www.CostaRicaTicas.com

I've stayed out of this so far, but anyone who believes a 91% tax rate is anything but stupid is too dumb for me to waste my time with - seriously. Get back to me on the last time someone poor, or living in poverty offered you a job.

I'll also not get into the mind set that says you got whealthy because of how the government helped you by the fact that you lived in the USA - see, if you can convince enough people that they got rich NOT solely on their own, you can also convince a huge bunch of poor people that they are poor through no fault of their own - regardless of all the poor lifestyle decisions they made, right Barak?????????

Back in the more recent past, when rates were over 91% for the top earners, no one with a brain (and lets face it, most folks in that bracket had one) ever paid anywhere close to 90% of their income to the government - all sorts of "tax shelters" - from oil wells, to bull semen - were in place - a whole industry in fact - and no one paid close to that amount.

One point we might agree - a little and I'll tell you why in a moment - is who is stupider - the guy that offers the credit card en mass, or the guy who takes it, runs up a big balance, and then does not pay it off (thus hurting all).

I think that regardless - even in todays society of validating everyone, and how nothing is ever anyone's fault (regardless that poor decisions on someone's part cause me hassle - not of my own making)- if you rec'd a credit car, ran up a balance, you owe it to repay what you spent - you can disagree all you want but one thing not in dispute - I know I did not spend the money but when they write you off I'm effected.



I think the lender is a dummy for mass mailing out cc's to those - some of whom are not qualified, or equipped to handle credit - but the money is still owed.

Web, as one human being to another, I honestly wish you the best - but even thinking of a trip to CR to Phuck whores is ill advised for you at this time - you should be contacting your home county's social services dep't and seeing how they can help you. While I wish the best for you, you have no business going to Costa Rica at this time.

Wrong again Rococco !!! ( From an old 40's movie) As some other members have correctly and adroitly pointed out, ch 7 is over with in a few months and many creditors surprisingly will give credit to someone who had a ch 7 because the law doesn't allow them to go bk for another 8 years, so if they see the creditor is earning a good paycheck, they'll extend credit. A chapter 13 is designed for business owners but unscrupulous attorneys have duped many well meaning but ignorant individuals into a 13 to milk triple or quadruple the fees.

I see a lot of pontificating moralists here almost inferring people intend to or intentionally plan bankruptcies to milk the system. I had been doing mortgages for over 25 years and have reviewed numerous, easily dozens and maybe hundreds of bk cases. Almost all of them have been due to illness, loss of work, divorce or some type of unseen problems with their small businesses, including employee fraud. In only a few cases it was just plain old irresponsibility with excessive charging of credit cards and living beyond their means instead of budgeting and making do with their income. Absolutely none were intentional fraud or cavalier attitudes with long range thinking, "Oh I can just declare bk and walk away".

Every client who had to do bk that I interviewed was embarrassed and ashamed and wished it hadn't come to that but they needed a life preserver and that is what the bk law was written for. Pontificating moralists can lecture all they want but what about the guy who used to earn 150k a year and lost his job or business and had to work 2 jobs earning 60k to support his family and has a 500k debt from the old income days ? At 150k a year, it's no problem to wind down that debt but at a middle class income it's impossible.

In the crash of 2007, I saw millionaires lose everything through no fault of their own except being in the wrong business. These were hard working people doing everything right working for the American dream, working 50 plus hours per week, saving, often running businesses employing numerous people. Chapter 7 is not a moral failure, it's an opportunity to restart one's life after a catastrophe of some sorts, that's what it was designed for.

Now if someone decides to declare a ch 7 and then continues to use their credit cards, that is illegal, that is intentional fraud.

One other brother here questioned why some credit card companies issue credit cards willy nilly. The reason is their profits are so massive they take into effect a certain percentage of losses and calculate how much interest rates and fees they impose on everyone to offset the losses. Insurance companies, banks and mortgage companies all do the same.

To those individuals who accuse people of moral failure for going into bk, I just would like to issue a refrain my sainted mother (G*d rest her hard working middle class soul) used to say to me when I occasionally would look down on someone as an immature youngster..."There by the grace of G*d, goes you..."

