Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 19 of 19

Thread: Hodgkinson

  1. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by SamSpade View Post
    I realize this only touches on a small part of the OP - but what the hell does anyone think is a "fair share" for the rich to pay, in taxes?

    When I was a kid, the common thought was that neither the rich nor the poor ever pay taxes - the rich avoid it, and the poor don't owe it.
    I don't know if people STILL think this - I don't see how they CAN if they think the rich are getting breaks they didn't pay into -

    But the rich pay an obscene amount of our collective taxes. If we didn't have the rich, we would be monumentally *screwed*.
    Good point (source)

    Percentage (Ranked by AGI) AGI Share (%) Percent of Federal Income Tax Revenue
    Top 1% 20.58% 39.48%
    Top 10% 47.21% 70.88%
    Top 50% 88.73% 97.25%
    Bottom 50% 11.27% 2.75%
    There are only two possibilities; one is that we are alone in the universe, the other is that we are not.
    Both are terrifying.

  2. #12
    Something like this is their fantasy...

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	2014.05-Top-US-PIT-rate.png 
Views:	42 
Size:	60.1 KB 
ID:	118900

  3. #13
    A motive is still unclear, and the FBI is investigating the incident. Slater, of the FBI, said it’s too soon to say whether the GOP lawmakers were targeted in a deliberate attack.


    http://time.com/4818165/steve-scalis...es-hodgkinson/


  4. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by SamSpade View Post
    I realize this only touches on a small part of the OP - but what the hell does anyone think is a "fair share" for the rich to pay, in taxes?

    When I was a kid, the common thought was that neither the rich nor the poor ever pay taxes - the rich avoid it, and the poor don't owe it.
    I don't know if people STILL think this - I don't see how they CAN if they think the rich are getting breaks they didn't pay into -

    But the rich pay an obscene amount of our collective taxes. If we didn't have the rich, we would be monumentally *screwed*.
    In its roots, I don't think it has anything to do with paying one's fair share; it has to do with stripping the wealth from the wealthy and giving it to the poor. If they take the top down, it will build the bottom up. No one should have any more money than anyone else; everyone is essentially poor. And here's the best part............... government is going to make that happen. What better way to establish absolute corruption and power over us than to allow the government strip away what we have rightfully earned.
    "Never let the old man in." - Clint Eastwood quoting an old friend

  5. #15

  6. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by SamSpade View Post
    I realize this only touches on a small part of the OP - but what the hell does anyone think is a "fair share" for the rich to pay, in taxes?

    When I was a kid, the common thought was that neither the rich nor the poor ever pay taxes - the rich avoid it, and the poor don't owe it.
    I don't know if people STILL think this - I don't see how they CAN if they think the rich are getting breaks they didn't pay into -

    But the rich pay an obscene amount of our collective taxes. If we didn't have the rich, we would be monumentally *screwed*.
    And what would be the point of encouraging our kids, or feeling emboldened ourselves for that matter, to work to attain wealth and comfort if we're going to get penalized for it in our taxes?
    Some folks just need a high-five. Some just need a high-five to the face.

  7. #17
    INGSOC GURPS's Avatar
    Member Since
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Peoples Republic Of Maryland
    Posts
    31,407
    Quote Originally Posted by SamSpade View Post
    I realize this only touches on a small part of the OP - but what the hell does anyone think is a "fair share" for the rich to pay, in taxes?


    dude made some reference on his Facebook page or letters to the editor about taxes in the 'Good Old Days'


    I think when it was 75 to 90% tax rate on the rich ....
    Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.
    - Robert J. Hanlon.

    “There is a deeply anti-democratic undercurrent to much of the criticism of the new president, borne aloft by an assumption that democracy is too important to be left to the voters.”

    And if a statue can oppress you, then I submit that you have greater issues. - A West.

  8. #18
    INGSOC GURPS's Avatar
    Member Since
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Peoples Republic Of Maryland
    Posts
    31,407
    Quote Originally Posted by PsyOps View Post
    ..... it has to do with stripping the wealth from the wealthy and giving it to the poor.


    only 'the rich' progressives don't like or that don't give to progressive pet projects
    Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.
    - Robert J. Hanlon.

    “There is a deeply anti-democratic undercurrent to much of the criticism of the new president, borne aloft by an assumption that democracy is too important to be left to the voters.”

    And if a statue can oppress you, then I submit that you have greater issues. - A West.

  9. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by GURPS View Post
    dude made some reference on his Facebook page or letters to the editor about taxes in the 'Good Old Days'


    I think when it was 75 to 90% tax rate on the rich ....
    And I remember some of those days. But it's important to remember a few things -

    Try and take a look at the *median* pay for someone in say, the 40's and 50's and look again at those tax brackets, with the actual numbers in them.
    THEN - do some digging and find out the population of the nation that actually MADE that money in the top few brackets.
    THEN - look at how much revenue came from those brackets.

    It wasn't a lot of money, and there weren't a lot of people making that money.
    As a consequence, those ultra-high brackets didn't bring in a lot of tax revenue - it's what happens when you tax the crap out of maybe 10 people.
    You take a lot of their money, but there ain't a lot of them to make a difference.

    It's also mathematically dumb - try to imagine a graph where there's a massive spike to the right, but a slow ramp to the spike.
    An exponential graph. That area on the right might be the rich. You see most of the curve is under the last little bit.
    But what happens to that graph if you cut the last bit - OUT? You don't have much. What happens to your money if the whole nation's economy tumbles?
    Or worse, a lot of those rich decide - to just *LEAVE*?

    A smart thing to do would be to smooth it out more - and to find optimal tax rates for each part. Move the part of the graph more to the left and make the rate
    a value where you get the most without losing it to inactivity.

    There's this idea among those clearly not familiar with human behavior where it's assumed that things like taxation can be straight linear - you know, tax more, get more.
    But it doesn't work that way. Tax enough, and they don't see the wisdom in working harder. It's like taxing gas - and people start carpooling.
    Maybe that's what you want them to do - but it sucks as a means of getting money.
    Insults are the arguments employed by those who are in the wrong". Jean-Jacques Rousseau

Members who have read this thread: 55

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Search:     Advanced Search
Search HELP

| Home | Help | Contact Us | About somd.com | Privacy | Advertising | Sponsors | Newsletter |

| What's New | What's Cool | Top Rated | Add A Link | Mod a Link |

| Announcements | Bookstore | Cafe | Calendar | Classifieds | Community |
| Culture | Dating | Dining | Education | Employment | Entertainment |
| Forums | Free E-Mail | Games | Gear! | Government | Guestbook | Health | Marketplace | Mortgage | News |
| Organizations | Photos | Real Estate | Relocation | Sports | Survey | Travel | Wiki | Weather | Worship |