February new home sales prices increased to 8.3 percent which is the largest jump in years.
On the other hand.
U.S. new home sales fell 1.6% in February to a 313,000 units pace. This was lower than what was expected and lower than the 318,000 number which came in for January.
Just as things on the macro side begin to brighten, oil, the price of dark oil begins to rear its ugly head.
It is very possible the U.S. could slip into another recession if oil prices reach around $150 per barrel.
Every ten dollar rise in oil will take take about 20 basis points off U.S. GDP growth in each of the first two
years of the price hike. Its important to remember that Gasoline, motor fuels, and fuel oil account for 5.5% of household spending, and rising.
A $10 rise in crude oil prices will hike gasoline prices by about 25 cents (8%) and cut consumers’ purchasing
power by about 0.4% which is a large number in this fragile recovery.
Monday, March 26, 2012
Monday, March 19, 2012
The case for reits
REITs offer potential for both capital appreciation and dividend increases. When the economy is doing well, companies expand and rent more office space. Employees, in turn, feel confident and rent larger apartments or storage units.
Companies also send employees out on the road to attract new business, so hotels do well. As businesses increase production and distribution of goods, they use more industrial space. And, with all this demand, REITs generally have increased pricing power.
The outlook for residential REITs looks positive. A lower homeowner rate, despite government incentives, and modest new supply (construction) look like they are both working in favor of multi-family operators.
Indeed, residential REITs — which usually own apartment buildings — reported average occupancy figures of more than 95% for the fourth quarter of 2011, allowing a push on new rents to higher levels.
Rents will continue to increase and roll through apartment portfolios in 2012 as U.S. job markets look to slowly recover. Many apartment REITs are also expressing renewed interest in acquisitions. The number of bidders and property valuations has increased in recent months.
It is easy to see a positive fundamental outlook on retail REITs as well. Although challenges remain and raising rents is always a contentious issue, its easy to think that increasing absorption of retail space should present retail landlords with more pricing power. If consumer spending and retail sales improve over the next 12 months, this should prompt a further slowdown in store closings.
The national office vacancy rate has stabilized at about 17.0%, up from about 12.5% at the end of 2007. If the economy improves vacancy levels should edge down in 2012.
Companies also send employees out on the road to attract new business, so hotels do well. As businesses increase production and distribution of goods, they use more industrial space. And, with all this demand, REITs generally have increased pricing power.
The outlook for residential REITs looks positive. A lower homeowner rate, despite government incentives, and modest new supply (construction) look like they are both working in favor of multi-family operators.
Indeed, residential REITs — which usually own apartment buildings — reported average occupancy figures of more than 95% for the fourth quarter of 2011, allowing a push on new rents to higher levels.
Rents will continue to increase and roll through apartment portfolios in 2012 as U.S. job markets look to slowly recover. Many apartment REITs are also expressing renewed interest in acquisitions. The number of bidders and property valuations has increased in recent months.
It is easy to see a positive fundamental outlook on retail REITs as well. Although challenges remain and raising rents is always a contentious issue, its easy to think that increasing absorption of retail space should present retail landlords with more pricing power. If consumer spending and retail sales improve over the next 12 months, this should prompt a further slowdown in store closings.
The national office vacancy rate has stabilized at about 17.0%, up from about 12.5% at the end of 2007. If the economy improves vacancy levels should edge down in 2012.
Friday, March 16, 2012
WELLS FARGO doubled their dividend.
After WELLS FARGO got approval from the FED, they doubled their quarterly dividend from $0.12 to .22 cents.
The increase is much larger than bank buyers were anticipating. This means that WFC is in a stronger position than many of its bank peers. Their capital levels and quality of their credit had to be sound for the FED to approve such a large increase.
The Fed also gave the green light to WFC for its aggressive capital plan. The capital plan includes share buybacks and redemptions of trust preferred securities.
The increase is much larger than bank buyers were anticipating. This means that WFC is in a stronger position than many of its bank peers. Their capital levels and quality of their credit had to be sound for the FED to approve such a large increase.
The Fed also gave the green light to WFC for its aggressive capital plan. The capital plan includes share buybacks and redemptions of trust preferred securities.