_________________
Don't try to understand 'em, just rope 'em down and brand 'em...

Web, the best thing for you is to continue on with your plan of running down to San Jose; have some LaLa time; enjoy yourself; and then return to confront. Even in Viet Nam we were given at least steam and creams and the very least and even R&R once in a blue moon. The "police action" was all there when we got back. A few weeks of your time spent on a fantasy isn't going to impact one little bit on your larger economic picture but WILL impact on your vitally critical mental health to get hell out of Dodge.



Excuse me, but I've forgotten. When was the rate ever more than 91%"....in the more recent past...."???

History of top rates

Historical federal marginal tax rates for income for the lowest and highest income earners in the US. In 1913, the top tax rate was 7% on incomes above $500,000 ($10 million 2007 dollars) and a total of $28.3 million was collected.

During World War I, the top rate rose to 77% and the income threshold to be in this top bracket increased to $1,000,000 ($16 million 2007 dollars).

Under Treasury Secretary Andrew Mellon, top tax rates were reduced in 1921, 1924, 1926, and 1928. Mellon argued that lower rates would spur economic growth. By 1928, the top rate was scaled down to 24% along with the income threshold for paying this rate lowered to $100,000 ($1 million 2007 dollars).

During the Great Depression and World War II, the top income tax rate rose from pre-war levels. In 1939, the top rate was 75% applied to incomes above $5,000,000 ($75 million 2007 dollars). During 1944 and 1945, the top rate was its all-time high at 94% applied to income above $200,000.

The highest marginal tax rate for individuals for U.S. federal income tax purposes for tax years 1952 and 1953 was 92%.

Since 1964, the threshold for paying top income tax rate has generally been between $200,000 and $400,000. The one exception is the period from 1982–1992 when the top income tax brackets were removed and incomes above around $100,000 (varies by year) paid the top rate. From 1981 until 1986 the top marginal rate was lowered to 50%. From 1988–1990, the threshold for paying the top rate was even lower, with incomes above $29,750 to $32,450 ($51,000 in 2007 dollars) paying the top rate of 28% in those years.
Top tax rates were increased in 1992 and 1994, culminating in a 39.6% top individual rate applicable to all classes of income.

Top individual tax rates were lowered in 2004 to 35% and tax rates on dividends and capital gains lowered to 15%, with the Bush administration claiming lower rates would spur economic growth.

Hatred of the poor is fueled by the middle class's fear of falling during hard times. Americans don't understand how the poor are victimized by a lack of jobs, inefficient schools, and unsafe neighborhoods People ignore the structural issues - jobs leaving, industry becoming more mechanized. Then they point to the poor and ask, 'Why aren't you making it?' As a society, we should be far more concerned about whether most Americans are getting ahead than about the size of the gains at the top. Yet extreme income inequality causes a cultural separation that is unhealthy on its face and corrosive over time. And the most-powerful economic forces of our times will likely continue to concentrate wealth at the top of society and to put more pressure on the middle. It is hard to imagine an adequate answer to the problems we face that doesn’t involve greater redistribution of wealth. It's hard to fix stupid.

In hard times, Americans blame the poor.

"Job creators" indeed. Hell, I'm a job creator every time I do not push my shopping cart back to where I got it or into a "bay" in the parking lot of the mega store. By so not doing, I'm creating a job for somebody to fetch it! That's job creation.

_________________
"Actual happiness always looks pretty squalid in comparison with the over-compensations for misery. And, of course, stability isn't nearly so spectacular as instability. And being contented has none of the glamour of a good fight against misfortune, none of the picturesqueness of a struggle with temptation, or a fatal overthrow by passion or doubt. Happiness is never grand."
- Aldous Huxley, Brave New World, Ch. 16

Lenders may certainly give credit after a bankruptcy is filed, but 'the slate is not wiped clean'.
As earlier stated, a Chapter 7 will remain on your credit report for 10 years, a Chapter 13 for 7 years.

