PDA

View Full Version : Made in USA = trash



J Tiers
07-11-2010, 01:07 AM
At least sometimes............

Bought some made-in-USA "Edsal Manufacturing" metal shelves. Only "metal" ones I could find, since the made-in china ones were all metal frames but particle board shelves. I wanted to put things on the shelves that might be oily, etc, and wood of any kind, let alone saggy particleboard just wasn't the plan.

So I ended up with this MIA POS. At least the shelves were all metal..... that is the only thing good about it.

If it had been made in china, the parts would have actually fit together, most likely.

As I tried to get it to fit, I got to thinking very evil thoughts:

At the plant auction (I assume they are all made "elsewhere" now), I could have cheered as the auctioneer whaled off the equipment to foreigners. "one more crapulous US manufacturer GONE"

On the last day at the plant, I could have jeered the supervisors and bosses as they got in their cars...."you made crap, you knew you made crap, and so you are toast".... "bunch of losers" etc.

Thinking that didn't help much. the parts still were not fitting........

The shelves had holes out of position as much as a half inch.

Parts were malformed, stamped wrong, visually and obviously bad.

Holes down the middle of some parts, way off center on others.

Folding of parts so wrong that 6mm round holes missed 15mm rectangular holes that they should have been centered on.

Most of the problem fits I was able to line up by either bending the shelves into their proper shape, or by using a tapered drift to align them. A couple I had to introduce to messrs Roper and Whitney..... they just were NOT going to ever line up.

I have put together a LOT of shelves from this company over the years, and have seen them get thinner, lighter, and flimsier, etc. But at least they always fit.

Not this time..... Apparently in an effort to compete with the chinese they eliminated the entire QC department.....fired the production engineers, supervisors, etc, and hired untrained illiterates to work.

Note to the last 5 US manufacturers who haven't left yet..... if you are gonna make it here, AT LEAST TRY TO DO QC............DON"T MAKE CRAP. MAKING CRAP WON"T SAVE YOU.

PeteF
07-11-2010, 02:00 AM
Jerry I'll hand it to you, you're a brave man to post that! Last time I similarly tried to point out country of origin is not necessarily a de-facto term for quality I had half the peanut gallery down on me like a house of bricks! ALL countries sometimes produce crap, basically to "compete" with the lower cost (read Chinese) producers. A very wise marketing professor drummed into us constantly, NEVER try to compete on price unless you have a strategic cost advantage, or else it will gravitate to those WITH that advantage and you'll lose.

I hear your pain. Think of it as a kit :D

Black_Moons
07-11-2010, 02:17 AM
I bought a new toolbox.. Said 'Proudly made in canada' on it, im like ok whatever. try and remove that label cause its big and over the drawer handles... it tears in multiple peices, its gonna take me 15+ mins to remove this stupid label because they cheaped out on it!
That and the 'Kit in this drawer' label..
Like I really need to be told that stuff is in one of the drawers, Like I would'nt of found it eventualy..

lazlo
07-11-2010, 09:16 AM
ALL countries sometimes produce crap, basically to "compete" with the lower cost (read Chinese) producers.

Except the Swiss. Have you ever see anything Swiss that was crap? :)

Although there's plenty of crap Made in USA, a good bit of it has been outsourced to China and falsely branded. The FTC relies on competitors (or consumers!) turning them in, so you can get away with it for quite awhile, especially if you're a lesser known company...

PeteF
07-11-2010, 09:29 AM
Except the Swiss. Have you ever see anything Swiss that was crap? :)

Although there's plenty of crap Made in USA, a good bit of it has been outsourced to China and falsely branded. The FTC relies on competitors (or consumers!) turning them in, so you can get away with it for quite awhile, especially if you're a lesser known company...

Really? That's a pretty worrying arrangement. I'm certainly under the impression that country of origin, including percentage of assembly was quite strict here in Australia, and presumed it was similar up there.

Hmm, I had to think about the Swiss, as you have a good point. Having lived right next to the Swiss border for a while I can think of one thing; their radio stations! Tuning in to Swiss radio is like turning back the clock 50 years! Apologies to any Swiss here, but non-stop "Lederhosen musik" just doesn't cut it for me I'm afraid :p

Liger Zero
07-11-2010, 09:45 AM
Plenty of American companies subscribe to the "crap in a box and put a shipping tag on it" method of manufacturing.

Often they use the same machines that "grandfather" purchased the war, they have the same "core" of family-members and cronies in the office and as "supervision" year after year... meanwhile the names and faces on the production floor change daily.

Fear not, this company will outsource itself to Asia or Africa when the Local Government get tired of subsidizing them with tax breaks.

J Tiers
07-11-2010, 09:45 AM
Proper labeling is required by law.

There are also laws against robbing banks, committing murder, a host of corporate frauds are illegal, etc, etc.

That and a buck fifty will get you coffee. I notice that all of the above are crimes, and yet are committed with regularity by folks who think they can get away with it. Some do, many don't.

In the case of labeling country of origin, there is a profit motive. In fact, I notice that in 95% of all the crimes listed above, and most of the ones NOT listed, there is a profit motive, monetary or otherwise.

Apparently people are driven by a personal profit motive. I am not at all certain that is "news".;)

I notice that "Edsal" is still in business, and a search on "Hom E Quip" brand turns up results, so even that is still being made, somewhere. I did NOT notice any "flags" on the websites, no mention of "made in USA".

Boucher
07-11-2010, 10:12 AM
Years ago I needed some good heavy shelves so I bought a bunch of 3"x3" X 3/16" angle for the corners and 1" sq tubing for the shelf supports and 3/4" plywood for the shelves. They are not adjustable but they will hold nearly anything that will fit on them. Was lots of work initially but has been very usefull over the years. Over the last few years I have bought some good shelves from Home Depot The shelves are particle board. I have been thinking of putting formica on some of them. I have actually been impressed at some of the fits from things made in China.

Liger Zero
07-11-2010, 10:19 AM
Sterilite. Made in America plastic household goods... but look at the quality compared to a foreign-sourced Rubbermaid item.

The ones we get locally at Wal-Mart... plastic bins specifically.... the thinnest self-supporting walls they can get... and stress marks all over the product. Either caused by ejecting too fast, not using a release aid or a whole host of "encheapening" methods.

I buy the Sterilite over the Rubbermaid even though it is junk simply because Rubbermaid shut down a huge operation here in NY and left a trainload of workers without work. Refuse to do business with them.

Tony Ennis
07-11-2010, 10:38 AM
I buy the Sterilite over the Rubbermaid even though it is junk simply because Rubbermaid shut down a huge operation here in NY and left a trainload of workers without work. Refuse to do business with them.

That's the most honest type of protest IMO. Keep yer little red and yellow "I care" magnetic 'ribbons', your bumber stickers, and your placards and poster boards. Voting with the wallet is king.

Also, regarding Jerry's post - crap can be made anywhere. Everyone cost engineers. And the laws about what is "made in USA" and "assembled in USA" are not clear cut. It could be that having a bunch of illegals in El Paso inserting instructions and a baggie of Chicom screws into the box was enough to make the shelves "MIA."

kendall
07-11-2010, 10:42 AM
I haven't bought shelving in years. I just feel that it's so much easier to build shelves that can take full advantage of an area and fit perfectly, than it is to hunt for shelves that are 'almost' right.

As far as country of origin, I've seen many products where the 'Made in USA' is clarified somewhere in the small print as applying ONLY to the packaging. Which to me is a very dishonest bit of subterfuge.

The Trend in most manufacturing, well, pretty much any area now is to shed the experienced workers and hire unskilled workers because they can be hired much cheaper. And with the advances in automation, many jobs no longer require an operator who knows what they are doing.

Ken.

RobbieKnobbie
07-11-2010, 10:47 AM
Sterilite. ... and stress marks all over the product. Either caused by ejecting too fast, not using a release aid or a whole host of "encheapening" methods.



Could you post some pictures of stress marks and encheapening what not's in plastic? I'd really like to learn a little about the symptoms of cheap v. quality plastic parts. Thanks. (seperate thread, of course!)

Liger Zero
07-11-2010, 10:47 AM
Oh you still need an operator that knows how to set up and tune the automation. Of course companies get around this by hiring any "mechanically inclined" crack-head they can get. "Oh I changed the brakes on my car and the spark-plugs too." There is a world of difference between someone who turned a wrench on his car and setting up/running an industrial process!

Problem becomes acute when you have a different "inspector packer" every day. No one learns the rhythm of the job no one learns what to watch for. Add to that no one is paying attention to the JOB they are too busy sniping the guy next to them in hopes that the job becomes permanent.

Liger Zero
07-11-2010, 10:48 AM
Could you post some pictures of stress marks and encheapening what not's in plastic? I'd really like to learn a little about the symptoms of cheap v. quality plastic parts. Thanks. (seperate thread, of course!)

White marks in colored plastic. Next time I'm at Wal Mart I'll snap a few photos.

lazlo
07-11-2010, 11:30 AM
Really? That's a pretty worrying arrangement.

The truly scary part is our Securities and Exchange Commission (who policies insider trading) operates in the same fashion.


Rubbermaid shut down a huge operation here in NY and left a trainload of workers without work. Refuse to do business with them.

You can thank Walmart for that. Walmart famously forced Rubbermaid into bankruptcy in 1999 when the cost of the plasticizer reisin went through the roof. Rubbermaid increased prices to pass on the cost, and Walmart punished them by not stocking their items. At the time, Walmart was, by far, Rubbermaid's largest distributor.

Newall corporation bought the Rubbermaid name and moved all the operations to China.

Mcruff
07-11-2010, 11:50 AM
Sterilite. Made in America plastic household goods... but look at the quality compared to a foreign-sourced Rubbermaid item.

The ones we get locally at Wal-Mart... plastic bins specifically.... the thinnest self-supporting walls they can get... and stress marks all over the product. Either caused by ejecting too fast, not using a release aid or a whole host of "encheapening" methods.

I buy the Sterilite over the Rubbermaid even though it is junk simply because Rubbermaid shut down a huge operation here in NY and left a trainload of workers without work. Refuse to do business with them.

If you saw the molds and machines in the Sterrilite plant here in Birmingham you would vapor lock, the employees try to make good stuff but the corporate office based out of Connecticut or somewhere around there continually shoots them down. There are no molds with standardized parts every leader pin in the mold is soft and of a different size and are made in house, return pins are the same, the molds have been repaired literally 1000's of times and parts from this years run will deinitely not fit last years run. The employees are paid decent but the owners simply don't give a crap about the Sterrilite name the product and the employees are tired of trying to change there attitude.

precisionmetal
07-11-2010, 11:59 AM
..... The employees are paid decent but the owners simply don't give a crap about the Sterrilite name the product and the employees are tired of trying to change there attitude.

