Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
apogee
climber
|
|
|
Aug 10, 2009 - 09:02pm PT
|
Lynne, I'm sure McLame would have done a much better job.....if he lived long enough to get that far in his presidency.....and he suddenly flushed all that GOP-nonsense out of his brain. Guess what I'm trying to say is...this situation is far from perfect, but it beat the h*ll out of the alternative.
|
|
donini
Trad climber
Ouray, Colorado
|
|
|
Aug 10, 2009 - 11:08pm PT
|
Pardon the language (I know you're Christain) but HOW IN THE HELL can you not see the difference between the Bush and Obama administrations? It's that kind of thinking, or lack thereof, that has this country so screwed up.
|
|
JEleazarian
Trad climber
Fresno CA
|
|
|
Aug 10, 2009 - 11:23pm PT
|
Lynne,
First, congratuations for starting a thread with politics in its title that seems to be addressing issues rather than slinging mud. To me, though, your specific problem transcends politics.
As you may know, I practiced law in the debtor-creditor and commercial law fields for almost thirty years. That means thirty years of helping people rebuild their credit. The situation you desscribe is one I've seen over and over again. The best advice I've seen so far on this thread is to find a personal banker who knows your business. Is your business incorporated? Does it have a line of credit? I assume it has at least a checking account. Anyway, if you have specific questions or concerns that you don't want published to all Tacoland, send me an email and I'd be happy to help.
As to the politics, I think the sychophants of the President, not the Republicans, set his bar so high. They led everyone to believe that the Second Coming was upon us, and that all of our problems would be solved. Now they need to deal with reality.
At least he's done some things right. The success against the Taliban in Pakistan I think rightly belongs to the current administration's credit. They did more of what Bush said he would do, but didn't. I fully expect to see similar success in Afghanistan.
On health care, though, he's in a no-win position. His voter base is on the left, and dreams of single-payer health care. The nation is clearly not convinced, and the Obama plan, while intrusive and expensive, is neither fish nor fowl. It is not single-payer, nor is it socialized. It's still, however, ceding control of a huge portion of the economy to the federal government.
Despite John Moosie's belief to the contrary, adding 1 to 3 percent to the tax bills of the "uber rich" cannot come close to paying for it. It also doesn't deal with the real problem, in my opinion, which is the disconnect between the patient and the cost of treatment. I posted a fairly detailed summary of my beliefs and solutions on the Dr. F. thread, but you need to wade though hundreds of posts of mud slinging to find it. Suffice to say that the administration's plan is one that doesn't go far enough in the eyes of his fans, and is anathema to his opponents. It will be interesting to see how it evolves.
John
|
|
Lynne Leichtfuss
Social climber
valley center, ca
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Aug 11, 2009 - 12:33am PT
|
donini, and pardon me. I am not a christian i am a jesus follower. and no need for getting crazy and swearing. If you read my post it has nothing to do with Bush vs.President Obama.
(yo guys need to get your political shee together. Respect for the President is calling him Mr. President....Dude.) At least I respect President Obama.
I was merely stating that the plan did not work for some of us that really need it. Simply stated, that's all. Lynne, Peace and Smiles.
Edit: Je, I've done all the right things .... I just fall in the chasm of life .... no sweat. God will indeed take care of lynnie. May not be a way I invisioned ... but it will be a great adventure.....which I love. Peace, Lynne
|
|
Bob D'A
Trad climber
Boulder, CO
|
|
|
Aug 11, 2009 - 12:41am PT
|
JL wrote: As to the politics, I think the sychophants of the President, not the Republicans, set his bar so high. They led everyone to believe that the Second Coming was upon us, and that all of our problems would be solved. Now they need to deal with reality.
No JL... he (OBama) and they just offered a different view and approach.
I think the Glen Beck's and the Rush Limbaugh started the messiah label.
Lynne...My wife just went back to work in the last five years, bought a car and has a few credit cards in her name. Hopefully she won't have to deal with things like you are after Dan's passing if anything would happened to me.
