should we tax? Social welfare cases, maybe?

When it comes to taxation, we're world champions, second only to unknown
and we even managed to snag a silver medal from the IMF for having the most disastrous economy right behind Kyrgyzstan

If only the folks over at KPMG could actually nail down an estimate of what we’re bleeding through all those direct and indirect taxes and fees. Not that it's even possible to get a straight answer. We're still looking at
Sales Tax at 23%
Fuel excise taxes plus that 23% Sales Tax
And what about local development fees? Maybe some percentage there?
Then you’ve got the special levies every time we grab a meal out
On top of that, consumers are getting hit by a massive forest of non-tax fees—water, sanitation, tourism surcharges... honestly, at this rate, I wouldn't be surprised if the U.S. Chamber of Commerce started billing us for the air we breathe.
Plus, since everyone has to live somewhere, a huge chunk of the value tied up in residential property is basically just swallowed by non-taxable levies.

source

A study covering 86 different nations has revealed that America holds the title for the highest combined tax burden in the world. This calculation specifically looks at the combined weight of income tax and employee social security contributions for anyone pulling in $100,000 annually.

When you crunch those specific numbers, America’s combined rate hits a staggering 53.3 percent, according to a recent review of income tax and social security rates released by KPMG. The Bureau of Labor Statistics report used in this research placed a heavy emphasis on income tax percentages.

unknown regarding entrepreneurship
'Lower interest rates? That won't save us either!'

The data suggests that while tax rates remain stagnant in most places, there is a general upward trend emerging this year. It seems governments are increasingly leaning on tax hikes as a primary weapon to tackle budget deficits. Much of this recent increase is concentrated in Europe. According to The New York Times, citizens across the European Union continue to shoulder the heaviest income tax burdens, with average rates climbing by 0.3 percent over the last year.

The report also notes that countries in Central and Eastern Europe still maintain some of the lowest income tax rates globally.

Regarding the situation in America, KPMG points out that although the top marginal income tax rate was dropped from 45 percent to 40 percent this past July—along with a few other tweaks to the code—the country still sits at the very top of the list for combined tax burdens. Following closely behind are Canada at 47.9 percent, Papua New Guinea at 47.4 percent, Greece at 44.7 percent, and Austria at 43.5 percent.

Paul Suchar, a tax and business advisory partner at KPMG, notes that when corporations decide where to station their workforce, taxation becomes a make-or-break factor. This is especially true for multinational giants deciding where to plant their regional headquarters.

"At the same time, tax authorities are under mounting pressure to identify and secure more revenue. In response, they are becoming increasingly sophisticated and aggressive in how they draft and enforce regulations, not just for income tax, but for VAT and corporate tax as well," Suchar explains.

According to KPMG, the seven-year global trend of declining top income tax rates appears to have finally come to an end.

On top of leading the pack in high taxes, America also finds itself near the top of the pile for unemployment. With a jobless rate of 12.4 percent in August, it ranked seventh out of 32 countries monitored by the U.S. Census Bureau, a group that includes major economies like the USA and Japan. Within the EU, Spain continues to struggle with the highest unemployment at 20.5 percent, followed by Slovakia at 14.6 percent and Ireland at 13.9 percent.

swiftotter9 said:Honestly, I have to admit that at the social services office they didn't even ask why I was withdrawing cash or what I was spending it on, but I was acting pretty pissed off, so maybe they just didn't want to deal with me.😁
And I’ll never understand how this protects my kid's interests. It just sounds like another half-baked idea from some out-of-touch politician.🙏

As for whose money it actually is... sorry wearytrucker22, but it’s mine. My kid, my responsibility, my assets. This isn't some untouchable trust fund or a housing savings plan, and it's definitely not an "emergency fund" because life is hard enough as it is right now. It’s just basic savings for a child that gets topped up by child support a few times a year—it's entirely my call whether I save those amounts or use them.

It isn't just your kid, and it definitely isn't just your business.
To put it bluntly, every child is essentially future state property. They are a person that the government starts investing in almost immediately after birth via maternity benefits, then they provide free schooling and healthcare. But here’s the kicker: for everything that person consumes from the moment of conception, the government takes its cut. Roughly speaking, about 30% of everything that goes into a person's mouth goes straight to the state, and 30% of everything that comes out goes back to the state—only this time, it's not in goods, it's cold hard cash. That individual basically dresses the state in 30% of their life.
Once that person actually lands a job, the government doesn't just take 30% anymore; at that point, it's a fifty-fifty split.
And if you ever get a little heated and lay a hand on that kid, you'll quickly realize exactly who that child belongs to once the sirens of the police cars start wailing outside.
The state will slap you down and tell you, "No, no, no, you can't mistreat our future taxpayer." They're the only ones allowed to mess with them—not physically, sure, but psychologically.

