monpere 

Speaking of welfare and playing fields. Welfare exists because the playing field is not level. The majority of people on welfare don't want to be there, they would rather work 3 jobs if they can find them. Problem is, because the field is not level, they have to take those 3 jobs which still is not enough for their basic needs. The decks are stacked against them, and they get stuck in that hole, void of opportunity due to the uneven playing field. They can't even afford to get sick, because they can't get health care. It's easy to brush that aside sitting in front of our array of 6 trading monitors.

Do you believe this is primarily due to education? Or is simply bad luck on who your parents were (rich vs poor) and the opportunity that is given or lost as a result?

For me personally, any time I encountered something that I wanted to learn, I would teach myself. I preferred this approach to a structured approach. I would rather fall back on structure only when needed.

Why do you think a poor person, even with great ambition and drive, is unable to break away from his surroundings and really excel?

I think education plays a large part, as does the family structure. If your family structure is setup in such a way that there are constant excuses as to why things cannot be changed or improved, then that is really tough to overcome.

There is a quote which I cannot recall the source, that goes basically like this: "Once you learn how to make money, you can always make more". I think it is true. I think that if the market blew up and ceased to exist tomorrow, I am not worried about how I will earn a living. But for the majority of Americans, this is unattainable and unimaginable.

Why do you think that is?

Mike

Big Mike 

Do you believe this is primarily due to education? Or is simply bad luck on who your parents were (rich vs poor) and the opportunity that is given or lost as a result? For me personally, any time I encountered something that I wanted to learn, I would teach myself. I preferred this approach to a structured approach. I would rather fall back on structure only when needed. Why do you think a poor person, even with great ambition and drive, is unable to break away from his surroundings and really excel? I think education plays a large part, as does the family structure. If your family structure is setup in such a way that there are constant excuses as to why things cannot be changed or improved, then that is really tough to overcome. There is a quote which I cannot recall the source, that goes basically like this: "Once you learn how to make money, you can always make more". I think it is true. I think that if the market blew up and ceased to exist tomorrow, I am not worried about how I will earn a living. But for the majority of Americans, this is unattainable and unimaginable. Why do you think that is? Mike

I think education or lack thereof, is a huge part of it. Those that make it out of that hole are the exceptions, and generally have an exceptional drive, or got an exceptional break. That should not be norm for any group of people. No one should have to be exceptional in order to get their basic needs met, or get real opportunities to better their lives. Are there those who abuse the system? sure, there will always be those, but by in large I don't believe they are the majority.

I think you are bang on the money Mike. I think we have all come to this forum and to the markets in search of a better life because of a similar drive to learn and succeed. Just to clarify, when I talk about a level playing field I am not talking about a pro-welfare state where all have the same opportunities and advantages. We are defined by what we overcome in life, it's what makes us who we are. What I am talking about in terms of fair game and a level playing field is on the side of anti-corruption, the pampering and coddling and serving of the rich through loopholes, special rights, and criminal monetary policies. As an independent proprietary trader competing against Goldman, another supposedly independent proprietary trading house, how can I possibly compete when they have an unlimited government backstop? A quick review of basic game theory will show that the former will have 0% chance of beating the latter in a free market. Hence, there is no game to be played. This is where I'm coming in from when I see the playing field as uneven. It has nothing to do with foodstamps or the like, that is a symptom of the corruption, not the cause.

Big Mike 

Do you believe this is primarily due to education? Or is simply bad luck on who your parents were (rich vs poor) and the opportunity that is given or lost as a result? For me personally, any time I encountered something that I wanted to learn, I would teach myself. I preferred this approach to a structured approach. I would rather fall back on structure only when needed. Why do you think a poor person, even with great ambition and drive, is unable to break away from his surroundings and really excel? I think education plays a large part, as does the family structure. If your family structure is setup in such a way that there are constant excuses as to why things cannot be changed or improved, then that is really tough to overcome. There is a quote which I cannot recall the source, that goes basically like this: "Once you learn how to make money, you can always make more". I think it is true. I think that if the market blew up and ceased to exist tomorrow, I am not worried about how I will earn a living. But for the majority of Americans, this is unattainable and unimaginable. Why do you think that is? Mike

liquidcci 

Here in lies the problem. The government can't raise the struggling up. Even if you believe wealth should be redistributed it is beyond me how anyone could believe the government can do it. All our entitlement programs government kangaroo accounting aside are bankrupt. The type of thinking coming out of the Obama administration will only serve to pull others down and will not raise up the struggling. Our current path is not sustainable. Either spending must be cut or all of the middle class taxed. Tax the rich won't put a dent in it. Higher taxes for middle class will make the middle class smaller. So we better start cutting spending and yes that means some will suffer initially but many better off in long run. .

The government cant raise up the struggling but it can create a path for those willing to make an effort.. I don't believe in redistribution of wealth but the government aims to be there for the people and that means taxes.. NO PATH IS SUSTAINABLE IN THE CURRENT ECONOMY... When the economy is good, tax revenues has resources to pay for more than people imagine.. THE KEY QUESTION IS HOW DO WE GROW THE ECONOMY, and it has less to do with taxes than people think.. middle class shopping will help the economy more than the 1% buying luxuries..

