text:
Now the only problem is getting the GOP 2 go along with what has been found. They have a pledge 2 raise the taxes on NO ONE and can't break it. Not even if it helps the country. SAD. Maybe Grover will give in just this one time. NEVER HAPPEN but it's a good thought. U Figure Out Who Is For America And Who Is Not.
well I must be one of the other 32%, If the rest of you idiots want to give the goverment extra money then do it! I happen to think what I am already paying is being wasted.
How many in that group have already accumulated their millions? What a joke just like Buffet.
So if they "want to put some more money in the coffers", why not start a business and hire people? It will do more good that giving the gov't money they can waste.
And what difference will it make if taxes were raised? The U.S. is so far in debt, if you took all the money from the top 1% it would not be enough to run the government for a year.
All this tax talk is just a smoke screen to take attention away from the real issue. The U.S, spends to darn much.
I support Buffett's ideas. Wealth distribution that favors the rich and cheats just about everyone else in the US is totally unjust and is, in fact, destroying the economy and civil society. I believe in the Occcupy Movement. And I am one of the 1 %! Read my web site and my blog:
Wealth redistribution only works for the lazy until it is all gonei. It is the concept that created the housing crisis (politicians pushing to make money easy for the irresponsible masses), It is the concept that is killing southern europe and holding back our current rebound. Wake up America. some of you need to study what made the american dream great ... it was not sit on your behind and expect more entitlements.
I doubt this to be a true representation of what was actually said. I think the author wrote it out taking comments out of context. I would be surprised if the majority of the people, and I don't care what class they are in, would be willing to give the idiots in Washington more money to squander. The government bureaucracy is out of control. We need political reform. The government needs to get back to being...of the people, by the people and for the people...this means term limits. Get rid of professional politiicians. If you cant get the job done in say 12 years, then get the hell out and give some one else a shot at it. I know the Pres only gets an opportunity to have 8 thank god but the Congress needs a good swift kick. What we have now isn't working...we've outgrown it...we aren't working as a team...we are fractured and fragmented and ultimately ineffective.
how are you doing today? i hope all is with
you. Am miss lovemary james.Humble and
Honest, please i saw your lovely profile
here in http://whzon.com and i became very much
interested in you to know you more
and I'm seeking of a reliable,
affectionate for a real love
relationship .please Reply me in my email
(firstname.lastname@example.com ) So that i will
give you my picture for you to me better
and for us to come together as a one divine
family.Please I am waiting impatiently to
hear from your lovely mail soonest
(Remember the distance, Age o color
does not matter but love matters allot in
a True love relationship)have an endless
special day & joyful moment and Be bless for me
Those who want to pay more tax can always write a check to the U. S. Treasury.
Warren Buffet is a fool. His buddy-buddy relationship with Obama and anti-"rich" views will end up harming his business in the end. He should learn to keep his false teeth from rattling off any more idiotic suggestions resembling income redistribution.
Does anyone know what Buffett actually pays in taxes? I have read that he takes a salary of $100,000, receives no dividends and has never sold a single share of his stock. He has also siad he never will sell his stock.
Anyone know for sure.
Barbara Blouin,
How large a check are you sending to the treasury today? If you want to pay more, "Just Do IT".
Barbara Blouin then just send the treasury a check. Idiot
A look at the wealthy around the world: http://bit.ly/su6mAR
There are a couple of problems with these types of surveys:
1) Even though it says "millionaires" support the higher tax rates we do not knwo if the proposal woudl mean higher taxes TO THEM. If I am a millionare with all my money in tax free munis, what do I care if the guy next door pays more.
2) The "Sure you can tax my neighbor" is a ubiquitous problem: Obama's proposals are generally to tax the to two percent of wage earners, ie those with family incomes in excess of 250K. So if only 2% of the people are facing higher taxes would'nt you naturally expect the 98% who are subsidized to be in favor of that? Otherwise stated, if someone asked you whether you woudl chose to (a) give up some benefit or (b) have your neighbor pay more in taxes, what do you think most people would choose?
3) The taxing "millionaires and billionaires" rhetoric is crap. If you and your spose have a family income of 300K in NY, NJ, etc, and have a kid in college, you (a) probably have a home and car mos people would not call extravagant, (b) have modest savings; and (c) would be hurt by an extra 2-3K in taxes per year.
Buffet won't get hurt, but most of that 2% targeted are not Buffet or anywhere near him.
If Mr. Buffet and all others are in favor of taxing the rich more, then do it. But also, so this is not a spin game on Buffets part - that he makes this statement knowing the politics are not going to do it and he makes this statement to make himself look good. Then I say this!!! To avoid this political spin, "Mr. Buffet, pay right now what you think the rich should be paying. PAY it "NOW." You don't need to wait for government to change the rules. "GO AHEAD, YOU AND ALL THE RICH THAT AGREED WITH YOU - PAY THE ADDITIONAL TAXES "NOW". Maybe then the average joe will believe you again. Otherwise it looks like your spining the issue.
So if the majority of Americans AND the majority of millionaires actually *support* raising taxes on high-income earners, WHAT ARE REPUBLICANS OBJECTING TO?
Only an idiot would want to raise their taxes. But then again, only idiots seem to be voting lately. Hmmmm......
Low likely-hood of success is no reason not to try.
Tax money from Wall Street transactions to pay for their next failures, the very Rich and Rich Corporations could help turn the economy around if properly spent to find jobs for returning and disabled veterans and getting the bottom 20% back to work and school, thereby allowing America to get out of debt as they play taxes and stimulate the economy from the bottom up. Remember, we were flush during the Clinton years!
However, comments are also quite correct that much of our taxes are wasted: on Defense and Wars, subsidizing Big Oil, dithering, co-opted departments, coddling and bailing out corporations, an IRS code that rewards exportation of jobs and punishes hiring (at least be neutral on jobs and tariff products from countries according to human rights records, fair trade practices. Barrack Obama promised in his State of the Union to address these issues and the Super Congress should too.
Key to America's future relies on keeping America's vets working by placing them into positions according to skills and disabilities, giving work experience to Students and Youths in their useful and chosen careers, giving 99ers individualized and relevant job search and skill training, retraining, and relevant work experience. Our strength is that our above average Internet technology, including E-rate networks can assist in individualization, networking and educational aspects.
Either that or world's Worker unions and Occupy movements join to establish worldwide minimum wages and conditions, by region, each according to its needs, in concert through negotiation.
Anyone calling Warren Buffet an idiot only shows how much of an idiot they are.
Things we don't know from the article: what are we tracking, income or wealth -- looks like income, so many will not actually be wealthy. What do the categories mean: Mass affluent, Millionaire, and Ultra High Net Worth?
Who was interviewed -- this group is kind of noted for being liberal, so I am assuming that mostly Democrats who back the president's redistribution of wealth agree.
As a Republican, I do not support raising taxes until spending is under control. The clowns will just spend the extra money. We have an annual $1.6/1.7 TRILLION budget short fall. The estimates are that this tax will raise $70 Billion over 10 years (there are numerous other estimates too, but most are politically over optimistic), so $7 B will cover the overdraft for less than 2 days. It is time for some tough love -- there is going to have to be a huge cut in entitlements. Watch how military spending will not drop after we leave Iraq -- if we actually do.
The tax will work on the high income non-wealthy people. They will pay the tax as they have no choice.
The tax will not work on the truly wealthy -- Like Buffett and friends. It might collect revenue for 1 or 2 years, but we will just change the way we invest and make the tax go away. We don't pay taxes on capital gains if we don't sell stock.
If most of my income were capital gains and dividends and non-taxed govt bond interest I'd be in favor of increases on income taxes too.
But my income is earned income. So drop my taxes and hit Warren and friends on capital gains and take away the govt bond interest exemptions.
Of course those with $1mm in assets want to tax those with $1mm in income. It is classic, tax the other guy. My local farmer has a $1mm in assets in his farm. He does not have $1mm in income. He would love to tax the guy down the street who makes a $1mm a year in income, until he has to pay the increased tax during the year he liquidates his farm or tries to transfer it to his children and then has to pay the income tax on the liquidation for the only year in his life that he will make $1mm in income.
HAHAHAHA what a mindjob. The people with 0 income want to raise income on others, but since they get capital gains, they want 0% cap. gains tax. Wake up people, they are feeding you BS. People just want the stock market to go up because they get their money by sitting around watching graphs move. Keep letting politicians steal your money through taxes and soon you will all be as powerless as the soviet citizen - good luck trying to climb the fence you wanted so much to get to Mexico.
Why don't we tax people on the worth of financial instruments? Bank accounts, stocks, bonds, mutual finds, the weird game playing derivative products - all of these. I'll bet we would see a huge increase in capital investments.
Buffet is the CEO of a $175bn listed company and pays himself $100k / year in cash and salaries...why? to avoid the top rate of income tax?? How can anyone take Buffet seriously when he has legally cheated the tax system most of his life? How about he calculates what he really should have been paid as a CEO for a company that size and pay tax at the top rate for that level of income. By very simple calculations - if he is 5m for each year during the 70's, 10m for the 80's 20m for the 90's and 30m for the 00's - he would have earned $710 million income - 35% (I know the tax rate has not been constant but wanted to keep it as a simple example) of which is ~250m. Why doesn't he start by writing a check for this amount and pay legitimate income tax like 99.9% for the population and then he has the right to have an opinion on income tax.