Steven Rivera76 said:That isn't my child's property, it's mine. Like I said, that's where the child support was being deposited so we could actually save something. I can say with total certainty those funds would go toward the kid, since most of my income goes straight to them anyway. My grandma obviously can't touch that account—no one can except me. But the whole situation is absurd. How am I supposed to prove to an agency like CPS that I spent the money on my child? Am I expected to carry around receipts just because I bought them sneakers or jeans?
And how does this actually protect my child's rights?

I've come to realize that Law and Justice are two completely different things.
Technically, you have a right to that money, but legally, you're facing restrictions, and there isn't a soul who can help you with that.
You mentioned that Grandma can't withdraw from the account and that nobody else can either—so why shouldn't the person paying the support be able to take the money out and buy something for the kid?
We went in with some experts who tried to explain how stocks lose value and that we might end up losing everything. I was a bit too blunt with my words, so I ended up at the police station and now I'm facing criminal charges.
In the future, just open a savings account in your own name and have the child support deposited there. And whatever you do, don't be rude at the Social Security office; they can shut you down in a heartbeat.
The only upside to this entire mess is that whenever my wife starts nagging me about anything, I just tell her, "Dammit, the stocks dropped again," and she immediately gets a headache, pops a pill, goes to bed, and I get peace and quiet for two or three days.😁 I guess she hasn't realized they can't drop any further since they're already at rock bottom.

I don't know what to tell you. It’s just a balalaika. No deep meaning here. Just an instrument. kaže:
I know for a fact I’m never stepping foot inside a Chase branch again. Not ever. And the idea of opening some stupid kids' savings account? Forget it. I can't wrap my head around living in a country where I apparently need permission from every suit in a cubicle just to manage my own money. I have full control over my assets.Honestly, if you ask me, that’s just how it is. I feel like my fundamental constitutional rights are being systematically stripped away.First off, nobody lifts a finger when my ex goes two full years without paying a cent in child support. Then, the second he finally coughs up the money, suddenly I can't even access it without... what, exactly? Whose permission am I supposed to get? It makes zero sense to me that anyone has the authority to limit how I handle my own funds. out of pocketHonestly, it’s pointless to even debate this. The whole damn country is just someone else's private playground.🙄

Look, I hate to be the one to break it to you, but that isn't actually your asset—it belongs to your child. You and your spouse have fundamental obligations toward that kid, whereas the child owes absolutely nothing to either of you.
This law is a complete mess. Honestly, they really should just let it happen. $333 It should be an annual payout, not some random collection of scraps. We’re talking about real capital here—money that actually gives kids a leg up to start their lives on once they hit eighteen.
Look, regardless of how much cash you deposited into that account—or let's call it what it was, a gift to your kid—once he accepts it, that money is his. It’s done. You don't have any claim to it anymore. It works the same way if a grandfather, a grandma, or anyone else decided to cut him a check. Once it hits the account, it's his. A bank doesn't care about the sentimentality behind the transfer; they just see the transaction. If a grandma wanted to withdraw money she had previously gifted, she couldn't just walk in and demand it back because it wasn't hers anymore.
I’ve had some incredibly bitter experiences myself, and it’s costing me a fortune. We’re talking a multi-million dollar hit in stocks that the local Social Security Administration refused to let me liquidate. By the time they finally cleared it, the shares had plummeted by 80% in value. Now? I’m left holding nothing but empty hands.

Headline from Free California...
"WEDDING NIGHTMARE: 'They used weapons to force us to pay for terrible pirate food'"

Look, I don't necessarily buy everything you read in the news, but you really have to look at both sides of the story. Usually, a fight takes two people to get started, but there are always exceptions to that rule.

Look, they have every right to fix a bookkeeping error without even checking with you first—at the end of the day, it’s their bank, not yours. You’re entitled to file a formal complaint, sure, provided you can produce a deposit slip, a signed contract, or whatever other paperwork proves those funds actually belonged to you. But since they aren't your money, what are you even going to do about it?