Join Early Retirement Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 06-19-2010, 10:34 PM   #21
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,903
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hiredgun View Post
Another reason for RE. The government is just going to keep taking more and more. Why bust your hump, run a successful business, hire employees and pay all their benefits when the govt will eventually take more than 50% of your profits?

These taxes will kill the economy, just as the healthcare bill will cause a lot of doctors to jump ship and those considering a career in medicine to go elsewhere.

My biggest fear is the govt will find more and more ways to go after our accumulated wealth. It's coming my friends, duck and cover!
Yes, this is why I was curious as to what the actual impact of the proposed tax changes would be. As I read the data in the tax site I quoted above, the average tax for the top 1% of earners was 22.4% in 2007. The proposed tax increase would raise that to 24.6%. I'm not sure how you get to 50% but I would like to know how that number comes about. Thanks
__________________

__________________
ejman is offline   Reply With Quote
Join the #1 Early Retirement and Financial Independence Forum Today - It's Totally Free!

Are you planning to be financially independent as early as possible so you can live life on your own terms? Discuss successful investing strategies, asset allocation models, tax strategies and other related topics in our online forum community. Our members range from young folks just starting their journey to financial independence, military retirees and even multimillionaires. No matter where you fit in you'll find that Early-Retirement.org is a great community to join. Best of all it's totally FREE!

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest so you have limited access to our community. Please take the time to register and you will gain a lot of great new features including; the ability to participate in discussions, network with our members, see fewer ads, upload photographs, create a retirement blog, send private messages and so much, much more!

Old 06-19-2010, 11:40 PM   #22
Moderator Emeritus
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,929
Quote:
Originally Posted by ejman View Post
As I read the data in the tax site I quoted above, the average tax for the top 1% of earners was 22.4% in 2007. The proposed tax increase would raise that to 24.6%. I'm not sure how you get to 50% but I would like to know how that number comes about. Thanks
The usual way is to add up all of the top marginal rates. As one's income tends toward infinity, these marginal rates would become the effective tax rate for that extremely high income taxpayer. For those of us not fortunate enough to earn income many times that of the top bracket bases, we pay at a lower effective tax rate. Some folks like to add in all taxes, including property tax, sales tax, vehicle registration fees, and whatnot, although those tend not to be proportional to income. (Taking these as a proportion of the mean $45,000 annual income, and adding that percentage to the top bracket marginal rates is flawed, of course, but that doesn't stop various pundits from doing it.)

I managed to reach a 0% effective federal tax rate, including FICA (SS + Medicare) and related costs, and a 1.8% state tax rate, through the simple expedient of having no earned income last year.
__________________

__________________
M Paquette is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-20-2010, 12:20 AM   #23
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,903
Quote:
Originally Posted by M Paquette View Post
The usual way is to add up all of the top marginal rates. As one's income tends toward infinity, these marginal rates would become the effective tax rate for that extremely high income taxpayer. For those of us not fortunate enough to earn income many times that of the top bracket bases, we pay at a lower effective tax rate. Some folks like to add in all taxes, including property tax, sales tax, vehicle registration fees, and whatnot, although those tend not to be proportional to income. (Taking these as a proportion of the mean $45,000 annual income, and adding that percentage to the top bracket marginal rates is flawed, of course, but that doesn't stop various pundits from doing it.)

I managed to reach a 0% effective federal tax rate, including FICA (SS + Medicare) and related costs, and a 1.8% state tax rate, through the simple expedient of having no earned income last year.
I see. The only observation I have regarding the effect of astronomical marginal tax rates is that most folks theoretically subject to them somehow manage not to pay them so that becomes an exercise in diatribe.

As to actual tax rates, last year I also achieved near tax nirvana, no federal, state, local, or sales taxes ( I live in Oregon) but regrettably I had to pay $980 property taxes on my little 7 acre ranch. Is this a great country or what?
__________________
ejman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-20-2010, 12:52 AM   #24
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 95
I'm thinking I'll eventually have to move alot of my taxable portfolio to munis.

I'd go triple tax free munis but I don't want to place a bet on my state. So it's Vanguard Intermediate Munis and I'll have to pay some state tax, but I'll avoid the Health Care Tax in 2013.
__________________
Hiredgun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-20-2010, 01:24 AM   #25
Full time employment: Posting here.
ESRwannabe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 626
Some of you might want to consider moving to a small town in a cheap area of the country. I spent around $30k last year on living expenses (including all taxes) and I was "living high on the hog". The difficulty of living in such places is that high paying jobs are scarce, but if you have already retired it works to your advantage. Perhaps an even better idea would be to expat.