I think your 68% number is questionable because of the catagory of people you interviewed. In the catagory of people with 1 million in investments you will find most earn much less than 1 million so they won't be affected by Buffets higher tax plan so why not vote for the other guy to pay higher taxes. The same comment is true, although to a lessor degree for you 61% catagory.
As for the idea of wealth verse income, capital gains should be charged at the same rate as income. It would promote long term investing rather than this day trading that causes major swings to markets and penalizes companies for steady long-term growth. It would also be more equitable. No reason why someone who just sits around should be taxed at a lesser rate than someone that needs to work for his money.
As for the idea of charging the wealthy more, considering we benefit the most from a stable society that protects property rights, educates the work force, and promotes commerce, in addition to the fact that a dollar to someone at the poverty line is worth more than a dollar to a millionaire (The economic law of decreasing marginal utility) this only makes sense. However, I think it should be done by simplifying the tax code. Without all the deductions and games that can be played with the system, the rich would pay more of our fair share.
The article manages to miss what is obvious in the first statements- that the people who have a million in investments (or 5 million) are not the people who pay the taxes they want on others, anymore that Buffet does. The "people" who pay the taxes are small to medium sized businesses, and money sent to coddle the congress is money not invested in job growth.
Nothing stops anyone in this country from sending additional money to the goverment, monthly if you want.
There shouldn't be any tax increases on anybody until a balanced budget amendment is passed, and the federal government has eliminated the fraud and corruption within itself.
The notion that tax collections should increase rests on a demonstrably faulty premise: that the Government has not wasted a cent of the People's wealth it has confiscated. If you can't show me that the maximum positive benefit has been realized from this or that spending program, you have just made the argument for lowering tax collections. It's what happens in our family's business -- the expenditure has to earn a good result, whether top line or measureable research+ development or good will. It's the difference between quitting while you're ahead and cutting your losses. Sometimes the two are the same, but most of times they are not, so let's stop assuming that the Government Wants more of our money because it Needs more of our money.
So what's stopping them from paying more? Just write a check!!
Another cunning liberal survey group trying to muddle the debate and issue. The survey guy George Walper of Spectrem's biase is in full display when he says in the quote " ...we need to increase taxes to stimulate the economy..." Geez..., what a joke. Even Krugman will not claim that increase taxes will stimulate economy.
Even more glaring is the lack of info about the sample size, results, etc. But did anyone notice (apparently some posters already mention it) that the survey is done on people with networth of $1 m (and that includes me), not those with income of $1m (that does NOT include me). There is vast difference between these groups.
Well, the joker may as well do the survey among those with net worth of $5k. I am sure the result will be even more impressive.
As to Buffett, he is a hypocrite of highest order. There are so many holes in his argument that I can write for 2 hours. Most important one being that he counts his secretary's Social Security deduction (from both employer and employee) as taxes paid by his secretary.
Total joke from Buffett and this so call "survey".
My father-in-law is Buffets age, he has pretty much lost his mind and has no idea what is going on but at times he can carry on a decent conversation like Buffet. If I were Buffet's age and had all that money/worth I would say something like this too. Must be heaven bound.
No millionaire has made his/her wealth all by him/herself, contrary to what most seem to believe. They've done so with the assistance of our infrastructure and relied on the help of a number of individuals. So now it's time that they show their gratitude to the system and the individuals who helped them by paying their fair and proportional share of taxes.
Remind us who has "more" -- the overworked and underappreciated? :
What we need is another "Sen. McCarthy" in DC to investigate this "Grover" character and all the scum bags
who signed his pledge.
Congress took a pledge to defend the Constitution, not Grover's idea of the Constitution.
We need to increase taxes, but we also need to encourage savings and investment. I think we should lower dividend and interest taxes, but increase capital gains both long term and short. In addition we should have tax ranges based on Gross Income, not net income. In other words if you start off at Gross Income of over a million dollars and your net income drops to 300K you still pay x percent. The goal isn't just to collect money or make it fair, we need reform that will reward hard work and encourage people to achieve the American Dream without putting a burden on those that are in the process of living the American Dream.
No we need to lower the capital gains rate. Capital gains is one of the few ways the little guy can become rich.
So it looks like the Republican party is owned by only 32% of the wealthiest American's. Nice to have so few people own an entire political party...
Your statement "In other words, Buffett's proposal had more supporters than detractors among the rich" is not supported by the data you cite.
Buffet's proposal was that the rich not pay lower average income tax rates than their employees. Whatever its merits, this was not a blanket call for somewhat higher taxes being paid by all high income taxpayers-- which is what apparently has support in the survey you cite.
Interestingly enough the situation Buffet was complaining about would still exist after adoption of the Obama administration's "Buffet Rule" which is simply a new top tax bracket for ordinary income (i.e. not the capital gains and dividend income that is taxed at 15% pushes Buffet's average rate down).
@ Ken = "No we need to lower the capital gains rate. Capital gains is one of the few ways the little guy can become rich."
How many little guys you know sell stocks and bonds or sells non-inventory asset bought at a lower price? You've bought into the rhetoric? The GOP wants Capitol gains eliminated or reduced so that Wall Street will be immune from paying taxes... That's why the tax is referred to as the Wall Street tax.
"Interestingly enough the situation Buffet was complaining about would still exist after adoption of the Obama administration's "Buffet Rule" which is simply a new top tax bracket for ordinary income (i.e. not the capital gains and dividend income that is taxed at 15% pushes Buffet's average rate down)."
Obama is also pushing to eliminate many of the loop holes and deductions the rich take advantage on which is what brings their tax rate down. You have to consider his entire plan if you make a statement like this and not just the part that proves your point...
The average person doesn't enjoy the special 15% low rate on cap gains and dividends since their capital investment assets, if any, are in an IRA or 401k taxed at 0%. Then taxed at ordinary rates when distributed. Why, why why, do some average income people vote/advocate against their interests?
I do not trust Warren Buffet. I will tell you why this is coming from a man who has made it his life ambition to avoid taxation. Why not just write a cheque to the treasury? Warren you may fool most of the people most of the time but then I never believed in the maxim vox populi vox dei. Go away Buffet and attend to BH you are needed there.
Well said Shanghai Lion and TOFTB. These guys employ accountants and lawyers to avoid taxation then turn around and ask for more taxation. Who you think is going to get caught paying the increases the masses or ther Buffetists? One would have thought he would be encouraging the efficient use of the tax dollar and increased production in the economy. Just goes to show transfer of skills does not automatically follow from one discipline to another. I take that back Warren is a politician damned good at telling the people what they want to hear and willing to decieve while at it. You have been exposed Warren!
The cognitive dissonance on the right will continue, however. Nearly 80% of Americans want taxes raised on the richest top 2% - in EVERY poll. Nearly 70% of MILLIONAIRES want their taxes raised, as they know it will help the economy and the deficit - JUST LIKE REAGAN understood when he said - it's on video, folks - that a millionaire paying a lower tax rate than a waitress was "crazy" in his defense of HIS tax hikes on the rich. I guess Reagan was a "socialist", huh? And all of these millionaires - they must be "socialists", too, huh? What I'm wondering is - if nearly 80% of Americans want taxes raised on the rich - does that mean that 80% of Americans are "socialists"? Or does that just mean that they're sick and tired of the wealth redistribution that's been going on for the last 30 years, taking money out of the pockets of the working poor and middle class and giving it all to the richest top 2% in the country - who then KEEP it, invest in the stock market, and buy yachts with it. Raising taxes on average Americans and increasing the deficit - to give welfare to millionaires - and every right winger I've spoken to supports it. That's how good the propaganda of Plutocracy has been on right wing radio and Faux News in its effort to dismantle our Democracy. They've actually gotten working, average Americans to support a political party (Republicans) who want to raise their taxes and increase the deficit to SUBSIDIZE the RICH - and who say things openly like, say, wanting to repeal the 17th amendment - you know - that little part of the Constitution that allows us to VOTE for our Senators - so GOP senators would no longer have to even have to labor under the PRETENSE of working for We the People - because we wouldn't have even voted for them. Louis Gohmert, Rick Perry, etc., have openly called for that - as well as prominent tea party "leaders" - and yet these right wingers that I speak to aren't even AWARE of it, because all they do is watch Faux News and listen to Rush Limbaugh - Limbaugh, who literally says things like he wants to drop a bomb on Americans in poverty because they're "bottom feeders". Come on, right wingers - you've been fooled long enough into voting against your own interests. The tea party has been exposed for being a front for insurance companies and corporations that used populist rhetorical devices and "patriotism" to get you to vote to make them richer, and make you poorer. This is not about Capitalism vs. Socialism, folks - that's more propaganda games from these people to throw you off of their trail. This is about what THOMAS JEFFERSON warned about when he said he wanted to "crush in its infancy the aristocracy of moneyed corporations" that would threaten our government and our laws. It's about the banks that Jefferson said were "a greater threat to liberty than standing armies". This is about nothing less than DEMOCRACY VS. PLUTOCRACY, friends. The right wing wants - and has openly stated as such on radio and television and print - to dismantle Democracy and all rights of average Americans - and replace it with Plutocracy where 1% of the population owns everything - and where 99% of us have no right to have our voice heard. Think that's not what's happening? Take a look at the memo that was written and passed around among the country's top CEO's that was leaked a few years ago that stated in plain English that Plutocracy was the goal - and that the only thing stopping them was that unfortunately, "people can still vote". Then take a look at the recent report that shows that if the anti-vote laws currently being passed and proposed by Republican governors across the nation all passed - that over 5 MILLION Americans would not be able to vote in 2012. This is a concerted effort between corporations, many with foreign owners, and the GOP, kids. WAKE. UP. NOW.
