And more hard news: on average folks who work in financial services make 52 percent more than you do.

“Corporate profits with inventory valuation and capital consumption adjustments) increased $32.5 billion in the third quarter,” said the BEA. So if company profits are on the rise should that not mean the government will collect more tax revenue and reduce the deficit? Er, no, said the BEA:

“Taxes on corporate income decreased $9.1 billion in the third quarter, compared with a decrease of $1.8 billion in the second.”

Well wait a minute. There must be some accounting in there which shows that for some reason corporate profits are down and therefore taxes should be lower.

Nope. That’s not it.

The domestic profits of financial corporations — banks, financial holding companies, etc. — increased $9.2 billion in the third quarter. Non-financial corporations saw profits grow by $17.9 billion.

You’ll Earn More In Banking

Notice that profits rose by $27.1 billion — of which 34 percent was earned by banks and financial companies.

In terms of income, the Bureau of Labor Statistics says the median wage of someone in the financial services field is $67,690 versus the general wage of $44,410. That’s a 52% premium.

Income, of course, is very important. The more you earn the more likely you are to get a good FHA, VA or conventional mortgage at a good rate — and the less likely you are to be foreclosed.

For the past few weeks the government has been debating the issue of whether to raise the payroll tax by 2 percent — but there has been little or no debate regarding an increase in effective corporate taxes. For all the yelling and screaming of those who claim that business is over-regulated and over-taxed, the plain fact is that while corporate revenues are rising corporate taxes are not — meaning Uncle Sam has less money from the very businesses it nurtures and protects until they are large enough to take jobs overseas, buy back their own stock and lay-off workers within our borders.

Today the top marginal tax rate is 35 percent for individuals. Under President Reagan the top marginal rate was 69% and it was 92% under President Eisenhower, 91% under Kennedy, 77% under Nixon and Johnson, and 39.6% under Clinton.

Deficit Interest

The real cost of the deficit lies ahead. Right now Uncle Sam has a mountain of debt but pays virtually no interest. As one example, Treasury inflation-protected securities, or TIPS, reached a record yield of minus 0.877% in mid-December.

Imagine the deficit if interest rates increase…and then try to imagine a world where interest rates will not go up at some point….

Happy New Year: Corporate Profits Up, Taxes Down is a post from: OurBroker.com -- Refinance, Home Mortgage Loans & Rates, Home Equity Loan

Technorati Tags: corporate, deficit, FHA, financial, financial services, foreclosure, income, jobs, mortgage, nonfinancial, payroll, profits, sector, taxes, VA. conventional, wages

The general answer largely depends on when you buy the property.

“If the property was foreclosed and possessed by the bank, the bank will have to pay the back taxes to sell the property with clear title,” says RealtyTrac spokesman Daren Blomquist. “However, if you purchase the property at the public foreclosure auction (on the courthouse steps) then you will be responsible for any senior liens, and property taxes fall into that category.”

With a short sale the situation is different. A short-sale is not a foreclosure. It’s a transaction where the lender agrees to allow a sale without a foreclosure even though the entire mortgage debt is not being repaid. In terms of property taxes a short sale is simply a sale with property taxes to be paid at closing. Who pays the property taxes? In some jurisdictions there is a tradition that the buyer will pay or that the seller will pay, but the issue can typically be negotiated.

For local practices speak with a nearby real estate broker or attorney who specializes in foreclosures.

Who Pays Foreclosure Property Taxes? is a post from: OurBroker.com -- Refinance, Home Mortgage Loans & Rates, Home Equity Loan

Technorati Tags: bank, Closing, foreclosure, home, house, lender, negotiate, negotiation, property, short sale, tax, taxes

Mortgage borrowers are now seeing home loans at not much more than 4 percent for 30-year, fixed-rate mortgages. And, reports HSH.com, 15-year loans are already below 4 percent.

The lower rates result in substantially reduced monthly payments. For instance, imagine that you borrow $100,000 over 30 years and the fixed rate is 3.9 percent. Your monthly cost for principal and interest will be $471.67. The same loan at 5 percent would have a cost of $536.82 and at 6 percent the expense would rise to $599.55.

