Ferrari Mailing List: Re: Are Ferraris Losing Their Good Looks?

[Ric Rainbolt (ricrainbolt]

The concentration of wealth is a function of the growing disparity 
between the productive and non-productive elements of society... NOT 
a function of having too little progression in taxes. Your 
generalizations about the status and ability of billionaires to pay 
0.6% more is fallous. First of all, the numbers are 35% to 39.6%, 
which is a 4.6% jump AND the magic man wants to eliminate the cap on 
FICA contributions (a nearly 15% tax hike). So we're really talking 
about closer to 19% tax increase. Secondly, the billionaires you seem 
to love to loathe are paying their taxes in capital gains NOT income.

The really fallacy in your more-emotional-than-fact argument is that 
the number of people in the upper 10% of wage earners pays 72.7% of 
all personal income taxes (2005 data). Now while it may be fun to 
throw rocks at T. Boone and Mr. Buffet, they, in fact, are not the 
ones really impacted. There are over 6 MILLION families in that upper 
10%. There are only a small number of billionaires. And throw rocks 
at the "newly-minted Millionaires" (i.e. the hard working productive 
people) if you want, but to get in the upper 10% club only requires a 
family income of $339,100... hardly rock-star income.

What you fail to address with your sound-bite level platitudes is 
there is no MORAL right to take life and liberty from one person to 
give it to someone else. Around 60% of total federal outlays are now 
some form of income redistribution.

The fact that there are more millionaires is: a) a good thing, not a 
bad thing, and b) due, in part, to inflation. But wait, you're going 
to tell me that the greedy 6 million families are taking more than 
their fair share from the "wellspring of prosperity", right? Utter 
Marxist bullshit, IMHO. The fact that intelligent, hard working 
people are gaining a growing concentration of the world's wealth is a 
natural function of having larger and larger numbers of people 
content to sucking off the teats of the productive people. At last 
estimate, over 40% of the people in this country are receiving 
federal benefits... 40%!!

You claim, as fact, that the rich ("those people") "aren't 
complaining or asking for relief from this situation", which is DEAD 
wrong again. I *AM* one of those people and I know many, and trust 
me, no one I know likes it. The reason you don't see organized 
marches or rallies or other crap like that, is that we're typically 
too busy making the products that provide the world with wealth in 
the first place. So what if billionaires aren't complaining, they're 
not the vast majority of those that will be affected by the tax 
hikes. You claim it's a waste of time to defend folks that don't need 
defending. But your are certainly content to sit by and watch, even 
advocate, having more and more of their hard earned wealth stolen 
from them by immoral and corrupt central governments.

The fact that the US is not as "tax progressive" as Europe is another 
BS argument. All you're saying there is that we haven't gone as far 
down the socialist/communist path as the other guy, therefore it's 
OK. Europe has lost many entrepreneurs and high-wage earners to 
"friendlier" tax-haven countries. If it's so freaking good, why do 
all the productive people bail out? I feel the USA is about to 
experience the same sort of exodus, as I'm not the only one in my 
circle of friends considering capital flight.

"Freedom isn't free"... a nice emotional patriotic quote that simply 
ignores the fact that the VAST MAJORITY of government spending is NOT 
DEFENSE NOR INFRASTRUCTURE, it's WELFARE. I'd be perfectly happy, and 
am perfectly happy, paying for the former (28% of the federal 
budget), but not happy at all paying the latter (62% of the federal budget).

Let's face the real facts:

#1 - You're a classist. Class envy is enough justification for you 
and those like you (looters) to spend someone else's money to fix 
other peoples perceived problems (beggars). An IMMORAL and 
unjustified position for anyone to take. In the end, wealth is only 
produced when a product is created; not by stealing and handing out.

#2 - Taking money from someone by force is IMMORAL. It's theft a the 
point of law. There is no charity in being forcefully deprived of 
your life's product. Having a huge central government do it means we 
have very little choice nor control over who and what gets the "charity".

#3 - No man can MORALLY make a claim to a better lifestyle at the 
expense of another, no matter what the disparities in their relative 
incomes. This is pure and simple slavery. Maybe not all-out 100% 
human ownership, but a large fraction nevertheless. A fraction that 
is growing progressively larger. So would you make the same argument 
in 1860, that the slaves in this country neither needed nor deserved defending?

#4 - Government programs to alleviate poverty have been in place for 
over 50 years. By your own admission, these programs have had just 
the opposite effect.

#5 - Our current crop of IMMORAL social insurance programs are simply 
not mathematically viable. A simple review of the numbers show that 
they can not and will not be able to sustain their current growth 
rates (or even hold their current standing), even if the maximum 
marginal tax rates were increased to 100%. By 2015, the CBO estimates 
that social insurance expenditures will be over 80% of the federal budget.

#6 - If US government social insurance programs are so wonderful, how 
come all those that foisted this crap on the rest of us don't even 
participate? Most government employees are NOT in Social Security. 
Yea, point a gun at me, force me to "contribute" to "my retirement", 
give me less than a 2% return year over year, and then bail out of 
the system that I was forced to be in. Real nice.