Friday, January 27, 2012
Modern Day Wealth Inequity
Here are some dirty stats on Wealth Inequity:
400 Americans own 3percent of all the nations wealth- they own more than 60% of all Americans combined.
top 1 percent own 43 percent of america
top 20% own 93% percent of america.
the bottom 80% own 7% of america
the bottom 50% own .02 percent of america.
in 1970 the bottom 99% owned 70% of america
in 2011 the bottom 99% own 57%
the bottom 90% account for 55% of all consumer spending. the barely middle class and the poor in the bottom 55% pay the majority of sales tax and the evil inflation tax.
400 Americans own 3percent of all the nations wealth- they own more than 60% of all Americans combined.
top 1 percent own 43 percent of america
top 20% own 93% percent of america.
the bottom 80% own 7% of america
the bottom 50% own .02 percent of america.
in 1970 the bottom 99% owned 70% of america
in 2011 the bottom 99% own 57%
the bottom 90% account for 55% of all consumer spending. the barely middle class and the poor in the bottom 55% pay the majority of sales tax and the evil inflation tax.
Thursday, January 19, 2012
CNBC: This is For all the Michelle Caruso Cabrera fans out there.
I report- you decide.
Fall Reading and Cookbooks.
Wednesday, January 4, 2012
If you own physical gold and silver you may want to hedge it with options.
There are plenty of investors that don’t trust ETFs for as a substitute for owning the physical metal in hand.
While this is completely understandable, it doesn’t’ mean that you can’t hedge what you own by using options on the GLD and SLV ETFs.
If you own thousands of dollars in precious metals, you are completely unhedged against severe market fluctuations.
Silver in particular displayed a lot of volatility in 2011, it had multiple 30% swings to both the upside and the downside.
The roller coaster ride was enough to make most owners a little bit squeamish.
The solution: Options.
If we take SLV as an example. We can purchase an (otm) out of the money put with 100 days till expiration, for .15 cents.
The catch: the put Is 30% out of the money.
That means you have unhedged for a 30% drop in the next 100 days, however, if silver were to drop precipitously the put would increase in value. The put would increase in value even if the spot price of silver didn’t fall below the strike price.
The reason, increased volitilty would make the put worth more than you paid for it. And at .15 cents, its pretty cheap protection for the next 100 days.
Hedging Gold (gld) is a little different. Gold hasn’t been as volatile as silver but you can still purchase a put that is 25% Out of the money for .20 cents. The question is though; with gold’s drop from 2000 does anyone expect it to drop another 25% this year? Either way- purchasing one put for 20 dollars, can protect your expensive gold holdings from a catastrophic drop.
I don’t favor purchasing puts less than 100 days before they expire, and I don’t believe the premium you have to pay for at (ATM) at the money put is worth it.
You are long term bullish on the metal, so it makes little sense to spend a ton of money to marry puts to your position at all times.
But, when the market is uncertain- owning a put is akin to owning insurance.
You insure all of your most precious assets, your precious metals must be thought of the same way.
If silver were to fall, you can sell the put for a profit, and purchase even more silver with it at the cheaper price point.
If the option expires worthless, as most do, then it would be the same as the premium you pay in your insurance policy- even if you never use it.
For bullish investors, I don’t calls work the same way. Instead of paying the premium for a call, you could just buy the physical. Most options expire worthless, so instead of wasting money on a call- you could own the metal in hand.
Its important to remember:
These puts are 30% out of the money. That means if gold or silver drop 15% your puts aren’t going to be worth much. The 15 dollar puts might be worth 100 bucks. Expectations need to correctly set.
While this is completely understandable, it doesn’t’ mean that you can’t hedge what you own by using options on the GLD and SLV ETFs.
If you own thousands of dollars in precious metals, you are completely unhedged against severe market fluctuations.
Silver in particular displayed a lot of volatility in 2011, it had multiple 30% swings to both the upside and the downside.
The roller coaster ride was enough to make most owners a little bit squeamish.
The solution: Options.
If we take SLV as an example. We can purchase an (otm) out of the money put with 100 days till expiration, for .15 cents.
The catch: the put Is 30% out of the money.