Of course, to get these terrific mortgage rates you need an income, a problem for the 16 million or so people who are unemployed or “marginally attached” to the workforce. And, certainly, no lender will give you a loan if you’ve recently been foreclosed, even if the cause of your financial distress was the lender’s “affordability” loan product that lead to your demise.

Federal Reserve

Since 2008 the government has done everything possible to save a tottering and tettering financial system, meaning big banks and brokerages on Wall Street. Part of this effort has been to knock down interest rates to levels unseen by any living human being.

For instance, the Federal Reserve has just decided to spend $400 billion to swap three-year Treasury securities for securities with a longer term, from six to 30 years. This maneuver shuffles the financial deck while not creating a single new job.

This has been great for the financial sector, which gleefully charges 29.9 percent for credit card debt while it borrows money through the Fed at near zero percent.

Taxes

There is now a serious proposal in Washington which would raise taxes on those who have benefited most from society. Some, however, oppose the idea because they feel it’s a form of “class warfare”.

“There’s class warfare, all right,” Warren Buffett told the New York Times, “but it’s my class, the rich class, that’s making war, and we’re winning.”

“This is not class warfare,” says President Obama. “It’s math.”

Meanwhile, major US corporations continue to generate massive profits — and pay little or no taxes.

GE, says the New York Times, “reported worldwide profits of $14.2 billion, and said $5.1 billion of the total came from its operations in the United States. Its American tax bill? None. In fact, G.E. claimed a tax benefit of $3.2 billion.”

US corporations now have some $1.5 trillion in overseas profits sitting outside our borders. This money could be used to modernize American factories and create millions of jobs but patriotic American companies will not bring the money back to the United States unless their overseas profits are taxed at just 5.25 percent.

Pensions

There is also much debate regarding the Social Security system, but little has been said about how the Fed’s efforts to help the financial sector have destroyed pensions.

Imagine that you had $2 million in retirement cash and invested it today in five-year CDs. Your likely interest rate would be roughly 1.75 percent or $2,915 a month.

But ask yourself: How many people have $2 million in retirement cash? Or $1 million? $100,000? In fact, the median amount set aside for retirement is just $45,000.

Truth is we all want interest rates that are higher than what we have today. Higher rates suggest the economy has begun to return, capital is more in demand, jobs are being created, homes are selling and savings are producing decent returns — things that help everyone, even folks not on Wall Street.

Ready For The 3 Percent Mortgage? is a post from: OurBroker.com -- Refinance, Home Mortgage Loans & Rates, Home Equity Loan

Technorati Tags: Buffett, class warfare, corporations, foreclosure, interest, level, loan, mortgage, Obama, overseas, rate, repatriated, taxes, Wall Street

Much has changed since the terrorist destruction of the Twin Towers, an awful event which has produced awful consequences.

If the attack was designed to reduce the US presence in Muslim states it surely back-fired. A decade later the US continues to have massive military forces in Iraq and Afghanistan. Osama Bin Laden is dead, as are many of his followers.

The commentary below was written after 9/11. See how much has changed since these words were first published.

——————————————-

We all remember such days. We remember where we were when we first heard of the deaths of John Kennedy, Robert Kennedy, and Martin Luther King. We remember when we heard of the Oklahoma City bombing and those who are older surely remember Pearl Harbor.

And now, until the end of our lives, we will remember September 11th.

In the U.S., at least, such terrible days are not frequent. We are insulated from genocide, civil war, and famine. Suicide bombers are a rarity rather than a daily event. We do not have hostile nations at our borders. Considering the full term of human history and looking around the globe, we live remarkably well.

Unlike any number of countries, we have a government which does not torture its citizens. We voice political opinions without fear. Our government does not tell us where to live, what job to hold, or which religion to prefer. As someone once expressed very well, no one cares what book you read, what day you pray, or if you pray at all.

As a nation we have our arguments and disputes. We have racism. We have faults.

And yet we understand that whatever our differences, we do better together than apart. We realize that debate and friction are necessary, and we act together as a nation not because we agree on everything, but because we have learned to channel disagreements without destroying the fabric of our society. Few nations, as an example, could have endured the close presidential contest we saw last year — a matter settled without the need to call up a single soldier.

The Nature of Terrorism

Blowing up civilian planes and buildings is terrible, barbaric and horrifying. The victims are wholly innocent.