If you can get your living expenses down to around that of the working class, there really isn't anything the government can do to you, tax wise. If I owned a house I could easily get expenses down to $20k or so.
__________________
ESRwannabe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-20-2010, 01:26 AM   #26
Moderator Emeritus
Nords's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Oahu
Posts: 26,616
I'm thinking that it's hard to sympathize with the tax burden of those making over $250K/year.

Spouse and I will just keep enjoying our below-the-radar ER...
__________________
*
*

The book written on E-R.org, "The Military Guide to Financial Independence and Retirement", on sale now! For more info see "About Me" in my profile.
I don't spend much time here anymore, so please send me a PM. Thanks.
Nords is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-20-2010, 03:44 AM   #27
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 95
No one is asking for sympathy. I'm just pointing out that if you keep taxing and taxing and taxing those that are productive, smart & hardworking, we will simply stop. We are the small business community. We are the backbone of the American Economy and we will simply stop. We are not fools and we take the economic cost and benefit of things into account in determining how hard to work.

We will stop being productive beyond the point of the abusive taxation.

We will stop providing good jobs for our employees.

We will stop providing health care, 401Ks, disability insurance and other benefits for our employees.

We will stop when the government takes more than we do from our profitable businesses, despite the fact that govt does nothing to contribute.

And when we stop, all the things our profitable small businesses buy from other large and small businesses will stop. It will have an enormous domino effect.

Do we want sympathy? No. We simply want to be left alone. We want the boot heel of our neck. We want the government NOT to take more than 50% of what we produce when it does NOTHING to earn it. When it is given to PUBLIC union workers who now make more on average than the private sector workers.

Read "Atlas Shrugged" by Ayn Rand, the hard workers decide its not worth it anymore and leave. This is happening in New Jersey and New York. Well of individuals are leaving for other states where they will not be taxed into oblivion. If the rest of this country becomes like N.Y., New Jersey, Calif and Michigan, I will leave and find somewhere else.

We are smart, hard working, resilient. We are the entrepreneurs and the backbone of this country. We don't want sympathy. We don't even want a thank you. However, we would like to know exactly how much it is okay to tax us? We already pay over 80% of the taxes in this country and almost 50% in this country pay no taxes. Is this fair? Equitable? How about "spreading the taxes around" along with "spreading the wealth around"?

I share the goal of those on these boards to leave the workforce early. Part of the reason is because running a small business and managing people is stressful and a helluva alot of hard work. And I refuse to feel bad for being successful. But another big part of wanting to RE is that I see where things are going and 2011 and 2013 will begin large tax increases and it's just the beginning.

I don't want sympathy. But please understand that when small business people leave the workforce it means "less revenue" for all the rest, not more. "Socialism is a great idea until you run out of other people's money." Margaret Thatcher
__________________
Hiredgun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-20-2010, 04:29 AM   #28
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 5,072
The socialism hyperbole wears a little thin... American Small Business will survive.

We have a progressive tax system for a number of legitimate reasons.

The Bush Tax cuts were not effective tax cuts for most... Oh sure, it applied to all taxpayers, but few Americans were able to take real advantage of it. It was a shell game that fooled the middle class and favored the wealthy. You get a few bucks... we get buckets of bucks.

Since most Americans put retirement savings in tax deferred accounts.. they did not really benefit. At best most Americans lowered their marginal payroll tax a little and spent it.

The people that really benefited were people with very high incomes and large amounts of taxable investments (often the wealthy or very wealthy) or heirs of very large estates.

They got richer... the vast majority of Americans just kicked the can down the road and got a delayed tax burden.


IMO - on the political front... Granted there are a few people on the extreme edges of the left or right. But the vast majority of us are center oriented. No matter how one slices it... most Americans want some sort of social floor. Most of us do not want to live in a third-world USA. That type of disparity could lead to anarchy and corrupt/oppressive regimes... while there is a lot of rhetoric and back room deals, our government is not flat out corrupt (although politicians on all sides often will sell out their political morals for a campaign contribution).
__________________
chinaco is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-20-2010, 09:46 AM   #29
Moderator
MichaelB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Rocky Inlets
Posts: 24,407
The Barronís article is purportedly about tax advice (Which taxes will rise, what you should do right now). Here is a summary of their tax advice, although I really donít think forum members will find it to be useful. The article is really a pretext to speculate (superficially) on impending tax changes.

