Things just keep getting rougher for average citizens in Europe. Some have faced government seizure of accounts to help fund government operations and requirements that they explain withdrawals to their banks. Now, the European Central Bank (ECB) is imposing a negative interest rate on banks for their deposits. So, you can keep your money under your mattress or put it in a bank where the bank will use it to earn money while charging you for the pleasure. This is of course the central bank which directly relates to individual banks as opposed to individual depositors. Those banks will now pay to park their money and those costs will be passed along to depositors. Banks are likely going to try to hide the fact that the interest rate is now negative through fees and other measures.
The ECB cut the rate on its deposit facility for banks from 0 percent to minus 0.10 percent. It also cut its main interest rate to from 0.25 percent to 0.15 percent as well as cutting the rate on its marginal lending facility by 35 basis points to 0.4 percent from 0.75 percent.
It is an interesting situation where banks will now be treated as solely a safe place for holding your money but you will pay for the service as a fee. Much like the airlines where aspects of what was once viewed as the basic service are being converted into fees, banks will now be treated as akin to a safety deposit box. However, unlike airlines or safety deposit boxes, the banks are making money off the deposits. It is a fundamental change in function of banks.
I have long been critical of the tax increases and measures in Europe that will likely have displacement impacts on investments and movement of citizens and businesses. In this case, I would expect people to look for alternatives from Internet banks to foreign banks.
Schulte: They pay unemployed union members to walk picket lines. BTW, fewer union members; shrinking middle class. I know you won’t see the connection, but more intelligent people do.
RTC – Here is that union, hiring the unemployed, to walk the picket line for them, paying minimum wage.
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052748704288204575362763101099660
Help, my thoughtful yet civil response to Karen was caught in the strainer! I swear there were no product endorsements of any kind.
Karen: When I said that bad policy is bad policy, and no one here is defending bad policy, does that look like Hungarian to you? There are plenty of unions that stand in need of reform. For instance, I think the Carpenter’s Union should allow democratic elections for Local officials instead of letting the leaders appoint them. But every organization can stand some reform. Put me in charge of the NRA or the Heritage Foundation, and I’ll find some reforms to make them better, if better means making people more miserable.
You complain about stagehands. (…*?) OK, the union for stagehands is doing its job, carrying out its duty to its members by getting as much for them they can. Your argument would carry more weight if you had ever complained about corporations slashing jobs, wages, and benefits in order to increase dividends.
Honestly though, I don’t know what you’re talking about. Is there a stagehand that makes more than Robert Dinero or Tom Cruise? Or more than Charlize Theron or Scarlett Johanson or any of the other actresses that won’t return my letters? More than Sandra Bullock? Well, there should be, but we can address that some other time.
Do you even know what the work of a stagehand involves? It involves long, crazy long hours; nights, days, days and nights, long periods of travel away from home. It requires college, determination, and hard work. And you begrudge a stagehand for making more money than the guy who played Bank Teller Number Three in, Hooch. Sheesh.
You know what I say to Teller No. Three? If you want to make as much as Tom Cruise, become a better actor. that almost has a Republican ring to it, don’t you think/
RTC – your take on IATSE is a little off center. When I worked with them there was no educational requirement. And there were only long hours if you did the load in plus the show on the same day and then did the load out. It doesn’t take a college degree to be a stagehand.
And really, the stagehands don’t work that hard. They are working by the hour so they walk slowly. Walking fast ends up costing you money. The older stagehands taught me that. The times of Broadway plays are set by the stagehands’ union. They get extra pay if they are not out of the theatre by a set time, so shows are timed to end before that.
Why do people ignore or excuse serious problems with unions?
Anybody check on the number of stage hands in NY that are so corrupting the entire population of union workers in America? Are there more than 500?
Must be Obama’s fault. He went to see “Raisin In The Sun’ the other evening. And he had the nerve to take a limo. What arrogance! What’s wrong with the subway?
I did not know that distinction. Half a million to be a stage hand. Cush job!
And yet there are many who feel that unions represent the common man, and that “there’s never been a more important time in the history of labor for the role of unions.” Amazing, given the facts.
This encapsulates the problems with unions. Stage hands moving props make a half a million dollars, far more than the performing artists.