#7 - Even if it were MORAL (which it's not), you can't level the 
playing field of have's and have-not's (your words). There will 
always be brighter and more productive people and those that are not. 
That's perhaps a sad, but true fact of human nature.

Obama's tax proposals will stick my wife and myself for another 
$2500-$3000 per month. This weighed against the fact, as I stated 
before, that our federal tax burden is already the majority of our 
monthly budget. Who are YOU to tell ME that I'm not doing my part? 
Over half my life is spent serving the "common good" (by force, but 
not by choice). In my lifetime, and that of my wife, neither of us 
has ever taken a single direct federal benefit other than FHA when we 
bought our first house (forced on us actually). Tell me how our large 
and punishing tax burden is MORALLY justified against the TENS OF 
MILLIONS of people in this country that have NEVER paid ANY federal 
personal income taxes.

As for viable tax havens, there are plenty of nice ones. Many are 
right off our southern coast. Some will even allow me to bring my AR15's.

Here's a quote that illustrates what I consider the whole looter mentality:

"...because we have been guided by a Republican administration who 
believes in the simplistic notion that people who have wealth are 
entitled to keep it. They have an antipathy toward the means of 
redistributing wealth. And they may be able to sustain that for a 
while, but it doesn't work in the long run." --Rep. Jim Moran 
(D-VA).. .HA! D-VA, it should read C-VA (C for communist).

When all the productive people have left or sheltered their incomes, 
who'll be left to pay for the all the social programs?


RR
"Unashamed capitalist for my 32 year working career"