There might be an additional amount of tax revenue collected this year as there was last year. People will probably sell some of their stock this year in preparation of the tax changes going into effect next year. These will be stocks that were short term last year but will have crossed the threshold to become long term gains. This happened in 2010 with the Democrat threat to raise the capital gains tax rate.
You take the income hit this year instead of next year when your rates go up 5% or whatever congress decides that they will increase. You makes your monies at the end of this year and can do damage control before 2012 starts.
Really, you must stop grouping people with investments of $1 million or more and people with annual income of $l million or more as if they were similar. Few investment millionaires are anywhere near rich. Most income millionaires probably are rich or will become rich for a time.
So of course most investment millionaires would favor higher income tax on income millionaires.
JLM -- you have it backwards. Most people with high incomes are not wealthy -- they typically spend most of their high income. Investment millionaires are those who are wealthy. This is what the research shows. It is the opposite of what the average non-wealthy person believes.
Mark -- what a tired liberal Democrat rant -- you have been watching too much fiction on NBC. You look at a poll by a liberal think tank and believe everything the article says. We really don't have enough information to make the calls that you are making. I believe the recent laws passed prevent non-US-citizens (who are usually Democrats) from voting. Republicans want to stop the hemorrhaging of the national debt before taxes are increased. We are currently running between $1.6/1.7 Trillion/year. Raising these taxes will only bring in enough money each year to cover the current "overdraft" for 2 days. You are talking about putting a band aid on an accident victim's scratch who has arterial bleeding.
Senators were not elected by the population at large until 1913 -- you did get the amendment correct. We have not had elected Senators longer than we have. If you look at the elections historically, it favors Democrats and Republicans pretty much equally.
There is not a finite amount of money. One person making a dollar does not necessarily mean that someone else loses a dollar.
I bet other then the politicians who are apposed is the Koch brothers. Jerks
Mark loves to hear himself say "cognitive dissonance", for whatever that means and surely not for what it's worth.
**All Protesters** Register to Vote Now make sure that we can vote the Problems out of office. REGISTER TO VOTE make sure you are heard. Lets do it Right cover ALL bases.
I'd have to agree the 15% capitol gains tax is unfair and un-american. I pay 36% of my income in taxes..... everybody else should too.... fair is fair
Give me a break, you are already getting a whopping break. Your taxes are about 1/4 of what they were under Eisenhower, and half of what they were just before Reagan. The top 1 percent now make 24 percent of all annual income, not a good thing. The same 1 percent now own over 50 percent of all stocks and bonds, and that's even worse. The bottom 50 percent, the "deadbeats" despised by the parrot mouthpieces at Fox, own 2 1/2 percent of all assets. The top 10 percent own 80 percent of assets. The quickest path for America to end up a communist or socialist state is for the trends of the last 30 years to continue. The "occupy wall street" movement will look like a popcorn fart if things don't change pretty quickly. Sounds like you have a big money problem-you love the stuff too much. If you think all your tax money is being wasted, you should move to Somalia, where you could pay zero taxes, hire your own army, build your own roads, etc. But, I'd recommend that you build a house with about 20 foot walls, a moat full of alligators, a drawbridge, and plenty of electrified razor wire. There you could live out your "I'm on my own" lifestyle and see how it works out for ya.
The big picture reality, is that the 'rich' clearly DO pay much more than their 'fair share'. Even Buffett paid $7M to the federal govt. The bigger picture NOW, is that the annual federal govt deficit CANNOT be fixed or even much improved, by soaking people with more taxes. The WHOLE ISSUE of taxing the 'rich' is now a campaign ploy by the Democrats -- they simply do NOT want to reduce the spending that's necessary to solve or start to solve, the orgy of federal spending. The deficit of nearly $1.5T/year for 3 yrs in a row now, is enough each year to give $30,000/year to 50 million people. That cannot continue. We're headed for an awful crash with this excess spending. And believe me, it's excess spending, it's not deficiency of tax revenue. We cannot spend $3.7T federal, and nearly 2T st & local, for $5.5T total, when AGI for all taxpayers is $9T. That's called excessive govt spending, pure and simple.
The wealthy are doing 70% of the buying right now — source WSJ — this blog, so we are paying 70% of the sales taxes.
Following numbers are from the IRS tables:
$50 to $75K pay 12.5%
$20 to $30 pay 5.7%
$100 to $125 pay 9.9%.
Over $150K pay 29.2%
We on the right are paying our taxes. You need to stop believing the conspiracy theory stuff. I have no problem paying more taxes when the government is forced to live on a balanced budget — we currently need about $1.6 Trillion per year in cuts.
Many states are in trouble too: New York, New Jersey, California, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, Illinois, Michigan. Taxpayers, business owners, jobs creators, retirees with assets are fleeing the high tax, big spending, Big Brother states. Illinois doesn't pay its bills anymore – they have outstanding bills over a year in default.
Interestingly, I cannot find a study by the Spectrem Group that references whether or not millionaires should pay more taxes. Spectrem itself refers to a Quinnipiac poll that does reference the pay-more-taxes question, but that only polls New York voters, and is most definitely not representative of the country as a whole.
Mr. Frank, you should re-check your Spectrem study and see if you can find an actual study done by Spectrem that's representative of the country as a whole. I certainly couldn't find it.
It isn't about cutting spending or raising taxes. It's about doing both. Economists, Americans, Democrats and majority of Americans agree that a combination of both cutting spending and raising taxes needs to happen. Problem is., party refuses to comply with one the necessary conditions and in short, stops all chances of fixing this country.
@ 9:54 -- since you won't take the time to create a moniker. It isn't about raising taxes. You could take all of the money from every wealthy person and the amount is too small to cover the debt load -- the tax the rich is all Democrat pre-election year smoke and mirrors. This is ALL ABOUT SPENDING CUTS.
Americans don't agree with you, or this would have passed in the blink of an eye. Of course the 47% of US citizens who pay no federal income tax would agree with you -- they have no skin in the game and want their entitlements. For every Liberal Democrat economist that supports this, there is a conservative Republican economist who says the problem is spending and not taxes. The Republicans have attempted to bring multiple bills to the Senate floor, but Harry Reid and the Democrats have enough votes to stifle even a discussion about the Republican plans. The Democrat party is now the scared party of NO and Obama is "Leading from Behind".
No one should even be talking about a tax increase until the spending is under control. We are overspending by ~ $1.6/1.7 TRILLION Dollars -- this is a number that boggles the mind.
"We contend that for a nation to try to tax itself into prosperity is like a man standing in a bucket and trying to lift himself up by the handle" Winston Churchill
Until the legislatures convincingly show that they have used every cent extracted from us for a program that yields measurable constructive results, the fiscal discussion has no business broaching the subject of increasing taxes. Get rid of the waste. Get rid of the programs that government has no business sponsoring. Get rid of inefficiency and duplication. There's a lot of bad stuff to be squeezed out of the public fisc before the taxpayers should be squeezed any more. It is folly to assume that government is a lean, mean, public service-delivery machine that invites no warranty claims.
This article is type of reporting that skews public opinion. Few reading this article will notice that a married couple, say a teacher and a truck driver, that save 10% in a 401K from age 28 to 55 will meet the definition of a millionaire. However, that couple wouldn't represent the $1M wage earners and almost certainly would be in favor of those earning $1M paying a higher tax.
I don't get it, how many of these millionaires contribute extra taxes every year? If they think they should pay more then go right ahead.
@TiredOfFlippingTheBill: That is remarkable that you were able to interview all low income, wage earners and find they had the same opinion that was contrary to yours. Funny how that sounds like "class warefare."
to BDM: yes, so...? People with $1MM or more in assets (say mainly in retirement funds, college savings and homeequity) probably do support this kind of tax raise in a big way. As you suggest, higher earners with over $1MM in income (real earnings) per year are in a different category altogether and can afford to pay more. Even Ronald Reagan taxed these high-income folks at higher rates and the economy still grew, and reduced the federal budget deficit. Same with Clinton and Congress in the 90's.
If 61% of millionaire think they should pay more taxes then please write a check for the amount you think you should pay. Why do you have to have the government force you to pay?
I could even agree with it myself - with two stipulations: Stop government grow and all the spending and cut it to a percentage of the national gdp.
Mike -- Touche.
Wayne wrote:
"I could even agree with it myself – with two stipulations: Stop government grow and all the spending and cut it to a percentage of the national gdp."
The only president who did that in the last 30 years was Bill Clinton.
