Thursday, October 20, 2011

Thursday thunks.

Linda has had a miserable cold. But it looks like a 3 day one --

I sort of resign myself to getting a cold when she gets one -- though once in awhile I get away with it.


The store is still on a roll. This will be the fourth month in a row that we beat last year, and I'm betting we can do it again next month. Christmas might be harder to do.

I'm also spending a lot more, too. I was able to pay my taxes without taking money out of savings, though it meant I wasn't able to pay down my credit cards quite as much as usual. I'll try to take care of that at Christmas.

I gotta say -- it's more fun at work when things are doing well.


I know it's regressive; but a flat tax appeals to me.

Problem is, I get the feeling that we all-- the 99%, if you will -- would pay the flat tax, but the 1% and the corporations would find a way not to pay.

And I'm not that far away from remembering what it was like to have to pay even a small amount of tax when I couldn't pay the rent.


No money for a silt study? (Bulletin.)

Hey, no money for anything.

Except studies that tell us we need more studies to tell us we need more studies...


"Retailers Plan to Offer Deals of Desperation."

Uh, no.

I'm going to spend every dime I have on premium, evergreen product and let nature take care of itself.

I'm not going to flail around chasing after reluctant customers.

I loved this quote: "....the only way to get holiday sales is to offer the one thing that will attract shoppers these days: low prices. That's a change from better economic times when stores could lure customers away with promises of higher-quality products or better customer service."

Uh....unless "these days" means the last half century, this is the way it's always been.

I don't remember the second half of that equation as EVER being true, at least not in my career.

Dream on.


I've already commented several times on the Kindle Fire exclusive with DC graphic novels, and the response by Barnes and Noble and Books a Million to remove those titles from their brick and mortar stores.

I wonder if this the first battle in an 'exclusive' battle. I sort of hope so and at the same time dread it. Hope for it, because such Balkanization will hurt the usefulness of e-books, dread it because of the damage it will do the the publishing industry. (Can't sell books if they aren't making them.)

The publishing industry is in trouble. Amazon has already started the process of leaving out the publishers altogether, going directly to authors.

Hey, what did they think was going to happen?

I still think the publishers made and are making a huge mistake expediting the transformation to digital books. They should have fought it. But they were so freaked out by what happened to the music industry, that they overreacted.

I would have said. "Our books will be coming out in hardcover, followed later by paperback, and when they are through selling, we'll be happy to put them into digital. That is all."

I know that absolutely no one agrees with me.


Duncan McGeary said...

Selling for "desperation" prices is so stupid that no legitimate retailer would do it and stay in business.

The example they use; a 249.99 bracelet that is selling for 24.99 postage and handling?

It's worth 24.99, folks. Maybe they're paying for the postage -- but as they point out, they get 1/3rd add on sales so that's taken care of.

I don't believe anymore that any blowout sale is a blowout sale.

They are regular prices constructed to LOOK like a discount.

If a furniture store is always 50% off, the 50% off price is the real price.

If Walmart offer a 600.00 T.V. for 400.00 it's because they shaved money off the production, not because they shaved their margins.

The only thing unbelievable about this Crazy Eddie deals is the American public's unending credulity.

Duncan McGeary said...

In other words, it's all hype.

H. Bruce Miller said...

Here's my take on the flat tax idea:

If we want to have government services, somebody has to pay for them. If you pay less, somebody else has to pay more. If somebody else pays less, you have to pay more.

Alternatively, if everybody pays less that means total revenues are reduced and services have to be cut. The 1-percenters, who can afford to hire private security guards and send their kids to private schools, etc., can do without government services better than us 99-percenters can. So when government services are cut the 99-percenters indirectly pay for the tax cuts for the 1-percenters.

Bottom line: A flat tax will mean the 99-percenters will pay a greater share of the total tax bill, directly or indirectly.

Which is why the 1-percenters love the idea.

Anonymous said...

Everyone that has an income should have to pay some Federal income tax. Everyone uses the services provided by Federal income taxes. Everyone should have a stake in the game. It would be much harder to raise taxes, waste taxes, etc., if those who did so were beholden to all. As it is now, politicians seek desperately the votes of those who benefit, yet don't have to pay. And those people play a big part in voting for things that cost us a lot of money. It's because they get something for nothing. It all helps fuel corruption and waste. I'm much more frugal with my money than someone elses, and I would guess that you are, too!

Oh, and also limit campaign contributions to, oh, say $50.

Anonymous said...

'flat tax' is just an open door for a federal sales tax

as my cpa said 40 years ago, the vested interests in complex tax reported are some of the most powerful klusterfucks in the usa, given that lawyers control the political and legal system, and only lawyers become senators and presidents, ... these people will NEVER turn off their principal source of income, that is complexity is what makes the entire legal accounting system profitable,

simplicity is bullshit, more complexity means more money, and the people running the usa will always make things more complex to insure continual revenue growth