Terrorists know this. The whole point of terror is that it’s illogical, unpredictable, unfair, and inhuman. It’s an effort by the few to cow the many.

What terrorists don’t understand is that a bombing, no matter how horrific, will not end our common purpose. The U.S. will be hardened by the events now taking place in New York and Washington, and no one will forget what has happened. Not since World War II has there been a greater sense of national unity.

Pearl Harbor is the immediate parallel which comes to mind when considering the events of the past week. The surprise Japanese attack on December 7, 1941 resulted in the murder of thousands of individuals and massive destruction.

But as Japanese Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto said after the attack, “We have awakened a sleeping giant and have instilled in him a terrible resolve.”

By June, 1942 — just seven months after Pearl Harbor — the U.S. Navy won the Battle of Midway, an event which largely ended Japan’s ability to control the seas. Never again would Japan pose a threat to the U.S. mainland.

Perspective

As bad, as awful, as frightening as the events of the past week have been, as terrible as the personal losses experienced by so many, we remain the world’s most-powerful nation. Our farms and factories are productive. Ninety-five percent of our people are employed. Homes are being bought and sold, and loans are being made. Grocery stores are filled, electricity flows, TV and radio stations are on the air, schools are open, government offices are busy, newspapers are being published, and the nation’s business is being done.

Now as before, we are a great and powerful nation, and we are a democracy.

A Caution

News reports and online postings are filled with descriptions of the perpetrators of last week’s attacks as “Arabs” and “Moslems.” But in this matter let us be careful not to generalize, not to condemn people on the basis of their group identity. Our fight — the fight that has been brought to us — is only with those individuals, groups, and governments that seek our destruction.

Our Strength

What is to come will not be easy and it will not end quickly. We are at war, but rather than fighting for land, oil, or power, the issue is culture — the existence or destruction of the modern society we represent and the values that terrorists despise.

The good news is that we have much on our side, we are not defenseless. Each day people worldwide can see the benefits of a society where education, medicine, science, security, entrepreneurship, and technology are valued.

Our most potent weapon in this battle is the ongoing spread of modern culture and the political democracy and pluralism it requires. But while it’s hard to imagine, huge numbers of people do not have access to information and ideas simply because basic technology is unavailable to them.

“There are 1 billion telephones in the world and the 48 least developed countries have some 1.5 million of them,” says the United Nations.

“More than 50 per cent of the world’s people have never made a phone call,” according to the U.N.

Think of it this way: If our world population includes six billion people, then three billion have never placed a phone call. Is a diversity of ideas possible, is progress plausible, in an environment where free access to information does not exist?

As more and more people are connected to one another via television, satellite, telephone, and the Internet, it will become increasingly difficult for even the most remote populations to ignore the benefits of modern civilization. It’s an appeal no terrorist can contain, and a threat to repressive governments everywhere.

—————————————–

(Published originally on September 18, 2001 by Realty Times and republished with permission. Photo copyright 2000 Peter G. Miller, all rights reserved.)

9/11 — How We’ve Changed In A Decade is a post from: OurBroker.com -- Refinance, Home Mortgage Loans & Rates, Home Equity Loan

Technorati Tags: 9/11, Afghanistan, Bush, deficit, Foreclosures, government, home values, Iraq, jobs, less government, lower taxes, Obama, Osama Bin Laden, social contract, taxes, Twin Towers, wages

The Detroit News reports that in the past year “about 200 of nearly 3,700 Detroit properties sold at auction last year that appeared to be bought back by owners, some under the names of relatives or different companies and many for $500. The total in taxes and other debts wiped away was about $1.8 million.”

“At the September auction,” says the paper, “the properties’ prices are the debt that’s owed. But in October, the county treasurer sells off whatever is left at a $500 opening bid. That’s where most of the sales happen, including owners buying back their properties.”

What these buyback sales represent is not a “solution” to the foreclosure crisis but evidence of just how distorted our system has become.

Imagine that such buybacks are allowed in your community. Imagine also that your neighbor does not pay the mortgage. Along with the mortgage local taxes are not paid. The home is foreclosed a year later, the property is bought back at auction, and your neighbor starts with a fresh slate after returning from a two-month vacation overseas.