How do you describe middle class? Obama administration describes it as $250k or greater, which is probably more like the average income of the wealthier neighborhoods here with 2 professionals.. The tax increases are also marginal for that group.. How will that snuff out the middle class?

syxforex 

Just to clarify, when I talk about a level playing field I am not talking about a pro-welfare state where all have the same opportunities and advantages. .

That's called communism and that experiment has already given its answers...ha Just look at China, Russia and East Germany before the Berlin Wall came down so clearly nobody on this thread is referring to that kind of level playing field but one where someone is looking out for the disadvantaged to help them out rather than to sympathize with the wealthy for paying more taxes.. Many of them or their parents would have never been in that upper middle class were it not for the opportunity presented to them..

Thanks, I do know what communism is.. There have been Canadians defending Norad stations and fighting against it for as long as there has been a cold war...

Jedi 

That's called communism and that experiment has already given its answers...ha Just look at China, Russia and East Germany before the Berlin Wall came down so clearly nobody on this thread is referring to that kind of level playing field but one where someone is looking out for the disadvantaged to help them out rather than to sympathize with the wealthy for paying more taxes.. Many of them or their parents would have never been in that upper middle class were it not for the opportunity presented to them..

anyhow, i just hope the real government knows what they are doing... time for me to get back to trading and away from this crazy blogging... it's been real...

Jedi 

The government cant raise up the struggling but it can create a path for those willing to make an effort.. I don't believe in redistribution of wealth but the government aims to be there for the people and that means taxes.. NO PATH IS SUSTAINABLE IN THE CURRENT ECONOMY... When the economy is good, tax revenues has resources to pay for more than people imagine.. THE KEY QUESTION IS HOW DO WE GROW THE ECONOMY, and it has less to do with taxes than people think.. middle class shopping will help the economy more than the 1% buying luxuries.. How do you describe middle class? Obama administration describes it as $250k or greater, which is probably more like the average income of the wealthier neighborhoods here with 2 professionals.. The tax increases are also marginal for that group.. How will that snuff out the middle class?

@Jedi in the governments effort to create a path through entitlement they have a dug a hole so deep we may not come out. They were digging this hole when the economy was good it is just seen for what it is when things get bad. Reality is it is unsustainable. Reality is we are starting to see the size of the iceberg.

Look at this debt clock and tell me what you see? U.S. National Debt Clock : Real Time

One thing I will point is the unfunded liabilities created by entitlement programs is over $1,000,000 per taxpayer and that is rising. In other words these programs are bankrupt now. I mean come on $1,000,000 per taxpayer.

Obama calls the 250k crowd rich I would call that upper middle class. But my point is they cannot do what they say they are going to do by raising taxes on 250k and above crowd. One it will kill jobs and two it will only marginally put a dent in the debt. They will have to go for the rest of the middle class unless they really curtail spending. It is essentially a lie when they say will not raise taxes on middle class. The only way they have any "chance" of not doing that is to curtail spending. Big government ideologues will not curtail spending they will only give us kangaroo accounting numbers that try and make it looks like cuts.


All I will say is we better wake up or there will be no path to prosperity for any American.

liquidcci 

@Jedi in the governments effort to create a path through entitlement they have a dug a hole so deep we may not come out. They were digging this hole when the economy was good it is just seen for what it is when things get bad. Reality is it is unsustainable. Reality is we are starting to see the size of the iceberg. Look at this debt clock and tell me what you see? U.S. National Debt Clock : Real Time One thing I will point is the unfunded liabilities created by entitlement programs is over $1,000,000 per taxpayer and that is rising. In other words these programs are bankrupt now. I mean come on $1,000,000 per taxpayer. Obama calls the 250k crowd rich I would call that upper middle class. But my point is they cannot do what they say they are going to do by raising taxes on 250k and above crowd. One it will kill jobs and two it will only marginally put a dent in the debt. They will have to go for the rest of the middle class unless they really curtail spending. It is essentially a lie when they say will not raise taxes on middle class. The only way they have any "chance" of not doing that is to curtail spending. Big government ideologues will not curtail spending they will only give us kangaroo accounting numbers that try and make it looks like cuts. All I will say is we better wake up or there will be no path to prosperity for any American.

I agree both sides needs to give some.. meaning taxes are necessary and likely more reasonable on the wealthier, but resources for programs can only go so far to prevent future deficits.. However, and ironically, the best time to cut programs is not when its needed the most like now but when the economy is strong and tax revenues are more bountiful.. Another big catch-22 and that's why politicians are often taken very lightly because most of the times, they're just talkers and light weights in action in a democracy.. but then a dictatorship creates its own issues..

We can all point the finger but until someone has a solution, we roll with the here and now and that means the rich not the poor pay more taxes until programs are reduced during better times to eliminate the need.. a big catch-22

What is bent cannot be straightened
and what is broken cannot possibly be counted

Alex lays this out pretty good.
.