1. Be aware of what they are doing in Washington

2. Sell your winners and buy them back

3. Donít use up your realized losses

4. Move your dividend paying stocks to your tax deferred accounts.

5. Invest in tax exempt munis.

6. Time your variable income stream to minimize tax exposure

7. Convert your IRA to ROTH.

8. Overfund your life insurance policies, borrow the excess, never cash out the policy.

9. There may be changes the estate tax next year.


BTW, they omitted all discussion of state, sales, use and property taxes.
__________________
MichaelB is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-20-2010, 10:15 AM   #30
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
dex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 5,105
Quote:
Originally Posted by chinaco View Post

The Bush Tax cuts were not effective tax cuts for most... Oh sure, it applied to all taxpayers, but few Americans were able to take real advantage of it. It was a shell game that fooled the middle class and favored the wealthy. You get a few bucks... we get buckets of bucks.
What do you mean by 'effective'?
__________________
Sometimes death is not as tragic as not knowing how to live. This man knew how to live--and how to make others glad they were living. - Jack Benny at Nat King Cole's funeral
dex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-20-2010, 10:46 AM   #31
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
dex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 5,105
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hiredgun View Post
No one is asking for sympathy. I'm just pointing out that if you keep taxing and taxing and taxing those that are productive, smart & hardworking, we will simply stop. We are the small business community. We are the backbone of the American Economy and we will simply stop. We are not fools and we take the economic cost and benefit of things into account in determining how hard to work.

We will stop being productive beyond the point of the abusive taxation.

We will stop providing good jobs for our employees.

We will stop providing health care, 401Ks, disability insurance and other benefits for our employees.

We will stop when the government takes more than we do from our profitable businesses, despite the fact that govt does nothing to contribute.

And when we stop, all the things our profitable small businesses buy from other large and small businesses will stop. It will have an enormous domino effect.

Do we want sympathy? No. We simply want to be left alone. We want the boot heel of our neck. We want the government NOT to take more than 50% of what we produce when it does NOTHING to earn it. When it is given to PUBLIC union workers who now make more on average than the private sector workers.

Read "Atlas Shrugged" by Ayn Rand, the hard workers decide its not worth it anymore and leave. This is happening in New Jersey and New York. Well of individuals are leaving for other states where they will not be taxed into oblivion. If the rest of this country becomes like N.Y., New Jersey, Calif and Michigan, I will leave and find somewhere else.

We are smart, hard working, resilient. We are the entrepreneurs and the backbone of this country. We don't want sympathy. We don't even want a thank you. However, we would like to know exactly how much it is okay to tax us? We already pay over 80% of the taxes in this country and almost 50% in this country pay no taxes. Is this fair? Equitable? How about "spreading the taxes around" along with "spreading the wealth around"?

I share the goal of those on these boards to leave the workforce early. Part of the reason is because running a small business and managing people is stressful and a helluva alot of hard work. And I refuse to feel bad for being successful. But another big part of wanting to RE is that I see where things are going and 2011 and 2013 will begin large tax increases and it's just the beginning.

I don't want sympathy. But please understand that when small business people leave the workforce it means "less revenue" for all the rest, not more. "Socialism is a great idea until you run out of other people's money." Margaret Thatcher
I agree with you that high taxes are not a good thing. Basically, corporate taxes and taxes on small business are regressive taxes. Corp and small businesses are conduits that pass along taxes (just like material costs) to the consumer in the base price of their product. So the poor get hurt the most.

As to small business cutting back because of the high taxes - I can see that happening in a short term with some of the current small business owners if they can not pass along the tax increases to the consumer. People adapt. They also forget. New people starting a business see opportunities and high taxes are just the cost of doing business.

In those industries that can not pass along the tax increase to the consumer business may go out of business, businesses may consolidate for efficiencies and pass along the tax increases later. Again, these things will hurt workers, the poor and owners.

Large tax increases are coming, VAT or Nat'l sales tax is coming and the people it will hurt the most are the poor - no matter how much the tax is increased on others. The discussion about increasing the taxes on the 'rich' is the magician's distraction: 'Watch this hand (tax the rich while the other hand takes from the poor).

A large and affluent middle class if a modern invention - primarily post WWII (the Federal Gov't will still be able to provide what is considered a middle class lifestyle for a long time). We are beginning to revert to the mean - large number of poor, small fragile middle class, very few rich.