Short term greed/profits = long term crap.

IMO, the countries that make the nicest products have a culturally different mindset -- they will invest heavily in the short term to ensure long term quality.

Liger Zero
07-11-2010, 12:00 PM
You can thank Walmart for that. Walmart famously forced Rubbermaid into bankruptcy in 1999 when the cost of the plasticizer reisin went through the roof. Rubbermaid increased prices to pass on the cost, and Walmart punished them by not stocking their items. At the time, Walmart was, by far, Rubbermaid's largest distributor.


1999 was a watershed year for the plastic industry. MANY companies 1999-2002 found themselves unable to "shoot the goo and pack the parts" because of this simple fact: 75% of a plastic company's profits come from marking up the price of resin.

When resin went from .05 a pound to $2.50 a pound overnight many companies looked to other options to turn a profit. The one I was at in 1999 found it's niche in "technical services" and "secondary operations." In other words they weren't just selling you a box of plastic widgets they would help you design that widget, they would assemble your widget into a sub-assembly or sell-able product.

Those who couldn't cope with the rapid change in the market place collapsed (Moll Rochester, JC Plastics) utterly while others shed their technical workforce and brought in unskilled labor (Polymeer, now closed down.) Others moved production offshore (Xerox, Kodak) where they could ignore expensive things like health-and-labor protection laws.

Companies like Pactiv spun off divisions, which became independent companies that got gobbled up by other companies... and then ultimately closed down. Tyco Plastics in Macedon was a great example of this.

Other companies turned to government subsidies and hand-outs. Most of the surviving companies have some kind of arrangement with the local and regional government regarding taxes. Most companies rely on temp labor to keep costs capped.

The end result is there has been very little capital investment, and almost no innovation in this region for a LONG time. Many companies are running presses that are pushing 15-20 years old. Some are running presses far older than that. Companies are in survival mode, and only look twords the next quarter, not two or three years down the road.

Our workforce, sadly has the same mentality. I am afraid of being replaced so I'll do whatever I can to protect my turf. No one bothers to take classes or training other... it's repetitive pattern with no innovation or change.

It's a vicious cycle, one that CAN be stopped. Someone has to set an example for others to emulate. Ones this hypothetical "good example" rises far enough for others to take notice, the others will strive to emulate the patterns that brought this newcomer success.

Once we stop doing what the Big Three did for 100+ years (Kodak, Xerox, B&L) this region will recover. And if New York can pull it out of the fire, so can the rest of the country.

Liger Zero
07-11-2010, 12:02 PM
If you saw the molds and machines in the Sterrilite plant here in Birmingham you would vapor lock, the employees try to make good stuff but the corporate office based out of Connecticut or somewhere around there continually shoots them down. There are no molds with standardized parts every leader pin in the mold is soft and of a different size and are made in house, return pins are the same, the molds have been repaired literally 1000's of times and parts from this years run will deinitely not fit last years run. The employees are paid decent but the owners simply don't give a crap about the Sterrilite name the product and the employees are tired of trying to change there attitude.


....I worked for Sterilite when I was in College before I moved to New York. :) They are based in Mass-Of-Chew-Sh1ts.

JCHannum
07-11-2010, 12:12 PM
Edsal did, at least several years ago, make a quality line of industrial shelving and cabinets. I don't know if that is still the case, but suspect that if you were to look in a Grainger catalog, you might find a different product line at a much higher price.

Robert has hit on it in part. The box stores all suscribe to the Walmart policy and demand the lowest price merchandise. Don't buy a John Deere mower or yard tractor at a box store and expect it to be the same machine you will get at a JD dealer. The same applies to almost any other merchandise you will find there, Edsal is no different. They are forced by the retailer to produce at the cheapest price point possible. The end result is that you end up with the poorest product imaginable.

Sears used to offer almost all of their merchandise in three quality and price levels. They were good, better and best. We used to make the decision ourselves, now it is made for us.

Black Forest
07-11-2010, 12:38 PM
Obviously you haven't bought any of their cheese. Damn stuff is full of holes! And not nice symmetrical holes, but randomly place with no concern for order!

oldtiffie
07-11-2010, 12:49 PM
Canton is in China - just one - but there are 26 cantons in Switzerland.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cantonese

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cantons_of_Switzerland

If that is so, are the Swiss not Cantonese? Do they speak Cantonese or are they mandarins and speak mandarin - like they do in China?

If the Swiss are that Chinese and as the Swiss make all "good stuff" is it not the case then that Chinese stuff is made in Switzerland too?

But how can that be if all Swiss stuff is wonderful and all Chinese stuff is pretty poor?

krutch
07-11-2010, 12:51 PM
So government regulation, tax scams, graft, corruption, and union regulation, tax scams, graft, corruption, etc. has nothing to do with the crap being offered to the public?
Along with workers putting out crap because they know the company is about to sh*t can them for a 'bowl of rice a day' worker.

Liger Zero
07-11-2010, 12:58 PM
Along with workers putting out crap because they know the company is about to sh*t can them for a 'bowl of rice a day' worker.

I mentioned this above, there is a sense of futility in the workforce. Why should I give two ****s out of a rats ass about anything, the company just wants to replace me. I'll make it as hard as possible and drag the rest of the company down around me if I have to.

Can't say that I blame them really... on the other hand it's part of that whole "not seeing the big picture" issue that we here in the USA suffer from.

RancherBill
07-11-2010, 01:06 PM
The Chinese did not invent crap. It was invented by the Egyptians. There has always been low(cheap), medium, and high(expensive) quality.

In all industries it is the same. The only thing today the junk comes from China instead of _______ (insert US city name). I can't think of some tool brands that are US junk - they have all been thrown away.

Liger Zero
07-11-2010, 01:23 PM
Ultimately the Chinese produce what we tell them to: We want it made AT THE LOWEST COST POSSIBLE. That means unskilled labor, poisonous/illegal materials and poor IP protection. But hey, it's CHEAP.

wierdscience
07-11-2010, 01:31 PM
Except the Swiss. Have you ever see anything Swiss that was crap? :)

...

Yup,ordered in some Swiss made 30mm all thread rod 120 m worth,pure unadulterated crap,worse than the Chinese stuff.Threads all chopped up,burrs everywhere,it went back.Next Batch was Japanese and excellent.

Every country on Earth is capable of making garbage.

Too_Many_Tools
07-11-2010, 01:40 PM
The truly scary part is our Securities and Exchange Commission (who policies insider trading) operates in the same fashion.



You can thank Walmart for that. Walmart famously forced Rubbermaid into bankruptcy in 1999 when the cost of the plasticizer reisin went through the roof. Rubbermaid increased prices to pass on the cost, and Walmart punished them by not stocking their items. At the time, Walmart was, by far, Rubbermaid's largest distributor.

Newall corporation bought the Rubbermaid name and moved all the operations to China.

And the fact that Rubbermaid management ALLOWED themselves to become dependent on ONE customer had nothing to do with their downfall....nothing at all.

TMT

goose
07-11-2010, 01:53 PM
I've bought some made in USA crap too. The lowest quality parts thrown together as cheaply as possible, put in the flimsy-est packaging imaginable. Doesn't even hold a candle to the cheapest import. Crap has always been made in the USA, think back to the 1960's when many American toy manufacturers would stamp out cheap toy cars with un-folded, jagged metal edges. No pride. It comes down to you get what you pay for, import or domestic.

I consider myself a maker of quality parts, I buy quality. I buy what I would sell, and won't sell anything I wouldn't buy.

Gary

mbensema
07-11-2010, 01:56 PM
Obviously you haven't bought any of their cheese. Damn stuff is full of holes! And not nice symmetrical holes, but randomly place with no concern for order!

Thank you for the good laugh!

Mister ED
07-11-2010, 02:35 PM
And the fact that Rubbermaid management ALLOWED themselves to become dependent on ONE customer had nothing to do with their downfall....nothing at all.

TMT
To maintain market share as Walmart has grown and become larger ... those larger companies with a high consumer market share have not had a choice (well at least not a good one).

The company I work for has held a +/- 75% market share for many, many years. As Wally World has grown to become the #1 retailer, they are also our biggest customer ... not by choice. To maintain the market share as consumers shifted their buying patterns from the traditional groceries to Wally World ... there was no choice but to sell to them, to maintain market share.

No doubt that is one company that the US could have been better off without! They are a cancer plain and simple. Someday their world will implode ... but unfortunately there will send many other companies down the tubes first.

J Tiers
07-11-2010, 05:28 PM
It comes down to you get what you pay for, import or domestic.

I consider myself a maker of quality parts, I buy quality.

Gary

As with the coffeemaker,mentioned elsewhere, I bought the ONLY all-metal shelves I could find in a week of looking. The only ones I could find that were 30" x 12" shelf, and could be reasonably configured to a height that fits under a workbench top, AND could get ASAP, not ordered and shipped-in. Could have had it shipped at teh beginning of teh week, but time got too short for that.

Didn't have a choice of bad/good/better/best.

it's getting like that...... choice = "insanely good and priced to match" OR cheapest almost non-functional consumer crap.

JCHannum
07-11-2010, 05:49 PM
The sorry part of the box store sales philosophy versus the old Sears good, better, best is that the slow movers are eventually no longer stocked. The unwashed public, not really knowing or caring about relative strength or load capacity go for the cheap, and the good ones end up phased out.

I have a set of good US made shelving with particleboard shelves and they have held up well. I don't know the manufacturer, but the uprights are stout formed angle and the cross bars are a formed channel.

I bought two sets from a local supplier a couple of years apart. The first set had four shelves. When I bought the second set, I found they had remained competitive in price by dropping one set of shelves.

Farbmeister
07-11-2010, 06:25 PM
My rule of thumb is if I want it done right, I do it myself.

The legs for my shelves are 4x4x8 treated lumber. My shelf runners are 2x6x8 and 2x4 diagonal braces. Cut 2x10x12 into 4ft board for the actual shelf. Legs are routed out for the shelves to sit in and then bolted. I have at least 1,000lbs per shelf (old GMC Transmissions and transfer cases from the 40's) and misc engine parts. No way I trust some union slob or illiterate china man to get it right.

Maybe $150 per.. have 2 (that's 16ft x 8ft x 4ft total) with three tiers each.

I did but some metal shelving from lowes but it had particle board shelf (rated at 1000lbs per shelf? Yeah, right. It holds some gardening stuff. I won't even put it in my garage.