That’s what you get when you hire unions.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=agzioCanEd0s
Karen – as a point of clarification. Actors move props. Stagehands move scenery and lights.
RTC:
You’re not sure what my point is about unions???
You said, “That’s because there’s never been a more important time in the history of labor for role of unions.” Clearly I disagree with that statement.
There was a time when there were very little laws that protected employees. Unions arose as a solution. Today, I believe that we need good laws to protect employees from abuses. Today, it is unions who exemplify “absolute power corrupts absolutely.” They donate more money than the Koch brothers to politics. They force their employees to donate to Demcorats through mandatory donations. They make their employees unfireable, which creates low quality and sloth. Ever dealt with a government union employee? I have. Many times. It’s like you’re in a Monty Python skit.
If it is true that you will not condone bad behavior in unions, then you, too, are for union reform.
RTC:
I will try to explain this once more. I have said (repeatedly) that if we keep up this trend, we will tax the rich out of existence. Please just reread my posts. I also said what will we do if we tax the rich out of existence, considering they pay most of our taxes?
I have also explained in detail how Romney’s income was from investments, not wages, and the legal investment rate was something like 15%. How can you savage a man for paying the legal rate for his income? What was he supposed to do, double his check to the IRS? Would you do that? Would anyone? Does no one see those tax preparer commercials saying, “Don’t pay more than you owe! We’ll save you money?” Would you do the same for the dependent child and mortgage interest deductions?
I think it is unfair that Bon Jovi pays $100 in property taxes because he claims a government subsidy for raising bees. Those subsidies were supposed to help struggling farmers. But it is legal.
Teams of CPAs find legal means in which to decrease tax burdens. Creative, but legal. This is EXACTLY why I promoted simplifying the tax code. I would like either a straight across the board flat tax, or a very simple system. This what you make. This is what you owe. Unfortunately, that would be very bad for CPAs everywhere. But, really, you should not require an expert to pay your taxes.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2061591/Springsteen-Bon-Jovi-Ted-Turner-30bn-tax-subsidies-EVERY-YEAR.html
Union members don’t walk the picket line because it doesn’t pay union wages.
Karen: Not sure what your point is about unions. If your asking me to defend bad policy, well then I can’t and I won’t. Bad policy is bad policy. But one or two examples from any particular union position does not make the case.
Across the nation, unions work to for safer working conditions and equitable compensation.
You know who said unions are indispensable to a free market economy. Godfather of the free market, capo di capo, Milton Friedman. Indispensable, not convenient, or helpful, or nice to have around. Indispensable. I understand what histrionic means; do you understand what indispensable means?
RTC – you do know that unions are losing membership? Enough that it they have to hire the unemployed to walk their picket lines for them.
warren’s position on individual tax payers has remained relatively consistent
Karen; you denied ever saying that the rich would become extinct, now you say that under current trends they will cease to exist. Again, the number of developers who are putting condos on the market in New York starting at $90 million would disagree.
Furthermore, the current trend is for actually reducing the tax rate for the wealthy. How much did Romney pay? 13%?
Yes, claiming that the rich are being taxed into oblivion is an histrionic claim beyond all reason
Strange, how I would “target” teachers unions who make bad teachers unfireable, and protect the pensions of convicted pedophiles. I mean, of COURSE our kids should be held back because they were unlucky enough to get that teacher who reads novels in class all day or just doesn’t show up. Or maybe they’ll get that teacher who slammed a little kid against the wall and held him up by his throat. That was a great video to watch. Firing her would take years and hundreds of thousands of dollars. Oh, and wait, Democrats voted along party lines to kill a bill that would have made it possible to fire those responsible for the DEATHS of vets from engaging in fraud and medical malpractice.
Yep. That is so unbelievable that any reasonable person would have a problem with that. Darn those fiscal conservatives. They just don’t care about the working man, vets, or kids.
The Global Economy:
Pros: It raises wages in Third World nations. It allows our companies to sell their goods at an international market. It allows them to produce goods that can compete here with imports. For example, some American made products are just too expensive to compete with Made in China.
Cons: It allows companies to skirt our laws, for instance growing produce with pesticides that are banned here. This exposes foreign workers to toxic substances. Or they buy components in countries like China with human rights abuses and a bad reputation with contamination. It exports jobs.
