The Obama Presidency

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by squall_vb

Did I say any such thing? Fuck you for not knowing how to read.



Oh, well in that case, I stand corrected.



They benefit through either (a) hard work, or (b) luck of circumstance. If I choose to pursue post-grad education and work my ass off and make a nice living for myself, it doesn't mean that I owe you a fucking thing.



And I know some small business owners who are seriously struggling to keep their heads above water. Whose anecdotal evidence is better, champ?

---

You advocated a flat rate tax, aka the opposite of progressive, the same rate for everyone regardless of income difference correct? So everyone would pay the low rate on their marginal income correct?

Most of the rich people in the top 1 percent didn't "work their ass off" for their money. They inherited it, not every rich person is this Randian Ideal of an industrious and creative entrepreneur contrary to what Fox News says. The funny part is that many of the richest people, who actually did work their ass off and or realize how the system is skewed, favor a progressive income tax as evidenced by Warren Buffet, Bill Gates, and George Soros support for it.

What I hear you saying whether you intended this or not is that: "We should tax janitors the same as Princeton educated Hedge Fund Managers because the hedge fund managers worked their ass off in school( LOL) and since they are better people ( the hardest working and brightest are the ones paid the most right?) why shouldn't they get breaks too?"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nocturne

You advocated a flat rate tax, aka the opposite of progressive, the same rate for everyone regardless of income difference correct? So everyone would pay the low rate on their marginal income correct?

Most of the rich people in the top 1 percent didn't "work their ass off" for their money. They inherited it, not every rich person is this Randian Ideal of an industrious and creative entrepreneur contrary to what Fox News says. The funny part is that many of the richest people, who actually did work their ass off and or realize how the system is skewed, favor a progressive income tax as evidenced by Warren Buffet, Bill Gates, and George Soros support for it.

What I hear you saying whether you intended this or not is that: "We should tax janitors the same as Princeton educated Hedge Fund Managers because the hedge fund managers worked their ass off in school( LOL) and since they are better people ( the hardest working and brightest are the ones paid the most right?) why shouldn't they get breaks too?"

---

I'm not a wealthy person by any stretch. About a decade ago, I was pulling in $2,000 per month before taxes. Today, I earn about $5,000 per month before taxes. My salary has more than doubled, and yes, it was because I worked my ass off, both in academia and the real world.

However, because of this lovely so-called progressive Robin Hood system, my take-home pay has not more than doubled. In fact, it has not doubled at all. You see, each raise has put me into a progressively more painful tax bracket, to the point where the overall increase in the past decade isn't anything to throw a parade over. Moreover, things have gotten much more expensive in the past ten years, be it through taxes or simple economics. The percentage of my paycheck that goes towards groceries, gasoline, utilities, and such is much higher now, regardless of my supposed pay increases. The leftish cap-and-tax scheme (trumpeted by the sagacious Mr. Soros, by the way), which even Obama said would cause utilities rates to "necessarily skyrocket," is going to hit me a hell of a lot harder than your dreaded hedge fund managers.

This isn't a doom and gloom situation on account that I am single. If I had a wife and children, we would just barely be above the poverty line. I could just work harder and increase my income to make up the difference, right? Well, oh shit, here comes another tax bracket. Uncle Sam's taste just got bigger. With a flat tax I would have a fair chance at providing a decent standard of living for a family (lucky for me that I don't want one).

It might look good to you on paper--as socialism always does--but in practice the middle class is getting squeezed. The truly wealthy find their loopholes and their offshore refuges, the zero liability voters get their bread and circuses. And the working stiff is left holding the bag.

Look, I have nothing against you. You just don't know what you're talking about yet. When I was younger, I was about as far to the left as they get. Then I entered the real world without any training wheels. Once you get some more hands-on time with the real world, and you establish some goals in life and pursue them, you will see that the tax system as it currently stands is not on your side. It might look great as a theory in a textbook, but it is anything but fair.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nocturne

Most of the rich people in the top 1 percent didn't "work their ass off" for their money. They inherited it,

---

There's a book out there entitled The Millionaire Next Door that claims this is a falacy. Perhaps a larger % in the googazillionaire ranks inherited it but most millionaires have their cash the old fashioned way by being cheapskates and busting ass alongside a dose of luck. That being said I dunno if the extra cash is worth the work/savaholic lifestyle.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by squall_vb

, If I had a wife and children, we would just barely be above the poverty line.

---

If you actually make 60k+/year take home you make FAR in excess of the federal and prolly most state poverty lines.