That means you have unhedged for a 30% drop in the next 100 days, however, if silver were to drop precipitously the put would increase in value. The put would increase in value even if the spot price of silver didn’t fall below the strike price.
The reason, increased volitilty would make the put worth more than you paid for it. And at .15 cents, its pretty cheap protection for the next 100 days.
Hedging Gold (gld) is a little different. Gold hasn’t been as volatile as silver but you can still purchase a put that is 25% Out of the money for .20 cents. The question is though; with gold’s drop from 2000 does anyone expect it to drop another 25% this year? Either way- purchasing one put for 20 dollars, can protect your expensive gold holdings from a catastrophic drop.
I don’t favor purchasing puts less than 100 days before they expire, and I don’t believe the premium you have to pay for at (ATM) at the money put is worth it.
You are long term bullish on the metal, so it makes little sense to spend a ton of money to marry puts to your position at all times.
But, when the market is uncertain- owning a put is akin to owning insurance.
You insure all of your most precious assets, your precious metals must be thought of the same way.
If silver were to fall, you can sell the put for a profit, and purchase even more silver with it at the cheaper price point.
If the option expires worthless, as most do, then it would be the same as the premium you pay in your insurance policy- even if you never use it.
For bullish investors, I don’t calls work the same way. Instead of paying the premium for a call, you could just buy the physical. Most options expire worthless, so instead of wasting money on a call- you could own the metal in hand.
Its important to remember:
These puts are 30% out of the money. That means if gold or silver drop 15% your puts aren’t going to be worth much. The 15 dollar puts might be worth 100 bucks. Expectations need to correctly set.
Friday, December 30, 2011
'Zombie' Properties Come Back to Life
Four months ago, Ky Nguyen was paying about $6,000 a month in rent for his small, 1,600 square-foot dental office, part of a mostly vacant strip mall in Manteca, Calif.
In July, he bought the entire 25,000 square-foot mall for $1.9 million, one-fifth of what the prior owner paid, purchasing it from a loan servicer that had foreclosed on the property. Now, with an affordable mortgage and some rental revenue, his debt service comes to about $2,000 a month less than he used to pay in rent for his office.
Is it finally time to buy that vacant property so that it can be rented back out?
When it comes to RE, do i want to purchase a cheap property to rent, or should i put that same amount of money into a few REIT ETF’s? I ask this question rhetorically, as i already own most of the REIT ETF's that exist.
Instead of a mortgage, one can purchase a REIT ETF on margin. In lieu of monthly mortgage payments, pay down the margin monthly. The quarterly dividend would help as well.
Do you think a REIT ETF investment purchased today, can outperform purchasing a rental unit over the next 30 years?
What kind of REIT ETF do you favor (equity, mortgage etc)- and do you favor a REIT ETF over an actual property?
What say you?
*I prefer a REIT ETF's over any individual REIT- less risk, more diversification.
Open question to all:
REIT's or directo ownership?
I own the REM etf which has a hefty dividend.
Open question to all:
In July, he bought the entire 25,000 square-foot mall for $1.9 million, one-fifth of what the prior owner paid, purchasing it from a loan servicer that had foreclosed on the property. Now, with an affordable mortgage and some rental revenue, his debt service comes to about $2,000 a month less than he used to pay in rent for his office.
Is it finally time to buy that vacant property so that it can be rented back out?
When it comes to RE, do i want to purchase a cheap property to rent, or should i put that same amount of money into a few REIT ETF’s? I ask this question rhetorically, as i already own most of the REIT ETF's that exist.
Instead of a mortgage, one can purchase a REIT ETF on margin. In lieu of monthly mortgage payments, pay down the margin monthly. The quarterly dividend would help as well.
Do you think a REIT ETF investment purchased today, can outperform purchasing a rental unit over the next 30 years?
What kind of REIT ETF do you favor (equity, mortgage etc)- and do you favor a REIT ETF over an actual property?
What say you?
*I prefer a REIT ETF's over any individual REIT- less risk, more diversification.
Open question to all:
REIT's or directo ownership?
I own the REM etf which has a hefty dividend.
Open question to all:
Thursday, December 29, 2011
Wages as a percentage of corporate profits.
Corporate profits are at an all time high, personal income and salary for the 99% is at an all time low.