Also...try a local credit union...they may be a little more flexible.
|
|
Lynne Leichtfuss
Social climber
valley center, ca
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Aug 11, 2009 - 12:47am PT
|
Hope if this happens again, Bob, people can last several years on a really bad economy. I'm lucky/blessed I have so far....many have not been able to.
|
|
Bob D'A
Trad climber
Boulder, CO
|
|
|
Aug 11, 2009 - 12:50am PT
|
Seems like Dan did his part and was a great husband. So sorry for your loss.
|
|
Lynne Leichtfuss
Social climber
valley center, ca
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Aug 11, 2009 - 12:58am PT
|
Thanks Bob, he did and life is what it is. I am so totally not whining. I just thought this clunker program could have really helped some of us that could have used some.
Flexibilty in these "programs", if you show a great track record and also recorded financial responsibilty should account for something. Lynne
Like I said God will help lynnie that's why I have never depended on the govt.
|
|
corniss chopper
Mountain climber
san jose, ca
|
|
|
Aug 11, 2009 - 12:58am PT
|
hei Lynne - I suspect the fun is just beginning. No one acts more goofy than a desperate politician.
Rep. Pelosi's un-American op ed today pissed off half the country.
So its the perfect climate for political smear fests. Let the mud fly.
Here's a clever edit job. Goes after just about everyone.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MRvtWEG_vhQ
|
|
Homer
Mountain climber
Santa Cruz, CA
|
|
|
Aug 11, 2009 - 01:19am PT
|
Sorry Lynne - God's rules don't seem to change much. The fastest lion catches the slowest antelope regardless of the administration. It doesn't always seem right to me, but I think that just means I don't understand.
|
|
Lynne Leichtfuss
Social climber
valley center, ca
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Aug 11, 2009 - 01:43am PT
|
Homer, it's ok ..... the rules of life are slightly changed when God applies his hand to lynnie or whoever needs him. I could never have made it this far without him.
I will keep making it....it's a little stressful at times, living by this policy, but I have for many years and the "Man" has always been there.
Peace All, we will see what the adventure holds.....lynnie
Edit: What's kinda crazy. I made God promise I would not rot on a couch (lynne coulda done that)but that life would be an adventure.....Sheeee it...(excuse me jesus) but it sho has been ...Smiles, LYnne
|
|
apogee
climber
|
|
|
Aug 11, 2009 - 02:04am PT
|
"However, making excuses, apogee, doesn't cut it in my free market."
Granted, Lynne, if you sign up for the job of POTUS, you agree to deal with the dumptruck full of sheee (to use your word) created by the previous administration(s). That's the name of that game. Obama's progress report should not be graded on a curve exclusively due to his predecessor.
That said, you have to admit that very few POTUS's have ever had to face the kind of challenges Obama has had to face on Day 1. To simply wipe away the immediate history that had a great role in creating this mess is simply blindering oneself, and in this media-driven world, doing so for the benefit of your ideology. As much as I agree with the ideal that the POTUS needs to deal with cards they are dealt to, one can certainly give consideration to who dealt the cards, eh?
|
|
happiegrrrl
Trad climber
New York, NY
|
|
|
Aug 11, 2009 - 08:10am PT
|
I am rather confused as to what the problem really is....
Lynne - could you be more specific in what went wrong with your attempt with the vehicle purchase?
Is it that the bank won't loan the money? As someone suggested, try various lenders - maybe a credit union or smaller bank. Maybe ANY bank...when you suggest you are considering moving some/all of your banking business, since the one you use doesn't appear to value your business.
Or was it that you could get the loan, but the Cash for Clunkers deal didn't apply to you? If you can identify the particular reason for denial, maybe someone familiar with the program can advise you a strategy to apply that will be a successful workaround.
|
|
Homer
Mountain climber
Santa Cruz, CA
|
|
|
Aug 11, 2009 - 11:36am PT
|
Hey Lynne, yea I have to agree. There are some natural laws that don't change much. It's easy to see how God rewards the rich and the fastest lion. I'm sure she rewards the less rich and the slow antelope too, it's just harder to see that. I'm glad that you do.
|
|
Lynne Leichtfuss
Social climber
valley center, ca
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Aug 11, 2009 - 02:28pm PT
|
Warbler, good points. lrl
|
|
JEleazarian
Trad climber
Fresno CA
|
|
|
Aug 11, 2009 - 02:42pm PT
|
"The last administration gave a $25,000 tax credit to people who bought a car weighing over 6,000 lbs."