But you’ve been paying your mortgage, taxes and insurance. It’s not easy. Maybe you pay $2,000 a month to live in the same neighborhood as the buyback artist. Now, suddenly, the value of your home is entirely in question. Here’s why:

• When your neighbor does not pay property taxes your community can no longer afford traditional services. The life-style value of living in your area declines as schools face cut-backs and other public services are reduced.
• When the neighboring home is sold at discount the value of your home declines.

• Lenders make it tougher to get loans because their risk increases with each buyback. This also means homes are harder to sell and refinance.

Lenders try to prevent buybacks with short sales, one of the reasons the process takes so long. And the states should prevent buybacks at tax sales because such purchases are flatly abusive.

There’s an effort in Michigan to outlaw buybacks. In the same way that lenders should not cheat borrowers with unfair and deceptive practices and loan products, borrowers should not be allowed to misuse the system — and screw the rest of us.

Why Foreclosure Buybacks Are Wrong is a post from: OurBroker.com -- Refinance, Home Mortgage Loans & Rates, Home Equity Loan

Technorati Tags: buy back, Detroit, foreclosure, lenders, mortgage, property, short sale, taxes, value

The answer works like this:

There are 435 members of the House of Representatives. According to CNN there are 60 members of the Tea Party caucus.

The Tea Party caucus represents just 14 percent of the House membership. It would seem to be a matter of simple math to assure that the Tea Party caucus — like many caucuses on Capitol Hill — has some influence but not total influence.

However, the House majority is now held by the Republicans. There are currently 240 Republicans, 193 Democrats and two vacancies. The Tea Party caucus represents fully 25 percent of the Republican membership.

This 25 percent is important. Here’s why:

Republicans have 47 more House members than the Democrats. That seems like a sizable majority, however a shift of 25 seats in the next election could return the Democrats to power in the House.

To keep their hold on the House — and thus to control the House committees and their ability to set agendas and issue subpoenas — Republicans must hang on to every House seat. This means three things:

First, House Republicans must support the Tea Party agenda because Tea Party members are a major part of the overall Republican caucus.

Second, those Republicans in the House who do not support the Tea Party agenda are likely to face Tea Party opposition in the 2012 primaries. These are generally events where few voters turn out thus giving an advantage to candidates with the most-committed followers. Importantly, the ability to win a primary and knock off a moderate or less-right candidate does not guarantee election. Consider Sharon Angle (Colorado) and Christine O’Donnell (Delaware) as examples. No less important, any serious primary challenge takes away resources which can otherwise be used in a general election.

Third, the House Republicans must support the Tea Party caucus because 17 of its 60 members are newly-elected and especially vulnerable in the next election. Without Tea Party wins the Republicans will lose their majority status in the House.

The Bottom Line: To accommodate  the Tea Party movement the entire Republican party has shifted visibly to the right.

Leverage

With control of the House the Republicans have control of the budget. The reason is that under the Constitution (Article I, Section 7, clause 1) all money bills must originate in the House.

Thus with a well-organized, disciplined and fervent caucus the Tea Party representatives control the agenda of the House Republicans, who in turn control the House of Representatives, and which in turn controls the budget process.

Will this continue?

Political arguments often sound great in theory, but once proponents are elected such ideas must be put into practice. Tea Party elected officials today have recorded votes which can be scrutinized.

The reaction to Tea Party positions has evolved. Between April 2010 and August 2011 the percentage of people who characterized their view of the Tea Party as “not favorable” grew from 18 percent to 40 percent, according to the New York Times.

Not all of the negative response to the Tea Party has come from liberals or centrists. As one example, the pro-business, conservative Wall Street Journal, a part of Rupert Murdock’s News Corp., described Tea Party elected officials as “hobbits” during the deficit debate. In essence there’s a considerable rift between Republican fiscal conservatives and Tea Party representatives.

The baseline Tea Party idea of reducing government programs while preventing tax increases for the nation’s wealthiest citizens or closing corporate loopholes will now be tested. What will be the public reaction in a situation where unemployment is above 9 percent, good jobs are going overseas and corporate profits have reached record levels? What will be the reaction in an economy where incomes are falling? As the IRS states in its most recent report, between 2008 and 2009 adjusted gross income fell 7.7 percent.