PeteF
07-11-2010, 07:13 PM
It's ironic some bemoan the role of government in "intervening" in business, yet complain about misleading advertising. The government regulates the advertising and what can be printed on a packet. Maybe the company that makes the goods that are labelled Packaged in America is also bemoaning the government in the same way in not allowing them to claim it is made in America.

The US has far less government intervention in business than, say, Australia. Similarly Australia has far less than the EU. I think it's drawing a long bow to start blaming government intervention for economic woes, tempting though it may be, maybe more the point is inappropriate intervention, because intervention can work for both sides of the equation.

oldbikerdude37
07-11-2010, 07:23 PM
:( the worst stuff made in America is made at Taco bell and burger king, never go there, i will not go into further details___

Rich Carlstedt
07-11-2010, 08:34 PM
Hey J, Did you tell the company ?
how about
http://www.edsal.com/?com=Contact

I think , if you are not satisfied, management needs to know it, and know it from someone like you.
They have 17 (!) different Product lines in shelving
They make all kinds of racks and storage units for commercial purposes.
I don't know anyone at the company, but heck, call the president....never hurts

All countries have good, better, best, even China.
How could the China put up a satelite and build rockets with a whoflungdung Lathe ? they can't ---is the answer

You guys can bemoan Walmart, but they do a special thing for our economy...they keep inflation down, and suppliers honest.
In doing so, sometimes things are good, and sometimes bad,
Sears did the same thing for years, but lost their way unfortunitely IMHO.
They pounded on vendors until the vendor went broke. I went to the close out sale for Minnisota Fats pool tables. Remember them ? I was told that Sears forced them to, cut prices, add production, then cut orders and they folded.
Happens in any business folks. I worked for a company one time and the owner told me he would never lock in more than 20 % of sales to any one customer. We thought he was nuts as one customer was growing like mad, and sent all that business to our competitors. Guess what?
10 years later, ALL the competition was gone, and our owner bought the equipment at auction and torched it. He taught me a valuable lesson.
in Business, You only do what YOU want to do.
if you make crap, you live and die by it.
If you sell to the big boys, better have a stronge backbone..

Now my last thoughts
When was the last time you told a store manager you were unhappy with what they were doing ? I do it at least once a month, and sometimes its a compliment...You don't like walmart...tell em !

Rich

A General Micrometer will never read like a Brown and Sharpe.
Don't confuse the difference

Too_Many_Tools
07-11-2010, 09:35 PM
To maintain market share as Walmart has grown and become larger ... those larger companies with a high consumer market share have not had a choice (well at least not a good one).

The company I work for has held a +/- 75% market share for many, many years. As Wally World has grown to become the #1 retailer, they are also our biggest customer ... not by choice. To maintain the market share as consumers shifted their buying patterns from the traditional groceries to Wally World ... there was no choice but to sell to them, to maintain market share.

No doubt that is one company that the US could have been better off without! They are a cancer plain and simple. Someday their world will implode ... but unfortunately there will send many other companies down the tubes first.

A company always has a choice..just as you and I do.

Going with one main customer is like putting all your money on one lottery ticket...a big payoff if you win..and the poorhouse if you do not.

It was greed, pure and simple that killed Rubbermaid.

TMT

Too_Many_Tools
07-11-2010, 09:38 PM
:( the worst stuff made in America is made at Taco bell and burger king, never go there, i will not go into further details___

LOL..if you really knew what goes on in the food supply chain you would NEVER eat at another fast food place in your life.

TMT

ckelloug
07-11-2010, 09:41 PM
I've got Edsal workbenches in my shop and they are nice. But, I bought them from my local tool supply who had them drop shipped in and they weren't cheap. I always hate to hear of companies that sell out and make products too cheap to even work.

I have some shelves I got from Lowes which I think were Edsal but don't remember and the particle board shelves sagged when I put my 9 inch rotary table on it for a year. only 80 pounds of load. They must not figure in creep when they make these bogus load claims for shelves.

--Cameron

J Tiers
07-11-2010, 09:45 PM
Hey J, Did you tell the company ?

I think , if you are not satisfied, management needs to know it, and know it from someone like you.


I did NOT tell them..... And I don't plan to.

1) They don't list that brand anymore, although it is still sold.....

2) I have a rule:

If I am just unhappy, or see a safety problem, I tell the manager. One usually gets a "thank you for your input" at that level.

If I am slightly more ticked, I tell the company. That usually gets a reply with a discount coupon for the very same item for which you have just explained why you will NEVER buy one again :rolleyes:

If I am royally pi$$ed off (or think they are too bad to BE fixed), I will NOT tell them, I prefer to see them fail than have them fix it. I refuse to give them ANY feedback. They already "know it all".........

Bill736
07-11-2010, 10:04 PM
In my experience, the biggest problem with poor "made in USA" items is an apparent lack of any end of the assembly line testing. Modern day quality control techniques take the responsibility away from end of the line inspectors and testers, and place it on each individual on the assembly line. A few years back, in one month I bought a new well pump ( made in USA) and a new gas water heater ( made in USA). I plugged in the new water pump , after installing it, and it just hummed. The pump rotor was jammed against the housing, and a simple test at the end of the assembly line would have revealed that fault. The gas water heater leaked gas from the control box, and again a simple test at the factory would have revealed that leak.
In both cases, the fault was not poor design or materials, but sloppy assembly, and no testing before shipping the units. I still prefer to buy items made in the USA , but it's no guarantee that the item will work .

Too_Many_Tools
07-12-2010, 12:55 AM
In my experience, the biggest problem with poor "made in USA" items is an apparent lack of any end of the assembly line testing. Modern day quality control techniques take the responsibility away from end of the line inspectors and testers, and place it on each individual on the assembly line.

The easiest way for a company to cut costs is to skip quality control measures...and let the customer be the QC inspector.

Ever notice how many times posters mention that they had to rebuy cheap tools until they get one that worked.

I recently needed some cheap 4" C clamps. At the local HF I checked the entire bin of clamps (15) to find 4 for them that were made correctly. The other 11 clamps should have never shipped.

TMT

ldn
07-12-2010, 01:11 AM
When resin went from .05 a pound to $2.50 a pound overnight many companies looked to other options to turn a profit.

Do you know why the price of resin went up so much? Just curious.

Liger Zero
07-12-2010, 02:01 AM
Do you know why the price of resin went up so much? Just curious.

Same reason that gas prices went up and continue to stay high: Simple greed on the supplier's part. When you are turning a tens-of-billion profit you don't need to charge $5 a pound for a basic resin like neat HDPE. You charge that much simply because you CAN and SOMEONE is going to pay regardless of what you charge.

Of course with the revised Press Safety Rules, NAFTA and then this, many companies were blindsided and collapsed. Some said it was a conspiracy to drive work to Mexico and ultimately to China but that's just silly.

This is how I see it from my point of view... I'm sure there is a "reason" for it, I'm just stating it from my POV.

EVguru
07-12-2010, 06:56 AM
The easiest way for a company to cut costs is to skip quality control measures...and let the customer be the QC inspector.

I often tell people that the little sticker that says 'Passsed Quality Control' means exactly that. It didn't go through QC!

Farbmeister
07-12-2010, 10:58 AM
Ever notice how many times posters mention that they had to rebuy NAME BRAND tools until they get one that worked.



Fixed that for you.

I've had top shelf stuff crap out as well as the cheaper stuff. Dillon reloaders are TOP SHELF in the reloading hobby. Yet they still get tons of crap sent back as defective. They are good about it, and have a better than average warranty, but still puts out bad parts. I've seen lots of 'quality' shops (machine shops in the USA with YEARS/DECADES of experience) recall an entire batch of parts. People seem to give them a pass as they are 'liked'. But garbage products is garbage products.

Too_Many_Tools
07-12-2010, 11:12 AM
Fixed that for you.

I've had top shelf stuff crap out as well as the cheaper stuff. Dillon reloaders are TOP SHELF in the reloading hobby. Yet they still get tons of crap sent back as defective. They are good about it, and have a better than average warranty, but still puts out bad parts. I've seen lots of 'quality' shops (machine shops in the USA with YEARS/DECADES of experience) recall an entire batch of parts. People seem to give them a pass as they are 'liked'. But garbage products is garbage products.

You make a very good point.

Anyone and any company can make a mistake and allow it to be sold.

Whether it is sold is the difference between poor and good companies.

The Devil IS in the details.

TMT

Too_Many_Tools
07-12-2010, 11:28 AM
I often tell people that the little sticker that says 'Passsed Quality Control' means exactly that. It didn't go through QC!

Good one. ;<)

In my example of the HF clamps, I was the QC inspector...who worked for free...so the company did not incur the additional cost of quality control.

In the end I consider the problem to be the customer...companies only sell what the customer will buy.

The trend seems to be cheap (buy at your risk) garbage or expensive (take your breath away) high end equipment.

I suspect it has a strong coorelation to the ever increasing division of wealth we are seeing in the world where the divide between the poor and the rich is now at the same degree of separation that it was in the robber baron age. Accompanied with the decline of the middle class (and their rapidly shrinking buying power/demand for middle of the road products of cost and quality ), an economy can price itself out of the profitable production of a product sector.

TMT

Too_Many_Tools
07-12-2010, 11:35 AM
Same reason that gas prices went up and continue to stay high: Simple greed on the supplier's part. When you are turning a tens-of-billion profit you don't need to charge $5 a pound for a basic resin like neat HDPE. You charge that much simply because you CAN and SOMEONE is going to pay regardless of what you charge.

Of course with the revised Press Safety Rules, NAFTA and then this, many companies were blindsided and collapsed. Some said it was a conspiracy to drive work to Mexico and ultimately to China but that's just silly.

This is how I see it from my point of view... I'm sure there is a "reason" for it, I'm just stating it from my POV.


As with any other commodity, a company can take steps to insure against damage from sudden price increases...the plastics industry did not...because management decided not to. One could ask where that money saved went...I suspect it went into their pockets.

Like not insuring your house for fire, you can "retain" more profits...until the fire occurs that is.

I recall that before the crash the CEO of Rubbermaid was making the news as the wonder child of the industry for the profits they were making...and now we know how they were doing it.

You can always fly higher if you don't have the weight of a parachute to weigh you down.

TMT

Twmaster
07-13-2010, 12:06 AM
The term 'high cost of low price' comes to mind here.

I've seen junk from every corner of the world. Even my own back yard. The sad part is we are doing this to ourselves as a society. We demand cheaper prices, something else in the economy has to shift. Well guess what, that shift was your job going to China, Mexico or Vietnam.....

I try to buy products made in the USA. It gets harder every passing day to both afford or find products.

Here is something I find amazing....

