On the face of this it appears that our tax burden is not fairly distributed but as the old saying goes percentages lie and liars use percentages.
When you make nearly 23 times more then the average income earner, you can afford to pay more in tax and you get plenty of other perks in society. The stimulus program are a good example.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 09, 2009 at 1208 hrs
For those who are wondering (I know I was when I saw the chart)...
99th percentile - Greater than $410,096
95th percentile - $160,041
90th percentile - $113,018
75th percentile - $66,532
50th percentile - $32,879The accompanying message on the website this chart came from erroneously refers to total returns as returns filed by individuals. FWIW, this data lumps joint filers in with individuals and treats them the same.
Posted by Recess Supervisor on August 09, 2009 at 1248 hrs
FWIW, this data lumps joint filers in with individuals and treats them the same.
Just like Uncle Sam does…
I don’t think it’s erroneous, just representative of the marriage tax… I don’t know, but could we assume a relatively even distribution of joint returns through the tax rates?
I wonder if all of those new couples recognized and employed by the state and getting joint benefits are filing jointly?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 09, 2009 at 1819 hrs
What gives anyone the right to expect another to pay extra just because “you can afford to”?
Posted by Steve on August 09, 2009 at 1937 hrs
Steve -
Why are we all paying for the mistakes of a few very well paid people?
I think 1 trillion in spending roughly comes to about $40,000 PER American, even children that don’t work.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 09, 2009 at 2005 hrs
I didn’t ask that question. Please answer the one I asked.
Posted by Steve on August 09, 2009 at 2012 hrs
What gives anyone the right to expect another to pay extra just because “you can afford to”?
I don’t expect someone to pay more, just because they can afford to. I expect someone to pay more when they benefit more from infrastructure and services provided by a representative democracy.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 09, 2009 at 2204 hrs
Liberals won’t be happy until the “rich” pay all the taxes.
They will see this chart and think there is more work to be done!
The ultimate greed. Expecting someone else to pay for the services and infrastructure (and entitlements) you enjoy and then thinking is all justified cause someone else makes more than you. Pathetic.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 09, 2009 at 2209 hrs
Pathetic is letting someone off the hook who has enjoyed the benefits of this society from paying there fair share. Have you paid your mortgage with percentage points or dollars. The sheep barn at State Fair is on the west end of the grounds.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 09, 2009 at 2236 hrs
Everytime I see this statistic I just wonder how the Republican party has convince people that the are ever going to be rich.
One or two out of every 100 will have a joint return with more that $250K on it.
Why is our angst directed at someone that has a union wage when nearly a quarter of our TOTAL income goes to 1% of the people.
Even that is fine if we hadn’t just gone through all the bonuses on Wall Street after the financial meltdown.
If only there was an OBJECTIVE way to determine wage, this pay disparity would not stand.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 09, 2009 at 2255 hrs
And you can keep going on. These 1% jerks are getting 22% of ALL income and that is AFTER all of their capital gains are assessed at only HALF or even a QUARTER their true value to the individual.
The more you think about this the more haneous it is.
I say tax them and tax them and tax them because when they are negotiating what my value is they are cheating because they have all the power. Or the company ran out of money paying their salaries.
That United Health CEO, for god sakes, in 2005 his salary represented 1 out of every 700 dollars of expense for the entire company. His salary represented 34,000 more people on health insurance.
Tax them and tax them until they cry tax them.
They say they can find someone like me for half the price. I think we can find some JUST LIKE THEM for a eighth.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 09, 2009 at 2306 hrs
Obviously, Keith and Vic are evidence of what xx has to say. What is fair share? Tell me. And who decises.
Posted by Steve on August 10, 2009 at 0439 hrs
Steve and pilot, what do you get out of these people not paying their fair share? What’s in it for you? Listening to Belling’s show and hearing people call in defending this current system and they sound like they don’t have a pot to pee in makes you wonder, how submissive can people be. The $600 MM one health insurance paid to an executive for retirement meant that $600 MM was not available to pay out claims, meaning a heck of a lot of people probably were getting screwed out of coverage.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 10, 2009 at 0514 hrs
Steve -
It appears you think that goverment tax burden should be divided equally among all people. The problem is that over 75% of the people would not be able to pay and buy food. The ability to pay is the only fair way to tax and I think has always been the consideration.