" ednapearl wrote:
If 61% of millionaire think they should pay more taxes then please write a check for the amount you think you should pay. Why do you have to have the government force you to pay?"
Same reason you do. Would you pay even one penny if the government didn't force you?
" Dain wrote:
I don't get it, how many of these millionaires contribute extra taxes every year? If they think they should pay more then go right ahead."
No. They think you should pay more.
" shanghai lion wrote:
Wealth redistribution only works for the lazy until it is all gonei. It is the concept that created the housing crisis (politicians pushing to make money easy for the irresponsible masses), It is the concept that is killing southern europe and holding back our current rebound. Wake up America. some of you need to study what made the american dream great … it was not sit on your behind and expect more entitlements."
I hope that name you chose means you are Chinese. I hate to think of those Americans who have such contempt for the American people.
What made America great was rewarding those who actually work for a living. Now those who run hedge funds get billions and workers get the shaft.
@ Bob From District 9 -- The quote Shanghai Lion misquoted is from Margaret Thatcher "The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money. " We millionaires already pay way more than our share of taxes.
Here are numbers from the IRS tax tables:
Following numbers are from the IRS tables:
$50 to $75K pay 12.5%
$20 to $30 pay 5.7%
$100 to $125 pay 9.9%.
Over $150K pay 29.2%
Why do you think we are not paying our share when we are paying a higher percentage than any other income group? We are paying 20% more than those making just $50K per year less. How is this fair? It isn't, it is BS.
same millionaires who voted for obamanation because they thought someone was watching them, so they decided to "prove" their tolerance by voting for an unqualified empy suit with floppy ears to boot . . . and that's why they don't write big checks to the Treasury and brag about it -- if they did, who knows who else would be lying in wait for them?
Everything came to a head for O'Neill at a November 2002 meeting at the White House of the economic team.
"It's a huge meeting. You got Dick Cheney from the, you know, secure location on the video. The President is there," says Suskind, who was given a nearly verbatim transcript by someone who attended the meeting.
He says everyone expected Mr. Bush to rubber stamp the plan under discussion: a big new tax cut. But, according to Suskind, the president was perhaps having second thoughts about cutting taxes again, and was uncharacteristically engaged.
"He asks, 'Haven't we already given money to rich people? This second tax cut's gonna do it again,'" says Suskind.
"Bush says, 'Didn't we already, why are we doing it again?' Now, his advisers, they say, 'Well Mr. President, the upper class, they're the entrepreneurs. That's the standard response.' And the president kind of goes, 'OK.' That's their response.
And then, he comes back to it again. 'Well, shouldn't we be giving money to the middle, won't people be able to say, 'You did it once, and then you did it twice, and what was it good for?'"
[The president is over-ruled.)
But according to the transcript, White House political advisor Karl Rove jumped in.
"Karl Rove is saying to the president, a kind of mantra. 'Stick to principle. Stick to principle.' He says it over and over again," says Suskind. "Don't waver."
In the end, the president didn't. And nine days after that meeting in which O'Neill made it clear he could not publicly support another tax cut, the vice president called and asked him (Paul O'Neill) to resign. [In the end Bush did. A second round of tax cuts became law May 23, 2003.]
With the deficit now climbing towards $400 billion, O'Neill maintains he was in the right.
[During the eight years of Bush in office, $5 trillion was added to the national debt.]
@ Nick10 -- the Bush tax cuts expired in 2008. They are done. Talking about Bush and the current tax rate is a mute point -- GET OVER IT.
The current tax rates are the Obama tax rates. He was the president who signed the bill after it was approved by a Democrat House and Senate. He could have let the rates go back to the Clinton era -- but he made a conscience decision and did not.
Tired..... Update. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bush_tax_cuts
"The Bush tax cuts had sunset provisions that made them expire at the end of 2010, since otherwise they would fall under the Byrd Rule. Whether to renew the lowered rates and how became the subject of extended political debate, which was resolved during the presidency of Barack Obama by a two-year extension that was part of a larger tax and economic package, the Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization, and Job Creation Act of 2010.
@ 10:10 -- Thank you. I entered the wrong year.
@TiredOfFlippingTheBill - It's moot point. And you were wrong anyway.
IF there are millionaires willing to pay more, the check would be payable to "Internal Revenue Service". Anyone can pay more than they own. I wonder how many say they would pay more because they know the law will not be changed and they will not have to pay more.
So those who have assets of a million — which isn't too unusual these days, especially with a big chunk in homes — don't mind higher taxes on those who earn a million — a far smaller group. Note how the percent drops by 7% when you get to those who own five million. I bet it would drop a whole lot if you asked those who EARN a million a year.
Since most of us WON"T be paying more taxes...What millionaires don't want to pay more taxes? This is too easy and too obvious. CONGRESS!! our elected officials and a few of their crony friends. IT makes absolute sense. Once these politicians, particularly senators get in, they make it a career. Then in a few years they somehow make it to millionaire status, that is if they didn't already buy their way into winning the seat. These "elected" bastards are leeches who simply don't want to pay taxes period. I will do the job for 80k and gladly pay my fair share and I will get out in two or four years which is what should be the LAW! Another wake the fuck up america moment.
I don't care if they take all of WB's money. I don't care if they send IRS SWAT teams into the home of every last rich person in the US and confiscate every last cent the bastards have squirreled away.
I just don't want the government to get any more money period, no matter where it comes from.
They will use this money to create even more entitlement programs that will spiral out of control in future years and run us even further into debt and hopelessness. Then they will have to raise taxes again.
They always use debt and deficits to justify tax increases, but they never use the new tax revenue to pay down any debt or bring the deficits under control. They just use it run up even more debt. It's like a gambler who begs you for money because the loansharks are going to kill him, but once he gets his hands on that money, he runs straight back to the casino and doubles the stakes.
Not one more cent in tax increases until the government shows they have changed their priorities. Let them cut spending, close the deficits, and start paying down the national debt. After they do that they can skin WB and all his friends alive for all I care. Then it actually might do us some good.
Rather than paying more taxes, a good portion of which Congress will waste, why not directly istablish a foundation to insure the money is used to do good. For instance servicemen are being ripped-off by payday lenders at 36% interest loans to buy a used car.. So set up loan office outside each base or camp to provide low interest 6% loans to the Service members to help them buy a car, new or used..
From my perspective, these comments display little more than greed, and blinders to the state of our declining country. Why bother even trying to have a conversation with people whose most base instincts are so obviously paramount?
Think I am wrong? Please say something thoughtful and I will happily have the conversation.
Steven -- what are you thought about how to fix the problems?
If someone be to sick with accurate knowledge your site is the village to suss out them. Carry on it up mate. My site: Space Painting.
I definitely agree. There's no reason that more wealthy people should get tax breaks. They can afford it while the average everyday American needs to be taxed less but isn't. After reading this, my view on Buffet has only become more positive. There's something noble about a person thinking about the greater good rather than proving the stereotype that the rich and wealthy are self-absorbed and as this article puts it, "self-serving".
Income tax, social security has only been around for approximately 80 years. Prior to that, it was America land of the free free. Oh how i yurn for the good ol days!
Come on with the Buffet Tax. We all know it is a misdirection and won't actually accomplish anything. We need a http://www.pennystockstrategy.com complete tax overhaul. Not just some bandaid designed to make people feel better about their situation. Quit giving tax breaks to companies that offshore. You are a net offshorer? You get slapped with import tarriffs.
Those old farts like Warren Buffet (my husband thinks he might be OK because he lives in his old house) has realised they can not take their money with them to their grave, and true to themselves they are looking for good business opportunities; they want to be remember in our world as being good, that is why the are being so "generous". Yeah right. Do not think for a minute they are doing it for us? But we hopefully benefit and then! God bless them.
The problem is, the sensible wealthy, who know we are all Americans in the same boat, are not the ones buying the media. The radio hateheads and their bald lies, are supported by the likes of the Koch Brothers, Bass Brothers, and non-American Rupert Murdoch.
Of course they pay taxes at the corporate level and on the investment so the total effective tax would be closer to %50 http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2011/08/15/warren-buffetts-very-strange-tax-argument/
The wealthy who support the Occupy movement could do some practical things, like donating Porta-Potties and portable showers for the various Occupy camps.
This whole thing is a farce! Type in "Warren Buffett and the IRS" into google search and look at the number of articles where he and or his company may owe a Billion Dollars. He and his team are fighting it tooth and nail. WHY? He is just another Obama lackey who talks all kinds of talk and walks the other direction.
Recently a reporter talked to several self proclaimed ONE Percenters at a gathering for those that support Obama's ideas. They were ALL for that increase in taxes, but the reporter was ready. She then announced that she had the IRS forms ready for each to sign and give more to the government RIGHT THEN!!!
To a person, they all refused. IF Obama and these guys were serious, then at least one of them would have signed RIGHT then. This Millionaires for more taxes is just fluff and more lies from Obama and those who support him!