I'm unemployed. Been looking for a job since November. Anyhow, I've been selling crap at flea markets. Mostly stuff I buy at auctions or yard sales. I've been looking at buying some new itmes to sell. I found plastic tool boxes. 12x6x6 or so in size. Flip open lid with storage in the lid. I've bought similar little tool boxes at Ace or maybe Home Despot. IIRC I paid between 6 and 7 bucks for this.

I can buy them in boxes of 24 for $1 each from a distributor in the USA.

How in the hell can anybody down the line make any money??

Some Chinaman had to make and assemble the thing (its 13 parts). Package it. Ship it to the USA. Truck it to a distributor and then sell them to me for $1 each. How much would that toolbox wholesale for if made in NY? Or Kansas?

Feh. Enough. I'm mad now....

J Tiers
07-13-2010, 12:30 AM
Your answer may be that it would cost more than is justified if made here (gotta pay that CEO).

And, it costs much LESS than is justified as it is.......

Either it was made by the "free labor" crowd, OR there is a case of different valuations of money...... And even free labor doesn't explain that, quite.

The source country evidently does not have to charge the actual going rate to the export market, possibly because the value of a dollar counted in national currency, is much more than it should be....

If, for instance, Canada were set up differently as to government, and decided to "peg" their dollar as worth 10 US cents each, externally, you would be able to buy $10 Cn of goods for $1 US, so long as you paid in $ US. Because ALL external purchases from Canada in that case are in $US, the issue of "real" exchange rate (based on value) would never come up, and the values would be to some extent insulated, especially if raw materials were available locally.

manufacturing would rush to set up there..... for obvious reasons.

And you could get your foldy-box for $1 or even less.

Twmaster
07-13-2010, 12:39 AM
I had not considered 'currency pegging'. Something new to honk me off.....

;)

Too_Many_Tools
07-13-2010, 01:31 AM
Your answer may be that it would cost more than is justified if made here (gotta pay that CEO).

And, it costs much LESS than is justified as it is.......

Either it was made by the "free labor" crowd, OR there is a case of different valuations of money...... And even free labor doesn't explain that, quite.

The source country evidently does not have to charge the actual going rate to the export market, possibly because the value of a dollar counted in national currency, is much more than it should be....

If, for instance, Canada were set up differently as to government, and decided to "peg" their dollar as worth 10 US cents each, externally, you would be able to buy $10 Cn of goods for $1 US, so long as you paid in $ US. Because ALL external purchases from Canada in that case are in $US, the issue of "real" exchange rate (based on value) would never come up, and the values would be to some extent insulated, especially if raw materials were available locally.

manufacturing would rush to set up there..... for obvious reasons.

And you could get your foldy-box for $1 or even less.

And a government thinking long term to build their country's infrastructure would do just that.

That and own most of our IOUs....

TMT

Farbmeister
07-13-2010, 07:03 AM
Your answer may be that it would cost more than is justified if made here (gotta pay that CEO).

And, it costs much LESS than is justified as it is.......

Either it was made by the "free labor" crowd, OR there is a case of different valuations of money...... And even free labor doesn't explain that, quite.

The source country evidently does not have to charge the actual going rate to the export market, possibly because the value of a dollar counted in national currency, is much more than it should be....

If, for instance, Canada were set up differently as to government, and decided to "peg" their dollar as worth 10 US cents each, externally, you would be able to buy $10 Cn of goods for $1 US, so long as you paid in $ US. Because ALL external purchases from Canada in that case are in $US, the issue of "real" exchange rate (based on value) would never come up, and the values would be to some extent insulated, especially if raw materials were available locally.

manufacturing would rush to set up there..... for obvious reasons.

And you could get your foldy-box for $1 or even less.

For a large resource rich country like China that would work as they only have to import so much.

Its not like undervaluing currency works in all situations. If say, Madagascar did that they would still not have any manufacturing base, but would make a ton of money in tourism.. as long as they could afford to keep the place looking nice.

China has the trifecta of cheap good: a vast workforce for cheap, natural resources in abundance, and a government that allows wholesale IP theft and counterfeiting. So no only are they not encumbered by lawyers, but they have people to make the goods and most of the 'stuff' to make it.

Even if we adjusted wages down by a factor of 10 the USA could not compete due to our legal system.

J Tiers
07-13-2010, 08:36 AM
Even if we adjusted wages down by a factor of 10 the USA could not compete due to our legal system.

I see a profitable export there..........:D

Unfortunately the cultural expectations on the legal system are different in china. it seems to be one area that has somewhat persisted right thru the communist revolution to the present day, while most other aspects of culture were changed.

Too_Many_Tools
07-13-2010, 11:24 AM
Even if we adjusted wages down by a factor of 10 the USA could not compete due to our legal system.

Could you expand on this comment?

I don't understand it.

Economics is the issue as I see it.

One of the biggest reason why foreign investors are willing to loan us money is that the United States has a reliable legal system in place that insures that they will be paid.

TMT

Too_Many_Tools
07-13-2010, 11:28 AM
For a large resource rich country like China that would work as they only have to import so much.

Its not like undervaluing currency works in all situations. If say, Madagascar did that they would still not have any manufacturing base, but would make a ton of money in tourism.. as long as they could afford to keep the place looking nice.

China has the trifecta of cheap good: a vast workforce for cheap, natural resources in abundance, and a government that allows wholesale IP theft and counterfeiting. So no only are they not encumbered by lawyers, but they have people to make the goods and most of the 'stuff' to make it.

Even if we adjusted wages down by a factor of 10 the USA could not compete due to our legal system.

You forgot to mention that foreign countries have been falling overselves for years building China's manufacturing infrastructure at a discount.

TMT

Your Old Dog
07-13-2010, 04:02 PM
The term 'high cost of low price' comes to mind here.

I've seen junk from every corner of the world. Even my own back yard. The sad part is we are doing this to ourselves as a society. We demand cheaper prices, something else in the economy has to shift. Well guess what, that shift was your job going to China, Mexico or Vietnam.....

I try to buy products made in the USA. It gets harder every passing day to both afford or find products.......................................... .......................

..

Governments are formed to do for individuals what they can't do for themselves. Put similar products on the market and charge 1/2 as much for one you can only expect people to buy the cheaper. Government should protect them from this phenomenon the same as protecting us from cocaine and other maybe pleasant but degenerate behavior.

gmatov
07-13-2010, 11:16 PM
Government is not designed to protect you from buying something that costs less, but will do what you require of the purchase.

Government does not say "That is too cheap, you cannot sell it here." Government CAN and DOES say that "You make a defective product. It harms our citizens. You may not sell it here until you repair the defects." as it has done with Toyota and the acceleration problem.

They don't do that nearly as often as they should, or we would have one hell of a lot fewer drugs in the apothecary shops.

That people vote with their wallets to buy tools from KNOWN Chinese vendors is what you might call "free trade". Black and Decker, DeWalt, Milwaukee, Stanley, etc., all have tools made in China. I do not have to pay for a US name brand for a consumer grade tool, when I probably will not wear that POS out.

The US name brand will have a CEO and an executive board, and some warehousemen to move that crap about, and NO other Americans will have made a nickle off it.

That is not my idea of American Industry. Warehousemen and truckers get some work. Execs reap millions for offshoring.

I have no idea what will be a result of the Yuan "floating". The Euro was at one time, about 10 years ago, about 89 cents. Then it was up to about a buck 45, and now it is down to about a buck 20. Has trade fallen or risen, as a result?

Cheers,

George

J Tiers
07-13-2010, 11:51 PM
Yep.....

Government is your "union" as a citizen........ It is the result of us all banding together for mutual support and defense.

The attitude of a few saying "I want the benefits, but I don't want the responsibility" is one that should be met with scorn and shunning by the rest of us. But it often is coddled and cossetted instead.

Some of these folks are CEOs, who want freedom to make more money, but don't want to pay taxes. I think it was Warren Buffett who actually said that his secretary pays more actual dollars in taxes than he does, and that the situation was totally wrong. :eek:

Then there are the ones who don't want the government to "be socialist" and "meddle in" health care...... not even to prevent insurance companies from dumping you as soon as you file a claim. . Most of the ones I know, are on medicare, and will fight for every last dollar of their "rights" under it..... they LIKE THAT form of socialism...."I've got mine, 's***w' you"..... :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Corporate responsibility is a thing of the past. So maybe corporations should be also. If a class of 'citizens", which corporations are under law (in a limited sense, see Supreme Court decisions), refuse to properly discharge their responsibilities, perhaps they should not be allowed their privileges.... They are hard to deport, and probably would only enjoy that anyway.

People have forgotten that in the 1950s, the tax code took over 80% of your earnings over and above a relatively low figure, an income which is comfortably exceeded by some who post here.

Now people squall and squeal about the 35% tax bracket...... And CEOs try to shield their $40 million incomes.... $32 million+ of which the government would have got in 1950.

They get that income by paring away every function of the corporation except the one that rakes in $$ and puts it in their personal pocket...... Shareholders need not apply, and any workers lower than themselves are merely servants. I have NO idea how that benefits the larger group of us citizens, and even less idea why it should be tolerated.

The benefits that corporations, and rich citizens, enjoy, are not their "just due", they are something which must be paid for. There is no reason for the rest of us to "pay the band" just because 'the rich man is too busy dancing" to do it.

Rich Carlstedt
07-14-2010, 12:23 AM
One of the problems we have as a society, and fostered by both political parties (one more than the other) is "graduated" taxes. They are the major cause of all problems. Let me explain
If everyone paid 10 % income tax, no matter what you earned, it would be fair to everyone. But you have people that say, I am too poor to pay taxes, and get excused from the tax because they make less than $ 10,000 (or whatever).
That means all the others pay their own taxes, plus yours in the form of a higher rate. But they do not want that, they want the guy who makes a million to pay 50 %, after all, he has the money. So the law gets passed reflecting that. With much fanfare and shouting about 'fairness"
However, the rich guy says to the politician ( who by the way is also VERY rich), how about not charging me tax for "my estate", and i will go allong with the higher rate, and the law gets passed
So you think he is paying 50 %, but in reality he has a tax loophole that allows him to pay no taxes..because he puts all his money in his "estate' (or whatever. ( the poor people also have a loophole..thats fair ..right ?)So the people scream he is not paying taxes, and want even higher rates for him. So he goes and gets another accountant and still pays no taxes.
We have the same problem where some people want higher sales taxes for some , and gennerally not for themselves !
Until we can ALL share the exact same tax structure, there will be cheating.
When you have cheating, its the honest guy who pays the price
Our tax code is 80,000 pages long.
That my friends is why we have problems

Mcgyver
07-14-2010, 12:29 AM
JT, I've a lot respect for you and your abilities and knowledge but you posted a lot of what just seems like anti corporate anti ceo rhetoric. Like on that other thread the comment about few CEO's ever adding value greater than their lifetime earnings - diligent research and analysis or angry prejudice?

