[David_Elvins]

Let's be exact on the tax burden--the top 1% pay 40% of the taxes; the next 9% pay 30% of the taxes--so the top 10% pay 70%.

and for completeness it is worth pointing out that the 10% of the population who pay 70% of the Federal Income tax  earn 45%+ of the income.  

45% of the people pay NO taxes.

I think you mean "Pay NO Federal Income Tax".  Big difference.  

[David_Elvins]

Given the corruption and negligence in government at every level , it never ceases to amaze me that we continually vote the same people into office . Ten years of turnover in office would change the country dramatically for the best .  

Anyone who tries to build a deck on the back of their house knows the pain of getting a permit without a "connection " or "friend downtown, It's really sad to see an elderly coupe or struggling young family have to pay for two surveys (as built and finished) , a lawyer , and various and sundry local permit fees just to replace rotting steps on their house.  Heaven forbid you scream about the costs to the bureaucrats , who then put you on the "list"  . It would be funny if it wasn't so tragic!

Just last week on a local radio station the mayor of a neighboring community complained about the "politicians " ruinijng our lives and runing up the costs of government (  he's a small govt. Republican LOL)   However in the twenty five years he has been "mayor" the local govenrment has grown enormously and the taxes are outrageous.  You can't get a permit to put a chair on your deck without him signing off ....what a joke it has become, and unless you have to build something you might never know it !

Archie, 

Not many people take me seriously but i seriously think that the downfall of western society will be excess paperwork.  it isn't just governments, but also the legal system and the large compensation payouts, the Occupational Health and Safety documentation required for using a stapler, the permision slip for putting a band-aid on a school child, a health system chock full of specialists, a golf course trying to remove a tree,  environmental audits on deeloping land, etc etc. 

All started off as well meaning plans to protect the environment, improve employee safety, etc but hae snowballed to the point where the amount of documentation and authorisation to do anything in any business seems to be growing exponentially. 

[Bill_McBride]

Mike Sweeny,

That is what I am here for - to save Pat's ass and roast David Moriarity's!  No, won't go there, its a kinder, gentler gca.com and I like DM's John Deere casket photo too much!

BTW, I read in an industry mag that land banking for new gc developments is underway this year, in preparation for the next round of development.  However, the author noted that new club members probably won't pay a dime for luxuries, specifically mentioning waterfalls.  I suspect overwrought clubhouses and signature design fees may be on the chopping block as well, together with wall to wall watering, but that is only my speculation.

In short, all the guys calling for minimalism can rest easy....where protest won't do it, simple economics will, at least according to one well informed source.

See, I will stop at no end to make this OT thread relevant to gca! (and save PM's ass)

Why would you want to save Pat's ass?  He is a big boy.

[John Kavanaugh]

The golfing community simply needs to move from a benevolent dictatorship culture to a benevolent membership society.  I see this transition as a very good thing.

[archie_struthers]

 

David you are so right . It's no longer a cottage industry. It fits right into the fabric of neo - american politics to control the masses with paperwork and permits. .  George Washington was offered the ring of power and refused .. not many since have followed his lead!


 The politico's are destroying the very fabric of ingenuity and risk taking by stacking the deck for their fellows.  the sad thing is they seem to control both parties , no matter what the talking heads may say...

[Bill_McBride]

I don't think the country club will become extinct.  The platinum clubs will be fine.  The middle and low tier clubs will have to change their mission and evolve into "sports clubs". They will provide golf, swimming, tennis, curling, fitness, with minimal service, snack bars, and golf grills.  The reduction in disposable income will kill the CMAA.  I think the golfers will be fine.

Roger, from what I saw of Carolina Golf Club, the club will be fine with or without the CMAA.  Mike Young has written often and at length about how the CMAA may not be the best answer to yje golf club's future problems.

I like your approach.  Minimalism and fixed revenue line items.

[PThomas]

hello Patrick

you mentioned that we should cut gov. spending, I believe

but how?  it seems i read this a lot , but no one ever provides specifics (and i'm not just picking on you Patrick)

about 70% of the Fed budget is for the militray, SOc Sec, Medicare/Medicaid, and interest on the debt (which cant be cut)....these are the big items, but no one ever mentions cutting them...why not?  

we have to pay for things like roads, clean water, etc....i think the anti-tax movement in this country has gone way too far..perhaps all the anti-tax people should go live in the desert where there are no roads to maintain, no water infrastructure to maintain, etc

during the one of the past Ryder Cups during the Clinton Administration, one of the US team members was whining about how high his taxes were (the poor baby)....they asked Jack his thoughts, and he said "I dont mind paying taxes, i just dont like to see them wasted"....

why doesnt politics have reasonableness like Jack's statement implies any more?  this lack of cooperation is so bad for the country...i think Newt Gingrich and the tone he promoted is one of the worst things ever to happen to this country politically

and re jobs:  everyone talks about unemployment...but unless factory work comes back to this country in a big way, where are all these good jobs supposed to come from??  perhaps the answer is that our country's populace needs to be better educated, which is certainly the case, since the high school droput rate, for ex in places like CHicago, is still  appalling...it blows me away to think that so many kids nowadays still dont evern graduate from HIGH SCHOOL?

and re Obama bashers. pls remember a few things:

1. he inherited the 2nd worse financial crisis in our history...at least some experts felt that the world economy was on the brink of collapse.....and i'm not saying things are perfect now, but why doesnt he get any credit for at least pulling us back from the brink of that?