So what should we do? There is debate about increasing tariffs, but how do we close the global economy to prevent the export of jobs? It could be an interesting discussion if people can abstain from throwing poop.
I guess this is something I’ll have to get used to. If I openly state an opinion that taxes are wasted, at current trends there will be no American Dream, or that we need to streamline our tax system, I’ll hear things like idiot, twaddle, and histrionics. That is what I’m talking about where Liberals have zero tolerance for other ideas. Professor Turley has written about Liberals hurling racial slurs at black conservatives, while claiming Republicans are racist. I think perhaps they need to look in the mirror a bit and change their ways. They blame Congress for vitriol and inaction, but look at how they handle differing opinions here, in this microcosm.
RTC:
Sigh. No. I have explained that if we keep on the current TREND, the rich will literally be taxed out of existence. Not that today’s rate makes it impossible for anyone to be rich. Right now, we take more than half. If we keep on at this rate, we will obviously get to 75%, then higher, until we find ourselves where the UK did. The rich just left. And they took their taxes with them. So . . . when the rich pay the vast majority of our taxes, and we induce them to leave . . . and we then lose that revenue . . . see how that would be a bad thing?
And I understand the confusion about Alaska. In my conversations about guns, I have remarked that some areas of the US have a lot on hunters, including Montana, Wyoming, and Alaska. Alaska is unique in that a great many people live a few hundred miles (and sometimes a plane ride) from a grocery store. Disarm the public and they would become grizzly poo or starve.
Perhaps you understand what the word “histrionics” mean. When someone takes a different point of view, that is not exaggerated dramatic behavior designed to get attention.
I see that a lot here – ad hominem attacks when someone merely states an opposing viewpoint.
Warren’s change of mind is actually pertinent. He claimed that high taxes does not affect investment behavior. And yet we have 50 YEARS of documentation proving that when he managed funds, he was QUITE tax averse.
The 90% tax rate was for EARNED INCOME. The rich don’t get rich on EARNED INCOME. The poor, middle class and upper middle class move up, you know the American dream, on EARNED INCOME. High income taxes thwart the American Dream.
Warren Buffet may change his views on occasion, but he’s been pretty consistent in his believe that the wealthy should pay their proportionally fair share to enjoy participating in what had been the world’s greatest economy before the neo-cons got involved. It’s the neo-cons that are mixing up the kool-aid you’re drinking. Buffet also realizes that paying more than he’s required to is inherently unfair and pointless. His overpayments can’t rectify a broken system in which the wealthy immorally devolve costs down onto the middle class which has been responsible for so much of the success of economy.
What you and David and Byron fail to realize is that the wealthy have cut bait on this country. They live in a world where international borders have no meaning and nationality only slightly more. Their goal is to reduce the amount it costs them to operate in any given country as much as possible and in the process, reduce the rest of us to the same level.
Think about it, the same goods and services that many of us can afford are becoming available to consumers in third world nations; tv’s, cars, cameras, and the like. Moreover, wages are rising faster in those parts of the world than they are here in the U.S. Soon, within a generation or two, we’ll all be earning the same low comparable wages as workers around the world. Then the jobs will return.
In the meantime, our economy is like a chicken that’s had its head topped off, running around on sheer momentum without any real life, and you guys don’t get it. The wealthy keep taking more and more out of the economy and they turn around and blame the poor and needy.
They also target the unions. That’s because there’s never been a more important time in the history of labor for role of unions. The standard of living in this country rose at the same rate as the rise in union membership during the last century, and they are the only thing that are gong to ensure that middle class workers retain their share of economic growth in this one. And the neo-cons who are mixing up your kool-aid know it, and are working assiduously to eliminate them.
Now if I don’t respond to your response, it’s because I’m going down to Kankakee to explore some sand prairies. Would you believe there’s not one high school team called the Kankakee Torrent?
RTC wrote: “The wealthy keep taking more and more out of the economy and they turn around and blame the poor and needy.”
Can you give me an example of how Warren Buffett has done this, or is he an exception to your generalization? If not Buffett, how about Mr. Gates, Mr. Zuckerberg, or someone else.