The decisions that led us here were made decades ago; we are reaping the effects of those decisions.
__________________
Sometimes death is not as tragic as not knowing how to live. This man knew how to live--and how to make others glad they were living. - Jack Benny at Nat King Cole's funeral
dex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-20-2010, 10:59 AM   #32
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Rustic23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Lake Livingston, Tx
Posts: 3,624
Nords you are right, but then it is hard for the person making $20,000 a year to relate to your lifestyle, and that is the problem, imho, with the 'tax the rich more' solution rather than 'spend less' solution. For me it was the 'bridge to Alaska' that really set the focus on excess government spending. As I grow older, I become more and more of a libertarian when it comes to federal spending.
__________________
If it is after 5:00 when I post I reserve the right to disavow anything I posted.
Rustic23 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-20-2010, 11:20 AM   #33
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
audreyh1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Rio Grande Valley
Posts: 16,451
Quote:
Originally Posted by ejman View Post
Dex, thanks for the information. So as I calculate it, that would represent approximately a 10% increase in their tax bill is that about your read?
Those of us in this top 1% category (I'm included) got a huge windfall from the Bush Tax cuts. For several years I was able to realize a lot of capital gains at historically very low rates. Nice break on that qualified dividend income as well.

My regular taxes stayed pretty low - well actually that AMT would get me most of the time, raising my effective tax bracket. It essentially forced 26% from dollar 0 of non-cap-gains income, wiping out and "lower marginal tax rate" benefit.

I've structured things so that I don's have a lot of unrealized cap gains left and I'll probably be able to easily fly under that $250K radar going forward and probably be able to avoid AMT as well.

So now the party is over. Whatever. It was fun while it lasted.....

I never figured those tax cuts were sustainable. There was a reason they were never made permanent.

I'm not crying for myself, so don't waste any tears on me!

Audrey
__________________
Well, I thought I was retired. But it seems that now I'm working as a travel agent instead!
audreyh1 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-20-2010, 11:27 AM   #34
Moderator
ziggy29's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Texas
Posts: 15,612
I've been saying for a while now that I think we're entering an economic era where financial planning for retirement will increasingly emphasize making moves to need less money in retirement rather than simply maximizing your retirement portfolio. Yes, there will still be emphasis on growing your money but in a tougher economic environment with this many headwinds, it will also be important for many to reduce expenses, reduce taxes and protect future means-tested health insurance subsidies if a decent retirement is still in the cards (particularly for the pensionless).

In other words, if someone is totally debt free, owns their home mortgage-free and has a relatively non-material lifestyle, in the next few years they may be able to live just about as well on a $35,000 AGI as someone with a mortgage, a fair bit of consumer debt and a $60,000 AGI -- especially factoring in the impact of graduated income tax and future health insurance subsidies at lower income levels.

Our laws and policies are increasingly discouraging working longer and harder to amass more wealth, and is instead starting to encourage pulling the plug when you have "just enough" to make it for the rest of your life. And I think this concept will be more and more a part of mainstream financial planning -- developing a lifestyle that creates an income "sweet spot" where much less income threatens retirement security and drops one below an acceptable lifestyle, but much more results in diminishing returns on continued work due to progressive income taxes and loss of health insurance subsidies (and perhaps loss of means-tested SS in the future, too).
__________________
"Hey, for every ten dollars, that's another hour that I have to be in the work place. That's an hour of my life. And my life is a very finite thing. I have only 'x' number of hours left before I'm dead. So how do I want to use these hours of my life? Do I want to use them just spending it on more crap and more stuff, or do I want to start getting a handle on it and using my life more intelligently?" -- Joe Dominguez (1938 - 1997)

RIP to Reemy, my avatar dog (2003 - 9/16/2017)
ziggy29 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-20-2010, 11:33 AM   #35
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
Gone4Good's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 5,381
Quote:
Originally Posted by audreyh1 View Post
I'm not crying for myself, so don't waste any tears on me!
Nicely said.

People act like returning to tax rates that prevailed during the 1990's represents some kind of apocalyptic scenario. And then they conveniently forget that rates were almost twice as high as those in the 90s for nearly the entirety of the 20th century.

Nobody likes to pay taxes, but a little historic perspective helps to put things into context. A recognition that government receipts as a % of GDP at about 14% this year, the lowest rate since the 1940's, also helps dispel the notion that somehow taxes are already extraordinarily high.
__________________
Retired early, traveling perpetually.
Gone4Good is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-20-2010, 11:40 AM   #36
Moderator
ziggy29's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Texas
Posts: 15,612
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gone4Good View Post
And then they conveniently forget that rates were almost twice as high as those in the 90s for nearly the entirety of the 20th century.
As opposed to conveniently forgetting that with those punitively high rates came an almost infinite ability to avoid them with all the deductions, loopholes and shelters available before the Reagan-era reforms?

