Home » Archive by category "Income Tax" (Page 11)

Alicia Keys Leaves Longtime Manager

Alicia Keys Leaves Longtime Manager
*Alicia Keys has reportedly parted ways with her manager, ending a business partnership that started at the beginning of her career more than a decade ago. Keys and Jeff Robinson announced the news Friday in a joint statement, saying their split was “mutually agreed upon and amicable,” according to Billboard. The singer, engaged to producer […]

Read more on EURweb

Wealth Creation Opportunities Vs. Financial Crisis

Yes, a lot has changed since the 1980s and their “Get Rich Now!” ideology.  Now, whenever you consider wealth creation opportunities, you also have to consider how this great business will be affected by the country’s recession.  Nowadays, there are also far more scams to beware of, because of the prevalence of anonymous Internet technology.

Wealth creation does not merely require a great idea, one that’s bound to make you rich overnight.  On the other hand, it takes patience and planning to actually build wealth over a period of time.  The higher your income is, the more you should devote to savings.  The income that you assume will be there every week may decrease unexpectedly.  Therefore, the true secret to building wealth is to create a personal financial plan that will organize your income, expenses and project a positive cash flow over time.  

Wealth creation might also involve you becoming more independent than the average American worker.  For example, consider the option of offshore accounts.  The average American worker stores his or her money in a bank, a bank that is still subject to U.S. federal and state law, a bank that could still easily go out of business like Washington Mutual.  This clearly illustrates an advantage for you, the independent thinker, and the master strategist intent on becoming wealthy.

An offshore account has complete freedom from the United States government.  You have total privacy over the account and the total freedom of independence.  You work with a corporation not your own home country.  Obviously, this doesn’t entitle you to hide any income you made courtesy of the U.S. government.  However it can protect you from certain taxes as well as further financial crisis.  Investing in offshore accounts also opens up further opportunity from sources that are not available domestically.

This is what you might call true independence, independence from your own country.  With dual citizenship, a process that’s complicated but not very expensive or demanding for the most part, you could even diversify your income from various sources.  These are tips in wealth creation that the average American self-made millionaire will probably not share with you.  There’s plenty to love about America…but hey, there’s also plenty to love about money.  Sometimes business is business, and an offshore account makes good business sense.

If you’re interested in learning how to build wealth, keep it and live the life you’ve always dreamed of, then ByeByeBigBrother.com is the place to start. Learn perfectly legal tactics to protecting what you’ve got and become “Happy, Healthy, Sexy & Wealthy!” Visit ByeByeBigBrother.com to learn more today.

security seals
Dan Kennedy
Game Used Jersey

Yesterday Vs. Today

I had an interesting conversation with my mom the other day about the economy.  One of the situations that she attributed our current situation was the “creative financing” that was put into place so that people could buy and/or refinance their homes.  My mom told me, “100% financing didn’t exist when your dad and I bought our house.  We had to put down 20%.”  I reminded her that 20% for their first home was $7200.00.  “Yes, but dad didn’t make much money back then either.”  This peaked my interest.  I decided to do a bit of research to see how much things really have changed between then and now.  First of all the home they bought in Colorado Springs is now worth about $150,000.00.  So a 20% down payment would now be $30,000.00.  What is basically a down payment on that home now almost equaled the purchase price paid 21 years ago. Times do definitely change.  

Let’s look at income levels.  Have they risen?  Of course but here is an interesting fact. What has caused the biggest economic shift in the last 20 years is that millions and millions of mothers have entered the work force.  A woman in 1970 who had a 16 year old child was less likely to be in the work force than a woman in 2003 that had a six month old child.  This is a profound shift in the American way of life.  Since this has happened, you would imagine that median household income would have greatly increased. Keep in mind the numbers I’m using are inflation adjusted.  So here is the first interesting fact that I discovered.  While the median household income went up, the median income for males working full time actually went down. That means that a middle class man who is working full time is making about $800.00 less than his dad did.  What that means is that median family income rose, but only because there were now two incomes coming into a home.  Incomes still went up so we should be a richer generation right? Well let’s take a look at savings.  In the 70’s families were putting away about 11% of their income into savings.  By 2006 we had a negative savings.  So for the last four or five years the average middle class family has been putting nothing into savings.