Keep in mind that wealth is created by many goverment incentives paving the way to wealth. They do not pay lobbiest to create disadvantages but advantages that we all pay for to help them get rich. The income tax is the only way to get a little back.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 10, 2009 at 0553 hrs
Keith/vic/anon have perfectly illustrated the liberal attitude. Guys, it’s not about what’s in it for me or whether or not I will ever be in the top 1% of income earners. It’s about respect for individual rights and private property. It’s not mine. I don’t have any more right to have the government seize their wealth and give it to me than I do to stick a gun in their face and take their wallet. Using a proxy (the government) to coerce people to surrender their property doesn’t make it any more acceptable.
Posted by Owen on August 10, 2009 at 0732 hrs
Can any of you three thieves detail for us all, just exactly what amount of “additional benefits” the 99th and 95th percentile have benefited from that the other 95% of us have not.
Please, lets discuss facts, and then maybe you’ll get replies other than “Socialist tools” and “liberal idiots”.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 10, 2009 at 0834 hrs
Owner -
What do you consider to be a fair way to tax?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 10, 2009 at 0942 hrs
excuse me, I meant Owen -
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 10, 2009 at 1001 hrs
“16.Can any of you three thieves detail for us all, just exactly what amount of “additional benefits” the 99th and 95th percentile have benefited from that the other 95% of us have not.”
Hello, time to smell the coffee. Have you noticed the feds spending trillions of dollars? The lower income people did not cause this.
yOU CAN JUST CALL ME AN OLD FASHION REPUBLICAN.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 10, 2009 at 1007 hrs
Hello, time to smell the coffee. Have you noticed the feds spending trillions of dollars? The lower income people did not cause this.
While I completely disagree with the way our government (both Bush and Obama) have dealt with the economy… you still haven’t answered my question. Unless you’re insinuating that the trillions of dollars spent went directly to the top 5% pockets. In which case, here’s some eyes rolling for you.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 10, 2009 at 1020 hrs
The solution to shoveling money at special interests isn’t to tax more, it’s to stop shoveling money to special interests.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 10, 2009 at 1119 hrs
Steve and pilot, what do you get out of these people not paying their fair share? What’s in it for you?
What I DO get Keith, that you and your liberal economics-comprehension-lacking cohorts do not, is that when you raise taxes on the “the rich”, they don’t just shrug their shoulders and say “well I guess we won’t make as much this year”. They reaise prices.
You guys ever seen a balance sheet? For every action there is an equal an opposite reaction. Its true in business just like physics.
When their cost of doing business increases, they increase the prices of their goods and services. And TAXES are one of the largest costs of doing business. Taxes drive inflation. When you tax those who set prices of their goods and services, those people just adjust to cover the tax burden. Whatever tax burden that is. Income taxes, property taxes, payroll taxes.
And trust me, the portion of the “middle class” that thinks they are benefiting because the “rich” are getting taxed to death is NOT getting the value back from the government that the government is taxing away from th rich. The middle class pays inflated prices for good and services to cover the tax burden of the rich and they DO NOT get back from the government an equal benefit. How could they? The government has to fund itself from the money it collects from the rich first.
The 1.1 Trillion of income tax collected is not paid back dollar for dollar in benefits to all those who pay for the increased prices for goods and services that you better BELIEVE companies and businesses set to cover that tax burden.
So you see Keith, if you and your ilk could take off the foggy distorted glasses of class-warfare and greed, you’d realize that raising taxes on “the rich” is reducing the purchasing power and standard of living of the lower income groups the most.
Beyond the priciples of freedom, private property and the right of people to keep what they earn and not have the big-government taking, wasting, and controlling people through the dispersal of some of what it takes,
The economics of the scenario are such that you are ONLY benefiting “government” with higher taxes and everyone else suffers, BUT the ones that suffer the most are not the rich. its the middle class. Those who are NOT in a position to merely raise their prices and set their costs to cover the tax burden.