Like others on the planet they want to make as much as they can but I think you're focused on compensation at a very tiny pinnacle but tar all with the same brush. Even the big dollar ones don't matter - whats 10m when your after tax profit is billions and comp plays a role as the prize for the tournament more than paying for value add of the individual. Over my career i've exposed to many, from small business those in the headlines, I would having direct exposure leaves one with a very positive characterization of their intelligence and commitment; they mostly from my anecdotal obvservation are impressive people doing good jobs. Some of the opinions in this and other threads (not just yours) sound more like they've been formed in bitterness at a distance. You may be annoyed at some headline grabbing enigmas, but for everyone of those there's 10,000 that are working well and not being grossly overpaid, hardly fair to paint them all with the brush. Maybe focus in on specifics who deserve your mirth but blasting all CEO 's and corporations i dont think makes sense

So far as the evil corporation goes, hogwash. People make decisions not corporations and there's good and bad all over. There's nothing insidious about a corporation - yeah there's some howlers of examples but there's also mass murders and child rapists...not like you can condemn all of humanity because of a few despicable creatures.

Any corporation is just a way to organize people - what alternative would you propose - everyone wake up wander out on the street and try to figure out what to do at the start of day? Form government collectives and tell people what to do? Free enterprise wins comes from the fact that its decentralize decision making using a carrot to motivate.....systems that either centralize decision making or use a stick have proven to fail to generate the same kind of national wealth.

not directed to you, but these constant references to BP in various threads? come on, he's the OJ of CEO's...He's acted like an pecker head and has been a PR disaster of epic proportions on this Gulf business, but he hardly caused it. For that matter is his failing in this indicative of shareholder value creating during his term - hey the guy may be complete wanker and driven off a cliff but the disaster in the gulf is a hardly al way to judge a all CEO's vs workers, The bottom like is don't think CEO's any good, don't like what he makes - turn the page and don't invest in that company or become one yourself and show how it could be done or propose a better system...the rest is whining.

oldtiffie
07-14-2010, 12:44 AM
.................................................. ...............

.................................................. ................

I have no idea what will be a result of the Yuan "floating". The Euro was at one time, about 10 years ago, about 89 cents. Then it was up to about a buck 45, and now it is down to about a buck 20. Has trade fallen or risen, as a result?

Cheers,

George

George,

If a few more (are there any?) that whine about loss of American (presumably "Machinist") grade jobs were to buy all new "good old American-made" SouthBend, Starrett, BridgePort etc. etc. and the like machines and tools instead of buying second-hand/used ("pre-loved"?) stuff they would perhaps be their own salvation - but they'd need to put their money where their mouths are and take their chances.

That second-hand market might get some people some quite good machines and tools at very low to good prices but it does nothing for USA manufacturing nor does it do anything positive about American machinists jobs nor does it contribute much if anything to the US tax revenue.

There is a pretty good chance that the retailers/dealers who sell new Chinese tools and machines in the USA will not only provide jobs but will also contribute to the local and national tax and other revenue.

If that is so, then those who buy new "Chinese" are worth more to the revenue system than those who sell or buy used or second-hand stuff.

The USA needs China and others with large Sovereign funds to "soak up" the USA debt via US government "paper" (read: bonds) which the US government has guaranteed (to pay). Some of those funds are "huge" and are run by some very hard-nosed shrewd people who may not necessarily be "friendly" to the USA but hold huge amounts of US$ and reserves.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_wealth_fund

I would not be the least bit surprised if some of conditions of those bonds were that the US government would not limit Chinese and other bond-holders trading.

Having the Chinese currency "unpegged" and/or "floated" would be to the benefits of the USA as it would make Chinese and others product dearer in the USA.

Increased wages and conditions in China will make the Chinese end-product dearer too.

But if China and other sovereign fund holders of USA bonds were to either "dump" a large part of their current bond holdings and/or were to not buy future bonds or raise the interest rates and conditions the US economy would be a lot worse off.

China does make a lot of crap - no question. But while people are buying it, why would they not keep making and selling it?

I would not be the least bit surprised if the sellers of new Chinese stuff (not just "tools") - in the USA - made a whole lot more in US$ terms out of the final sale to the consumer than was made in China by the original manufacturer/s. If that's so then perhaps a significant or major part of the "problem" is right there in the USA.

I have a lot of Chinese stuff and for what I need and for what I do in my shop, it does very well.

But I don't mind paying a premium price for a good product with good service and a good warranty that is more than adequate for my needs.

I am not at all sure that if American manufacturing and exporting were to recover to its previous dollar terms that there will be as many "old fashioned" good "machining" jobs with good wages and conditions with it.

And even if it does improve eventually, I am not at all sure that many here will be young enough (under 40?) to get those jobs which will be very vigorously competed for.

In the meantime, some of the complainers can let their money see the light of day and go and buy new American machines and tools.

I can't see the flood of Chinese goods being stopped or slowed anytime soon as "consumers" would tear the place down.

Too many people have gotten (too?) used to the Chinese product pricing at all levels and they are a lot more "careful" "picky" and frugal with what money they have.

J Tiers
07-14-2010, 09:01 AM
JT, I've a lot respect for you and your abilities and knowledge but you posted a lot of what just seems like anti corporate anti ceo rhetoric. Like on that other thread the comment about few CEO's ever adding value greater than their lifetime earnings - diligent research and analysis or angry prejudice?

Like others on the planet they want to make as much as they can but I think you're focused on compensation at a very tiny pinnacle but tar all with the same brush. Even the big dollar ones don't matter - whats 10m when your after tax profit is billions and comp plays a role as the prize for the tournament more than paying for value add of the individual. ...the rest is whining.

Good apology for corporate blackmailers......

the point is that in many cases, the total cost of the workers fired by a large corporation is remarkably near to the salary of the CEO......and his reporting staff. For firing them they often get a bonus.....

And, totally contrary to YOUR apologetic comments, look at wall street banks....... A tiny few? What planet are you ON?

ONE bank paid, to a wide group of employees, BONUSES totaling somewhere north of a BILLION dollars..... You can look it up, it's out in the public domain. This at a time when they were failing.......

Remind me again about the tiny amounts relative to profits, and the microscopic group receiving that pay............?

I am NOT anti-corporation. I AM VERY anti- corporations being able to thumb their nose at the society that allows them, created them, and sustains them. Why should we support them if they only want our money, and otherwise hate us?

It is a form of blackmail..... "Give us tax breaks or we will move away"...... "if we fail we'll probably take down your entire economy, so you HAVE to pay for our mistakes, but BTW, we are still going to personally profit , so don't be surprised when we rake off a billion or two"...... "we are going to move to the Cayman islands so we don't pay taxes, but we expect to do business as usual with you"......

Care to justify that sort of thing on any scale of social responsibility?

This is NOT why we tolerate corporations.... it is. like most OTHER such things, a case of teh benefits to society outweighing the costs..... BUT in recent years, the costs seem to be outweighing the benefits to any but a very select few.....

EVEN THE STOCKHOLDERS do not get much benefit, despite OWNING part of the corporation.... At that point it is time to consider whether there is ANY enduring benefit to society in the status quo.

You mentioned "don't invest", as if investment was conferring a favor on teh corporation... it is not. it is SUPPOSED to be an ownership condition, which confers benefits on YOU. That is no longer nearly so valid as it used to be.

Stock is viewed as just like pork bellies, almost a form of currency, which you trade to benefit from short-term imbalances. As such, the actual, long term value of a corporation is unimportant....

A CEO can rape and destroy a corporation, beggaring the stockholders, and yet get away with a very substantial personal profit..... This is upside down.... wrong, and shows that stock, corporations, etc are again just "markers" as they were in teh robber baron era.....

Mcgyver
07-14-2010, 09:27 AM
I haven't apologized for anyone. My point is you're taking specific situations you view as negative, and your view may be valid and i'm willing to listen, and applying it to millions of ceo's/corporations you've never heard of let along that deserve criticism. In the context of the number of corporations out there and CEO's, the number who received these massive comp packages you refer to is infinitesimal. There are 10 million corporations in the US - what percentage of those are even capable of paying the sorts of salaries that seem to annoy you? Yet a few anecdotes has you trashing them all in that you are not critical of a particular CEO or Corp, you're critical of CEO's and Corps. The guy down the street who's CEO of business with 45 employees deserves your scorn because of what someone did on wall street?

Focus on specifics that you think are offside and deserve it because most businesses and business leaders are doing a good job, or least if they're not aren't doing so because of any social malice

Another item is this business of the the high net worth individuals not paying tax, again hogwash. Politicians love to spur this forward and the ignorant love to hear it - its all those rich #@#$@'s fault! Fact is its just fear mongering the rich pay WAYYYY more than there fair share, if you view everyone as an individual created equally. Its humorous when people go on about how little the rich pay - how would they know? In googling i found this, I can't verify but its consistent with similar stuff I've seen so seems plausible

•According to data from the IRS, the bottom 50 percent of income earners pay approximately 4 percent of income taxes.
•The top 1 percent of income earners pay almost 35 percent of all income taxes.
•The top 400 richest Americans paid 1.58 of total income taxes in 2000.


EVEN THE STOCKHOLDERS do not get much benefit, despite OWNING part of the corporation.... At that point it is time to consider whether there is ANY enduring benefit to society in the status quo.

then they should sell, or fire management. Any enduring benefit? How do you think America, the western world became so wealthy? Please explain what system you'd replace it with?

Tony Ennis
07-14-2010, 09:34 AM
I think it was Warren Buffett who actually said that his secretary pays more actual dollars in taxes than he does

I believe he paid a lesser percentage than she did, not an absolute amount, but the point is taken. He also offered a $1M bounty to any rich person who paid a higher percentage than his secretary. No one took him up on it.

In any event, who pays what tax rate is of no consequence. The reason is that our Betters in Washington are spending well beyond our ability to pay for it. Since even a minimal level of financial responsibility is lacking in DC, I don't understand the point of taxation. We can't pay for the spending and they are spending more than ever.

Why not abolish all taxes? What's the point? To stave of bankruptcy for a few extra years?

Mcgyver
07-14-2010, 11:19 AM
I believe he paid a lesser percentage than she did, not an absolute amount, but the point is taken.

maybe, but what exactly is the point and whatever it is how can you know without looking at his tax return? Here's a scenario. The amounts of course are made up, but i hope believable and paint a picture whereby he could very well pay a smaller percentage than his secretary. You decide if he's a scoundrel or not if it was something like this that let him make that statement

Secretary Income: 100,000
tax paid 35,000
tax percentage 35%

Buffet Income: 100,000,000
Buffet Builds a hospital 75,000,000 (charitable tax deduction)
taxable income after deductions: 25,000,000
Tax bracket 50%
Tax paid 12,500,000

Tax percentage of income 12.5%

in this example it would only be fair to state Buffets contribution to society as tax and charity. Don't like that charitable donations are deductible? wow, would that be a major blow to the less fortunate as most charity comes from the wealthy and corporations.