What about debt?  In the 70’s the average middle class family spent 1.5% of their income on credit card debt, this has increased to 15% in the 2000’s. The big question is what are we spending our money on?  Clothes right?  I mean you see how packed the malls are and the designer labels that people are sporting.  Well actually the amount of money spent on clothes has decreased from the 1970’s to the 2000’s by 32%.  OK, so maybe it’s food. I remember when I was a kid going out to dinner was a really big deal, but since it isn’t now we’ll include that.  18% decrease.  Appliances saw a 52% decrease and the cost of owning and operating a car has decreased by 24%.  

What has gone up is scary.  Housing prices have seen a 76% increase. We’ve seen an increase of 74% in health care (this by the way is with employee sponsored insurance).  We’ve experienced a 43% increase in cars (yes it costs 24% less to own and operate one, but we now are a two car household).  Child care has basically increased 100% since the 70’s.  What about taxes?  There has been a 25% increase in taxes since the last generation.

It’s important to take a look at the ups and the downs in the economy. What you will notice is that the things that have gone down are the flexible things.  The things you can “tighten your belt” on.  The expenses that have increased significantly are the basic expenses.  The stuff you have to pay for regardless of circumstances.  Using again inflation adjusted numbers, the average household made $32,000.00 a year in the 70’s compared to $73,000.00 in the 2000’s; however, 50% of the household money was spent on basic expenses in the 70’s compared to 75% today.  This basically means that people today have less money left over after paying their basic expenses then the generation of the 70’s.  

Here are some other realities that we have to deal with in this generation. People are far more likely to lose their jobs because of layoffs and out-sourcing.  No job, no mortgage payments.

Health care is totally different now.  Previously a mom that gave birth without having a cesarean spent approximately five days in the hospital. Today she stays 24 hours if she has no problems.  People are being sent home following surgery with tubes and bandages in place with instruction for their “care giver” on how to change and clean them.  There is an unknown saying in the health care industry, “get them out quicker and sicker.”  The problem is, the care giver is probably working to pay the necessities. What if your mom or dad were ill, or your spouse or significant other, or you child? Who is going to be cleaning their tubes and bandages while you’re at work? Are you going to be able to afford hiring someone to do that while you go to work?

By the way, this all implies that you have health insurance.  More and more people are losing their benefits every day.  In 2001 1.4 million people lost their insurance and of those 800 thousand made more than $75,000.00 per year.

So right now we are seeing firsthand the devastation of a basic economic mess.  It’s not going to get better regardless of whether that 700 billion dollar “fix” bill is passed.  That’s like putting a Band Aid on a severed artery. You might see the bleeding stop for a minute, but it will start gushing very shortly afterward.

What can the government do to help us?  The answer is, I don’t know and I don’t think anyone else out there does.  There is however a solution.  It is time to stop focusing on what our government can do to help our personal economic status and start taking control of it yourself.  If you have one source of income right now then you are either broke, or not too far from it. The numbers don’t lie. We aren’t putting away money for our future.  More and more of us are without healthcare.  Facing the loss of a job leaves you with the support of an unemployment check, which barely covers your basic survival expenses.

Do you want a life of financial freedom?  Do you want to be financially free to the point that if something did happen to your job you wouldn’t worry how you were going to pay the basic bills?  If there is a health issue with a loved one, do you want to be able to be financially secure enough to care for them?  You can’t if you have only one source of income.  I don’t mean another person in your family working either, I mean you yourself having more than one source of income.  

What are these sources of additional income?  Tell people about a new health drink that you found that has helped change your life.  Help people learn to make foods at home that are healthy and inexpensive.  Tell people about cleaning products that aren’t only good for the environment, but cost less than retail products.  Get educated in real estate and start producing income using your new knowledge.  I don’t mean by buying homes either, there are a lot of different ways to make money in real estate that doesn’t cost a dime, but you have to get educated.  Send people to other sites to buy products that you recommend and get paid for doing that.  All of these things are available to you. They aren’t going to come knocking at your door though, you have to go out and get them.  If you are serious about owning your financial freedom to the point that I think you are then the time to act is now!  The favorite word of people who wait for the world to take care of them is “tomorrow”.  The favorite word of warriors who decide to create their reality is “action”.  Which one will you choose?