Anyone else have a problem with the chart at the bottom? Maybe we could have a KEY, or definition of terms? Millionaire is relatively self-explanatory. "Mass affluent" means someone with a lot of money, but the cutoff is not at all clear. It could be the $5 million net worth referred to at some points in the article. It could be people who make $1 million per year. Or any other relatively arbitrary cutoff, which should have been specified. And UHNW? How the heck am I supposed to know what that means? I suppose a decent educated guess might be that it refers to the rest of the population, the people who aren't rich...but then again, the rest of the article makes no mention of what middle and lower class folk think. It's about the fact that many of the rich agree that they should be paying more taxes. So, maybe it's some other subset of millionaires? Maybe the chart maker should have just TOLD us, instead of using inscrutable acronyms.
1AUdentist6 -- here's the thing. If you had a lot of money, you might be willing to chip in, along with all your fellow rich folk, to make a big difference for our country. Because, you would recognize that it would make a big difference for the country. If, however, you were asked to give a lot of money, while all your fellow rich friends gave nothing -- and you realized that it would make NO DIFFERENCE at all for the economy, when you were the only one to do it -- wouldn't that be a very different thing to you? It won't make much difference to the economy when it's just you, so you might as well keep your money. I'd feel that way. Asking them, as individuals, to sign away money with no reasonable expectation that anyone else in similar financial situations would do the same, is nothing more than a silly, political ploy.
Now, consider also the difference between an anonymous survey and identified political opinions. As a rich person who disagrees with Buffett's idea -- one who thinks the money is his and his alone, and he should not have to give more to the government -- maybe you would still say you agreed with Buffett when you could be identified. After all, it looks good, makes you seem generous. On an anonymous survey, though, you would tell the truth, right? Doesn't make any difference to your public image, so why not say what you really feel?
That's the difference between the 61% the article found, without personally identifiable information, and the 100% your example found, where each person who expressed their opinion could be identified for agreeing or disagreeing. No wonder they might be disingenuous in your example, if that's the case. Also, even if ALL the millionaires disagreed, which seems not to be the case, explain to me how that would be at all relevant to whether Obama was serious about the taxes...
Wow anti Buffett commentor #2 has apparently never filed a tax return...the box for give more because you want to has existed for many years. Congratulations, you're not as bright as your wealth may indicate.
Buffett guy made his tens of billions of dollars thaks to the Capital Gains tax and our capitalism. Now he wants to shut down cap gain tax, to deny all young people to make money. Buffett guy's remarks are nothing but the beginnig of Socialism. Lets start with confiscating all of Buffett's money right now. Young Americans need the same rules that afforded Buffett to get rich.
BTW, this Buffett guy never did a day of honest work like most of us do. All he did was buy and sell stocks.
The government is really not doing anything this time. God bless America. http://www.investorgoodies.com/
I sense Buffet was only attempting to point out that all should pay the same tax rate.
That is an awfully deceptive introductory paragraph.
"A new survey from Spectrem Group found that 68% of millionaires (those with investments of $1 million or more) support raising taxes on those with $1 million or more in income. Fully 61% of those with net worths of $5 million or more support the tax on million-plus earners."
Sure. What about reporting on how those who -earn- $1mil+/year feel about the proposal?
I'm right there with Buffet, and I am part of the 1%. I want to pay my fair share, and I think it is ridiculous that my tax rate is lower than many blue collar Americans. I somehow had the idea that progressive taxation was, ultimately, fair. I think that most of the wealthy agree with that. We don't *want* to shirk our responsibilities. That said, I don't want to pay any more taxes, individually, than I have to. I take all my deductions. I don't send extra money into the government, nor do I think many people do, rich or poor. Rich people don't get rich by giving their money away. That said, we *all* benefit from a vibrant and healthy, fiscally responsible, government.
I am also a fiscal conservative, but I am not anti-government or anti-regulation. The government is responsible for setting the rules that we all agree to live by. In that sense, even though I am a registered Republican, I feel the Republican party continues to abdicate its own responsibilities, in favor of the clamor to get rich. Nowhere is this more evident than the health care and military industrial complexes.
Warren Buffett and I didn't get rich because of the relaxed tax code of the past few years. We didn't get rich because we worked hard, either. (Everyone just does the best they can.) No, mostly, we just happened to be in the right place at the right time, and a large part of that "right place" was the ecosystem created for us by our government. We would not have been able to prosper if we lived in an anarchy state.
Get rid of the big deductions. Tax dividends and cap. gains at a higher rate. Make the tax code more progressive. Heck, make FICA a flat tax. As it is, it is extremely regressive. At the same time, I'm all in favor of something akin to the base closure commissions of the past, scouring the government to look for wasteful spending and making the politically difficult, but fiscally responsible, changes.
God Bless America and all the hard working people
The Wealth Report is a daily blog focused on the culture and economy of the wealthy. It is written by Robert Frank, a senior writer for the Wall Street Journal and author of the newly released book "THE HIGH-BETA RICH."


text:
petsupplies.com > Fish Supplies > UV Sterilizers > All UV Sterilizers > Item # 721739
promotional discount applied. Cart total will reflect savings.
Buy 2 or more, each at $41.39 Buy 3 or more, each at $40.47
Buy 2 or more, each at $49.49 Buy 3 or more, each at $48.39
Buy 2 or more, each at $55.07 Buy 3 or more, each at $53.85
Quantity discount will reflect in cart.
Sometimes, manufacturers require that products be advertised only at their suggested prices.
When we choose to sell these items for less, we display the sale price only in the cart. To see the price, click Add to Cart.
One-time delivery
Save 10% with Auto Ship
Deliver Every:
2 Weeks
3 Weeks
4 Weeks
5 Weeks
6 Weeks
7 Weeks
8 Weeks
1 Month
2 Months
3 Months
6 Months
Aqua Ultraviolet UV Transformer
Starting at: $126.89
Lifegard Replacement UV Bulb
Starting at: $54.44
Tetra GreenFree Replacement UV Clarifier Bulb
Starting at: $12.79
Product Summary:
Coralife Turbo Twist UV Sterlizer
Starting at: $130.94
Deep Blue Clarity Plus in Tank UV Sterlizer
Starting at: $109.79
Deep Blue ClarityPlus Replacement UV Cartridge
Deep Blue Clarity Pro Replacement UV Lamp
Starting at: $12.49
Zanusa Tree Trunk Tank Ornament
Now: $25.99
DB Coral Concepts Sm Atlantic Sea Anemone
Starting at: $2.49
Deep Blue DecoConcepts Texas Holey Rock
Starting from: $47.99
Deep Blue DecoConcepts Mangrove Tree Root
Starting at: $69.29
Aqueon Quietflow Replacement UV Lamp
Starting from: $49.99
Aqueon Quietflow UV Sterilizer
Starting at: $118.07
Product Reviews by Customers
This item is not eligible for Canadian shipping.
Some items everyday price is so low we can't discount or we have marked down the item to a final sale price. These select items will not be included in your order total when determining if your order qualifies for a promotional event.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Posts By This Author
God Behind Bars
In the prison-industrial complex, is there hope for redemption?
Columbine, Kudzu, and a Colt .45
'Columbine' used to refer to a mountain wildflower. Now it conjures up a national tragedy of teens killing teens.
Let My Pharaoh Go!
Just when I become practiced in the art of waving my fist and demanding my rights, I get a divine yank.
Revenge or Mercy?
The last time Jake saw his mother, he spit on her.
Eyes Wide Open
"You don't know what it's like to have a husband, small children, and a congregation. There's no time for prayer."


text:
Our holdings include hundreds of glass and film negatives/transparencies that we've scanned ourselves; in addition, many other photos on this site were extracted from reference images (high-resolution tiffs) in the Library of Congress research archive. (To query the database click here.) They are adjusted, restored and reworked by your webmaster in accordance with his aesthetic sensibilities before being downsized and turned into the jpegs you see here. All of these images (including "derivative works") are protected by copyright laws of the United States and other jurisdictions and may not be sold, reproduced or otherwise used for commercial purposes without permission.
Vintage photos of:
August 1942. "Testing small diameter, high-speed twist drills, these women employed by Republic Drill & Tool, Chicago, roll the drills down a slight incline to determine regularity of diameter. It's a job requiring patience and finger dexterity, and these young women possess those definite feminine propensities for just such work." Photo by Ann Rosener, Office of War Information. View full size.
Crockett, Calif., circa 1915. "South view of refinery and entrance to Loring Avenue." Plant of the California & Hawaii Sugar Refining Co. View full size.
December 1942. "Mary Miller, operator of a router at the Boeing plant in Seattle, drills holes in a part for a new B-17F (Flying Fortress) bomber. The Flying Fortress, a four-engine heavy bomber capable of flying at high altitudes, has performed with great credit in the South Pacific, over Germany and elsewhere." Photo by Andreas Feininger for the Office of War Information. View full size.
January 1937. Flint, Michigan. "Sit-down strikers. Fisher Body plant No. 3." The labor action that led to the unionization of the American auto industry. Note the "sleeping car" at right. Photo by Sheldon Dick. View full size.
1942. "Final assembly at Vultee's Downey, California, plant of the BT-13A 'Valiant' basic trainer -- a fast, sturdy ship powered by a Pratt & Whitney Wasp engine." Photo by Alfred Palmer for the Office of War Information. View full size.
August 4, 1949. "General Electric turbine plant, Schenectady, New York." Calling all car-spotters! Large-format negative by Gottscho-Schleisner. View full size.
