Mitt is a convertible bond that may change to a stock at a future date.

If Mitt is a bond, he is not a risk free AAA. He is more like a convertible bond that can switch to a stock in the future.

Saw this on Twitter today.  Three great apples in history.  1. Eve in the Garden of Eden.  2. Apple falls on Newton  3. Steve Job's Apple.  

I can brag I have something in common with Steve.  I too was born in 1955.  Maybe there is some Karma there somewhere.

Even in Massachusetts,  Scott Brown won this one.  His retort after finding out about her comment at the debate was well received by the masses.  At least if you listen to the radio. 

Here's another to try.  Has more questions- a little more thorough.

http://www.politicalcompass.org/

Recommendations are $3.58 at the flagship Ricochet office in California.

I actually thought Obama was good last night on 60 Minutes. It was nice to finally see him able to speak without TOTUS.  On the other hand, I am sure the thoroughly aroused Steve Kroft only asked him questions that were prepared by the White House.

We the people do deserve a week off from seeing the smiling face of our fearless leader.

The ultra wealthy pay such a low percentage because their income is passive. Long term capital gains tax is 15%. Their portfolios include many tax free and tax sheltered instruments. This likely describes the top 1 million earners nationwide- o.3% or so.

Sorry. Just rechecked. 1992- $45 million@28 2009- 350 million@16

Buffett was speaking to MBA students at Univ. Of Maryland, citing IRS data comparing 1992- top 400 income average $35 million paying 28% vs. 2010- income average $450 million paying 16%.

The other side of this coin is the ultra rich.  Warren Buffett just pointed out that the richest 400 Americans are paying the lowest tax in our history at approx. 16%. Perhaps we need to revise our tax strategy to extract revenue from the non- productive rentiers. Doctors, lawyers, engineers, small business owners, etc., may have "high" incomes, but are not wealthy.  Taxing the wealthy may not be out of line.  I don't have a specific mechanism in mind.  Thoughts?

Trade off.  Collect taxes on profits and let productive capacity stagnate or allow capital investment to increase capacity and stimulate economy.  

Also keep in mind that of those 47%, those working still pay FICA and state taxes.  State and local (sales, real estate, fees, tolls, etc.) taxes are sure to increase as well.  All those with paychecks see some of their earnings deducted.  Even though it's not and arm and a leg, most of them have some skin in the game.

I don't know anyone who watches Celebrity Apprentice and it seems everyone I know watches Glee.  Ryan Murphy keeps his views in the domain of a fictional high school, which makes it tolerable,  Those kids are talented.  Donald's would be apprentices are worthless.

My premium went from $1458 to $1942 per month for my family. My broker said unapologetically, "Obama/Romney Care". Yes, I live in Massachusetts. Why can't some candidate step up and propose that insurance is insurance, MedicAid is MedicAid, and tort reform is absolutely required to solve this health care issue. Healthy folks can pool money and insure for catastrophies, chronically ill and disabled would qualify for federal welfare and malpractice would be capped at reasonable limits. BILLIONS saved.

OK. Time to get Keynesian with my fellow conservatives.  Deficit spending is required in a growing economy.  New dollars must be created to meet aggregate demand.  In a time of high unemployment and low productivity and output, huge non-government savings and high trade deficit, Government spending is all there is to pick up the slack.  With this in mind, there is no immediate threat of inflation.  Granted, commodity prices are high, but that is directly related to the price of oil.  The US is not broke and cannot go broke.  Spending constraints are political.  We issue our own currency.  Tax revenue is not required to spend.  The federal government is not beholden to the rules of state, local and household budgets.  Our dollars value is based on our productive capacity to provide goods and services.  The government exists to provide the most ideal environment for that productivity.  I will concede govt. waste, inefficiency, cronyism and fraud, but cutting Medicare and Social Security and Education etc. will only deepen a recession and send us along the same path Japan has taken the last 20 years.  Once everyone is working and productive, then we'll cut deficits.