Why the disconnect?
The top 1% which include the CEO's directors, and upper level managers are siphoning more of the salary pie than they used to receive as compensation.
What's left after the executives take the lions share is a tiny fraction. The small crumbs that are left are split amongst offshore workers that make pennies a day, and the American laborers that are forced to work for salaries that are barely above minimum wage.
Before the Ronald Reagan revolution- that was the beginning of the destruction of the middle class, executives in the 1% took 10% of the salary pie, now they take 40% of all wages. The middle class in the 99% now has 30% less of that salary pie to divided between themselves. Its even worse when you consider anther 20% of that income pie goes to workers in India and China.
Before the Ronald Reagan revolution- that was the beginning of the destruction of the middle class, executives in the 1% took 10% of the salary pie, now they take 40% of all wages. The middle class in the 99% now has 30% less of that salary pie to divided between themselves. Its even worse when you consider anther 20% of that income pie goes to workers in India and China.
Buy Gas just in case the Strait of Hormuz, and the Iranian Threat might be more than bluster.
If you can buy a few gallons, and store them away, that might be the ideal solution. This is certainly not the safest option or the most convenient for the vast majority.
For the rest of us, buying options is probably the way to go on Gasoline.
Take a look at (UGA) United States Gasoline Fund.
The United States Gasoline Fund, LP ("UGA") is a new way for investors and hedgers to manage their exposure to energy.
The United States Gasoline Fund LP (UGA) is an exchange traded security that is designed to track in percentage terms the movements of gasoline prices. UGA issues units that may be purchased and sold on the NYSE Arca.
I am not recommending you go out and bet it all on this. But, it might be prudent to hedge your gas costs against headline risk- just a little.
You can buy out of the money calls on UGA- take a look at the Feb 18 2012 with 51 Days to Expiration.
The 65.0 strike Call can be purchased for .10 cents.
If the Iranian scenario does go bad, gas is going to double, and those calls will be worth $2 to $3 bucks- each.
Spending $100 on these calls to protect your short term fuel costs is a modest proposal that could potentially pay off for the long haul.
That hundred you wagered could be worth a few grand if things go to hell in hand basket.
Dec 29
Two trades for today.
I want to sell the (FAS) Feb 18 2012 55 put for a $400 credit.
FAS is trading at 65.82
I am also going long the FAS Jan 21 2012 put (36 strike) for a .15 cent debit.
I want to sell the (UYM) Feb 18 2012 30 put for a $240 credit.
UYM is trading at 31.87
I am also going long the UYM put (17 strike)same expiration for a .15 cent debit.
They are both verticals, but the fas put is a calendar vert. The FEB puts on FAS are too rich for my blood at the moment.
I am willing to let the shares be put to me if need be.
I want to sell the (FAS) Feb 18 2012 55 put for a $400 credit.
FAS is trading at 65.82
I am also going long the FAS Jan 21 2012 put (36 strike) for a .15 cent debit.
I want to sell the (UYM) Feb 18 2012 30 put for a $240 credit.
UYM is trading at 31.87
I am also going long the UYM put (17 strike)same expiration for a .15 cent debit.
They are both verticals, but the fas put is a calendar vert. The FEB puts on FAS are too rich for my blood at the moment.
I am willing to let the shares be put to me if need be.
I began in the investing world with $2,000
Today, my investing portfolio is worth over $100,000 as of December 2011.
I liken my investing style closer to Warren Buffet, but i am not opposed to the swing trade.
With this blog, i am going to try and give investing ideas on a daily basis, we can track how they do over time.
Lets begin.
Happy trading.
I liken my investing style closer to Warren Buffet, but i am not opposed to the swing trade.
With this blog, i am going to try and give investing ideas on a daily basis, we can track how they do over time.
Lets begin.
Happy trading.
Wednesday, December 28, 2011
If you thought Bloomberg even had one shred of decency- think again.
A Living Wage, Long Overdue
Published: December 25, 2011
Published in The New York Times.
Get that- middle class NYC taxpayers provide kickbacks to developers so that they can build fancy buildings for wall street big shots and others.
The benefits sound fair.
