Mtg2192

Why is everybody on the internet obsessed with Obama? He's a crook (just like every other politician from Illinois: look at his track record: he has been associated with a terrorist, a black racist who encourages violence, and a governor who is a complete and total crook, not to mention the fact that he spent more money on his campaign than McCain), and anybody paying any attention to the budget would notice that he's destroying it! He's borrowing so much money from China, it will take years from 2020 when the loan matures to pay it back off! And I'll be one of those people paying those taxes!

it's beautiful. it even has the palace grounds park area!

btw, the RTA in Cleveland used to show a profit before the crashes and oil climbs. Also, if you value your time so much, if you were to take a 8 hour ride, you could do it at night and sleep in one of the beds provided in any train that goes for 8 hours.

locally of course.

What we need in America is to bring back the streetcars. The motor companies have had their chance to expand, and in a time when people can't buy cars, public streetcars would help people get from place to place.

and to the post before, wouldn't a plane be impractical then? After all, it would go at about double the speed of the train and get there in half the time, but you also have to deal with many security issues and checkpoints and such, while trains usually involve a ticket, possibly a metal detector alone, and you can get on the train and go right away. so maybe on a trip to NYC from Cleveland, you're saving about 15 minutes taking a plane. Plus, though cross-country trains would be nice, we're probably talking more like inter-city trains. Trains that will get you to places you don't need to take a plane to get to faster than a car can.

Really, I think that the best time to build a new railway is at what seems like a VERY low point for car sales. Why should the car industry have a monopoly on intrastate transportation? Now is a great time for the railway to be built. But I personally think that it should be built across the country. Sort of a Route 66 of railways, if you will. Also, why not extend the one from Boston to Washington to Florida? Maybe a fork over to Philly to Pittsburg to Cleveland to Chicago, stopping at various points along the way? I think it would be great for tourism, as a train would likely be cheaper than a plane to ride on, and it would probably also be great for commuting to a place very far from your house. Think about it: being able to live in Pittsburgh and work in NYC, getting there within an hour. Living in Cleveland (with one of the lowest cost-of-livings) and commuting to Chicago for work. Hell, you could live in San Diego and work in Washington State like my uncle does and still get back home in time to spend time with the kids. I certainly approve of the idea of a bullet train, and if it is funded correctly, perhaps it would be possible to earn a Manhattan income without having to spend the money to live in Manhattan or the surrounding boroughs. New York City would become more like Tokyo too: more bustling even than it is now, and possibly more important to industries outside of finance as well as the financial importance. After all, a crash in America can cause the entire world to fall into an economic recession as well, can't it? Shows our importance, even at a point in time when we thought we had little.

Its at times like these when people begin to think: What is the officially most capitalistically free city in the world? Hong Kong What is one of the largest and most successful cities in the world? Hong Kong What was the least capitalistic nations in the world? Russia What country had such a horrible economy that the country itself went under from lack of money in 1991? Russia. As this short study clearly shows, capitalism is successful. Free market creates competition, which creates efficiency, which encourages people to compete more, which makes things even more efficient. A fully capitalistic economy will only speed up. When government tries to get involved with the economy and regulate the way businesses work, the economy slows. Look at the effects of taxes on inflation in any situation. Inflation is the visible slowing of the economy. The economy is a cycle. You get money from your job, you spend that money on food, shelter, taxes, those who receive that money spend that money on food, shelter, taxes, (except the government, which spends money often on weapons, vehicles, and other things produced outside the USA (not that other people don't), and the government will not spend this money directly on you (aside from army/police) unless you do NOT have a job, are NOT contributing to society, and are on welfare), eventually, the cycle goes back around when somebody spends money on your business or employer; then you are paid and the cycle continues. When you increase taxes, there is less money to spend on food and shelter (and leisure, appearances, many other things, but food and shelter are basic and expensive), so companies have to raise the salaries they pay people, so it costs more to pay for things, so your company needs to raise its salaries for workers, so the workers have to spend even more because those who are buying from your company raise their salaries, which increases the cost of products. This is inflation. It is a natural result of excessively high taxes and a coercion to pay them. Sometimes the cost is even greater than it seems. That's what this nation elected with Obama. Do we need that?

the only thing that annoys me about this is that it ISN'T actually based off of the actual Beachwood in Cleveland, since I live in Shaker Heights, which is a suburb of Cleveland adjacent to beachwood.

