CGOLD has been given a PoliticoPub timeout because it seems he's just unable or sadder yet, perhaps unwilling to communicate his ideas without personal insults to other forum members woven into his content.
Fellas (and any lurking ladies)....for cryin' out loud. This is not a High Intensity internet forum here.
It's a sports handicapping web forum with a side room for tossing around comments about Current Events, Financial Chat and Political News and Opinion.
If there's anyone else reading this who feels themselves unable to just hang out here in between sports capping/investing without trading insults with other members, please do yourself a favor and start spending your loose hours over on FreeRepublic or DailyKos or one of the hundreds of other web venues where people wax eloquent with all brands of political thought - delivered in a more no-holds-barred Texas Deathmatch style.
Fellas (and any lurking ladies)....for cryin' out loud. This is not a High Intensity internet forum here.
It's a sports handicapping web forum with a side room for tossing around comments about Current Events, Financial Chat and Political News and Opinion.
If there's anyone else reading this who feels themselves unable to just hang out here in between sports capping/investing without trading insults with other members, please do yourself a favor and start spending your loose hours over on FreeRepublic or DailyKos or one of the hundreds of other web venues where people wax eloquent with all brands of political thought - delivered in a more no-holds-barred Texas Deathmatch style.
On Wall Street, $400K income is being treated as "retail" and less than $100K is often referred to "call centers" because the firms don't want brokers "wasting their time" with clients like that. $1-$5mm clients start to get access to more "wealth management" type services/products. $5-$10mm get almost full access, $10mm+ get full service and even a meeting with the CEO if it requires.
Bottom line, the $400K investor doesn't have access to much more than the $50-$100K guy/gal. It just means they pay more "service fees" to the investment firms and perhaps access to a debit card that allows them to take money out of their account.
Well probably smarter than just giving it up in full without exhausting all potential avenues for legal investment and/or tax deductible application of your hard earned jack.
My hockey bud, ALIVER educated me above that perhaps those options are not quite so diverse and accessible for $400KGuy as perhaps I perceived.
Given that modification to the discussion, then I see that I myself quite honestly have some learning to do on how to smartly protect larger income. Our in-house revenues have been on a decent upward curve for past five years and should continue on that track. I want to learn as many legal, smart ways to protect my income as much as any of the rest of you.
But what I refuse to do is to subscribe to the sentiment that started this sub-swerve on the lead Topic - that being SAYHEYKID gravely intoning that the future for those of us living in the USA is doomed.
Thanks for the friendly feedback so far in this here thread.
I got Denver 2H pk and Under 209 keeping my main attention this evening.
Actually, I wouldn't be surprised if they (Employer) lurked around the "WWW" looking for people bad-mouthing the company or the "system". Maybe not in gambling forums (though I will let you know), but I know for a fact, that they watch various message boards, blogs, online quasi-news forums (Drudge, Huffington, etc.), and individuals have been fired with no explanation, no severance pay, losing retirement benefits, etc. It sucks, but it is reality.
Yes, more importantly.....Denver -4.5 for game and 2H pk, but with the 2H Over here. GL B'man.
As for legal ways to do so, always be sure to do your own due diligence because there are plenty of corrupt/misinformed lawyers, financial planners, CPAs, etc., out there that intentionally/mistakenly lure investors down the wrong path and next thing you know the IRS/Feds/State, etc. is knocking at the door looking for their piece (and possibly the "culprit").
SH, I've always got the sense you and your Bklyn gal are street smart, but always remember..."if it looks too good to be true, it probably is."
That's why I was puzzled why so many "wealthy individuals" were clients of Madoff and were able to get burned. They should've have known that there is no investment that is 100% guaranteed and nothing that goes up steadily at 10-12%/annum without some decline along the way. NOTHING. I would even say that U.S. Treasuries at this time, despite being the "safest" investment, are still not 100% guaranteed. They are only as safe as the U.S. government is willing to meet its obligations.
I have to admit that though I realize there are employees who rightfully earn $400K AGI, when I honked on the Mythical Example posed by SayHeyKid I was actually thinking of someone who is not an employee, but rather, is a contractor, a business owner or otherwise self-employed.
Would a "non-employee" with our cited example of $400K AGI have any additional legitimate ways to invest surplus income so that it's less vulnerabel to income taxes?