First off, $7.25 isn't a living wage in New York City, it hasn't been for years. Meanwhile, on the left coast, the other expensive city, San Francisco, just raised their minimum wage for ALL workers to $10.24 an hour.
Once again Bloombito is talking his book:
"But, if we don't give these fancy billionaire developers millions in kickbacks, they will build those penthouses that sell for 30 million in Cincinnati!
We can't make these job creators pay another 3 bucks an hour to poor people- that would cut into their tens of millions in profits."
Disgusting!
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/26/opinion/a-living-wage-long-overdue.html
Published: December 25, 2011
Published in The New York Times.
New York City provides hundreds of millions of dollars a year in taxpayer-financed subsidies to private developers. It is only right that the jobs created by those projects pay a decent wage. The Fair Wages for New Yorkers Act, widely known as the living-wage bill, would nudge these employers in the right direction.
Get that- middle class NYC taxpayers provide kickbacks to developers so that they can build fancy buildings for wall street big shots and others.
The bill now before the City Council would require future development projects that receive $1 million or more in discretionary financial assistance from the city to pay $10 an hour plus benefits for full-time workers and $11.50 an hour without benefits for at least 10 years. That may not be much, but it is an improvement over the minimum wage of $7. 25 an hour.
The benefits sound fair.
Mayor Michael Bloomberg is fighting this change, arguing that a wage increase might scare off new developments and cost the city thousands of lower-paying jobs. That has not been the experience elsewhere.
First off, $7.25 isn't a living wage in New York City, it hasn't been for years. Meanwhile, on the left coast, the other expensive city, San Francisco, just raised their minimum wage for ALL workers to $10.24 an hour.
Once again Bloombito is talking his book:
"But, if we don't give these fancy billionaire developers millions in kickbacks, they will build those penthouses that sell for 30 million in Cincinnati!
We can't make these job creators pay another 3 bucks an hour to poor people- that would cut into their tens of millions in profits."
Disgusting!
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/26/opinion/a-living-wage-long-overdue.html
Tuesday, December 27, 2011
Monday, November 28, 2011
Illinois workers pay taxes to their employers, not to the state. read on.
If that headline had you confused- here it is again.
Some companies in Illinois have convinced the government to let them pocket their workers taxes.
In other words, if you work for one of these companies, the taxes that are deduced from every paycheck don’t go into the governments coffers- they go to the company you work for.
Tax dollars that would normally flow into the state treasury to pay for education and other necessary state services never make it there- instead these taxes go towards CEO bonuses. The corporations that get these sweet deals get to keep the money from their employees that would normally go to the state free and clear.
Why would the government agree to this?
The Illinois government was desperate to keep companies in state, so they went looking for a solution that could reward the job creators.
Usually states offer tax incentives, to entice companies to stay, trouble is- these companies either pay zero state taxes, or the minimal amount they pay on taxes weren't enough of an incentive to stick around.
The Illinois government knew that if it had to write a large check to these companies to stay in state, it would look ugly. Some might call it a kickback, others might say it was extortion.
Either way, the solution was to let the businesses retain worker paid for taxes as they were generated.
Sounds like the people that work for these companies, aren't getting necessary services for their tax dollars. You know, little things, like police, fire departments, roads, schools. Oh well, who needs the police anyway. Better that those tax dollars contribute to the corporations profits. Call me cynical, but it sounds like the workers are actually paying their employers for the privilege of having a job.
funny that, i thought the job creators were supposed to pay employees.
call this what you will, but this isn't capitalism, it isn't a free market.
If this continues- you need to know that it isn't a zero sum game.
As the federal government cuts back financial aid and subsidies to states, it will starve the states of revenue.
Every single republican running for president wants to eliminate capitals gains taxes, and corporate taxes.
If they do that, the states will have to raise tax rates on corporations. Businesses will threaten to move from one state with high taxes, to a state with lower taxes. Finally, when the tax rate is zero in every single state, the job creators will still demand larger and larger kickbacks.
When that isn't enough if an incentive- what then?
read more here.
you can view the story here.
Paying the corporate overseers for the privilege of having a job, sounds like feudalism doesn't it?