Sharon is a thought leader who has achieved top honors in her business world and is a thriving entrepreneur. Sharon realizes that like herself, there are so many people out there looking for growth opportunities. Because of that, she created the company Livin’ Free. It is your one-stop-shop for finding resources to help you grow financially, relationally, spiritually and physically.


Visit her website at www.livinfree.com

What do you think of this…?

GREEDY LIBERALS AND GENEROUS CONSERVATIVES
By Rick Roberts
I want Conservatives and Christians to NOT give to charities this Christmas. That’s right! I want Conservatives and Christians to stop donating… but with ONE exception:Anything to help the military is fine!I’ve given this a lot of thought, and I believe that the right thing to do this Christmas is NOT to give…Don’t give to Father Joe. Don’t give to the Salvation Army. Don’t give to homeless shelters. Just don’t give. Now, many of you may already be cutting back on your giving this year… And you maybe feeling guilty about it.But I’m here to tell you… DROP THE GUILT. You ARE doing the right thing by not giving. Do not feel guilty about keeping your money for you and yours.Now, here’s why I’m asking Christians and Conservatives NOT to give this holiday:I’m just trying to wake people up. I’m not trying to be mean, or heartless, or cruel. I’m just trying to get people to open their eyes. When you get hit up for charities this Christmas Season, MOST of that money goes into either:A) The pockets of people who run the charities, or:B) Drug addicts and deadbeats on welfare who have done nothing to contribute to their own lives, let alone society.When you think of that bell ringing outside the department store, I want you to think of the soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan who sacrificed everything for your freedom…And think of all those men and women coming home without limbs, with shrapnel in their bodies who have seen their friends die in the battlefield.And then I want you to compare that sacrifice to the bum sitting on the roadside. I want you to think of Rosie O’Donnell, Sean Penn, and all the other pompous Hollywood actors who call you names just for being a conservative. You know, the ones who slam our troops at every opportunity. The ones who accuse them of evil. The ones who accuse President Bush of being Hitler and accuse our troops of committing genocide and random acts of violence. My take on giving is this: Give to those who have actually done something for this country and NOT to the ingrates who are nothing more than a leech on our great nation.And if that, for whatever reason, just doesn’t make sense to you, how about this:GIVE TO YOUR OWN FAMILY. The economy is a drag. People are down on their luck. But not everyone gives up and buries their sorrows in a bottle. Some people actually work harder, try harder, study harder… Give to these people. Help those who are trying to help themselves.Besides… Obama will soon come to the welfare crowd’s defense. Which brings me to my third reason not to give to charities this holiday season: Politics.You are going to wish you kept some of your money for yourself and your loved ones come tax season. That’s when our new President’s uber-welfare state is going to kick in…So you may as well start an Obama savings account now so that the welfare mom can have her new plasma TV.If you need another reason why Christians and Conservatives should stop giving, here it is:I’ve had ENOUGH. Haven’t you?I’ve had enough of the liberals and their name-calling.I’ve had enough of the attacks on churches, Mormon temples and Jewish Synagogues. I’ve had enough of their hatred and spouting that our God doesn’t exist.Did you know that – even though liberal families’ income averages 6% higher than that of conservative families – conservative households give, on average, 30% more to charity than the household of the opposite politcal belief?• That’s $1,600 per year vs. $1,227.• Conservatives also donate more time and give more blood. • Residents of the states that voted for John Kerry in 2004 gave smaller percentages of their incomes to charity than did residents of states that voted for George Bush. • Bush carried 24 of the 25 states where charitable giving was above average. • In the 10 reddest states, in which Bush got more than 60 percent majorities, the average percentage of personal income donated to charity was 3.5. Residents of the bluest states, which gave Bush less than 40 percent, donated just 1.9 percent.• People who reject the idea that “government has a responsibility to reduce income inequality” give an average of four times more than people who accept that proposition. • And another good example of liberalism… In 2000 Vice President Al Gore’s charitable contributions, as a percentage of his income, were below the national average: He gave 0.2 percent of his family income, one-seventh of the average for donating households. But Gore “gave at the office.” He said he used his public office to give other peoples’ money to government programs and therefore he was being “charitable.” If Barack Obama wants to spread the wealth around, he needs to start digging in the pockets of the liberals. We’ve got to even out the playing field.Conservatives MUST stop being suckers. Seriously, just stop!Obama and the liberals need to start throwing all their support behind the drug addicts and bums on the street.Want to know where MY m

Why do liberals feel it’s okay to force an individual to pay for anothers problem?