And thats the real shame of the whole thing. You liberals and your supposed efforts to “help the poor” are ironically doing the exact opposite. I think some of you realize it, but the reality is that your REAL motive is to build a bigger more powerful government because you DON’T believe in the self-efficacy of people and believe in command an control. But there is the other segment that REALLY thinks they are helping the middle class by soaking the rich. And they aren’t. They are only making a big government that controls mroe and more of the spending in our economy and does NOT produce standard-of-living-increasing output for all the money they take in. (unlike the private sectore which produces goods and services that DO increase the standard of living for our society through economic activity)
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 10, 2009 at 1208 hrs
xxpilot -
You didn’t say how you think people can be fairly taxed?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 10, 2009 at 1229 hrs
Owen on you comment #15.
So you think these executives are thinking about my right the poperty of the company that they are working for when their cronies give them huge bonuses. So you think that these exectutive are thinking about my ownership in a company as an employee of the company when I get a zero percent raise while theirs goes up 100% for convincing us that a zero percent raise is just.
The federal government is the only entity with enough power in today’s environment to level the playing field.
Look at your proxy statements. You have votes for each of your shares and that is all you have as a stockholder. But all of the voting is really held by the mutual funds that own the huge swaths of stock in a company. Nearly every proxy statement I get has a vote for or against the executive compensation program that exists. Do you think that is ever going to be defeated?
And look at the propectus from your company. Every one of them is about 1/3 talking about the salary and bonuses of the top 5 people in the organization. There could be thousands working for an organization and the prospectus still only talks about 5.
So if there was some real reform that would allow my voice to be heard on these issues then I would not propose taxing and taxing and taxing. But the government is the only entity that I have enough influence over to remedy this situation.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 10, 2009 at 1247 hrs
So how about this? Companies are not just about the investors. They’re about the sweat and blood of the employees, too. What about a member of the board of a public coming having a representative elected by the employees?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 10, 2009 at 1254 hrs
Here is another suggestion:
Let me direct my IRA to loans to people I trust - including my family - rather than almost exclusively having to deal with Wall Street.
How about allowing people to pull money out of their 401K while still being employed if it being poorly run? How about requiring a company match to the 401K if the CEO’s pay goes up 100%?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 10, 2009 at 1339 hrs
xxpilot on #22.
I don’t know if I buy your sudden concern for the poor.
Here is the thing, you raise taxes on the rich, lower taxes on the low and middle income, you are putting much more money in the hands of people that can actually spend it. If the middle class spends more money some of it will get in the hands of poor people.
You comment also assumes that a company can set and hold the price of their product. We will simply start buying from a company that has a CEO that give a crap about the pay disparity.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 10, 2009 at 1343 hrs
No vic, you are wrong. First, the market sets the price. Companies hold their prices because they must compete in a marketplace that dictates the price. It is you who are making the assumption here, namely that companies do not face price competition.
Second, companies that must compete do not begin with costs and arrive at a price. They begin with the price and arrive at the cost. If the price they can receive exceeds the cost and costs cannot be lowered, they do not raise their price, they simply don’t produce the product.
Third, you will not buy from a company that gives a crap about pay disparity. That’s an empty threat and everyone knows it. You will buy from who is cheapest unless you have been conned into buying a brand because that is what people do.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 10, 2009 at 1414 hrs
You didn’t say how you think people can be fairly taxed?
The only way to fairly tax is to tax as little as possible.
Limiting the size of government. Its the only real solution.
Tax increases just get passed along by “the rich” or anyone else in the form of higher prices for goods and services. What is important is for people who “hate big companies and the rich” to set aside their “hate” of anyone with more than they for a moment and understand the economics involved.
If you do that, you’ll realize the truth, that big government benefits ONLY those in government. It does not benefit the rich, it CERTAINLY does not benefit the poor. In fact, the poor suffer more than anyone else from big government and higher taxes.