_________________
"In a nation ruled by swine, all pigs are upwardly mobile, and the rest of us are phucked until we can put our acts together; not necessarily to win, but mainly to keep from losing completely"...Hunter S. Thompson (RIP)

True. True. BUTTTTTTTTTTTTt....just as soon as the paper work is all over with, the offers to obtain credit start rolling in...albeit at usurious and obscene rates of interest. The very creditors named in said paperwork are some of the first to "offer"....;

_________________
"Actual happiness always looks pretty squalid in comparison with the over-compensations for misery. And, of course, stability isn't nearly so spectacular as instability. And being contented has none of the glamour of a good fight against misfortune, none of the picturesqueness of a struggle with temptation, or a fatal overthrow by passion or doubt. Happiness is never grand."
- Aldous Huxley, Brave New World, Ch. 16

Bro Netgems' essay is on-point and backed by deep personal knowledge--most of the rest here is specious reasoning and bushwa moralizing. I'll be the first to admit I hid my unnecessary BK in a huge stack of requests from the mostly truly needy--my "interview" by an examiner lasted 5 minutes and was about 5 questions long. I slipped through like fat through a duck. If you think poorly of me for this, tell me the next time we meet. Meanwhile anybody want to return to the original topic, the mouth-breathing pond-scum making life even harder for needy or ignorant folks? Back to you, Chet.

_________________
"A man accustomed to hear only the echo of his own sentiments, soon bars all the common avenues of delight, and has no part in the general gratification of mankind"--Dr. Johnson
"Amen, brother"-ED

Yeah, it usually starts with the offers for 'secured' cards, then come the offers for 'unsecured' cards with a credit line of perhaps $300 to $500.

_________________
"In a nation ruled by swine, all pigs are upwardly mobile, and the rest of us are phucked until we can put our acts together; not necessarily to win, but mainly to keep from losing completely"...Hunter S. Thompson (RIP)

During the 1950s and early 1960s, the top bracket income tax rate was over 90%

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/history- ... z3CCw7ymk1

egg on face and I posted it myself: During 1944 and 1945, the top rate was its all-time high at 94% applied to income above $200,000. The highest marginal tax rate for individuals for U.S. federal income tax purposes for tax years 1952 and 1953 was 92%

Still, that was more than 50 years ago. The very article Scuba1 posts about notes "And taxes stayed pretty much just that way for the next 15 years, until the early 1960s. Importantly, this was one of the most successful eras in US economic history. The middle class boomed, the economy boomed, and the stock market boomed. And all with the top marginal income tax rate over 90%. This suggests that the Republican mantra about high marginal tax rates killing the economy is, well, a bunch of crap."

The article continues and concludes: "So, what does the future hold? Good question! Obviously, no one likes tax increases, but the similarities between the 1920s-1930s and the 2000s-2010s seem hard to ignore. Today, after an era of very low taxes, we have enormous inequality and a huge deficit. Last time that happened, the top tax rate soared (and, it should be noted, the economy boomed--even with the top rate high). And we certainly wouldn't be surprised to see history repeat itself again..."

Bottom line for Steven1: Too many have too much in the USA and too many have too little. Ain't much of a middle class left. It's one or the other. And that fact, my friends, is going to prove to be a really, really, big problem.

_________________
"Actual happiness always looks pretty squalid in comparison with the over-compensations for misery. And, of course, stability isn't nearly so spectacular as instability. And being contented has none of the glamour of a good fight against misfortune, none of the picturesqueness of a struggle with temptation, or a fatal overthrow by passion or doubt. Happiness is never grand."
- Aldous Huxley, Brave New World, Ch. 16

Estaban is verdad. The case I am making is ch 7 is a far far better choice for the private individual. The bk is over quickly then the person can go about restoring credit immediately. Ch 13 costs dramatically more and restricts the borrower and his every financial move short of purchasing a snickers bar at 7-11 and is controlled by a bk judge for years as more dollars continue to be drained from him. In 2 to 3 years after a ch 7 bk a borrower can have partially restored credit and freedom as well as be ahead 1000's of dollars, 100's of thousands of colones...

it is true that bk 7 lasts 10 years compared to 7 for a bk 13 but that's merely technical rules, by the time 7 to 10 years arrives after a bk, it's ancient history, many creditors care only what has been happening in the last several years. many ch 13 bk's will easily take 3 plus years to discharge, as the bk 7 takes a few months so the 7 vs 10 years often becomes the same time, I suspect that's the reason for the disparity.