Tomorrow there will be a number of recall elections in Wisconsin, a state where the governor embodies many Tea Party views. It should be an interesting test for both parties — and perhaps a hint of things to come in 2012.

How The Tea Party Controls Washington is a post from: OurBroker.com -- Refinance, Home Mortgage Loans & Rates, Home Equity Loan

Technorati Tags: Christine O'Donnell, civil rights, corporations, deficit, Democrats, house, majority, Republicans, rich, Senate, Sharon Angle, taxes, Tea Party, TV, unemployment, workers

Speaking before the Society for the Encouragement of Multiple Marriages, Gingrich explained that “we are at a point in our Nation’s history where we must turn back to our corporate roots for salvation. We have a massive national debt, including the $4.35 billion added under the Bush Administration, but we also have no need to increase personal or corporate taxes. The solution is not less debt, it’s better debt, and what could be better than an interest-free account with Tiffany’s?”

Gingrich — who has had a credit balance with the famous New York jeweler for as much as $500,000 — said that extensions of credit without interest were common for business leaders, celebrities and politicians.

“Look, not that it’s anyone’s business, but those who can afford interest don’t pay it,” said the former Speaker of the House. “Think about it this way: If you have bad credit you pay high interest, if you have good credit you pay low interest and if you’re among the national elite you pay no interest. What could possibly be more elite than our federal government?”

The book author and historian also explained that a zero tax rate was part of our national heritage.

“The Founding Fathers were plainly against income taxes. You can look throughout the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence as they were written by Washington, Jefferson and Reagan and you won’t find a word about the 16th Amendment.

“We have plainly corrupted our financial system,” said Gingrich. “The best resolution would simply be to tell China and the oil-producing states that our debt is canceled. That would save $6 trillion right there. What are they going to do? Seize Iowa? We should just explain that it’s an overdue currency adjustment, maybe get a telephone company to send them a bill. It would take years before they could decipher all the charges.”

“Alternatively,” said the presidential candidate, “if foreigners really wanted to trade $6 trillion for three million acres of Iowa real estate that could be a win-win for everyone, especially when they find out about the energy-efficiencies of ethanol. As to the rest, just put it on a tab with Tiffany’s.”

Gingrich Offers Deficit Solution: Credit From Tiffany’s is a post from: OurBroker.com -- Refinance, Home Mortgage Loans & Rates, Home Equity Loan

Technorati Tags: comedy, Constitution, debt, Declaration of Independence, Gingrich, Iowa, Jefferson, marriages, Newt, Newt Gingrich, Reagan, satire, taxes, Tiffany, Tiffany's, Washington

The question is why are home values rising in one area but not 19 others? Is there a magical formula that can be exported to other cities?

The answer, certainly, is not better mortgage quotes. Current mortgage rates across the country are fairly similar; there is no great preference for home loans near Washington’s famous beltway.

Nor is the housing stock in Washington especially remarkable. Homes in the capital region are pretty much like houses in any area with a similar climate.

The Job Base

What is different is the job base: There’s less unemployment in Maryland and Virginia, the areas which surround Washington, DC.

The reason for such economic stability is fairly simple: The government is here. The Washington area is filled with agencies, departments, bureaus, laboratories, forts, stations and offices. The roads are clogged with people trying to reach job sites each day, the rush “hour” apparently runs from 5 to 10 AM in the morning and from 3 to 7PM and later in the afternoon.

Indeed, the local job market is so good that people actually commute from Pennsylvania.

Where there is government there are also companies that want to do work for federal agencies, which means a huge private-sector investment in contractors and research. In suburban Maryland, as one example, the National Naval Medical Center in Bethesda, the National Institutes of Health, the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the Food and Drug Administration are virtually down the road from one another. The place is thick with skilled doctors and scientists.

We have lobbyists here in great profusion because they need to be near the decision-makers who impact every industry and profession. Every cause and concern has a representative who can explain with great emotion why as a matter of fairness and to protect the national interest the tax rate for glue should be lower than the tax on steel ingots.

And not to be overlooked, we have incredibly dedicated people who keep the country safe.