A friends a top tax lawyer, one of the rare people who really do know what the wealthy pay. Tell her the rich don't pay and you'll be laughed at, everyone pays and your IRS our CRA are blood hounds who will wring the last nickle from you, deserving or not.

The problem with the political kool aid of 'lets make the rich pay more, beyond that they already pay way more than there share, is 1) it discourages being rich ( the rich leave, less motivation to get rich, punishes success etc - go to a country without rich and see how much you like it) and 2) its such tasty koolaid the masses drink it which misdirects attention and obfuscates the real issues causing whatever it is people think should be fixed....which 9 times out of 10 imo is the massive economic sea anchor all levels of government have become through inefficiency, slack hours and expansion

sansbury
07-14-2010, 01:12 PM
The problem with "make the rich pay their fair share" is that eventually the rest of us become "rich" too.

The Alternative Minimum Tax was passed in 1969 specifically to account for 250 ultra-rich people who structured their finances to legally evade all tax. Today it hits nearly 20% of taxpayers. Politicians on both sides of the aisle would like to fix this, but the money it produces is too good to pass up.

By a similar token, NY state recently passed something called a "millionaire's tax." Naturally it kicked in at annual income of $350k. Given 20-30 years of inflation that should be a nice middle-class income before long.

Many people do not realize that the US has one of the highest corporate income tax rates in the world: 35%. This leads to lower dividends, as companies look for ways to spend money to grow rather than return it to the shareholders. While this isn't a primary cause of executive over-compensation, it is part of how the tax system distorts incentives away from shareholders and towards insiders.

sansbury
07-14-2010, 01:21 PM
Buffet Income: 100,000,000
Buffet Builds a hospital 75,000,000 (charitable tax deduction)
taxable income after deductions: 25,000,000
Tax bracket 50%
Tax paid 12,500,000

The bigger issue with Warren Buffett etc. is that most of their income is in the form of capital gains, which are taxed at a flat 15% (going to 20% in 2011) rather than W-2 income.

Most of the value I expect to earn from my business will be in the form of capital gains when I sell it. The fact that it will be taxed at 20% rather than 40% makes a huge difference in my decision to keep at it and try to grow it rather than sitting on my @$$ and sucking profits out of it. If you raise capital gains to income-tax levels it will be the end of a lot of entrepreneurial activity.

Mcgyver
07-14-2010, 02:09 PM
The bigger issue with Warren Buffett etc. is that most of their income is in the form of capital gains, which are taxed at a flat 15% (going to 20% in 2011) rather than W-2 income.




In Canada, and i believe its similar in the US, there are umpteen rules around income being classified as capital gain. One of the primary ones is whether the transaction was part of your regular business and if so its not a capital gain. For example if i'm a developer and sell lots, the profit is income not capital gains over what i paid for the land. I'd bet Buffet doesn't wheel and deal outside of Berkshire, he's to straight (very bad form fraught with conflict for holding company execs to do that) but if he did it might be classified as income as he's in the business of buying selling stock.....or maybe you're right and he gets stock options, holds them long enough that they are gains...just making the point that none of us really know without seeing his tax return which i tag as highly improbably :)

I'd be surprised if proceeds from selling shares in Berkshire were classified as capital gains, but it would be a small % of income anyway, most is insurance premiums and dividends from investee firms

J Tiers
07-14-2010, 10:53 PM
IThe guy down the street who's CEO of business with 45 employees deserves your scorn because of what someone did on wall street?


You are quite aware of what we refer to as "corporations"....and "CEOs"... there is no need to pretend to think we mean the local roofing company that is an LLP. That is simply misdirection and evasion on your part.

But, since you brought it up, I find that those corporations often are WORSE than the big ones........ No stock, of course, they are not "PUBLIC" corporations, which AS YOU ARE WELL AWARE, are what we are discussing.

I know of several small companies which cry poor, cut pay or hours, etc, all the while maintaining a half dozen family members on the payroll..... Some of whom never darken the door of the place, and others of whom the employees WISH would never darken the door..... Money is sucked out as fast as possible, while maintenance, pay, etc is delayed, cut, etc. There is a remarkable parallel to the actions at the very large corporations...... Apparently people are not so different after all.




then they should sell, or fire management. Any enduring benefit? How do you think America, the western world became so wealthy? Please explain what system you'd replace it with?

You are trolling for a Marxian diatribe, which you will NOT get from me..... although I have read Marx, as much as I could take, anyhow. I tend towards conservatism, but I am very much aware of the implied social contracts involved in the basis of any society.....

When any group or class begins to ride the letter of the law, and say "if it ain't forbidden, it's compulsory", there is trouble.

That is what we often have with large corporations. They have power, and they often use it in ways that are technically legal, but otherwise go contrary to the implied social agreements..... It is a failing of the legal system that it must allow that which is not specifically illegal.

being "within your rights under the law" makes your actions legal. It does NOT make them "right".

An insurance company may "legally" cancel your coverage as soon as you make a claim..... if the written contract allows it, or may be made to seem as if it allows that.

However, that action directly goes contrary to the entire purpose of allowing companies to sell insurance, which is to allow the clients to pay the company to take on the risk of large payments, in return for the certainty of much smaller, but known, payments to the company.

The company must use the "law of averages" in letting one person's good health and low claims, pay for another's misfortune. The buyers "bet" that they will pay less than they claim, and the company "bets" that they can charge enough to cover the claims and have a profit left over. Actuaries figure the risks, and can be quite accurate for the company.

But it is essential that the claims BE paid..... if the company cancels as soon as it looks like you might actually require some real payment, there is no point to buying insurance, and the company's license should be revoked. They are providing no benefit, and are actually defrauding their clients with promises which they have no intention of fulfilling.

That is not in accord with the social contract, and that contract may need to be spelled out for them. Either the license is revoked, or the objectionable behavior is made illegal. We recently did the latter, although a vocal few (many already on totally socialized medicine called medicare) object to forcing the insurance companies to do what they promise..... For reasons which escape me.

sansbury
07-14-2010, 11:05 PM
I'd be surprised if proceeds from selling shares in Berkshire were classified as capital gains

I wouldn't. Google "carried interest" for an example of the subtleties of the issue. I don't know how Buffett's taxes are structured, but I do know US tax law looks like the small intestine--and the similarities don't end there.

dsquire
07-14-2010, 11:57 PM
Obviously you haven't bought any of their cheese. Damn stuff is full of holes! And not nice symmetrical holes, but randomly place with no concern for order!

Yes, but it's so good with Black Forest Ham.

Cheers :)

Don

AlexK
07-15-2010, 01:05 AM
How much some high earners pay in taxes?
How about nothing?

Real life example: Your income comes in a form of profit sharing and go into a deferred profit sharing plan. Money in those plans are not taxed and you also earn tax-deferred interest.
You pay capital gain tax only if you decide to withdraw money.

Now imagine you have died and left several billion dollars in this plan. Thanks to Congress' repeal of the estate tax for 2010 your heirs would pay NO TAXES.
Isn't it nice? Not only you've paid 0% taxes but your heirs also paid 0% on inherited money. :eek:

Richard-TX
07-15-2010, 01:55 AM
If you make money but never pull it out, what good is it? I might as well write myself a check for 200 billion dollars and then tear it up.



If high income = no taxes then why is it that i keep seeing statistics like this:

"The latest data show that a big portion of the federal income tax burden is shoul*dered by a small group of the very richest Americans. The wealthiest 1 percent of the population earn 19 per*cent of the income but pay 37 percent of the income tax. The top 10 percent pay 68 percent of the tab. Meanwhile, the bottom 50 percent—those below the median income level—now earn 13 percent of the income but pay just 3 percent of the taxes. These are proportions of the income tax alone and don’t include payroll taxes for Social Security and Medicare."

If you really want to see high taxes, start a corporation and pay yourself a reasonable salary. You will lose your mind.

oldtiffie
07-15-2010, 02:07 AM
So much for "morality".

I think that the way its expressed and touted by some here is sheer bloody naked greed and class envy.

Farbmeister
07-15-2010, 07:12 AM
Companies are willing to build in China because ITS CHEAPER TO DO SO. If the Chinese gubment wants a factory at point X, they put one there.

In the US there are zoning laws, permits, studies, fees blah blah blah. I had to pay a $20 permit to put up a fence around my own land! When I built my garage I needed three different agencies to sign off for a simply metal garage.

As for taxes, the government uses taxes to implement SOCIAL POLICY FIRST, then revenue. Sin taxes, evil rich people etc etc etc. When you die, the government will TAKE 55% of your estate (at the end of 2010 - Bush Tax cuts expire) so the smart people blow it all before they die and leave little behind.. or shelter it legally to make the taxes less burdensome.

Somehow, Libtards think that everyone paying the same % is evil. Remember the motto of communism is;

"From each according to his ability, to each according to his need" - Karl Marx

Yet it HAS NEVER WORKED in every country its been tried in. :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

J Tiers
07-15-2010, 08:44 AM
So much for "morality".

I think that the way its expressed and touted by some here is sheer bloody naked greed and class envy.

So you would prefer to enter into contracts which bind YOU, but NOT the other party (insurance)?

If you are referring to me as having "naked greed and class envy", then you should tear up all your union documents... you were never a union member in anything but name.


If high income = no taxes then why is it that i keep seeing statistics like this:

"The latest data show that a big portion of the federal income tax burden is shoul*dered by a small group of the very richest Americans. The wealthiest 1 percent of the population earn 19 per*cent of the income but pay 37 percent of the income tax. The top 10 percent pay 68 percent of the tab. Meanwhile, the bottom 50 percent—those below the median income level—now earn 13 percent of the income but pay just 3 percent of the taxes. These are proportions of the income tax alone and don’t include payroll taxes for Social Security and Medicare."

You would prefer to be taxed at a rate comparatively close to the maximum rate, despite earning well under 0.1% of the annual income of the richest person?

The richest people will ALWAYS pay more taxes, since even a small percentage of a huge amount of money is still a lot of money....

The fact that they pay somewhat more is not the point.

THE RICH PAY FAR LESS THAN THEY USED TO PAY.

Go look at the tax rates back 50 or 60 years. The top tax rate was over 90% for the very richest. In 2009, the top tax rate was 35%.