Admittedly, I was slow to catch on; but if you look at those on the far right, namely the Koch brothers, Cain, Perry, Bachman, and Paul Ryan, they all pay lip service the Constitution, to freedom, but- what they really want- is to make us all serfs!
If we are the serfs, who would the feudal lords be?
Call what the far right believe in- feudalism, corporatism, fascism- it doesn't matter, what does matter is that they do not believe in democracy.
CNBC: Is this Michelle Caruso Cabrera? Happier days.
You can get her book here.
Many people seem to think this is her- I'm not so sure.
I report- you decide.
I report- you decide.
Thursday, November 10, 2011
Compare and contrast.
this clip speaks for itself- it makes a sharp point.
How can an American watching the republican candidates not weep for the country.
The republican debates are a race to the bottom- they spout meaningless, mindless, soundbites wrapped in a vitriolic wrapper meant to appeal to baser instincts.
There isn't even one republican at the debates that can compare to ANY of the democratic nominees back in 08.
Politics aside, the entire democratic field wipes the floor with these republican baboons.
How can an American watching the republican candidates not weep for the country.
The republican debates are a race to the bottom- they spout meaningless, mindless, soundbites wrapped in a vitriolic wrapper meant to appeal to baser instincts.
There isn't even one republican at the debates that can compare to ANY of the democratic nominees back in 08.
Politics aside, the entire democratic field wipes the floor with these republican baboons.
Tuesday, November 8, 2011
Who really owns the debt?
Spiegel
Time to put another republican lie to bed.
As you can see from this chart, the bulk of debt and deficit load belongs to Bush.
Take note, The Federal fiscal year runs from OCT 1 to Sept 30.
The day Obama took office, he was running on the Bush budget from Oct 1 2010 (the previous year), till Sept 20 2011. The debt accumulation during this first year in office belongs to the prior congress and president.
Further, it’s important to remember that a large portion of the debt Obama inherited can be blamed on the recession.
How much of this debt is due to the recession? It’s hard to quantify, but it’s a significant amount.
No matter who inherited the White House in 2009, the debt was going to go parabolic.
If you look at the debt with a critical eye, the facts are what matter, just the facts.
The deficit and the debt were going to explode during this massive recession.
You can’t rip the housing sector out of the economy without a colossal hit to collected tax revenues.
The recession led to an increase of unprofitable + bankrupt corporations + Job loss = decreased tax receipts.
Couple the above with an increase of unemployment benefits + assistance programs to help larger numbers of out of work citizens= a guaranteed explosion in the debt and the deficit.
Bake in lower consumer spending in 2009 and 2010 to the overall equation = less demand = fewer hires = even less tax revenues.
Blame Obama if you want- but you are being intellectually dishonest if you do. The debt and the deficit were going to increase no matter who was in charge.
The bottom line:
The bipartisan recession owns a very large part of this debt.
If the stimulus created or saved jobs, even temporarily- it cost less than the 800billion price tag.
There is way too much partisanship on issues in this day and age.
We need more logic, not hatred and biased taking points.
Thursday, November 3, 2011
Massive income inequity.
These graphics speak for themselves.
There are two simple ways to fix this attack on the middle class.
Tax the rich- do it right away!
Raise the Minimum wage!
There are two simple ways to fix this attack on the middle class.
Tax the rich- do it right away!
Raise the Minimum wage!
Tuesday, November 1, 2011
Gov cuomo would rather tax the poor instead of taxing the millionaires.
Anyone that lives in New York City know that the mta is going to jack rates up by at least 30% in the next three years.
The mta needs serious funding for new operations and maintenance over the next few years.
Since the federal government, and the New York state government decided to cut back on funding for the MTA, the MTA had no choice but to raise rates 17% last year. Add that 17% hike with another 30% increase over the next two to three years and that is some serious pain for minimum wage workers.
Instead of taxing millionaires tax one single penny, the Gov is going to tax the poor and the middle class a pound.
These massive MTA hikes are nothing more than painful regressive taxes on the working poor and the middle class.
Cuomo got a lot of good will with his support via the gay marriage issue, but that doesn't forgive his plans on taxing the poor instead of the rich!
I said it before, and i will say it again: millionaires aren't going to leave their Manhattan penthouses and Brooklyn townhouses to move to the suburbs.