I don’t get why Liberals believe it’s okay to forcefully tax one individual and redistribute their income to help another individual. It’s not helpful since force is being applied. It be like making it illegal to pass someone down the street who’s car is broken down and you must aid them or face legal penalty.

Liberals are supposed to be for Liberty, which is supposed to equate Freedom. There is no freedom in coercive action.

By the way, Austrian Libertarianism isn’t affiliated with the country. Rather it’s founders, please read about Keynesian vs Austrian Economics if you’re interested.
Example of Liberals and Coercive action would be Obama’s mandatory purchase of health insurance, forcing instead of giving them an option.
For all to Know – Thanks for your vulgar language. Glad to see those who get frustrated over the internet. I’m against all coercive action, forcing one to burden anothers problem. I’m against Public Education, Socialized Medicine, and so fourth. Everyone should live by their own dollar, not dependent on others.

Property Tax Appeals – Property Tax Reduction.

Engage In A Property Tax Appeal? Lower Your Property Tax Once And It Continues For Years. Consumer Reports Report 40% Of The Population Is Over-assessed! Some Say Higher. Step-by-step Specifics, Percentages And Numbers To Use Maximize The Win!
Property Tax Appeals – Property Tax Reduction.

Why are powerful liberal politicians so afraid of grassroots Democrats understanding “KELO VS NEW LONDON” case?

Why are they fearful of allowing grass roots Democrats understanding the significance of powerful politicians colluding with rich businesses and taking property from middle class families?

Will the Democrats suffer a hemorrraging of voters once regular Obama-voters undersand how his Supreme Court Jutice nominees will destroy their freedom?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelo_v._City_of_New_London#Dissenting_opinions

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
On June 25, 2005, Justice Sandra Day O’Connor wrote the principal dissent, joined by Chief Justice William Rehnquist, Justice Antonin Scalia and Justice Clarence Thomas. The dissenting opinion suggested that the use of this taking power in a reverse Robin Hood fashion— take from the poor, give to the rich— would become the norm, not the exception:

“ Any property may now be taken for the benefit of another private party, but the fallout from this decision will not be random. The beneficiaries are likely to be those citizens with disproportionate influence and power in the political process, including large corporations and development firms. ”

She argued that the decision eliminates “any distinction between private and public use of property — and thereby effectively delete[s] the words ‘for public use’ from the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment.” 125 S.Ct. 2655, 2671

Clarence Thomas also penned a separate originalist dissent, in which he argued that the precedents the court’s decision relied upon were flawed and that “something has gone seriously awry with this Court’s interpretation of the Constitution.” He accuses the majority of replacing the Fifth Amendment’s “Public Use” clause with a very different “public purpose” test:

“ This deferential shift in phraseology enables the Court to hold, against all common sense, that a costly urban-renewal project whose stated purpose is a vague promise of new jobs and increased tax revenue, but which is also suspiciously agreeable to the Pfizer Corporation, is for a ‘public use.’ ”

Thomas also made use of the argument presented in the NAACP/AARP/SCLC/SJLS amicus brief on behalf of three low-income residents’ groups fighting redevelopment in New Jersey, noting:

“ Allowing the government to take property solely for public purposes is bad enough, but extending the concept of public purpose to encompass any economically beneficial goal guarantees that these losses will fall disproportionately on poor communities. Those communities are not only systematically less likely to put their lands to the highest and best social use, but are also the least politically powerful.[11]
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Can someone please help me with my essay on conservatism vs liberalism?