I'm not arguing against tax increases where they are necessary but I grow very tired of hearing about past tax rates as an example of why taxes are too low now, all the while not acknowledging all the deductions and shelters which accompanied the high rates of the past.
__________________
"Hey, for every ten dollars, that's another hour that I have to be in the work place. That's an hour of my life. And my life is a very finite thing. I have only 'x' number of hours left before I'm dead. So how do I want to use these hours of my life? Do I want to use them just spending it on more crap and more stuff, or do I want to start getting a handle on it and using my life more intelligently?" -- Joe Dominguez (1938 - 1997)

RIP to Reemy, my avatar dog (2003 - 9/16/2017)
ziggy29 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-20-2010, 12:04 PM   #37
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
Gone4Good's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 5,381
Quote:
Originally Posted by ziggy29 View Post
As opposed to conveniently forgetting that with those punitively high rates came an almost infinite ability to avoid them with all the deductions, loopholes and shelters available before the Reagan-era reforms?
And I believe I posted a study, in response to a similar comment by you some time ago, showing that the effective tax rates of the top income earners is much lower today than it was in those prior periods. (did you "conveniently forget?). I don't have time to look it up right now (I'll be back with more).
__________________
Retired early, traveling perpetually.
Gone4Good is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-20-2010, 12:17 PM   #38
Moderator Emeritus
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 11,031
Quote:
Originally Posted by audreyh1 View Post
Those of us in this top 1% category (I'm included) got a huge windfall from the Bush Tax cuts.


My regular taxes stayed pretty low - well actually that AMT would get me most of the time, raising my effective tax bracket. It essentially forced 26% from dollar 0 of non-cap-gains income, wiping out and "lower marginal tax rate" benefit.

I've structured things so that I don's have a lot of unrealized cap gains left and I'll probably be able to easily fly under that $250K radar going forward and probably be able to avoid AMT as well.

So now the party is over. Whatever. It was fun while it lasted.....

I never figured those tax cuts were sustainable. There was a reason they were never made permanent.

I'm not crying for myself, so don't waste any tears on me!

Audrey
You are lucky. I just joined the top 1% category this year and expect to remain in that category for the next 2 or 3 years. So, while we saw our taxes reduced somewhat during the Bush years (we were in the 28% bracket during Clinton years and the 25% tax bracket during most of the Bush years), we didn't enjoy the kind of windfall you are talking about.

But like you say, we don't need people to feel sorry for us. In 3 years, we'll join the ranks of the subsidized middle class again and let others do their parts to save the country. By then, we will have paid close to a cumulative $1M in income and payroll taxes. More than our fair share, IMO.
__________________
FIREd is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-20-2010, 12:22 PM   #39
Moderator
ziggy29's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Texas
Posts: 15,612
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gone4Good View Post
And I believe I posted a study, in response to a similar comment by you some time ago, showing that the effective tax rates of the top income earners is much lower today than it was in those prior periods. (did you "conveniently forget?). I don't have time to look it up right now (I'll be back with more).
But not nearly lower by the difference in tax rates, which is what some folks might easily infer. And it's still misleading (assuming honest motivations to be charitable) to use the massive differences in tax rates as justification for raising taxes. Why not just use the fact that the overall effective rate is lower today and stop using the (IMO, intentionally) misleading "70-90% tax rate" stuff?
__________________
"Hey, for every ten dollars, that's another hour that I have to be in the work place. That's an hour of my life. And my life is a very finite thing. I have only 'x' number of hours left before I'm dead. So how do I want to use these hours of my life? Do I want to use them just spending it on more crap and more stuff, or do I want to start getting a handle on it and using my life more intelligently?" -- Joe Dominguez (1938 - 1997)

RIP to Reemy, my avatar dog (2003 - 9/16/2017)
ziggy29 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-20-2010, 12:43 PM   #40
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 95
"Windfall", wow! When did the definition of a windfall become being able to keep more of the money I earned.


And yes, I think future retirees will look for that sweet spot where they have enough to RE but trying to amass more makes no sense because of taxes. We are moving toward European Socialism, have been for some time.

And like Firedreamer, I've only been in the 1% for a few years, but by the time I get out in five years I will more than have paid my fair share.
__________________

__________________
Hiredgun is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Home prices rising in certain areas? xtradoe Other topics 9 04-27-2010 07:33 PM
Bonds and rising rates bobbee25 FIRE and Money 4 09-24-2009 03:18 PM
Rising Rate Fund RockOn FIRE and Money 8 03-25-2008 07:25 PM
bamboo rising lazygood4nothinbum Other topics 24 12-08-2007 06:31 PM
Who's to blame for rising insurance costs? wildcat Other topics 18 12-23-2005 09:26 AM

 

 
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:27 AM.
 
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.