Circa 1901. "Paterson, N.J., from Water Works Park." Lovely Paterson, Pearl of the Passaic. 8x10 inch glass negative, Detroit Publishing Co. View full size.


text:
Dongguan Sonido Model Co., Ltd.
Start Order
|Business Type:
|Recent Transactions:
|Main Products:
|Guangdong, China (Mainland)
|Year Established:
|Total Employees:
|51 - 100 People
|Total Annual Revenue:
|US$5 Million - US$10 Million
|Main Markets:
|Average Lead Time:
|120 Day(s)
Dong Guan Sonido Model Co.,Ltd is a booming factory which concentrate on die cast model industry . We were founded ...
Dong Guan Sonido Model Co.,Ltd is a booming factory which concentrate on die cast model industry .
We were founded in 2010 and focused on providing custom molded diecast models to different model brands with collectible level and companies who want to develop new premium gifts with promotional level .
Upon years of unremitting endeavor , we has enhanced our production ability , so far , we own over 100 workers and a complete production line that can produce 1000 pieces models per day under our certificate ISO 9001:2008 .
In the past yeasr , we have served more than 50 brands and exported our models to the most of the world . We are still in the process of development , but we believe in our one-to-one service and tirelessly communication are the good assistance for you business .
Company Capability
Trade Capacity
Eastern Europe : 30.00%
North America : 20.00%
Production Capacity
Factory Size : 1,000-3,000 square meters
No. of Production Lines : 2
R&D Capacity
No. of R&D Staff : Less than 5 People
Email to this supplier


text:
- "The line of beauty is the line of perfect economy" - Emerson
- 11" Savannah Wall Mount
- Extends: 16"
- Back plate: 5" x 11"
- Height from Center of Outlet Box: 4-5/8"
- 1 100w Max Medium Base (Bulb Not Included)
- UL Damp Listed
Additional Arroyo Craftsman Links
- View the Manufacturer Warranty
- Browse All Arroyo Craftsman Products
- Arroyo Craftsman Savannah Collection
This Arroyo Craftsman item can also be referenced by the following color/finish specific model #:
- Arroyo Craftsman SB-11-AB
Antique Brass
- Arroyo Craftsman SB-11-AC
Antique Copper
- Arroyo Craftsman SB-11-BZ
- Arroyo Craftsman SB-11-MB
Mission Brown
- Arroyo Craftsman SB-11-RC
Raw Copper
- Arroyo Craftsman SB-11-RB
Rustic Brown
- Arroyo Craftsman SB-11-BK
Satin Black
- Arroyo Craftsman SB-11-S
- Arroyo Craftsman SB-11-VP
Verdigris Patina
*Discontinued model or finish
More Than Just a Store - Your Reasons to Shop
Discover the best online deals for the SB-11 and everything else for your home from the leading online home improvement store.
We're committed to providing you with the best assortment of Arroyo Craftsman products with over 400 warehouses across the country.
Our knowledgeable product specialists work to bring you the best prices on every product and provide unmatched customer service. Your satisfaction is our highest priority!
Product Videos
Do It Yourself: Installing an Indoor Wall SconceFollow Kyleen Bromley of Build.com as she shows you the step-by-step process of replacing and installing an indoor wall sconce.
Installation Resource Center
Whether you are installing the product yourself or hiring a professional, our installation Resource Center has everything you need to get your project done. Visit the Installation Resource Center to get started.


text:
AP Photo/Carolyn Kaster
But the ratings agencies also exert sway on policy the old-fashioned way: by lobbying. S&P's parent company, McGraw-Hill, has spent over $11 million on lobbying in the past 15 years,the Washington Post reports. And it lobbies the government while continuing to rate its creditworthiness.
S&P spent at least $1 million on legislation specifically related to its business. Recently, the firm and its fellow credit-rating agencies--Moody's and Fitch--have been fighting a provision in the 2010 Dodd-Frank financial reform law that makes it possible to sue ratings firms for negligence if they offer faulty ratings. The agencies want to go back to a world where investors who make decisions based on their ratings--like those AAA ratings they slapped on the non-prime mortgage securities that helped cause the financial crisis--are out of luck.
And these aren't just any lobbyists. S&P's stable of high-powered advocates includes Tony Podesta, a prominent Washington mover and shaker whose brother John ran the transition team for the Obama administration, and Douglas Nappi, who has worked for the Senate Banking Committee and the Securities and Exchange Commission.
All three agencies say their ratings and lobbying operations are kept separate from each other.


text:
Average rating from 5 reviews.
More Products By PetSafe:
Average rating from 1 reviews.
Average rating from 1 reviews.
Similar Products:
Average rating from 38 reviews.
Average rating from 12 reviews.
Average rating from 12 reviews.
Products We Are Testing:
Readers' Reviews add review
4 reviews
- Sort by:
- Most Helpful |
- Date
Great for barking dogs
posted 8 years ago
I have two of these one from PetSmart and one from Wal-Mart. They are both made by the same company. The one from Walmart does not have an on/off switch. The one from PetSmart does. They are really effective. I have one that likes to bark a lot especially when we are not home. It had helped a lot and our neighbors are much happier.
Pros: Really helps with bark control
Cons: battery life
9 of 9 people found this review helpful.
Did you?
Works for some
posted 8 years ago
This is a good product that didn't hurt me so I figure it won't hurt them. One dog barked it out and broke it but it worked on the other one. Another dog just relearned how to bark to not set it off. I would most likely purchase another one if I needed to.
Pros: worked for some
Cons: only worked for some
0 of 0 people found this review helpful.
Did you?
Helps keeps dogs in
posted 7 years ago
i hate that the dog has to be shocked but they learn quickly
Pros: helps keep your pets in your yard
Cons: i hate the whole shocking aspect
0 of 0 people found this review helpful.
Did you?
Want to review a product, but not finding it? Just add it and review it!
Recent Product Reviews
Tapeworm Tablets
June 8, 2015 | By Lynn
I've used this product on rescued dogs for years. My last large dog rescued had been an outdoor dog her entire life, living among Lamas where she picked up tapeworms. This product expelled several 2 … more ›
November 15, 2014 | By Robyn
July 14, 2013 | By Xiaoxiao111
Pink is my favorite color these are wonderful.I will recommend a good website fou you: www.9footballshirt.org


text:
Follow me on: - www.facebook.com/mirellasantan…
All ther rest was painted!
All my artworks are copyrighted © Mirella Santana 2012
Respect my gear and not distribute unless you have my permission otherwise be infringed my rights by law.
This is pretty
Outstanding work!
awesome pic ^^
Beautiful work
Complimenti bellissimo lavoro
Complimenti bellissimo lavoro
wonderful work my dear
Amazing idea. I just love how you put a city into it.
Faved! Keep up a good work!
Faved! Keep up a good work!
This is sooooo fantastic! Love the concept and the 2 dimensional aspect of it. Fabulous!
I don't usually like photomanips, but this is so beautifully done, it looks like a painting! Such a cool concept too. Amazing work!
very amazing and beautiful
so creative ..loved it
This is beautiful great work. Your wonderful with detail


text:
The Arab Republic of Egypt
H.E. Yasser ElKady,
Minister of Communications and Information Technology
(Information Technology Industry Development Agency)
The Arab Republic of Egypt
H.E. Yasser ElKady,
Minister of Communications and Information Technology
(Information Technology Industry Development Agency)
eLearning Africa is the key networking event for ICT enhanced development, education and training in Africa. As the largest conference of its kind, the three-day event is a must for those wanting to develop multinational, cross-industry partnerships and contacts whilst sharing knowledge and learning new skills.
Taking place in Cairo, Egypt, the 11th eLearning Africa will bring together decision makers and practitioners from across the education, business and public sectors to debate, share and take action on all themes surrounding access, openness, skills, pedagogy, sustainable development, best practice and more.
Four plenary sessions will bring together outstanding keynotes from around the world, including:
January 27, 2016
Technology helps keep girls in school in Africa
January 27, 2016
How eLearning saved a university in crisis
January 27, 2016
"The next Einstein will be African"
January 22, 2016
AMECSE: Discover the future of software innovation
January 19, 2016
The online revival of African languages
eLearning Africa 2014 was a great discovery for me in terms of thinking, understanding and reasoning capabilities. I left the conference as an ICT expert, full of innovation, tools, and information on usage of eLearning tools. I do believe that if all professionals came out and embraced the idea and principle of e-learning, Africa's confidence will be built and the frontiers will really be opened.
I thank the sponsors and EAST who have enabled me to attend this wonderful, fun-filled, empowering and network-dominant conference."
Florence Awino, International University of East Africa, Uganda
EAST Participant 2014
"the eLearning Africa conference was an eye opener for me to see the need for ICT in learning, training and education. The conference has given me a broader knowledge of the challenges faced by various countries in Afric"
Adebola Adedugbe, Bonifab Nigeria Limited, Nigeria
EAST Participant 2014
"The eLearning Africa Conference continues to be a worthwhile conference that every educator, policymaker and eLearner needs to plan to attend every year."