2. how quickly some people forget that Pres. Reagan, a REPUBLICAN, was the one who started the massive increase of the federal debt..Reagan seems t get so much credit for helping the economy, but what about the huge deficits he rang up?

3. a DEMOCRAT actually had us in surplus mode for a few years?

i'm willing to discuss this on a rational level , btw

[Jud_T]

Paul,

Some good points.  The most difficult issues that must be addressed are military spending and social security.  I'm no expert, but a few things seem obvious...Firstly, we no longer need to be the world's babysitter.  If we can get off the mid-east oil teat (hello gas tax?) we wouldn't feel so obligated to blow a trillion in places like Iraq. Secondly, I'm sure if you really took a sharp pencil to the defense budget you could find more than a few bucks.  Thirdly, we'll soon have to pull a France with regard to Social Security.  Just bump the minimum age and be done with it.  Finally, the only company I know of that still has a rediculous pension plan is the government, federal and state.  Give 'em a 401k and proper pay-for-performance incentives like the rest of us.  Whether you like 'em or not, there's one glaring problem with this administration:   The average percentage of Cabinet members with private sector experience is around 50%, this administration on day one stood at 5%!

[George Pazin]

i'm willing to discuss this on a rational level , btw

  Just like everyone else...

Thanks for the laughs, everyone.

[corey miller]

Paul

In regard to point two...Do you think all debt is created equal?  Even Obama must not think that is the case as he uses the phrase "investments" for some of his spending.

So with that in mind, one might argue that Reagan's spending changed the economic trajectory of the world, certainly allowing for higher debt to GDP levels.    Can the same (or even lower levels) be sustained with the economic regulators that Obama has put on the economy?

Reagan won the cold war with his spending and Obama is allowing  public union employees to continue to work a while longer until the bloated local governments have to do something.  Not sure that "investment" is equal.

[Patrick_Mucci]

It a club's financial viability is dependent on subsidy from federal tax deductions I have no trouble seeing that club forced into closure or a significant reduction of services by the removal of that subsidy.

Public money should not be used to benefit private entities, especially the playgrounds of the wealthy and privileged. Funny, it's always the wealthy and privileged who bitch the most about being shortchanged by the tax code. 

Michael,

You don't get it.
Public Money is NOT being used to fund clubs, dues are NOT deductible.

Maybe the wealthy and privileged bitch because they're the ones working the hardest to build businesses and create jobs which employ people.  You forget, The wealthy didn't get that way because they won the lottery, they got there through hard work.

Forget about golf/country clubs for a second, home ownership and the home building industry will take the major hit. [/color]    

[PThomas]

i'm willing to discuss this on a rational level , btw

  Just like everyone else...

Thanks for the laughs, everyone.

George, i do not pretend to be an expert on any of this stuff...but when people start name calling, screaming, etc, that's when its a waste of my time

politics is the art of compromise, which seems to be forgotten

[Patrick_Mucci]

Many of you don't get it.

Local clubs are teetering on the brink today, desperately trying to get new members to shore up their operating costs which continue to escalate.  The loss of an additional 10 % to 20 % will certainly sound the death knell for those clubs.

While I don't know the exact figures, I'd say that 75 % to 90 % of members have mortgages.
If the interest on those mortgages ceases being deductible, their discretionary income will decrease enough to cause them to reconsider membership.  With a smaller base to support club operations, clubs will fail and good to great golf courses will NLE.

Some seem to be happy with that situation, but remember, when a club fails, all it's employees are now out of work.
NO JOBS.  NO employer sponsored health benefits.

Be careful what you wish for.

[PThomas]

Paul

In regard to point two...Do you think all debt is created equal?  Even Obama must not think that is the case as he uses the phrase "investments" for some of his spending.

So with that in mind, one might argue that Reagan's spending changed the economic trajectory of the world, certainly allowing for higher debt to GDP levels.    Can the same (or even lower levels) be sustained with the economic regulators that Obama has put on the economy?

Reagan won the cold war with his spending and Obama is allowing  public union employees to continue to work a while longer until the bloated local governments have to do something.  Not sure that "investment" is equal.

perhaps not Corey...pls tell me some of the economic regulators you mention (seriously, pls...i am not an expert)..

although, if you mean - and i should have put this in my first semi-rambling post - that the head of GM was replaced, i dont have a problem with that, since he obviously wasnt doing a good jo

a lot of people moan about the gov. being inefficient...but what about the private sector?  we can start with two sectors easily:  the auto one and the financial one

[David_Tepper]

“The TARP may well be the best and most useful federal program that has ever been despised by the public,” says Douglas J. Elliott, a fellow at the Brookings Institution and a former JPMorgan Chase managing director.

