Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
February 19, 2013 at 3:28 PM in reply to: So, that budget surplus we mentioned? That may have been a fluke… #759822
SK in CV
Participant[quote=no_such_reality]What’s the difference between a boiler room and a auction with a reserve?[/quote]
Salmon? (I hope I got this right.)
ParticipantNo, it’s been significantly higher than that most years. Eyeballing the numbers, it looks like it’s been lower than that only a handful of times, mostly in the 90’s, and I think between 2000 and 2009 it happened twice.
Historical numbers are here:
http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfacts/displayafact.cfm?Docid=200
Estimates for future years on that page aren’t valid, too many things have changed.
ParticipantAfter the explosion it was flat compared to the explosion year. But the increase from FY 2008 through FY 2015 includes the last pre-explosion year. At least that’s what I think I figured. If I remember correctly what I looked at, the pre-explosion year compared to the 1st year with a significant increase was around 27% higher over a 7 year period.
Corrected. Total outlays FY 2008 were $2,982B. Projected FY 2014 is $3,618B, increase of $636B or 21.32% of $2,982. Divided by 6 years is 3.55% average increase over the 6 year period.
Participant[quote=EconProf]We are seeing a lot of scary claims about how much the sequester will hurt. But just how big is it in our overall federal budget?
It is $85 billion in a budget of $2.5 trillion. That puts it at about three percent of our federal spending.
Since our federal spending has exploded in the past four years, it should be easy to find the low hanging fruit and trim the fat. Instead, we will hear sob stories of cuts that hurt real people and valued programs. Instead of cutting waste, they will create real victims to pull at our heartstrings. And this strategy will probably work–it already is working with many people here.[/quote]Re the bolded part….our federal spending really hasn’t exploded the last four years. It exploded in fiscal year ending 9/30/09. Since then, it has been relatively flat, and current projections are for it to remain relatively flat though 2014 with about a 5% increase in 2015. That’s a 5% increase after a 2% increase between 2009 and 2014. Not annual. A total increase of 2% over 5 years. The only time during our lifetimes when the budget has grown anywhere near that slowly over a 6 year period is the late 90’s. When we had a balanced budget.
Participant[quote=SD Realtor]It will not wreak havoc on re prices.
sk um… aren’t you the one who always points out how much of the budget is spent on military?[/quote]
Yeah, I am. But I’m also an economist. So I understand the effects of sudden and drastic cuts to government spending. The US has never avoided a recession in the past when total government spending (fed and states) has been cut as it has been the last 3 years. Somehow we’re managing now, but further cuts won’t increase the likelihood of further recovery, and the cuts required by the sequester is likely to push the economy into another recession. There’s a time and place for everything.
Participant[quote=flu][quote=SK in CV][quote=flu][quote=SK in CV][quote=flu]
The only time money managers might be helpful is someone completely financially irresponsible..But chances are, those folks have nothing worth managing :)[/quote]I think maybe our host on this blog might have a different opinion.[/quote]
He’s different.[/quote]
Nice save.[/quote]
What?
He’s different.
There’s a difference between getting advice (and paying for it) and being ignorant/risk adverse and turning the kingdom over to someone completely.
And a majority of money managers available to average joe do not have your best interest in mind.
You’re just full of nit picking aren’t you SK? 🙂
You know what. Forget it.. I take back what I say. I’m wrong. Most money managers for average joe are great at what they do. I think everyone should turn there money over to a complete stranger, completely count on them, never try to understand what they are getting themselves into, listen to whatever money manager says as 100% accurate..And in the unlikely scenario that the investment/speculation blows up, call up our government and ask for a bailout…Seems to work for real estate.[/quote]
I just take exception to the broad brush you waved in your comment. I don’t think it’s nit picking. It just isn’t black and white. It isn’t all money managers and investment advisors are worthless. Or most are great at what they do.
Some are very competent and do a great job. Some aren’t the least bit interested in the well being of their clients, only their own paychecks. And some are scam artists.
Participant[quote=flu][quote=SK in CV][quote=flu]
The only time money managers might be helpful is someone completely financially irresponsible..But chances are, those folks have nothing worth managing :)[/quote]I think maybe our host on this blog might have a different opinion.[/quote]
He’s different.[/quote]
Nice save.
Participant[quote=flu]
The only time money managers might be helpful is someone completely financially irresponsible..But chances are, those folks have nothing worth managing :)[/quote]I think maybe our host on this blog might have a different opinion.
ParticipantThe secret to their success really shouldn’t be a secret. They just make damn good products that are simple to use and sell them at a reasonable price. Quicken first and then QB have been revolutionary. And they never rested, continually trying to make their products better. They’ve failed a few times, and got ahead of themsevles, but they always seem to come back and fix what doesn’t work. They kinda put me out of business.
February 19, 2013 at 9:19 AM in reply to: Why American is failing to prepare for their retirement? #759738Participant[quote=UCGal]Not only do people not understand compound interest… they don’t leave money in a savings account (or investment account)… they spend it.
For a large part of the population, the answer would be zero to the question… because they’d have withdrawn that $100 and spent it at the first opportunity.[/quote]
Bingo.
For probably 1/3 of those responding, the right answer would be <$102.
ParticipantIt won’t be trivial to the two million workers who lose their jobs if it goes into effect.
ParticipantI have to agree with you BG. Aguirre is both passionate and brilliant in his work. And Bauder does his homework. A real journalist.
Participant[quote=flu]yes folks, buy more intuit software. I still have equity from there and it would be nice if it can double again….:)
If you haven’t tried it already quickbooks and go payment… Just saying….[/quote]
Funny you should bring that up. My former employee left to work for Intuit in the fall of 1994 (I just looked it up.), and one of the things they gave him was a shitload of market value options. They wouldn’t ordinarily vest for a couple years or more, but in Oct. 94 Microsoft tried to buy Intuit to get Quicken. Intuit stock shot up, and had the transaction closed, all his options would have vested. His take on the deal would have been well over $1M. Pretty good deal for a guy in his late 20’s. But alas, the DOJ said no go, MSFT can’t buy that winner. So his >$1M disappeared. At least for the moment. The stock is currently 20X higher than it was then, so I’m sure he’s made that money and much more since then. But that instant millionaire status would have been pretty nice for him back then.
Sorry for the hijack.
ParticipantGreat comment joe. I could quibble with some minor details but overall it’s pretty accurate. People who aren’t afraid of their taxes should at least try to do them themselves. It can be overwhelming for some, but it’s certainly worth a try if the alternative is paying much more than a few hundred bucks to a professional preparer.
I do want to comment on this though:
[quote=joec]
If your return is relatively simple, I don’t see why anyone would need to hire a CPA honestly as most major tax deduction legislation would be hard to miss by Turbotax.[/quote]The likelihood of a tax professional understanding legislation better than the people at Turbotax is extraordinarily slim. They hire scores of CPA’s to review legislation and make sure their software is consistent with the law. About 20 years ago I actually found a flaw in their software (one of the professional versions, they produce two professional tax software programs in addition to Turbotax) and they fixed it. (It’s a slight exaggeration to say “I” found it. One of my tax managers found it. He went to work for them the next year. As far as I know, he’s still there.) They have professionals working with incredibly narrow focus (like people dedicated to nothing but the home office deduction, or as my former employee was doing, just on ACE depreciation). They might miss something, but the chances are really slim that a professional tax preparer would catch something they don’t.
-
AuthorPosts