As one of my ex favoritas in Costa Rica once explained to me when she was supposed to call me and come over, "My baby sick". Ok, I said, but you have a cell phone, why didn't you call me to let me know you were not able to make it last night ? Once again, she replied "My baby sick''.

_________________
Don't try to understand 'em, just rope 'em down and brand 'em...

"Marginal tax rates" as the name implies are not tax rates from $1 to $-last, they have brackets. So even if all yearly wealth gained is fully exposed to income taxes, it wouldn't all be taxed at the top rate. As has been pointed out, there are so many loopholes then and now that you need to focus on "net effective tax rate"--drastically lower than any headline figure. The real shocker is Social Security taxes--you pay nothing on any income above $117000 (Medicare tax has no such limit): http://www.ssa.gov/retire2/topwages.htm
In my view, the top 2 issues facing folks in the US are the growing obesity epidemic (I think it's fair to call it that) and growing wealth inequality--this even pits the very wealthy against the ultra wealthy: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/31/nyreg ... nough.html Intriguingly enough, this may spark a resurgence of Progressive politics by those who are merely very wealthy, as the essay explains.
Oh and Skyport323, there's a vast difference between crafted sentences as opposed to those just banged out. There's a lot of the former by myself and others; you seem only capable of the latter. How's that for smack talk? Back to you, Chet.

_________________
"A man accustomed to hear only the echo of his own sentiments, soon bars all the common avenues of delight, and has no part in the general gratification of mankind"--Dr. Johnson
"Amen, brother"-ED

Interesting article.

Have a Great Day,

Dave

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB1 ... 1554982808

"True enough, the top marginal income-tax rate in the 1950s was much higher than today's top rate of 35%—but the share of income paid by the wealthiest Americans has essentially remained flat since then.

In 1958, the top 3% of taxpayers earned 14.7% of all adjusted gross income and paid 29.2% of all federal income taxes. In 2010, the top 3% earned 27.2% of adjusted gross income and their share of all federal taxes rose proportionally, to 51%."

Interesting figures, Bro Dave. To put it another way, the percentage of total wealth held by the Big Dogs has increased by 54%; the percentage of taxes paid by them, 57.3% All this depends of course on what's considered "wealth" or "earnings" but I'd say they're still doing alright...and now they own a much greater part of the political process at every level...Let the debate rage on of "fair share" vs. what they've gotten from all parts of our system.

_________________
"A man accustomed to hear only the echo of his own sentiments, soon bars all the common avenues of delight, and has no part in the general gratification of mankind"--Dr. Johnson
"Amen, brother"-ED

None of you seem to focus on what I posted previously <surprise surprise >

At the height of the top tax brackets - during my lifetime, at least, the 50's and 60's - no one paid these stupidly high rates......there was a whole industry of tax shelters from oil wells to bull semen designed to shelter income and bring your bracket way down.

I don't know or care what "small percentage" of Americans found themselves in a position whereby the government felt entitled to taking 90% of every dollar they earned - I do know that many aspired to earning more <like my own father>, only to edge closer to that "magic number"

I don't care if you are a liberal, conservative, libertarian, even a socialist - under any theory thinking (regardless of the small percentage - that's BS too - you paid more percentage wise of your income - and we have not even touched on state income taxes!) that government is entitled to 90 cents of every dollar you earn - or have it your way - 50%, 60%, 70% - is in my opinion stupid - especially since government is not known for its efficiency and spending restraint (and yes...spare me please - I know there are things government has to do that make it less efficient than running a business ).

Reagan was correct - Washington does not have a revinue problem; they have a spending problem - you will pardon me if I don't endorse giving <more> money to people who have shown time and again that they don't know how to be good stewards of it.

I agree wholeheartedly that very, very few paid the high rates. Much like today where the wealthy employs many legal tax shelters to minimize taxes.

However, I do believe that Reagan changed the country's perception of debt and that has led to where we are today. This article is pretty interesting. http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2011/ ... entennial/

Have a Great Day,

Dave