Quote:

---

It might look good to you on paper--as socialism always does--but in practice the middle class is getting squeezed. The truly wealthy find their loopholes and their offshore refuges, the zero liability voters get their bread and circuses. And the working stiff is left holding the bag.

---

A flat tax wouldn't make your life any better unless it was less than what you're paying now. A simple progressive tax system also does not equal socialism. The answer to your problems would be a simple loop hole free progressive system. If you made like 25k and then got raises to 60k then you made the largest jump on the scale. Successive jumps would hurt less and less. Perhaps the scale could be adjusted but to abandon the system because you feel shafted is dumb.

I also agree with Razor that all this tax/economics debate should be in the economy thread.

If people don't want to talk about the economy they should stop boo-hooing about it and post other shit to talk about then. Off the top of my head: don't ask don't tell legislation? The shit going on in Ivory Coast? Korea? People talk about the economy because it directly effects them.

The flat tax system is dumb, btw. Ideally I love it - but as a consequentialist I realize that it just ends up increasing the gap between the rich and the poor. Everyone's tax % should be lowered across the board - but a progressive tax makes the most sense dealing with the realities of life and reasonably balanced opportunity.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bojack

If you actually make 60k+/year take home you make FAR in excess of the federal and prolly most state poverty lines.

---

That figure was before taxes. My take home is much less. Your point still stands, but the difference is significant.

Quote:

---

If you made like 25k and then got raises to 60k then you made the largest jump on the scale. Successive jumps would hurt less and less. Perhaps the scale could be adjusted but to abandon the system because you feel shafted is dumb.

---

Like I said, the middle class is getting squeezed. Rather than having any jumps, it would be a lot more fair if everyone paid the same percentage across the board. Let's just go with 20% for the sake of easy math.

Ten years ago I would have paid $400 per month in taxes. Today, I would pay $1000 per month in taxes. The government makes more money off of me as my prosperity increases, except this time in a way that is fair to everybody. There is no penalty for continued success; Uncle Sam gets more of a cut the as I earn more, and it is proportional from cradle to grave.

Yes, under the Robin Hood system I make out better in certain times than others. The problem is that it is not fair, and does not reward or even cast a neutral eye towards success. A flat tax is transparent, predictable, and fair.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Drewbacca

don't ask don't tell legislation?

---

Long overdue.

Quote:

---

The shit going on in Ivory Coast?

---

I don't care.

Quote:

---

Korea?

---

I care greatly.

Quote:

---

The flat tax system is dumb, btw. Ideally I love it - but as a consequentialist I realize that it just ends up increasing the gap between the rich and the poor. Everyone's tax % should be lowered across the board - but a progressive tax makes the most sense dealing with the realities of life and reasonably balanced opportunity.

---

Not gonna happen as long as both ruling parties are bought and paid for. I'm not saying a flat tax is a cure-all. But it IS a much more transparent and fair way of doing things than the current method. No loopholes, no deductions, no mountains of paperwork. Just pay your share and press on.

You think the middle class is getting squeezed (which they are, perpetually) and to fix that you want a flat tax? I'm not sure how that would solve a goddamn thing.

There might be a huge difference in tax liability between making 25k a year to making 60k a year - but there isn't from 500k a year to 1 billion a year. That's where we're losing revenue. We need another tax bracket if anything

Again, I'm not saying it would solve the world's ills. I'm simply saying that it would be more fair.

In any event, let's look at the case of a small business owner who is somewhat successful and manages to take home a couple million dollars per year. Why should he be charged at a substantially higher rate because he has done okay for himself? That's less money for his family and his future, less money to expand his business, buy more goods, hire more people, donate to charity, etc. All so that money can go to the government... who will either throw it towards (a) a waste ridden zero-liability voter social program, or (b) innumerable special interests representing the big corporate fat cats that you so detest. I trust the man pulling down a couple million dollars a year (which is NOT a lot these days) to spend his money more than I trust a government with this mind-boggling track record of failure.

Well, except for NASA. NASA has actually provided phenomenal results from the people's money. So, of course, their funding situation is worse than ever while Wall Street money shufflers can help themselves to whatever isn't nailed down at the Treasury Department.

I know I'm going in a few different directions on this (blame the late hour), but my overall point is that I will happily take a system that is imperfect but fair over the inequitable and dishonest clusterfuck we have now. And I will always favor a system that gives taxpayers (notice I said taxpayers, not citizens) as much of their money as possible, while keeping as much of it out of the hands of our inept federal government as possible.

Ok, no more economy talkie. Anyways, the Zadroga bill, WTF is up with the GOP striking this down? Or the DREAM Act? Can some one provide reasonable ideas on why they would fight such a thing?

Can you explain what they are?