Gabriel S. Konayuma, Ministry of Science, Technology & Vocational Training, Zambia
"I was most impressed with the organisation of the eLearning Africa Conference, the hospitality of the Namibian government and people, and the level of knowledge and interest from the delegates. With conferences like this, it is clear to see that Africa is rising!"
Barbara Mallinson, OBAMI, South Africa
Speaker, "The Use of Social Media for Learning, Teaching and Citizenship", 2013
"The conference gave me a new perspective on how ICT can help greatly in the development and educational sectors in Liberia after the 14 years of civil war.
From the sessions and networking in Windhoek, I believe that eLearning could become an integral part of Liberia's virgin ICT and Education sectors."
Luther D. Jeke, iLab Liberia, Liberia
Speaker, "Technology Innovation Hubs in Africa: Creating Opportunities for Peer Learning and Knowledge Exchange", 2013
"[eLearning Africa] was so empowering and asserting and gave me access to various technological tools, especially through the exhibition and the various presentations … I benefitted a lot from eLearning Africa, not only as a chairperson, but as a participant too.
It was my first experience and I walked away avery rich person in terms of ICT-tools usageinformation and innovation."
Menesia Muinjo, Namibian Broadcasting Corporation, Namibia
Chairperson, 2013
"The success of a conference is determined both during and after the event, but most importantly when the ideas shared and skills gained are put into practice. [eLearning Africa] was a great learning experience for me to challenge my thinking and at the same time discover new tools to improve my work.
Best practices have already been transferred. In fact, my colleagues at work and I will be visiting one of the universities that shared experiences of how they had successfully implemented courses that were taught completely online."
Sarah Kiden, Ugandan Christian Univesity, Uganda
Participant, 2013


text:
Rapid Communication
Hepatic urea biosynthesis in the euryhaline elasmobranch Carcharhinus leucas
Article first published online: 13 SEP 2005
DOI: 10.1002/jez.a.199
Copyright © 2005 Wiley-Liss, Inc., A Wiley Company
Journal of Experimental Zoology Part A: Comparative Experimental Biology
Volume 303A, Issue 10, pages 917–921, 1 October 2005
Additional Information
How to Cite
Anderson, W. G., Good, J. P., Pillans, R. D., Hazon, N. and Franklin, C. E. (2005), Hepatic urea biosynthesis in the euryhaline elasmobranch Carcharhinus leucas. J. Exp. Zool., 303A: 917–921. doi: 10.1002/jez.a.199
Publication History
- Issue published online: 13 SEP 2005
- Article first published online: 13 SEP 2005
- Manuscript Accepted: 3 MAY 2005
- Manuscript Received: 3 JAN 2005
Funded by
- NERC grant. Grant Number: NER/A/S/2000/01270
- CRC Coastal Zone Estuary and Waterway Management postgraduate top-up scholarship
- Abstract
- References
- Cited By
Plasma urea levels and hepatic urea production in the euryhaline bull shark, Carcharhinus leucas, acclimated to freshwater and seawater environments were measured. It was found that plasma urea concentration increased with salinity and that this increase was, in part, the result of a significant increase in hepatic production of urea. This study provides direct evidence that hepatic production of urea plays an important role in the osmoregulatory strategy of C. leucas. J. Exp. Zool. 303A:917–921, 2005. © 2005 Wiley-Liss, Inc.


text:
Sign in now to view, license and download this image or contact us to see this image without a watermark. Want to embed this image on a non-commercial website or blog? Learn more.
Similar imagesView all
Flamingo Resting On One Leg Stock PhotoAnimal Body Part,Animal Head,Animal Neck,Animal Wildlife,Animals In The Wild,Beauty In Nature,Captivity - Film Title,Color Image,Dusk,Elegance,Flamingo,Florida - US State,Grace,No People,One Animal,Outdoors,Photography,Pink Color,Resting,Standing On One Leg,Tampa,USA,VerticalPhotographer Connie ColemanCollection: Photographer's Choice (c) Connie ColemanCaribbean flamingo, Latin name Phoenicopterus ruber,


text:
Music: Pretenders
Got brass in pocket,Pretenders is a British-American New Wave band formed in 1978, and whose most famous lineup is made up of vocalist Chrissie Hynde, James Honeyman-Scott on guitar, Pete Farndon on bass and Martin Chambers on drums. Their first Self-Titled Album, from 1979, is often considered one of the foundation bricks of Alternative Rock as we know it.Despite losing their guitarist and bassist at the peak of their success, the remaining living members went on with the band and released some more albums, got more singles on the charts... While at the same time changing members like one would clothes.They were inducted (the original formation only) to the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame in 2005.Discography of studio albums:
Got bottle I'm gonna use it,
Intention I feel inventive,
Gonna make you, make you, make you notice.
Got bottle I'm gonna use it,
Intention I feel inventive,
Gonna make you, make you, make you notice.
"Brass in Pocket"
- Pretenders (1980)
- Pretenders II (1981)
- Learning to Crawl (1983)
- Get Close (1986)
- Packed! (1990)
- Last of the Independents (1994)
- Viva el Amor (1999)
- Loose Screw (2002)
- Break Up the Concrete (2008)
Pretenders provide examples of the following tropes:
- Author Existence Failure: James Honeyman-Scott died in 1982 of cardiac arrest stemming from his use of cocaine. Averted with Pete Farndon, who died the next year, he had already been kicked out before Honeyman-Scott's death.
- Breakaway Pop Hit: "I'll Stand By You"
- Christmas Songs: "2000 Miles" from Learning to Crawl, as well as their cover of "Have Yourself a Merry Little Christmas" on one of the Very Special Christmas charity compilations.
- Epic Rocking: "Private Life". "Up the Neck" also gets extended past the 6-minute mark in live shows.
- Fingerless Gloves: Chrissie wears them on the cover of the first album.
- Forever Young Song: "Forever Young"
- Granola Girl: Chrissie is vegetarian (she even owns a vegan restaurant in Akron, Ohio) and supports animal rights. It was her love of animal rights that caused her to allow Rush Limbaugh to continue using "My City Was Gone" after initially balking at it; she donates the licence fees to PETA (who Rush sided with against the EPA on animal testing).
- Grief Song: "Back on the Chain Gang", about fallen member James Honeyman Scott
- Precision F-Strike: "Precious" is a famous example.
- Revolving Door Band: Between Learning to Crawl (the first album after JHS and Pete Farndon's deaths) and Last of the Independents, no two studio albums had the same lineup. Their record of holding a lineup is three albums, between Last... (1994) and Loose Screw (2002), with guitarist Adam Seymour and drummer Andy Hobson joining the other two original members.
- The Pete Best: Many, as a result of this trope. Among them, Johnny Marr and Andy Rourke.
- Self-Titled Album: The first one.
- Working on the Chain Gang: Though not literally about this, "Back on the Chain Gang" does reference Sam Cooke's trope-naming tune in its chorus. ("Hooh! Aaah!")
- You Are Not Alone: "I'll Stand By You"


text:
Welcome to Philosophy and Religious Studies
What is Philosophy?
Philosophy examines the most general and fundamental problems that confront us in our attempt to understand reality; problems concerning human nature itself, as well as the physical and social world we inhabit. Examples include:
What is truth? Is it possible to have knowledge of the world?
What is reality, and are there limits to our knowledge of it?
What is the mind? What is consciousness?
What is good? Why should I be moral?
Does God exist?
What is art?
Studying these questions is both fascinating and an excellent means of intellectual training and development. By examining these difficult abstract questions a student of philosophy learns to think clearly and systematically, argue vigorously and question deeply-held assumptions.
What is Religious Studies?
Religion is a universal phenomenon, although expressed in many and varied forms. Indeed, it is arguably the case that religion has been a vital and pervasive feature throughout the entire course of human history. As a university discipline the emphasis of Religious Studies is on the study of religion as human phenomena. It sets out to examine the religious dimension of human existence in all its diversity objectively, systematically, and yet sympathetically. Most people have experienced, to a greater or lesser degree, the influence of religious thinking, religious practices, and religious institutions. In the contemporary world religion continues to be a significant, if not major factor, in the shaping of people's lives and the determining of political and social outcomes. To study religion is to facilitate a broader understanding of human history and a deeper understanding of human life. The appropriate context for the study of religion is that of critical empathy: neither seeking to destroy nor promote, but rather to describe, analyse and evaluate and, hopefully, arrive at a position of informed understanding.
Our Taught Subjects
Philosophy & Religious Studies Events
Academic events are a crucial part of the Faculty's lively research culture, and provide opportunities for our staff and students to meaningfully engage with their peers in a setting that is both social and professional. We regularly advertise upcoming events of particular interest to staff and students in this programme - including events that we are facilitating, and events that our staff and students have the opportunity to actively participate in. We encourage you to monitor this listing, to diarise, and, where applicable, register your interest in any upcoming events of relevance to you.
Waikato Philosophy Seminars
Upcoming seminar details, Thursdays 3.10-4.30pm followed by post-talk drinks and snacks.
Australasian Association of Philosophy
Promoting the study of philosophy in Australasia, and the exchange of ideas among philosophers.
Current Conferences.
UoW Islamic Studies Group
A non-partisan and a not-for-profit organisation committed to the objective of fostering academic insight and understanding on Islamic phenomena through interdisciplinary research initiatives.