New York state and city have become more regressive due to Cuomo and Bloomberg. The Middle class in New York pay the highest state and local taxes as a percentage of their income in the entire nation!
The rich in NY were getting a good deal even with the millionaires tax in place, now they are getting a free ride- courtesy of Cuomo and Bloomberg.
Cuomo needs to be shamed for this disgusting move.
The mta needs serious funding for new operations and maintenance over the next few years.
Since the federal government, and the New York state government decided to cut back on funding for the MTA, the MTA had no choice but to raise rates 17% last year. Add that 17% hike with another 30% increase over the next two to three years and that is some serious pain for minimum wage workers.
Instead of taxing millionaires tax one single penny, the Gov is going to tax the poor and the middle class a pound.
These massive MTA hikes are nothing more than painful regressive taxes on the working poor and the middle class.
Cuomo got a lot of good will with his support via the gay marriage issue, but that doesn't forgive his plans on taxing the poor instead of the rich!
I said it before, and i will say it again: millionaires aren't going to leave their Manhattan penthouses and Brooklyn townhouses to move to the suburbs.
New York state and city have become more regressive due to Cuomo and Bloomberg. The Middle class in New York pay the highest state and local taxes as a percentage of their income in the entire nation!
The rich in NY were getting a good deal even with the millionaires tax in place, now they are getting a free ride- courtesy of Cuomo and Bloomberg.
Cuomo needs to be shamed for this disgusting move.
Friday, October 28, 2011
The poor already pay more than their fair share in taxes.
Over and over we need to hear lies from the right that half of the country doesn’t pay taxes.
Over and over again we need to dispute the tripe that the right-wingers pollute the airwaves with.
-As the federal government has cut back on aid to states, the states have given less to local cities and townships.
-As the federal spigot of tax revenues dries up, and cutbacks are enacted, the states have had to take matters into their own hands for funding.
Here is a simple example of a hidden tax that the poor pay when the government refuses to progressively tax the rich.
Across the nation, funding that would normally come from taxes for mass transit has been severely cutback. The public transit systems have had to raise fares in most of the country to compensate for that lost revenue. Fares have gone up more than 10% in almost every instance.
For someone making the minimum wage, a 10% increase on most major MTA platforms is a 2% tax on their gross paycheck.
Half of the citizens that work in the US make less than 27 grand a year, that same increase in Mass Transit fares is equivalent to 1% tax increase.
The mass transit increase (tax) is highly regressive, the poor and the struggling pay dearly for it.
Sales tax.
Many local cities have raised rates .25 to .50% without much fanfare. For the median wage and minimum wage worker, these seemingly tiny increases can cost 50 to 100 bucks extra every year- To someone making 15k or 20k a year that isn’t chump change.
Local, and state sales taxes, have either gone up recently or they are planning to raise them all across the nation. As the federal government starves the states, the states stave local cities and towns. While it has become almost impossible to raise taxes on the wealthiest citizens on a federal, state or city level, regressive sales and severe hikes are the only places that governments can go to take in revenue.
This is a sick game that the rightwing is playing, as they give tax breaks to the wealthy on the federal or state level, the cities have to raises taxes to make up for the shortfalls. Local municipalities and they aren’t able to change the income tax structure as that usually requires legislation by state senators and governors, many of which are tea party extremists, and they are playing the same games that the GOP is playing in Washington.
Most people have no idea what their state and local tax rates charge. Many, have no idea, how regressive state and local taxes eat away at their purchasing power. Coupled with sales taxes, and hidden taxes such as the mass transit fare increase, and you have a recipe for disaster.
The bottom line:
When the federal government refuses to tax the rich, the states take matters into their own hands by taxing the poor to make up the difference.
For most of the working citizens and the poor- that 20% increase on the bus fare, means you paying 1 to 2% more in taxes on your gross pay, just to get to work.
If the government was able to tax the rich just a tiny bit more, there would be no need to raise fares / taxes on the poor.
I just gave two examples of hidden taxes there are plenty others. While taxes on the rich aren’t raised the states and cities have had to become creative in generation new forms on taxation, the problem is they are all incredibly regressive.