If I didn’t care about the middle class and the working class, I’d just as soon let the class-warfare greed game go on. I’m ahead of the curve. I’ve made money, I have capital and assets that are out of reach for all practical purposes of the government and income taxes. When the government stifles the ability of people to make money, those who already have money are at an advantage.
I want to see people prosper, and its shameful of politicians and others who are, for political advantage, using the working class as pawns. Firing up anger for political gain and for the benefit of government and government control.
The working class are being used to fight a battle that is ironically hindering themselves.
Political demagogues are literally using the working class to fight the very battle that is placing shackles around their own feet.
Look at your proxy statements. You have votes for each of your shares and that is all you have as a stockholder. But all of the voting is really held by the mutual funds that own the huge swaths of stock in a company. Nearly every proxy statement I get has a vote for or against the executive compensation program that exists. Do you think that is ever going to be defeated?
Well, I hashed this over in a topic on here 6 months or so ago. Mutual funds control the market. Mutual funds are the worst thing that happened to the american investor in the history of the financial markets. Its the “lazy investors way” I blame the lazy investor as much as wall street.
But you are 100% correct, most people don’t own individual stocks, they own mutual funds. When you own mutual funds, you DO NOT own stock in ANY company, you own stock in a fund. THUS the fund managers control all the voting leverage that USE to be in the hands of stockholders. Its the elite taking care of the elite. So keep shoveling your money into your companies 401k and keep enabling. Oh wait… If you want the tax advantages/company match, etc, you have to do mutual funds… See how government manipulates you with tax policy???
You think its an accident that your company funded retirement plans get “tax advantage” and you become restricted in what you can do with the money? Do you finally realize that GOVERNMENT POLICY is being manipulated for power and control over every aspect of your life? How you invest! How you live? (mortage tax deductions). The history of people using the government and selective tax favors to certain people if you do certain things (which all come at a sacrifice of your freedom) goes back many decades.
So if there was some real reform that would allow my voice to be heard on these issues then I would not propose taxing and taxing and taxing. But the government is the only entity that I have enough influence over to remedy this situation.
sigh.. you only THINK you have influence over the government. And maybe 100 years ago, you did. But now government is so big, so complex. Bills are thousands of pages long and contain provisions that even elected representatives cannot possibly understand. Thats the problem with big government that controls everything. Its such a behemoth its IMPOSSIBLE to hold any one person accountable. You’re anger and your hostility is clouding your ability to truly understand what really happens in government and in this whole economic cycle.
Stop hating the rich… Until we have a complete command and control economy, (which will really spell the end of progress) “the rich” which are those who make the most are going to be the ones that have mobile capital and the ability to adapt. They move production offshore… They raise prices to cover increased tax burden. A million different adjustments that businessmen make to deal with the marketplace that is set out in front of them. And when the government clamps down on one little section, they move investment elsewhere, they raise prices, they divest and re-invest in different opportunities.
Big government hurts the working class the most. I assure you the uber rich have tax attorneys and accountants who have analyzed their finances and shown them exactly how to meander through any new government rules and regulations… DO YOU have those kinds or resources? I don’t think so… Do YOU have the ability to pull up your capital and move it to a better tax-advantageous endeavor. I doubt it. So your desire to tax tax tax the rich is coming back to bite you in the ass time and time again as the rich guys with attorneys and accountants adapt and pass along price increases to others. While the middle class TRYING to get ahead is stuck shoveling money into mutual funds like drones, complaining why they get an 8% return on inventment and businesses get much larger returns on investment. Wondering why the government tax policies force your to do certain things with your money because thats what government DOES (control people and limit their ability to do whats best for themselves)
Government has gotten us where we are my friend.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 10, 2009 at 1430 hrs
OK xxpilot.
Help get me started and I will see if you plan works. I got $50K in cash burning a whole in my pocket.
Give me a glint of information and I will take if from there.
Have you found a resource or blog that is informative?