I am not a CPA and don't know about surplusing income (on the books, actually as you know, following my plays/picks also doesn't supplement income), but I would think there are definitely business expenses that can be itemized and deducted that help one retain what they have made.
I have known people in the advertising business that have deducted their cable bill because they "need" to watch TV in order to assess other TV commercials (I'm not advocating that, just siting an example). I also have known self-employed proprietors that have "clients" that attend dinner and baseball games with them on a regular basis. Home offices tend to be a target of the IRS (based on what I've read), so be careful there. Save receipts and records for everything and I'm sure your tax preparer can assist with things.
Again, based on what I've read, one legitimate deduction is the mileage that one incurs in driving to medical/dental/psychiatric, etc. treatment (above a certain % of AGI) or charity work (although they are different deductions, so speak with your tax guy/gal beforehand).
I recently read, don't fall for the "WORK AT HOME" emails or infomercials. The only one making money is the person who is selling the information.
Punter deflects from the truth while calling somebody else a liar, LOL. Gotta be the genes
http://rossdouthat.theatlantic.com/wapoobamabudget1.jpg
so when I say Mama Obama's figures project massive deficits, what was I lying about?
as for the OP, it doesn't take rocket science to explain it
In order to compete in a national and/or international marketplace, businesses look to reduce costs. The most liberal states will not only have the highest taxes, they'll have the highest workers' compensation premiums and are much more likely to impose employee benefits requirements on smaller businesses.
Such liberal policies will tend to force many small businesses to relocate and they will absolutely encourage new businesses to open shop in other states.
The message in the OP is not a lie, it's common sense and common knowledge.
In order to compete in a national and/or international marketplace, businesses look to reduce costs. The most liberal states will not only have the highest taxes, they'll have the highest workers' compensation premiums and are much more likely to impose employee benefits requirements on smaller businesses.
Such liberal policies will tend to force many small businesses to relocate and they will absolutely encourage new businesses to open shop in other states.
The message in the OP is not a lie, it's common sense and common knowledge.
Back to the OP??
Okay, why not.
I believe that this type of motivation for businesses and/or individuals to relocate is in part what will fuel an inevitable migration of many US companies and current residents to locations south of the current US/Mexico border.
The primary obstacle to more positive business and personal immigration between the two countries is the failure of both the US and Mexico to end the policy of 21st century Prohibition, thus leaving the criminal and often violent illicit drug cartels in power over the community.
Once that policy is rescinded and the cartels are financially disempowered, peaceful immigration southward will commence in earnest. And as more American businesses and individuals with money relocate, there will be increased motivation for existing Mexican citizens to cease trying to sneak into the USA as they will have real and legitimate reasons to stay within their own country for work and living.
Okay, why not.
I believe that this type of motivation for businesses and/or individuals to relocate is in part what will fuel an inevitable migration of many US companies and current residents to locations south of the current US/Mexico border.
The primary obstacle to more positive business and personal immigration between the two countries is the failure of both the US and Mexico to end the policy of 21st century Prohibition, thus leaving the criminal and often violent illicit drug cartels in power over the community.
Once that policy is rescinded and the cartels are financially disempowered, peaceful immigration southward will commence in earnest. And as more American businesses and individuals with money relocate, there will be increased motivation for existing Mexican citizens to cease trying to sneak into the USA as they will have real and legitimate reasons to stay within their own country for work and living.
You are unfortunately correct in all your observations on this thread.
Obama's committment to socialism I can't believe that the gullible young
or the center left Democrats (who voted in this guy) expected or wanted.
They remind me of the gleefull masses in Haiti expecting everything to be rosy after they forced BabyDoc Duvalier out, things only got worse. Or, even the landed Cuba gentry who were tired of the corrupt Batista initially
praising Castro HOPING FOR CHANGE along with the downtrodden masses.
To me Bush's dismal presidency paved the way for Obama. Obama's thinking supporters who I respect wanted the anti-Bush, a change; but not the REVOLUTION BO has in mind. To me the spending the USA is imbarking upon under this stranger to the American way is even worse than Bush
spending our cash & sending young Americans to Iraq for no rational reason, & some of Obama's appointees are much worse than the incompetent AG Alberto Gonzo. Unless BO can be checked we are in for a brutal 4 years.