“When all is said and done, this program will be viewed as one of the most effective and least costly forms of assistance” in the financial crisis, says Herbert M. Allison Jr., the former Merrill Lynch executive and Fannie Mae official who has shepherded the rescue effort for Geithner and leaves the job today.

[George Pazin]

“The TARP may well be the best and most useful federal program that has ever been despised by the public,” says Douglas J. Elliott, a fellow at the Brookings Institution and a former JPMorgan Chase managing director.

“When all is said and done, this program will be viewed as one of the most effective and least costly forms of assistance” in the financial crisis, says Herbert M. Allison Jr., the former Merrill Lynch executive and Fannie Mae official who has shepherded the rescue effort for Geithner and leaves the job today.

Gee, think those guys might be just a little bit biased?

[David_Tepper]

"Gee, think those guys might be just a little bit biased?"

George -

I think EVERYONE is biased!

DT

[Bill_McBride]

"Gee, think those guys might be just a little bit biased?"

George -

I think EVERYONE is biased!

DT

One way or the other!

[Tim Leahy]

If you can afford country club dues, then you can afford to pay some more taxes.
Otherwise, see you at the muni!

[George Pazin]

"Gee, think those guys might be just a little bit biased?"

George -

I think EVERYONE is biased!

DT

  Hence my original quip to Paul...

Tim Leahy, such thinking is why envy is one of the 7 deadly sins.

[John Keenan]

Mr Malone is spot on.

As a country and a citizenry we have lived well beyond our means. Yes the fine citizens of the US all lived as though they were rich. The reality is they were not but they had multiple credit cards to run up, autos to lease and WOW homes  to use as ATM's. No money for a home and you want to live in a guard gate community no problem the bank will lend you the money to buy no matter if you can qualify (quaint word) or not.

Now suddenly the bubble has burst and they are upset. Is it there fault of course not it is the government because they spent too much. Yes they did as well because we all believed that we were rich.

We are living through a de- leveraging of the US citizens and its government. It will be painful we will blame everyone but ourselves.  It really does not matter who gets elected in a macro sense as we need to clean up our balances sheets both the government adn its population.

My hope is that we come out of this much as my parents did after the great depression. More careful with money, and appreciate the lives we lead not live in envy of others

[Craig Van Egmond]

John,

         There's a problem with your thesis... some of us, a few, did not live beyond our means, we don't have credit card balances,  we drive older cars that are paid for and we live in house that we actually can afford.  We don't take extravagent vacations, etc...  we just keeping plugging along hoping and praying that something will be left for the rest of us.  So I respectfully take offense with being lumped in with those people you mentioned in your post.

Respectfully yours.

[JESII]

Forget the politics, is there actually any debate about the substance of what Pat wrote?

Those three areas represent $10,000 or more of real living cash flow for the people that join private clubs. The impact will be huge.

My question is, does it matter?

Taking emotion out of it, my general area is so saturated with private golf that it could use a correction. If we lost 25% of the clubs the remaining 75% would be extremely healthy.

For it to be completely relevant to this website we would have to revisit the question of...does the quality of the architecture drive the financial health of the club? Around here, no. It's the club's ethos and fiscal responsibility.

So Pat, in my opinion, you're right but does it really matter? We've got too many golf clubs.

[John Keenan]

Craig

You have my apologies. and I should note I was right next to you.  Sadly as we see now a large very large segment of our population did not.

My wife and I were always amazed at the life styles of some of our friends. We generally had an idea what they earned and could not understand how they lived the way they did. Now we do

Sadly those who "did the right thing" will be punished  as well those who did not.

John

 

[JMEvensky]

Forget the politics, is there actually any debate about the substance of what Pat wrote?

Those three areas represent $10,000 or more of real living cash flow for the people that join private clubs. The impact will be huge.

My question is, does it matter?

Taking emotion out of it, my general area is so saturated with private golf that it could use a correction. If we lost 25% of the clubs the remaining 75% would be extremely healthy.

For it to be completely relevant to this website we would have to revisit the question of...does the quality of the architecture drive the financial health of the club? Around here, no. It's the club's ethos and fiscal responsibility.

So Pat, in my opinion, you're right but does it really matter? We've got too many golf clubs.

It matters to the extent that this would be one more straw on the camel's already aching back.

My part of the world is similar in that a reduction in the number of clubs would greatly benefit those remaining.But,what can you do?Root for the other guys to fail?Try to steal their members?All you can do is know that everybody knows everything and each is just hoping to outlast the club down the street.At some point in the not too distant future,some clubs in my area are not going to exist in their current state--it's that simple.

I guess one could argue that this is a good thing because any surviving clubs will be stronger after a contraction.But the process won't be pretty.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()