Are you willing to help out a fellow American to see the way or do you think that the dog eat dog competition is what is good about America and I am on my own?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 10, 2009 at 1456 hrs
Warren Buffett explained in an interview with Tom Brokaw that his taxes are low: 17.7% for total taxable income.
Out of 15 people surveyed in his office: The average for the office was 32.9% for total taxable income.
Warren: “One third of the entire budget comes from payroll taxes. And payroll taxes on income, just like income taxes, are taxes on income.”
Warren: ” . . . And the payroll tax is over $800 billion out of two and a trillion, or something like that. And people don’t understand—they—they—that the rich pay practically no payroll tax. I mean, I paid payroll tax last year on $90 odd thousand, whatever the number is. I paid income tax on $66 million. But my double income tax, one of ‘em quits at $90,000. And the remaining $66 million does not get taxed with payroll tax. So, the person who makes $60,000 in our office gets ta—taxed in full on the payroll tax, and taxed in full on the income tax. And—and all the statistics you read, particularly the one don’t like taxes, well now, they totally ignore the payroll tax. And it’s huge now.
Tom: Of all the tax lines that you’ve seen proposed over the years, a flat tax, a consumption tax, a more progressive income tax, which is the one that appeals to you the most?
Warren: Well, in theory a progressive consumption tax makes the most sense. I mean, if you tax the people who use the resources of society rather than ones who—who—who provide the resources of society, that makes more sense. And a consumption tax can be very progressive.”
http://www.cnbc.com/id/21553857/
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 10, 2009 at 1539 hrs
vic, you are on your own whether you realize it or not.
No one has your self interest better in mind than you do.
You can’t be serious asking me what you should do with 50 grand??
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 10, 2009 at 1539 hrs
xxpilot -
Who do you think has more power in our Federal goverment; those who want National Socialism or, large Corporations or the people?
I would love to see it be the people again.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 10, 2009 at 1543 hrs
I would love to see it be the people again.
So would I, and I’m quite sure that XX would too. Do you have a point?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 10, 2009 at 1548 hrs
anon, its certainly not the people.
When government has its hands in everything we do, the individual gets lost.
When a government limits itself to protecting the rights of people, respecting the boundaries of where one individuals rights stop and anothers begin, a government that enforces contracts and provides a courts system for people to address grievences, but by and large allows peolpe to hold on to the resources they have and decide for each and everyone indivually (or with their family) how to live their lives and how to meet there needs, THAT is power of the people.
When government is taxing and spending and telling people what to do and what they can’t do for things that have NOTHING to do with my rights intersecting my neighbors, but stupid shit like how TRILLIONS of dollars gets handed out…
Good grief, the individual is LOST. My voice as an individual.. ANYONE’s voice as an individual is GONE.
Instead, the only voice is that of big groups. Big unions… Big companies, but lobbying groups, be it the NRA or moveon.org.
Only big groups sway the government to spend its money one direction vs. another.
And anytime you cannot decide for yourself and are beholden to your ability to find thousands or millions of others just to get your voice heard, THAT voice is not yours. The message of “big groups” is NEVER fitting to individual people. “one size fits all” is never better than the ‘custom fit’ of being able to KEEP your money and decide with your familiy how to make ends meet and prosper.
Now, because government has SO much money and SO much influence over every aspect of our economy, our retirement, our investments, we are stuck living with a one-size-fits all solution that was arrived at by committee’s thousands of miles away who don’t have any ability to actually meet the needs of people, but damn if they don’t know how to waste billions and trillions of dollars trying to figure out how to do what we could each do better for ourselves.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 10, 2009 at 1604 hrs
XX
Thanks for the helpful tips. I guess it is dog eat dog in your world.
The deal is that when the government did not participate in the markets we got a series of depressions every 20 years. we got chaos. With government participation we got more order, more safety.
As a percentage of things I wonder if any more money is wasted more in government than is wasted in private business. Remember that Time Warner bought AOL. ATT bought cable companies. GM built the Vega.
I just feel that this government interest in the market doesn’t provide you with enough opportunity.