Taxes and Jobs

I bring up the local Washington housing market because it offers a compelling real estate lesson: If you want to shore up home prices, you have to first develop a sound job base.

There are two central reasons why home prices have fallen 18.6 percent nationwide since 2007: First, lenders sold toxic loans to borrowers, loans which were obviously going to fail in large numbers. Second, while the population increased the pool of buyers shrank as jobs were exported and American companies invested overseas.

So how can other metro areas duplicate the rising home values seen in and around the national capital?

The only possible answer is to re-start the local jobs market. We have lots of bridges on the verge of falling down, tons of public buildings that need to be repaired or replaced and endless miles of roads that are lumpy and dangerous. Not only infra-structure jobs, but jobs in research, science, computers, telecommunications, health and education.

We need to invest in America. We can do that in the Washington area because we inherently benefit from YOUR tax dollars.

Less is Really Less

But folks in many places don’t have the tax money which is available in the Washington metro region. Instead of — oh my — raising taxes from the citizens and corporations who benefit most from our society and will never miss a meal or a dividend, we constantly talk about shrinking government.

But when someone says we need “less government” let’s understand that this expression is simply shorthand for fewer jobs — including the jobs that could lead to higher home prices on your block.

The top federal tax rate for today’s millionaires and billionaires is 35 percent. That’s sure a lot lower than the 91 percent top marginal rate during the Eisenhower administration in the 1950s. To argue that today’s top tax rate is somehow set in stone or cannot be raised is absurd, especially when the country needs the jobs and higher home values that a fair and honest tax base would produce.

Why Less Government Means Fewer Jobs and Lower Home Prices is a post from: OurBroker.com -- Refinance, Home Mortgage Loans & Rates, Home Equity Loan

Technorati Tags: 35 percent, 91 percent, Eisenhower, government, homes, houses, jobs, less government, loan, marginal, mortgage, real estate, rush hour, tax rate, taxes, unemployment

As Judson Phillips explains, the Founding Fathers “put certain restrictions on who gets the right to vote. It wasn’t you were just a citizen and you got to vote. Some of the restrictions, you know, you obviously would not think about today. But one of those was you had to be a property owner. And that makes a lot of sense, because if you’re a property owner you actually have a vested stake in the community. If you’re not a property owner, you know, I’m sorry but property owners have a little bit more of a vested interest in the community than non-property owners.”

The comment above was recorded by the good folks at ThinkProgress.org and raises a question: Is Phillips right or wrong?

According to the Census Bureau, in the first quarter of 2011 the US had 131 million households. Of these, 37.7 million were rentals. Were we to adopt Phillips’ argument then better than 38 million adults would lose the right to vote.

And not just any 38 million adults. It turns out that whites have a homeownership rate of 74.1 percent while the rates are much lower for African Americans (44.8 percent) and Hispanics (46.8 percent).

In other words, were we to return to the standards of the 1700s so favored by Mr. Phillips the biggest losers would be not just renters, but minorities.

But why stop there?

At the time of its founding the United States denied voting rights to women. So, if we are to follow the logic offered by Mr. Phillips, the ranks of the unrepresented would be expanded to include more than half the population.

Slavery

Of course, the founding documents also allowed the practice of slavery, and nope, slaves did not have the right to vote regardless of gender.

“Whilst America hath been the land of promise to Europeans, and their descendants, it hath been the vale of death to millions of the wretched sons of Africa,” wrote St. George Tucker, a Virginian who proposed the abolition of slavery — and thus much of his personal fortune — in 1796.

“The genial light of liberty,” he continued, “which hath here shone with unrivalled lustre on the former, hath yielded no comfort to the latter, but to them hath proved a pillar of darkness, whilst it hath conducted the former to the most enviable state of human existence. Whilst we were offering up vows at the shrine of Liberty, and sacrificing hecatombs upon her altars; whilst we swore irreconcilable hostility to her enemies, and hurled defiance in their faces; whilst we adjured the God of Hosts to witness our resolution to live free, or die, and imprecated curses on their heads who refused to unite with us in establishing the empire of freedom; we were imposing upon our fellow men, who differ in complexion from us, a slavery, ten thousand times more cruel than the utmost extremity of those grievances and oppressions, of which we complained.”