Kevin, you may be right, but I don't remember that tax credit. Of course at my age, there's much I don't remember.
Anyway, could you cite me to some authority for that proposition? I'd really like to see the tax code section, but you don't need to be that detailed. Anything that gets me closer would help. If it is true (and I would not be surprised), I can determine who voted for such nonsense once I find the legislative history.
Thanks.
John
|
|
nature
climber
Tucson, AZ
|
|
|
Aug 11, 2009 - 02:47pm PT
|
Have you not seen the news?!?!??! We'll be a Socialist Country in no time.
At least according to Faux.....
that's change!
|
|
tolman_paul
Trad climber
Anchorage, AK
|
|
|
Aug 11, 2009 - 03:25pm PT
|
The guvment is a massive beast, and it seems to me it really doesn't matter who is at the helm. I figure if you look for the government to provide for your quality of life, you likely will be disapointed. If on the other hand you look at it as a necessary evil and gain your hapiness in spite of the government, you'll be happy no matter what.
Those that have $ will keep making it because they've figured out how to make it. Tweaks in the tax code et al will just mean they have to change their tactics a bit. Those in the middle, some will do a little better, some will pay some more. Those at the bottom, need to figure out how to pull themselves up vs. waiting for someone to do it for them.
Often times government incentives cost you more in the long run, so run all the numbers before making a decision to take advantage of a government program. Yeah maybe you have a gas hog vehicle, but would you be saving enough $ to cover payments and high insurance?
|
|
JEleazarian
Trad climber
Fresno CA
|
|
|
Aug 11, 2009 - 03:58pm PT
|
Thank you, apogee and Warbler, for your references. I was able to find the relevant code and regulation sections from them. The provision in question relates to Section 179(b)(6) of the Internal Revenue Code.
I was rather outraged that such a provision existed, but knowing what I know about tax policy, it would not surprise me that it did. Fortunately, the actual provision is rather more benign that what I thought it was. For those who know tax law, no further explanation is necessary. For those who don't, no further explanation is possible, at least from me, but I'm going to try anyway.
Section 179 allows business to expense certain expenditures that they would otherwise amortize. Translated into English: We tax income, not gross receipts. If I bring in $200,000, but it cost me $150,000 to do it, I made $50,000, not $200,000. The problem is determining what it cost me in any given year. Suppose I run a delivery service, and I buy a van for $50,000. If I can deduct that $50,000 as a cost in year one, I will reduce my taxable income by $50,000 that year.
In reality, the cost of the van doesn't just affect my ability to produce income in year one, but in every subsequent year in which the van runs decently. Accordingly, we normally make that owner deduct that $50,000 spread out over several years, not just all in the first year. That means the owner has more income that first year (and therefore pays more taxes) and has less income the rest of the years (and therefore pays less taxes). The total deduction for the van is the same under both schemes, it's just spread out differently. We do this because a dollar today is worth more than a dollar tomorrow.
Section 179 allows certain of these expenses that we would normally depreciate to be treated as expenses in the year they occur. Section 179(b)(6) says that if the expense that otherwise qualifies is for an SUV, it is limited to $25,000. In other words, if the expense is otherwise deductible, you cannot deduct more than $25,000 in year one.
This certainly makes some difference on the total after-tax cost of an SUV used in business, but it is not nearly as spectacular as what I thought. A $25,000 tax credit, for example, would mean that the government treats you as if you paid an additional $25,000 in taxes. Accelerated depreciation of $25,000, which is what this "loophole" is, saves the present value of having perhaps $6,500 less money now and $6,500 more later. The difference is probably less than $1,000.
Don't get me wrong. This is a real loophole, but the nature of the loophole is much smaller than what is represented, and it appears to have originated with a Republican congress and a Democratic president (Clinton), so maybe it simply supports Lynne's thesis.
Sorry for being so soporific, but the thought of a $25,000 tax credit for those big, bovine-like vehicles I always seem to be behind got my blood up.
John
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!