If it weren't for companies like Walmart and the vast majority of steel producers, we wouldn't be sending so much money to the other countries. The government buys manufactured goods from such places for its workers: computers from Japan for each bureau, lamps and furniture from China and various other places, weaponry from scattered manufacturers (for the army), and many other things. Companies like Walmart outsource ALL manufacturing to China and use cheaper Chinese services to make cheap products that are shipped to the USA. There is no health insurance for ANY of its workers that don't work 40 hours or more, and workers who work 40 hours or more have to pay a ridiculous amount of their money for health insurance. Also, small towns have all of their money sucked out of them and sent to China to manufacture the same cheap stuff that ruins their economies. In other words, A medium wealth area is turned into a low-wealth area because of elimination of competition. Such a thing should be illegal in America. In my personal opinion, what would solve this problem is alter the law a little: for companies that would have a significant profit after taxes (including all other non-tax expenses), they should pay the full tax. For companies that would have little to no profit with full taxes (but no loss necessarily) they should have to pay a reduced tax. For companies that are already losing money significantly, they should have to pay either no federal income taxes or a very reduced tax. The only problem with this is that this particular idea is socialism, and would eliminate the need for companies to compete, thus causing products to degrade in actual quality, and leaving people using bad products.

The only reason this is being questioned is because there is currently a democrat-controlled congress. These loopholes are not unfair; they make things sold by the companies cheaper, anybody can own a company and use them, and they don't give more money to a currently overly-controlling congress that believes that people cannot be trusted to successfully protect and govern themselves. In reality, though the entire safety and comfort of our lower class citizens in the US would be jeopardized if it were any other way, government spending on welfare and laws governing how much you have to pay workers are what really caused the US national debt to increase as significantly as it has. Manufacturers left the USA because they knew it would be cheaper to manufacture in a place like China, Taiwan, or India. Why? Even with the cost of importing on freight ships and the fluctuating, yet excessively high price of gas, China, India, and Taiwan have NO MINIMUM WAGE. You can pay somebody ten dollars for a 10-hour or more workday and get away with it. This brings industry and money into that country. When the USA had no unions or minimum wage, it had TONS of money coming into it from other countries: Workers were forced to be efficient, got miniscule amounts of money, and worked long hours. This brought money into America. However, the price paid for this money was a malnourished and impoverished working class and greedy, excessively powerful monopolies owned by such people as Rockefeller. Business was amazing and jobs were abundant, but huge amounts of people were poor. As a matter of fact, it could be compared easily to the feudal system: One rich man (Rockefeller) gave power (money) to barons (people he had governing his factories), who gave power (money) to lords (supervisors) who gave orders to serfs (working class). Just before anti-trust laws were established by the government, Rockefeller had control over a vast amount of small towns and other communities (much like Walmart continues to do, but that discussion is for another board) due to the fact that he was the only company in them and a wave of his hand could remove anybody from his job. Luckily, such a feudal system was ended by the US government and unions, but ever since then, industry in the USA has never been the same. Many small corporations barely have the money to pay workers after taxes, let alone expand and offer more jobs. The law has taken away certain things that allow companies to make profits, and, while taking such things was needed, it would be a fair trade to give companies tax incentives and loopholes.

Yeah, the way these taxes are avoided may right now be crafted by lobbied politicians, but you have to consider the fact that this one third of all corporations includes small businesses. Consider this: according to the US census, the VAST majority of all companies currently in existence (corporations as well) are small businesses. When people think of corporations, they may think of J P Morgan Chase or Morgan Stanley, but in fact your local barber shop is probably a corporation. A barber shop is generally a low-density, low-wealth establishment that truly doesn't bring in much profit, and the high taxes it has to pay often cut into the profit significantly. A barber shop is a corporation primarily for this reason: so the barbers can't be sued. If the corporation is sued and goes bankrupt from paying court fees and fines, the barbers don't lose points in their credit rating and won't go bankrupt themselves. They could just go work for another barber. A lot of small businesses become corporations for that reason - liability transfers from the worker to the company. However, small businesses need money to pay workers, and with unexpected expenses like being sued and constant expenses like taxes, people can't always be paid. Also, wasn't this country built on a lack of taxes?