On Thu, 30 Sep 2010 07:34:48 -0400, jeff wrote:

On 9/29/2010 9:48 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 29 Sep 2010 18:24:23 -0400, wrote:

http://boss.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/0...eria/?src=dayp

Rational? Seemingly. Fair? Who knows. And the unasked question: Accurate?
Not in the least.

HTH,
R

and how is that guy "inaccurate"? at least he goes about the question
and process without the divisive phony rhetoric being seized upon by the
anti-anything-obama politicians.

The inaccuracy stems from the fact that he fails to address the "real-world"
ramifications of Fed action, as well as using the businesses' "net profit" as
some basis for computation as to what the effects of a increase in the
_personal_ tax rate might be. But OK. Suppose, as a reasonable example, these
are "family" businesses in which 2-3 people share in the "net profit" as their
yearly income. Let's say, to keep numbers simple, that in all cases, the owners
make 250K each. That's 12.5K each based solely on the roughly 5% increase to
those at 250K or above. In the "real world," most folks making in the range of
250K a year will almost certainly feel a 5% hit to their net income. Granted,
if Gates or Buffett takes a 5% hit in net worth, the effect on their lifestyle
is non-existent, but business owners making 250, 500, even a mil aren't Gates or
Buffett. In fact, Gates and Buffett have practically no danger, financially,
short of doing something mind-bogglingly stupid, whereas the relatively small
business owner could easily wind up flat-assed broke (not because of this one
thing, but many are "all in" in the sense that they are "at risk," on many
fronts) even if they generally do everything "right."

As to other effects, think about how Greenspan, etc. got into trouble and
economists still get into trouble. People don't act "rationally" or as
predicted ala some economic theory, and if you give them bad news combined with
a climate of uncertainty, they act less so. A recent poll showed that folks in
US now feel that the GOP can better provide for national security and Obama's
job approval in that area has slipped. WTF? It's not rational, but it's the
way it is - they have lost confidence in the Dems and him, so even in areas that
there is no rational reason to feel that either party could handle X better than
the other, folks still feel the way they feel. You're a lawyer - if anyone
ought to have a understanding of less-than-rational behavior, it's a lawyer.

IAC, combine that with folks who are already carrying a large chunk of the load
being asked to carry all that more, and for things that they see (objectively
and subjectively) as either not helping or actually hurting the overall
situation (i.e., healthcare reform as it currently stands, uneven regulations,
seemingly randomly created and administered "bailouts," etc., etc.). And then
add the jumpy markets (i.e., US stocks and bourses, commodities part. oil and
gold, currency pairs, etc.), caused in part, but not entirely, by such actions
and what appears to be a Fed without any clear plan, and the personal "fear"
seems at least reasonable, even if it isn't purely and objectively warranted.

And now, you tell the folks in what is, relatively, a low-ish income level for
the risks assumed in owning and running a business (IOW, 250K to 500K can
provide a nice lifestyle, but it ain't exactly robber-baron rich) that you're
gonna clip 'em ANOTHER 5%. And IMO, the "ding" to the confidence of such folks
is perfectly understandable.

TC,
R

jeff