Mr. Tucker — author of the Americanized version of Blackstone’s Commentaries — also explained that “with regard to the property of women, there is taxation without representation; for they pay taxes without having the liberty of voting for representatives; and indeed there seems at present no substantial reason why single women should be denied this privilege.”

Vested Interests

Mr. Phillips makes the argument that property owners have more of a vested interest in their community than renters. Really? Renters don’t care about the quality of schools? When we fight wars only the children of property owners are drafted? When it snows only property owners care about clearing the streets? And given their exalted status, surely Mr. Phillips would want property owners to pay higher taxes.

The essence of Mr. Phillips’ position is that somehow the founding documents were immutable and not subject to change. There are a lot of Amendments to the Constitution which suggest otherwise.

In considering Mr. Phillips’s ideas you have to wonder: Just how many Tea Party members are renters? Does Mr. Phillips believe they should be denied the right to vote?

Just curious….

Tea Party Nation Founder: Renters Should Be Banned From Voting is a post from: OurBroker.com -- Refinance, Home Mortgage Loans & Rates, Home Equity Loan

Technorati Tags: minority, renters, slaves, taxes, Tea Party, vote, women

Buckley is the Chairman, President and CEO of 3M. And as Buckley told the Financial Times, “there is a sense among companies that this is a difficult place to do business. It is about regulation, taxation, seemingly anti-business policies in Washington, attitudes towards science.”

Buckley continued and explained that “politicians forget that business has choice. We’re not indentured servants and we will do business where it’s good and friendly. If it’s hostile, incrementally, things will slip away. We’ve got a real choice between manufacturing in Canada and Mexico — which tend to be pro-business — or America.” (See: 3M chief warns Obama over business regulation, February 27, 2011)

Wow. Amazing. You might think that Mr. Buckley is upset because 3M has run into tough financial times or that he has somehow suffered under the cruel lash of Washington.

In fact, Mr. Buckley is hugely successful. He just wants more.

Multi-Billion Profits

Most of us know 3M — once Minnesota, Mining & Manufacturing — a company that produces Scotch-brand adhesive tape and notes.

But 3M is actually a diversified manufacturer and distributor of many products. Not only that, 3M is very good at what it does: The company had huge profits in 2010 ($4,085,000,000), 2009 ($3,193,000,000) and 2008 ($3,460,000,000).

“Over the past five years,” says 3M, “the company has returned over $15 billion to shareholders through a combination of dividends and share repurchases. 3M has paid dividends to its shareholders without interruption for more than 94 years.”

At the same time, 3M dumped 3,500 workers in 2008 and 1,200 in 2010.

In February the company was able to announce still-another increased dividend — the 53rd consecutive year the company had raised dividends!

As to Mr. Buckley, you won’t see him in a soup line anytime soon. In 2009, for example, Forbes Magazine reports that Mr. Buckley’s compensation was $14,935,793.00.

According to Equilar.com, Mr. Buckley is one of the 200 highest-paid corporate executives in America. The site estimates that by 2009 his accumulated wealth amounted to $54,905,045 from equity holdings, pension balances and deferred compensation.

$7 Billion Buy-Back

3M has plenty of money but instead of investing in new technologies, new American hires, or new facilities within our borders it’s using $7 billion to buy back stock.

The February buy-back announcement “reflects the strength of our business model and our confidence in the future,” said Buckley. “Our strong balance sheet and outstanding free cash flow allow us to fund growth investments and continue our legacy of returning significant cash to shareholders.”

Just how much more would it take for US business policies to be acceptable to Mr. Buckley? How much less regulation would be acceptable to keep 3M in Minnesota instead of Mexico? How much less taxation is enough? And what would we have to do to avoid accusations by Mr. Buckley of being anti-business?

Mr. Buckley owes an apology 3M employees and executives — especially those who have lost their jobs. He owes an apology to the state of Minnesota, a place where 3M has done very well for more than a century.

And Mr. Buckley owes his resignation to the 3M board of directors.

When Is $50 Million Not Enough? is a post from: OurBroker.com -- Refinance, Home Mortgage Loans & Rates, Home Equity Loan

Technorati Tags: 3M, Buckley, Canada, Mexico, move to, pro business, regulation, taxes