We have given the rich an enormous tax break, and the result of it has been mostly for them to squeal and kick about how much they pay in taxes....... as they fire workers and import more and more cheap goods from overseas.

Even taxes are not really the point......

The real point is that the entire viewpoint is skewed.....

EVERYONE, you included, schemes to somehow manage to pay less tax. Legally, or illegally. Corporations scheme to wiggle out of laws they don't like, etc, etc.

The point that has been forgotten is that taxes and laws restraining corporations, etc, are not the impositions of a foreign king.........

No, taxes are the way we pay for the government that provides the benefits you enjoy, and in most cases enjoy without thinking, considering them a basic right. Those who benefit the most, who have the most to lose and the best ability to pay, ought to pay more towards the services, since a certain percentage of the population is unable to pay.

And because it is not good for the population or nation to have a small number of extremely powerful people who are richer than many whole cities or states, taxes provide some leveling effect by differential taxing at the same time. Or they used to. The effect now is more to take from the poor and give to the rich.

Laws restraining corporations from seizing your goods, defrauding you, or poisoning you with waste materials are for the public good, and that view is NOT limited to "libitards", to which group I do not belong.......

Unless you feel that your employer should view paying you as optional, that corporations should be able to dump their garbage on your land, that insurance companies should take your money but never procide the promised benefit............ If you believe those things to be good, then I am afraid you have "drunk the koolaid" for sure.....and are an active corporate apologist.

A corporation which obeys the law, and behaves in a way beneficial to the community is a good, useful thing, to be encouraged. We need more of them. They provide employment, and a net societal good.

A corporation where the top people suck money out as fast as possible, which outsources as fast as possible and leaves abandoned factories for the government to clean up....which holds up cities and states for tax breaks just so that they will stay inside the borders anotehr few years........ those we don't need, they are just parasitical..

Farbmeister
07-15-2010, 10:06 AM
"No, taxes are the way we pay for the government that provides the benefits you enjoy, and in most cases enjoy without thinking, considering them a basic right. Those who benefit the most, who have the most to lose and the best ability to pay, ought to pay more towards the services, since a certain percentage of the population is unable to pay. "

How does a rich person enjoy the roads more than a poor person? How does a rich person enjoy public education more than a poor person?

Your methodology is back-a$$wards poor people a a SIGNIFICANTLY LARGER drain than rich/middle class. Who's more likely to have an incident requiring the police? Rich or Poor? POOR. That costs money, prosecutors, judges, jail time etc etc. Whos car is going to break down an be abandoned on the highway? Rich person has a well maintained car with AAA towing. Poor person is not gonna have insurance, be able to pay for a tow or even the repair. So the State has to tow the car, impound it, fine the owner, process the criminal penality etc.. what part of that does the Rich/Middle class enjoy?

There are FEW POOR people in the USA. Most POOR people have 2 cars, live in a house with cable and AC and X-boxes and suck the welfare/social services system dry with NO input back into the system.

Fair is fair.. let *EVERYONE* pay a fair share. How is it my fault that I have a decent job and nice things? Why should the GOVERNMENT PUNISH ME for not being a crack-head, welfare momma, or drunk? Why should one be REWARDED for being black, an illegal alien or a breeder?

In China a job is ESSENTIAL. Most people are shamed by unemployment. In the US welfare is generational. If you know the welfare rules front to back, you should know how to hold a job. They are not stupid, just lazy, and realize the free 'gubment money' is the easy money. Working is for 'suckers'.

Mcgyver
07-15-2010, 11:33 AM
You are quite aware of what we refer to as "corporations"....and "CEOs"... there is no need to pretend to think we mean the local roofing company that is an LLP. That is simply misdirection and evasion on your part.
.

hardly. I have no idea what you mean beyond what you write, you trashed corporations and CEO's I made no reference to LLPs; the 10 million was corporations and S corps and you made no differentiation on size, public private, sector or anything; you trashed them all.

The point is its completely irrational to tar and feather every CEO and every corp because your personal bad experiences with specific ones or accounts you've read. Offering points of corporate nastiness is irrelevant, I don't doubt they exist and we'd likely agree on them - my objection is universal application of you negative view like you do for bmw drivers. Its a bigoted and irrational prejudice that your scorn goes to all rather than the offenders.

you say your not anti corporate but suggest corporations should be a thing of the past? You think I'm trolling for a Marxist tirade? Oh, the other remark you thought was trolling was asking you what you'd replace the system with - you've said corps should be a thing of past how could you perceive it as anything but a legitimate Q? If you want to do away with corporations, what system do you suggest instead?



Corporate responsibility is a thing of the past. So maybe corporations should be also. If a class of 'citizens", which corporations are under law (in a limited sense, see Supreme Court decisions), refuse to properly discharge their responsibilities, perhaps they should not be allowed their privileges.... They are hard to deport, and probably would only enjoy that anyway.

...and what past? when the robber barons allowed workers to be killed daily to get rich, when GE was dumping hazardous chemicals in rivers? Ford doing an optimization calculation on it being cheaper to pay on pinto deaths than fix it? When leaders would collude and trade to form monopolies, when the railways essentially used immigrant slave labour?

The situation you describe around insurance; it sounds like abhorrent behaviour - I'm hardly saying all that all corps do is righteous; but are there are no good insurers out there, should we eliminate the insurance industry? You wanting to get rid of corps is throwing the baby out with the bath water. Maybe thats not what you want, but its how what you wrote came across....so why not deal in specifics rather than all corps and CEOs?


A corporation which obeys the law, and behaves in a way beneficial to the community is a good, useful thing, to be encouraged. We need more of them. They provide employment, and a net societal good.

A corporation where the top people suck money out as fast as possible, which outsources as fast as possible and leaves abandoned factories for the government to clean up....which holds up cities and states for tax breaks just so that they will stay inside the borders anotehr few years........ those we don't need, they are just parasitical..

You're confused on this point and have a unrealistic expectation - you expect corporations to align with your value system. Corporations will behave in a socially responsible manner only to the extent in maximizes shareholder value. That's all they do now or have done in the past. To the extent that they don't pollute, treat workers well, provide workplace safety and training, sponsor kids sports or give to charity all are judgment calls based on increasing shareholder value rather social responsibility.

You fondly reference the past yet corporations behave better today than they ever did not because of some anthropomorphism toward wearing a white hat, but because it usually better servers shareholder value to comply with a law than break it.

For example, if you don't like outsourcing, tell your politician to introduce fair trade duties or scream at them for free trade with countries not on the same playing field. If it becomes cheaper for the corp to produce here that's what they'll do.....but the corporation meanwhile can't be expected to do what you think is right, if it conflicts with whats best for the shareholders. In other words what's right depends on paradigm and all corporations are doing, have ever done or can be expected to do is maximize shareholder value in the environment in which they're placed - they have to outsource of someone else will putting them out of business. Blame the politicians for creating that environment and the consumers demanding cupboards full of cheap running shoes

Arcane
07-15-2010, 11:49 AM
I think I'm going to invest heavily in the Kool-Aid Company...

Mike Hunter
07-15-2010, 12:08 PM
I personally believe that there should be a flat rate tax; everyone pays the same amount 10-15% of their income.

Asking for the rich to pay more than their fair share is just plain stupid. All it does is stifle ambition; the harder you work, the more you learn should equal more reward…not a higher burden.

Remember It’s the rich that create jobs… not the poor.

Personal case in point; Both my wife and I work, a few years ago I accepted a new job… at a decent salary, what I found out come tax day… is that this new job put me in a whole new tax bracket, my wife and I actually had more take home dollars before I took the job. Working harder for less pay.

To make a short story longer, we decided that if my wife quit her job, it would put us in a lower tax bracket… and we would be able to keep more. ….One hell of a system isn’t it? …the harder /smarter you work…the less you keep. ….really stifles hard work, ambition and creativity.



FABMASTER…brought up a good point, it’s generally the poor use the majority of the services, the educated middle/upper class don’t riot and burn down buildings. I suspect 90% of the police/fire/social services budgets are spent dealing with the poor, yet the middle/upper level income folks must pay for these services.

There are some who want a better standard of living and are actually willing to go out and work for it, while others ….sit there and demand it.

This Country’s Founding Fathers actually debated paying taxes as a requirement to vote; general feeling was that that if you had a say in how the money was spent (Vote), you needed to put some money in the pot. It’s always easy to spend someone else money.

lazlo
07-15-2010, 12:27 PM
I personally believe that there should be a flat rate tax; everyone pays the same amount 10-15% of their income.

Agreed. In fact, I think most Americans agree.


Asking for the rich to pay more than their fair share is just plain stupid.

The rich pay way less taxes as a percentage of income than you do. Every year, Warren Buffet posts his tax rate, and points out that it's much less than than his employees. But to emphasize the point, he's had a standing $1 Million Reward for any CEO who can show that his tax rate is higher than his secretary's.

http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2007/06/warren-buffet-p.html


Warren Buffet complained that he paid a 17.7% tax rate on his $46 million of taxable income in 2006, while his employees paid an average 32.9% tax rate (his receptionist's tax rate was 30%).

Black_Moons
07-15-2010, 12:35 PM
Simple solution to tax bracket problems:
a nice TI graphing calculator required for taxes!
We'll have a tax curve. Discribed by a 5th order polynormal.
(Yea I just made that up)
'Heheh, I just saved 1% by switching from cubic to spline interpolation!'

lazlo
07-15-2010, 12:36 PM
The bigger issue with Warren Buffett etc. is that most of their income is in the form of capital gains, which are taxed at a flat 15% (going to 20% in 2011) rather than W-2 income.

That's part of it, but American corporations have made a art form of compensating their senior staff to minimize taxes.

I'm a senior architect at a major corporation, and more than 1/3rf of my salary comes from capital gains. Meaning, I'm paying 15% income tax on 1/3 of my annual income. On top of that, American corporate law lets you purchase company stock at a 15% discount from the street value.

As you move higher up the corporate ladder, your base salary remains fixed, and the radical increase in salary is from stock grants, options, RSU's, etc. Even bonuses are given in stock, to avoid paying ordinary income tax on it.

Then, when you're an executive, they take the tax sheltering even further: it's common for the corporation to pay for the CEO's mortgage, lease all his vehicles to him for $1, pay his automobile insurance, fly him to vacations, ...

Hence Warren Buffet, the richest man in the world, declaring $45 million dollars of income in 2007. He's probably got more than that in change under the cushions on his sofa :)

AlexK
07-15-2010, 12:38 PM
Your methodology is back-a$$wards poor people a a SIGNIFICANTLY LARGER drain than rich/middle class. Who's more likely to have an incident requiring the police?
Farbmeister, if we discuss tax rates for the highest income bracket you just can't bring in arguments like that. It is just totally unrelated to the subject and really not an argument for or against higher taxes for wealthy.