So after I wrote my intro and a little history on the the two ideologies, I need to write a paragraph about how liberalism and conservatism connect to the Republican and Democratic parties. I also have to write about the definitions of the two ideologies, and their beliefs on issues such as abortion etc….now for my question, can anyone please help me how I should arrange this? I wrote it out, but the paragraphs would be too long if I put it together and its confusing for me to organize it.

My second question, how exactly does liberalism and conservatism connect to the Republican and Democratic parties? help please!!! I would really appreciate it…here are my paragraphs in the essay so far:

Liberalism emphasizes individual rights and equality of opportunity, relative to any constraints imposed by the states. Different forms of liberalism may propose very different policies, but they are generally united by their support for a liberal democracy, where all citizens have equal rights by law. There are two major streams of thought which compete over the use of the term liberal, which are classical liberalism and social liberalism. Classical liberals place the highest value on individual freedom and believe the role of government should be limited. They see state intervention in the economy as a restriction on the economic freedom of individuals. Social liberals want the government to play an active role in promoting the freedom of citizens. They favor the right to healthcare, an education and a minimum wage. Some also favor laws against pollution, provision of welfare, and discrimination in housing and employment. The Democratic Party is home to an ideologically diverse base, with liberals forming the largest and most influential demographic within the party. Conservatism is a belief in the virtue of preserving traditional values, where tradition refers to various religious, cultural, or nationally defined beliefs and customs. The Republican Party supports a conservative ideology with further establishment in social conservatism and supply-side fiscal policies, which argues that economic growth, can be most effectively created by adjusting the income tax and capital gains tax rates.

Democrats and Republicans have opposing opinions on many different issues such as abortion, taxes, affirmative action, and the environment. When dealing with the issue of abortion, Democrats believe it is the advocate’s choice. Republicans support a human life amendment to the constitution that would outlaw abortion, without exceptions. (THEN WRITE ABOUT MORE ISSUES)

someone please help!! THANKS!

Ghana Sits on Borrowed Money & Borrowed Time

Ghana Sits on Borrowed Money & Borrowed Time
The World Bank Ghana Country Office’s Conference Room was the scene of lively discussions and startling revelations on Friday last week (18th June 2010).

Read more on Ghanaweb.com

Compete comfort vs. complete freedom – a question?

I am going to describe two scenarios and I want you to tell me which scenario you would rather live in and why. Also please include your age, gender, country and political affiliation.

Scenario A:

Your government (and its citizens through a majority vote) has decided that all citizens should be given the basic necessities. Every citizen is given a car and a home to suit their needs. The car is one that is safe, reliable and gets the best gas mileage. You are allowed limited options such as color and whether you want a convertible, two door or four door, and other options are allowed for those who need them such as pickup trucks for farmers, minivans for large families and handicap accessibility features. The homes you get are also suited to your needs with few options, and if the home doesn’t fit your needs you may be asked to move (but in the same town) such as if you have children you can move to a larger house, when they grow up you must move to a smaller house. You also get free healthy food and you have the option of buying junk food with your own money if you so choose. You are not however allowed to buy larger cars or houses due to the environmental impact. You also get your utilities provided for up to a certain limit as well as gasoline and car maintenance (you are free to buy more utilities and gasoline from your own earnings if you wish). Healthcare and education is also provided to each citizen as well as clothing for work and job interviews (other clothing may of course be bought by the individual) as well as free school uniforms for school children. Childcare is covered for everyone and so is care for the elderly, sick and disabled such as home health, hospice, nursing homes and retirement homes.

There are no taxes for anyone making less than $250k per year, and subsidies to get incomes up to 250k for families and 200k for individuals who are working full time and not making that much. People making over that will be taxed, and very wealthy who have more than one million dollars will be taxed heavily.

Scenario B:

You live in a system with total freedom and complete individual responsibility. The government exists only to curb serious crime (murder and rape – there are no more laws against drugs, prostitution or other such crimes and private property is the individual’s responsibility to protect) and to provide a military. Everything is owned by the private sector including schools, roads and fire departments. You must pay for children to go to school, you must subscribe to the fire department to use their services, even emergency room care is not provided to people with no insurance. There are no more public libraries – there are privately owned book rentals instead. You must also pay tolls on every road you drive because they are all privately owned. However, there are no taxes other than a sales tax to fund police and military.