At 01:32 PM 11/12/2008, you wrote:
> I won't deny that there's a growing animosity brewing between the 
> 'haves' and the 'have-nots' in this country, but its hard for me to 
> sympathize with a socio-economic class of people who:
>
> - are growing in numbers, both in the number of newly-minted 
> Millionaires and Billionaires
> - are growing in amounts/share of global wealth they personally hold
> - aren't complaining or asking for relief from this situation
>
> These are facts regardless of political persuasion.
>
> For me, its a waste of bandwidth to 'come to the aid' of folks who 
> don't seem to want or need defending.  Every time I read of T.Boon 
> Picken's exploits, he's made another $100 Million, he certainly 
> isn't looking for a shoulder to cry on (Kerkorian might, but its his 
> own fault and he knows it).  They're doing well, they continue to do 
> well, and they'll do well in the future.  The pages of DuPont 
> Registry aren't getting any thinner, Ferraris in US markets still 
> have multi-year wait lists, and the one segment of the Housing 
> market that is still VERY robust and healthy is the 
> upper-end.  Plenty of money there, and its being enjoyed and spent 
> by the people who earned it.  Let's all put-away our kleenex and pitch-forks.
>
> The US tax structure has a ways to go before it approaches taxation 
> levels of Europe, Canada or most other countries of the 
> world.  Where ya gonna go that offers more financial 
> opportunity?  Perhaps an Arab country that has socialized its 
> natural resources to support its citizens?  You'll be leaving many 
> of your Liberties/Freedoms you enjoy now at the door...your politics 
> and your religion might not be welcome in your new 
> country-of-residence, either.  But if all of that means absolutely 
> nothing to you in an effort to preserve 0.6% of your income, by all 
> means.  Freedom isn't 'Free', expecially when 'We The People' are 
> spending $10 Billion per month to establish it in Iraq.  Feel free 
> to lecture all the soldiers, sailors, Airmen and Marines out there 
> about how painful the Gas Guzzler tax is on the purchase of your Ferrari.....
>
> And now I'm done ranting.
>
> M
>
> --- On Wed, 11/12/08, LarryT <l02turner [at] comcast.net> wrote:
>
> From: LarryT <l02turner [at] comcast.net>
> Subject: Re: [Ferrari] Are Ferraris Losing Their Good Looks?
> To: cavallino_rapante [at] yahoo.com
> Cc: "The FerrariList" <ferrari [at] ferrarilist.com>
> Date: Wednesday, November 12, 2008, 11:29 AM
>
> Hey Michael -  Hope you're having a good week -
>
> You're right - it doesn't have anything to do with the way
> Ferrari's are designed - and I won't say anymore about it whether you
> respond to this or not. -
>
> well, if you don't care - you obviously have enough money to not have to
> worry about it. -  *will* it bother you at some point?  Because you may see
> these kinds of fees rise in the next few years -
> BTW, it could be turned into a yearly fee with the stroke of a pen -
>
> May as well send me $10000 or $20000 - I deserve it as much as the govt.
> .
> Well- at least you got a good laugh from my posts  ;-)
>
> Take care -
> Sincerely,
> Larry T  (74 911, 91 300D 2.5T)
> www.youroil.net Oil Analysis Kits &
> Porsche Posters/Weber parts
> .
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Michael James"
> <cavallino_rapante [at] yahoo.com>
> To: "Larry Turner" <l02turner [at] comcast.net>
> Cc: "The FerrariList" <ferrari [at] ferrarilist.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2008 11:05 AM
> Subject: Re: [Ferrari] Are Ferraris Losing Their Good Looks?
>
>
> When you're ready to compare the GAINS attained by that top 5% in the past
> several years in relation to their tax burden, you would note that the top 5%
> still increased their profits/wealth overall - they have not lost 
> money because
> of Uncle Sam. Nor will they lose money with a 0.6% increase - gains 
> made by that
> top 5% far surpass their US tax burden, as many in this tax bracket have taken
> their business ventures global. Ask Kirk Kerkorian or Warren Buffet if
> they're worried about the IRS....these folks make/lose huge sums money
> through other activities completely unrelated to their tax bill.
>
> Are you suggesting we suspend Democracy in order to protect the top 5%
> financial earners? Certainly 'the Rich' are capable of making their case
> to politicians and the voting electorate regarding their plight in today's
> economic situation. Those folks are smarter than your and I on so many levels
> when it comes to finances, many of them voted in-support of the upcoming
> administration. I'm sure they had their reasons - reasons you may not be
> privy to.
>
> BTW, what does any of this have anything to do with Ferrari designing by
> Windtunnel instead of imagination??? Just curious....
>
>
>
> --- On Wed, 11/12/08, jashburne [at] aol.com <jashburne [at] aol.com> wrote:
>
> From: jashburne [at] aol.com <jashburne [at] aol.com>
> Subject: Re: [Ferrari] Are Ferraris Losing Their Good Looks?
> To: "Michael" <Cavallino_Rapante [at] yahoo.com>
> Cc: "The FerrariList" <ferrari [at] ferrarilist.com>
> Date: Wednesday, November 12, 2008, 10:35 AM
>
> This is the problem with a "soak the rich" philosophy.  Already we
> have accepted a very progressive tax structure in which the top 5 percent of
> earners pay half or more of total tax revenues and the bottom 45 pct pay no
> income taxes at all.
>
> When the president elect says that increasing the top tax rate from 36 pct to
> 39.6 pct is only "chump change" to a million dollar earner when it is
> really a tax increase of $36,000 a year, this country is in big trouble.
>
> This is dangerous because politicians don't care about losing 5 pct of the
> vote when they can promise tax cuts or checks to the other 95 pct.
>
> There is a limit to how far the government can force fewer and fewer people to
> carry more and more of the tax burden and we may be approaching it.  If we are
> careful the most productive sectors will leave and this economy will spiral
> downward.
>
> Rant off
>
> John
> ------Original Message------
> From: Matt Boyd
> Sender:
> To: jashburne [at] aol.com
> Cc: The FerrariList
> Sent: Nov 12, 2008 8:47 AM
> Subject: Re: [Ferrari] Are Ferraris Losing Their Good Looks?
>
> Right!  They're rich enough, so we should just extract the $$ from
> them.  If they can afford a gold stripe, they certainly should pay
> some money to the government!
>
> :-?
>
> -matt
> '85 euro 308....with no gas guzzler fine...
>
> On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 4:23 PM, Michael James
> <cavallino_rapante [at] yahoo.com> wrote:
> > LOL, you're funny Larry.
> >
> > NEVER have I heard someone wanting to buy a new Ferrari walk into a
> dealership and go:  "Damn, I could 'just' afford a new 430, but I
> can't afford the car with that Gas Guzzler tax added on!  My dreams are
> over, I'm going to have to go buy a Buick now.....Damn those Washington
> Socialists, boo-hoo.....sniff..."
> >
> > Please - buyers are spending several thousand$$$ extra to have those gold
> stripes painted on their Scuderia's hood to match the color of the rims and
> have the seat-stitching threads contrast the seat leather.  Do you 
> think any of
> these 'extras' make the car go faster?  These folks don't care
> about
> the money, good for them.  Care to guess that the California won't sell
> well, even in this economy?
> _________________________________________________________________
> To unsubscribe or modify your subscription options, please visit:
> http://lists.ferrarilist.com/mailman/options/ferrari/jashburne%40aol.com
>
> Sponsored by BooyahMedia.com
> and F1 Headlines
> http://www.F1Headlines.com/
>
>
> Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
> _________________________________________________________________
> To unsubscribe or modify your subscription options, please visit:
> http://lists.ferrarilist.com/mailman/options/ferrari/cavallino_rapante%40yahoo.com
>
> Sponsored by BooyahMedia.com
> and F1 Headlines
> http://www.F1Headlines.com/
>
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> To unsubscribe or modify your subscription options, please visit:
> http://lists.ferrarilist.com/mailman/options/ferrari/l02turner%40comcast.net
>
> Sponsored by BooyahMedia.com
> and F1 Headlines
> http://www.F1Headlines.com/
>
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> To unsubscribe or modify your subscription options, please visit:
> http://lists.ferrarilist.com/mailman/options/ferrari/ricrainbolt%40gmail.com
>
> Sponsored by BooyahMedia.com
> and F1 Headlines
> http://www.F1Headlines.com/