For a minimum wage worker, that 1% tax on mass transit, and that 1% increase in sales tax can break the bank. When you add these surcharges (and others) to state and local taxes, even those that don’t’ directly pay federal income taxes, pay indirect federal taxes. Taken all together, the poor are paying close to 20% of their incomes in taxes. 20% is way too high for a minimum wage worker, especially when you consider the effective top tax rate for a millionaire, falls somewhere between 15 and 35% of their income.
Take that 20% tax rate; couple it with increased costs for rent, food and other necessities- you now know why we have a class of citizen called, -the working poor-, and know you know why their numbers are growing.
One last note:
If the federal government were to impose an income tax of say, 9% on the working poor, they wouldn’t be able to pay their expenses.
Soon, they may not even be able to afford the bus ride that gets them there.
Put another way; why even bother to work if you can’t afford to put a roof over your head?
Over and over again we need to dispute the tripe that the right-wingers pollute the airwaves with.
-As the federal government has cut back on aid to states, the states have given less to local cities and townships.
-As the federal spigot of tax revenues dries up, and cutbacks are enacted, the states have had to take matters into their own hands for funding.
Here is a simple example of a hidden tax that the poor pay when the government refuses to progressively tax the rich.
Across the nation, funding that would normally come from taxes for mass transit has been severely cutback. The public transit systems have had to raise fares in most of the country to compensate for that lost revenue. Fares have gone up more than 10% in almost every instance.
For someone making the minimum wage, a 10% increase on most major MTA platforms is a 2% tax on their gross paycheck.
Half of the citizens that work in the US make less than 27 grand a year, that same increase in Mass Transit fares is equivalent to 1% tax increase.
The mass transit increase (tax) is highly regressive, the poor and the struggling pay dearly for it.
Sales tax.
Many local cities have raised rates .25 to .50% without much fanfare. For the median wage and minimum wage worker, these seemingly tiny increases can cost 50 to 100 bucks extra every year- To someone making 15k or 20k a year that isn’t chump change.
Local, and state sales taxes, have either gone up recently or they are planning to raise them all across the nation. As the federal government starves the states, the states stave local cities and towns. While it has become almost impossible to raise taxes on the wealthiest citizens on a federal, state or city level, regressive sales and severe hikes are the only places that governments can go to take in revenue.
This is a sick game that the rightwing is playing, as they give tax breaks to the wealthy on the federal or state level, the cities have to raises taxes to make up for the shortfalls. Local municipalities and they aren’t able to change the income tax structure as that usually requires legislation by state senators and governors, many of which are tea party extremists, and they are playing the same games that the GOP is playing in Washington.
Most people have no idea what their state and local tax rates charge. Many, have no idea, how regressive state and local taxes eat away at their purchasing power. Coupled with sales taxes, and hidden taxes such as the mass transit fare increase, and you have a recipe for disaster.
The bottom line:
When the federal government refuses to tax the rich, the states take matters into their own hands by taxing the poor to make up the difference.
For most of the working citizens and the poor- that 20% increase on the bus fare, means you paying 1 to 2% more in taxes on your gross pay, just to get to work.
If the government was able to tax the rich just a tiny bit more, there would be no need to raise fares / taxes on the poor.
I just gave two examples of hidden taxes there are plenty others. While taxes on the rich aren’t raised the states and cities have had to become creative in generation new forms on taxation, the problem is they are all incredibly regressive.
For a minimum wage worker, that 1% tax on mass transit, and that 1% increase in sales tax can break the bank. When you add these surcharges (and others) to state and local taxes, even those that don’t’ directly pay federal income taxes, pay indirect federal taxes. Taken all together, the poor are paying close to 20% of their incomes in taxes. 20% is way too high for a minimum wage worker, especially when you consider the effective top tax rate for a millionaire, falls somewhere between 15 and 35% of their income.
Take that 20% tax rate; couple it with increased costs for rent, food and other necessities- you now know why we have a class of citizen called, -the working poor-, and know you know why their numbers are growing.
One last note:
If the federal government were to impose an income tax of say, 9% on the working poor, they wouldn’t be able to pay their expenses.
Soon, they may not even be able to afford the bus ride that gets them there.
Put another way; why even bother to work if you can’t afford to put a roof over your head?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)