Contact FASS
Tel: +64 7 838 4080
or 0800 800 145 (within NZ)
Fax: +64 7 838 4636
Email: firstname.lastname@example.com
Our Subjects
We have a huge range of exciting subjects that will immerse you in the challenges of observation, creativity and development.
Our Qualifications
Explore our undergraduate, graduate and postgraduate qualifications and find out which one suits your needs.


text:
Wet 'n' Wild Color Icon SPF 15 Bronzer, Ticket to Brazil
81 reviews
85% would repurchase
Package Quality: 3.6
Price: $$
Package Quality: 3.6
Price: $$
Age: 30-35
Skin: Normal, Medium, Not Sure
Hair: Brunette, Other, Other
Eyes: Green
I have an older version of this and I just bought a new one at Walmart in Canada today. I knew as soon as I saw it that the new one was much lighter then it was previously. I quickly tried it and it looks ok on me now since its the dead of winter, but I know in the summer months it will be too light to use as a bronzer (maybe an all over brightening face powder though, which is what I use Reserve Your Cabana for in the winter). Still a great product and it's cheap. Just wanted to let others know in case you're expecting the old version.
Age: 19-24
Skin: Dry, Fair-Medium, Not Sure
Hair: Brunette, Other, Other
Eyes: Green
I have repurchased this bronzer around 6-7 times. The first time I bought it was because I forgot my makeup bag going out of town and needed something cheap to hold me over for the days I was gone. I've used this ever since.
I am fair-medium and this is the perfect shade for my skin tone. I apply a bit in the hollows of my cheeks and edge of my forehead with my RT contour brush. Applies nicely and blends very easily. I not only use this for bronzer but as a transition shade in my crease.
In terms of packaging, the size is incredible. Awesome value. The only drawback is that each time I buy I never make it through the product without it breaking somehow. However, it's very affordable so I don't mind that too much.
Age: 36-43
Skin: Sensitive, Fair-Medium, Neutral
Hair: Red, Wavy, Fine
Eyes: Hazel
The scene is your local big chain drugstore. It's quite busy, it being pay-day and all. Cheesy muzak is playing in the background, and for some reason it reminds you of the Mall in the remake of Dawn Of The Dead (!).
Jane, a 40-ish woman, finally gets the attention of a cashier.
Jane: Hi, Ms Very Nice Drugstore Cashier! I was looking for a product and I can't seem to locate it. Could you please help me?
Cashier: Well no, I can't actually but let me buzz someone
Jane: Thank you!
/metallic voice over loudspeaker "Matt to the front please, Matt to the front"
(Matt enters, stage left.)
Cashier: Matt, this lady needs something
Matt: Hi there, how can I help?
Jane: Hi, Matt! I'm looking for a particular bronzer by Wet & Wild ...
Matt: Ah. You're looking for Reserve Your Cabana, aren't you?
Jane (wide-eyed): Ye-e-e-e-s ....
Matt, giving Jane a "it's a secret" look: Follow me ....
Jane: ... oooooooohkay...
(Scene change, now in the Make-Up Dept)
Matt: Ah, here we are. (hands Ticket To Brazil to Jane)
Jane: No, no, I was ....
Matt: I know. Everybody loves Cabana. Even those who would look better with something else. But y'know, you've got really pretty eyes and your hair has these little gold highlights over the red and I think Brazil would be just perfect for you
Jane: Oh. Erm...
Matt: Tell you what - let's go into the entranceway so you can see in real daylight
Jane: Okay, sure ...
5 minutes later
Jane: OH MY GOD YOU'RE RIGHT.
Matt: Awesome. I'll ring it up here. Don't tell anyone, but I don't really work here ...
(okay that last line was pure fabrication, but the rest was verbatim. I swear)
So... yeah! $3. Ticket To Brazil. Most fantastic bronzer in the whole world with the possible exception of the marbled stuff from Pur Minerals which was discontinued and then reformulated and now it's crap. It's not orangey, it's not muddy, and it gives me what my husband called, "healthy face". I think that was a compliment.
Many, many thanks to Matt without whom none of this review would have been possible.
Age: 30-35
Skin: Combination, Fair-Medium, Not Sure
Hair: Black, Wavy, Medium
Eyes: Brown
I love this bronzer. I have repurchased it more than once and I highly recommend for anyone to give it a try. The color is a perfect brown not orange. You get a lot of product for the price . It is less than $5.00 it last me a months. The only thing I don't like is the packaging because it lasts so long the hinge usually breaks but other than that I love this bronzer my absolute favorite bronzer.
Age: 19-24
Skin: Combination, Fair, Cool
Hair: Blond, Straight, Coarse
Eyes: Blue
For the price of this product, it does its job. I said I would repurchase, bit I probably only would if I had no other bronzers to choose from. It works fine, but for the quality there are definitely better products out there.
Age: 19-24
Skin: Normal, Fair-Medium, Not Sure
Hair: Black, Wavy, Fine
Eyes: Brown
When I purchased this product, I was looking for a bronzer that I could put all over my face to give me some color and make my face (which is really pale) match the rest of my body (which is moderately tan.) I have read that putting bronzer all over your face is a beauty no-no but be that as it may, a light all-over application with this product has been working wonders for me.
"How hard can it be to find a matte bronzer at the drugstore?" I thought. Turns out, it was more difficult than anticipated. There were a few matte bronzers, but they were all so dark. I saw Ticket to Brazil and was immediately drawn to it... the golden brown color was EXACTLY what I was looking for. Upon closer inspection, I realized it had what appeared to be quite a bit of fine glitter/shimmer throughout the bronzing powder. I decided not to let this deter me, which is a decision I don't regret.
First off, this stuff has great staying power. When I get home at the end of the day my face looks the same as it did when I left in the morning. I use this all over my face, and if I look really closely I can see some shimmer on my skin. That doesn't bother me at all though. I'm sure it'd be even more noticeable in sunlight, but I've never shied away from a little glitter, tbh. This works perfectly for adding a bit of tan to your complexion, I look sunkissed and glowy. And I'm sure it would work even better if just applied to the cheeks, temples, and other places where sunlight would typically hit your face (as a bronzer would typically be applied.)
These are buttery, apply smoothly, and are extremely easy to blend. I have very acne-prone skin and this stuff hasn't made me break out at all. It has SPF in it which is an added bonus. Another plus is that Wet N Wild doesn't test on animals. And lets be real they are dirt cheap (this bronzer was $3.99). It'll probably take me forever to use this all up but I'll repurchase when I run out.
Age: 36-43
Skin: Very Oily, Fair-Medium, Neutral
Hair: Brown, Wavy, Fine
Eyes: Grey
I have this in a huge LE compact (the name escapes me), I've tried Bikini Contest which was okay & Reserve Your Cabana (which I used as a setting powder coz not dark enuff to use as a bronzer & not shimmery enuff as a hi-lite on its own), I think Ticket To Brazil is the most useful of them to compare/contrast hthalb, I like to use it like a traditional bronzer & also I put it where I would normally place blush. I like Wnw Starlight Bronze atm for my bronzing needs but this will certainly prob last awhile ESP since I have so many bronzer/hi-lite products in rotation but I've managed to use up 2 Reserve Your Cabana's so the product amount is an exaggerated optical illusion & I whisk away a lot of excess product that gets wasted in the application process. I hate wasting product, it bugs me! SPF is an added bonus! It does not appear dirty/muddy nor too shimmery. FWIW elf has some good Bronzers (mine are located in some of the Disney palettes). My fave wnw bronzer is Starlight Bronze the one w the shimmer strips I like a light shimmer which "...Brazil" also has. Debating on repurchase coz I prefer elf as a brand over wnw generally. Both similar price pointe & cruelty-free. This is fragile, I'm trying not to drop mine coz I always see at least one wnw powdered product sitting next to the display all pulverized & sad.
Age: 18 & Under
Skin: Oily, Fair, Not Sure
Hair: Blond, Other, Other
Eyes: Brown
Just kinda Orange on me. Didn't like it. Perhaps it would look better on someone tanner or with different skin. But it does have good staying power and the price is good.
Age: 19-24
Skin: Combination, Fair-Medium, Not Sure
Hair: Brunette, Straight, Fine
Eyes: Brown
This is my favorite bronzer and I have already repurchased. What sets it apart is the fact that there are no red undertones. It is yellow based making it extremely flattering on warm skintones. This bronzer is perfect for creating a bronzed glow. The pigmentation is perfect and the color is fairly light making it hard to overdo. I like that I can pack it on without looking like I am wearing too much. There is a fine shimmer to it but it does not effect the product too much once it is on the face. It also does not accentuate skin texture on me.
Age: 18 & Under
Skin: Oily, Tan, Not Sure
Hair: Brunette, Other, Other
Eyes: Brown
I been using this for 3 years I love it , it stays on all day and what I do is tap my bronzer brush on this and then tap it a little on a brown eyeshadow yes eyeshadow! and it gives it a better color before applying make sure you blow a little so that you don't get too much product on your face you don't want it to look cakey
Popular Bronzers
1286 Reviews
448 Reviews
132 Reviews
159 Reviews
206 Reviews
1274 Reviews