Mike Hunter
07-15-2010, 01:04 PM
Yes…but the way I understand it…. The Dividends are not taxed, BUT the Corporation was taxed on those dollars prior to Mr. Buffet.

So Mr. Buffet paid what $ 7.8M, the corp. got taxed what $16M on those dollars.

So I’m kinda thinking Mr. Buffet (and Corp) really added north of $23M to the tax coffers.

How many jobs did Mr. Buffet (&Corps) create…. 100? 1000? 10,000? And every one of those jobs now has income earners paying taxes.

That will pay for a lot of social programs.

Yup I agree… lets tax Mr. Buffet (& Corp) at the 99.99% tax rate, how long before he decides to close shop, send all those workers home and sit on his a$$ all day watching TV.

Tax the rich at an affordable rate =money
Tax the rich at an unaffordable rate= 0

AlexK
07-15-2010, 01:08 PM
If you make money but never pull it out, what good is it? I might as well write myself a check for 200 billion dollars and then tear it up.

Here is a solution for you: Withdraw and pay taxes on 1 billion and enjoy life to the fullest. Keep the rest 199 billion dollars in no-tax plan. Still pretty good deal. You are paying taxes only on 1/200 part of your income.




If high income = no taxes then why is it that i keep seeing statistics like this:

"The latest data show that a big portion of the federal income tax burden is shoul*dered by a small group of the very richest Americans. The wealthiest 1 percent of the population earn 19 per*cent of the income but pay 37 percent of the income tax. The top 10 percent pay 68 percent of the tab. Meanwhile, the bottom 50 percent—those below the median income level—now earn 13 percent of the income but pay just 3 percent of the taxes. These are proportions of the income tax alone and don’t include payroll taxes for Social Security and Medicare."


It is very simple. People with higher income(doctors, lawyers etc.) do have higher tax rates on their income. We are not talking about these people.
We are talking about the fact that really wealthy people, again not doctors and lawyers but executives, BIG company owners etc. not paying income tax AT ALL or on a very small fraction on what they earn. Because they DON"T have income. They have capital gain.



If you really want to see high taxes, start a corporation and pay yourself a reasonable salary. You will lose your mind. I did exactly that only except loosing my mind I save on taxes.

lazlo
07-15-2010, 01:13 PM
Yes…but the way I understand it…. The Dividends are not taxed, BUT the Corporation was taxed on those dollars prior to Mr. Buffet.

The corporate tax laws for stock options are extremely complicated -- I don't begin to understand them. Until about 4 years ago, stock options were completely tax free to the corporation, and weren't even accounted for as an operating expense, which is why at Intel, for example, they'd pay you more in options than salary, because the options cost them virtually nothing.

Then (under Bush) were was an overhaul in the way stock options were accounted, and now most corporations give you RSU's instead of stock options. RSU's are where they give you the stock out-right, it's not a stock option.


How many jobs did Mr. Buffet (&Corps) create…. 100? 1000? 10,000? And every one of those jobs now has income earners paying taxes.

No doubt! No argument there. I'm most definitely not proposing to increase taxes for the upper 1%, but as it is, most American corporations pay no corporate income tax due to tax loopholes, and most executives pay a very, very low marginal tax rate for the same reason.

By the way Mike, you're a fantastic artist!

Mcgyver
07-15-2010, 01:18 PM
Here is a solution for you: Withdraw and pay taxes on 1 billion and enjoy life to the fullest. Keep the rest 199 billion dollars in no-tax plan. Still pretty good deal. You are paying taxes only on 1/200 part of your income.

keep in mind that because the money doesn't go the government doesn't mean it disappears. One could argue that's the best move for economy, keep the money circulating in the real world and away the money clutching silly servants with their ridiculous packages (in Ontario between a cold and claiming mental stress you can say home and be paid for year :eek: ), 25 hour work week and $900 hammers.....cuz you know, if they get a whiff of it they'll only hire more, get bigger and buy more hammers. :D

Mike Hunter
07-15-2010, 02:12 PM
Lazlo
First, Thanks for the complement… I try:)

Not big on corporate tax laws either, but from what I understand, the Dividends come out of the Corp. profit…which is taxed at the 35-39% rate.

I am not a Gazillionaire…not even close, but I don’t hold it against them. Most of the time they earned it.

By the personal example I gave earlier, by working less we actually brought home more money…. To me there is something inherently wrong with that concept…but unfortunately there are many people that believe they should receive rewards for doing nothing.

And unfortunately it seems that education and hard work are traits to be despised. And now we want to punish those that are successful. Again great way to stifle hard work.

Great lesson is California, where 49% of the state’s population was sucking the working 51% of the state’s population dry. Many of the smart industrious folks have already left that state for greener pastures, places where laws & taxes are not designed to destroy productivity.

I spent 22 years in the Military, in that time I traveled to a whole bunch of different countries… most really crummy. That experience taught me that living in this country is not a Right but a Privilege, and like a privilege you need to work hard to keep it.

V/R

Mike

J Tiers
07-15-2010, 11:25 PM
hardly. I have no idea what you mean beyond what you write, you trashed corporations and CEO's I made no reference to LLPs; the 10 million was corporations and S corps and you made no differentiation on size, public private, sector or anything; you trashed them all.

So every corporation pays those salaries? You pointed out yourself that they do not, so you are well aware of the subject.

You are simply doing the "Evan wiggle" here.



The point is its completely irrational to tar and feather every CEO and every corp because your personal bad experiences with specific ones or accounts you've read. Offering points of corporate nastiness is irrelevant, I don't doubt they exist and we'd likely agree on them - my objection is universal application of you negative view like you do for bmw drivers. Its a bigoted and irrational prejudice that your scorn goes to all rather than the offenders.

You have missed the point..... and stood it on it's head.

There are enough corporations which do the sorts of things I listed, and much more..... How many do you need to have before you sluggishly and reluctantly, with dragging feet, mumble an admission that maybe there are some bad ones that need action?



you say your not anti corporate but suggest corporations should be a thing of the past? If you want to do away with corporations, what system do you suggest instead?

Some of them, yes..... that could be an option..... the articles of incorporation are allowed by a state, for a fee, and that state may with just cause, rescind them, just as it may rescind a driver's license. The assets would be bought by other corporations, I presume.

The past? Corporations have a "mottled past", although you cannot blame one or two for what was a common and ho-hum practice, such as dumping effluent, indulged in by corporations AND governmental entities alike..... it wasn't considered bad then, although we have learned better since.

GE is actually one of the better ones...... they had a long-standing concern for their workers, within the common standards of the time, all during, and after, the time when Charles Coffin was in charge.



The situation you describe around insurance; it sounds like abhorrent behaviour - I'm hardly saying all that all corps do is righteous; but are there are no good insurers out there, should we eliminate the insurance industry?


It sure is. And there are getting to be very few good ones..... Hence the recent legislation.




You're confused on this point and have a unrealistic expectation - you expect corporations to align with your value system. Corporations will behave in a socially responsible manner only to the extent in maximizes shareholder value. That's all they do now or have done in the past. To the extent that they don't pollute, treat workers well, provide workplace safety and training, sponsor kids sports or give to charity all are judgment calls based on increasing shareholder value rather social responsibility.


You drank the koolaid for sure.....

You said the words, but you don't know what they mean.

"MY value system"? not hardly.......... You have not thought clearly about the function of government as your proxy in dealing with problems of state-wide, or national character.

Nominally, a corporation is ALLOWED TO EXIST by the government of a state, because that existence is beneficial to the people.

The corporation is not "pre-existing", it is not like a mountain or lake. It is a legal creation, permitted to exist because it's existence has more benefits than disadvantages. it is not intended to be a nuisance or a positive danger to the people or the state.

"The people" have , through their proxies in US national government, passed recent laws intended to prevent known and documented abuses by several classes of corporations, to wit: insurance companies, banks, financial corporations other than banks, and corporations incidentally involved in the above sorts of activities.

That is precisely the way it is supposed to work.

Nominally, it does. In practice, and in future, with the way opened by the Supreme Court for corporations to buy elections, it may not work as well, and some adjustments may be needed.

Certain corporations may need to cease to exist...... to be allowed to fail, or be put in involuntary liquidation. That happens to banks all the time, I believe about 82 so far this year. When it does, I do NOT want to hear about how the CEO and top executives got bonuses during the time it was failing.

When it is done to banks, it is done to protect the customers, which is the proper function of government..... There is no POINT to government if it does not exist to protect the interests of the citizens who collectively vote it into existence on a regular basis.

As with banks, so with the other corporations...... See to it that they obey the law, and exact penalties when they do not. That is a proper function of government.

If there happens to be (and there does happen to be) a subclass of corporations, large AND small, public ones AND private family-owned corporations, which exist only to maximize teh income of the owners by any means, fair or foul, then that is tough luck on the rest of them...... the best may have to obey new rules meant to prevent the worst from being as bad.

One piece of crap makes the whole cake stink.......... that's just the way it goes......

AlexK
07-16-2010, 10:28 AM
Here is some food for thoughts (direct link to the source (http://ataxingmatter.blogs.com/tax/2010/02/how-much-do-the-wealthiest-americans-make-and-how-much-do-they-pay-in-taxes.html)):

Bloomberg.com's Ryan Donmoyer has a brief story out on recent IRS statistics of income. See Top Earners Averaged $345 million in 2007, IRS says (http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-02-17/top-earners-averaged-345-million-in-2007-irs-says-update1-.html)

Here are the figures cited in Donmoyer's report:

Average income of top 400 US households in 2007: $345 million (that's income per year, folks)
Average income of top 400 US households in 2001: $131.1 million (that's about half)
Average effective tax rate in 2007 for this same group: 16.6%
Average effective tax rate in 1993 for this same group: 29.4% So the richest of the rich managed to do quite well when most Americans were barely holding even (or actually declining) in wages. They doubled their annual income from 2001 to 2007

These statistics evidence "two long-term trends: that income at the very top has exploded and their taxes have been cut dramatically" says Chuck Marr of Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. Donmoyer, op.cit.

Falcon67
07-16-2010, 01:01 PM
For a lot of cases, you'll are making the the tax deal a bit too complicated.

Congress - Everybody making over $250K pays 50%.
Small/medium business person making $300K a year is in trouble, eh? Small business person makes adjustments, now only "makes" $200K a year. All done. A good friend that is well off also alluded to this when I mentioned that I thought it unsmart to target "rich" people making $250K+. He basically said "I make a LOT of money - but I don't get PAID very much." LOL, good deal IMHO.