I want some minor adjustments that allow me to invest my money in people that I believe in.
You seem to be wanting changes on a much grander scale.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 10, 2009 at 1632 hrs
“With government we got more order, more safety.” Based on what? Have recessions become less frequent? Are they shorter? Are the post recession recoveries faster and more robust? The data will disappoint you, vic.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 10, 2009 at 1645 hrs
Jason - Yes, the point is to be careful of who and what you support. Large corporations eliminate the competition (jobs) creating the need for socialism. Both are top down controls on the economy and our life’s, courtesy of both major political powers.
Vic - The country started experiencing recessions and depressions after the Federal Reserve was established.
Xxpilot - I didn’t think we we’re to far off.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 10, 2009 at 1714 hrs
So, all,
I don’t want to get into the society is going down the drain thing. I am interested in solutions. How about throwing out income taxes and in their place (to finance law, order, military, roads, post offices, etc.) install a…
progressive consumption tax: tax the people who use the resources of society rather than the ones who provide the resources of society. Essentially, a sales tax divided four ways: local/county/state/fed
Tax service/merchandise/energy/property/stock sales only. The laborer is not taxed. Saving money is encouraged.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 11, 2009 at 0700 hrs
The problem with a consumption tax is that is does not benefit existing interests. Therefore it will never be implemented. The government is, and has been, manipulating anything it can to benefit existing interests at the expense of the future.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 11, 2009 at 0830 hrs
If people would spend as much time working on bettering themselves as they do complaining about people who are making more they’d be better off for it.
Stop the class war fare.
I would hope you’d (me included) all strive to make more money and better our lives instead of knocking down those who do. Rich people make the world go round. They employ people and buy things which employ people. They work many hours and make sacrifices to be where they are.
If you want “fair” then let’s make it “fair” and everyone pays the same percent in taxes. If we buy a basketball we all pay the same price for the ball…they don’t jack it up or lower the price depending on your income.
Are their some corrupt CEO’s, sure…but I am sure there are plenty who are not. Don’t lump them all together.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 11, 2009 at 0914 hrs
XX
Thanks for the helpful tips. I guess it is dog eat dog in your world.
Oh drop the pejoratives Vic.
If I tried to offer you financial advice without knowing ANYTHING about you, I’d be doing you a horrible disservice. HORRIBLE.
Second… The mentality that there is some “big secret” out there that somehow is just being kept from people and keeping them from suceeding is ludicrous.
There is no golden ticket. There is no quick fix. For some of my friends, their best investment is real estate. For other friends, their best investment is a side business they run from their house, and for other friends, their best investment is movie-prop collectibles. (seriously, the return on investment my frieng makes on those things is CRAZY)
And to be honest, for other friends, the best thing they could do with 50 grand is pay down debt. Everyone is different.
I’m sorry I don’t have a day to devote to getting to know your personal financial situation to be able to offer better advice.
If it helps you get some closure on the thread and topic at hand to assume I’m an a-hole and I don’t give a shit. Have at it. You seem to have a proclivity to play the victim card.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 11, 2009 at 1118 hrs
“If you want “fair” then let’s make it “fair” and everyone pays the same percent in taxes.”
Hi Kelly - your solution would reduce the taxes of the rich and increase everyone elses taxes. Is that what you intended?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 11, 2009 at 1121 hrs
“The country started experiencing recessions and depressions after the Federal Reserve was established.”
Actually, recessions and depressions started well before. The first U.S. recession was in 1797. http://recession.org/history The Federal reserve was not created until 1907.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on September 03, 2009 at 1806 hrs
Total Entries: 19998
Total Comments: 134035
Most Recent Entry: 05/24/2012 05:43 pm
Most Recent Comment on: 05/24/2012 08:52 pm
Total Members: 9751
Total Logged in members: 0
Total guests: 109
Total anonymous users: 1
Most Recent Visitor on: 05/24/2012 08:57 pm
The most visitors ever was 538 on 12/01/2007 02:11 pm
Protected and licensed under a Creative Commons License (some rights reserved).