The Current Events, News, and Politics Thread
#681
Elite Member
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 2,799
Total Cats: 179
By posting too much in the political threads and trying to objectively discuss current events and economic policy while never discussing my car or on-track antics?
#684
The "ultra-wealthy" are the "ultra-wealthy" for a reason...
First, I'd like to differentiate between "ultra-wealthy" and "ultra-high-income-earner"
The former may not need to pay any taxes at all, because "wealthy" does not imply "income earner", though an ultra-wealthy man with no income is a fool, and as we all know, "a fool and his money are soon parted".
So, lets take an investigative peek at the "ultra-high-income-earner". To help me make my point, we'll use a story - everyone loves a good story.
It's the end of the quarter, and the CEO of "Tile and Carpet, Inc." has asked for a payroll report from his sales force. When he looks at the report, he is staggered to find out that Greg, his number one sales person, earned $12,000 more than he did over the quarter.
"How is this possible?" He thinks to himself. I am the CEO, I'm supposed to make more than this..."Greg". He looks at Gregs records and sees that Greg had focused on selling "hi-gloss no-slip tile", which has the highest commission payout of all of the products. Thinking to himself that he's going to pull a fast one on this "greg" charachter, the CEO changes the commission structure of his company so that the "hi-gloss no slip tile" is actually towards the bottom of the commission structure.
At the end of the next quarter, the CEO gets his eagerly awaited payroll report. Tickled to death that he's going to have the highest payroll in the company, he glances over the report for self-validation. Immediately he's speechless. This "greg" charachter, as the report states, earned $18,000 more than he did.
How in the world did this happen? The CEO changed up the entire comission structure to move greg's top products to the bottom. As he dives deeper into the report, he finds out that greg sold only $3,200 worth of "hi-gloss non-slip" tile this quarter, whereas last quarter, greg had sold $812,000 of that exact same product. Furthermore, in the previous quarter, greg had not sold a single dollar worth of "super blue carpet padding", but had sold well over $1,000,000 in this quarter. The funny thing is, the CEO had moved "super blue carpet padding" from near the bottom of the commission structure, all the way up to the very top.
You see, Greg was making an incredible amount of money because he was selling products based on the commission structure (which was published to the entire sales force whenever changes were made). Greg was able to pick and choose which products he pushed based upon how much money he would make in the sale.
Yeah, I know.... "cool story, bro"
How does this relate to the "ultra-high income earners"?
Well you see, the ultra-high income earners know what types of income are most profitable for them - and since many methods are relatively similar in income earning potential, a lot of times these tax "loopholes" (as we call them) mean that a certain opportunity is more profitable than another, and this helps determine which opportunities that an income earner pursues. The "loopholes" are actually designed as government incentives to get people to use their money in certain ways, and since the income-earners are using these incentives, the "loopholes" are serving their purpose exactly as intended. Just as our carpet and tile salesman used the commission structure to determine exactly which products he was going to promote, the high-earner is using the tax code to help him determine the most profitable investments of his time and money.
Thus, the ultra-high income-earner is not "earning a high income and then finding tax loopholes which allows him to keep most of it", but rather, he is "finding tax loopholes and integrating them into his investment decision making process". You see, he is not "evading taxes", he is making sound business decisions. He is maximizing profits, and as all democrats instictively know, profits are the root of all evil.
In the end, the effective tax rate of these high income-earners is significantly decreased because they can choose how they will earn their incomes. On the flip side median income earners generally earn the vast majority of their income as wage-earners, and I should note that there is little or no government incentive to be a "wage earner" and thus, the median income earner doesn't get to exploit any "loopholes".
On a different note, "charitable contributions" are generally exempt from taxation, up to a certain threshold. Compare how likely a median-earner is to make a large charitable donation versus an ultra-high earner. This is a "loophole" that I, (definitely not a high-income earner) am very unlikely to exploit.
First, I'd like to differentiate between "ultra-wealthy" and "ultra-high-income-earner"
The former may not need to pay any taxes at all, because "wealthy" does not imply "income earner", though an ultra-wealthy man with no income is a fool, and as we all know, "a fool and his money are soon parted".
So, lets take an investigative peek at the "ultra-high-income-earner". To help me make my point, we'll use a story - everyone loves a good story.
It's the end of the quarter, and the CEO of "Tile and Carpet, Inc." has asked for a payroll report from his sales force. When he looks at the report, he is staggered to find out that Greg, his number one sales person, earned $12,000 more than he did over the quarter.
"How is this possible?" He thinks to himself. I am the CEO, I'm supposed to make more than this..."Greg". He looks at Gregs records and sees that Greg had focused on selling "hi-gloss no-slip tile", which has the highest commission payout of all of the products. Thinking to himself that he's going to pull a fast one on this "greg" charachter, the CEO changes the commission structure of his company so that the "hi-gloss no slip tile" is actually towards the bottom of the commission structure.
At the end of the next quarter, the CEO gets his eagerly awaited payroll report. Tickled to death that he's going to have the highest payroll in the company, he glances over the report for self-validation. Immediately he's speechless. This "greg" charachter, as the report states, earned $18,000 more than he did.
How in the world did this happen? The CEO changed up the entire comission structure to move greg's top products to the bottom. As he dives deeper into the report, he finds out that greg sold only $3,200 worth of "hi-gloss non-slip" tile this quarter, whereas last quarter, greg had sold $812,000 of that exact same product. Furthermore, in the previous quarter, greg had not sold a single dollar worth of "super blue carpet padding", but had sold well over $1,000,000 in this quarter. The funny thing is, the CEO had moved "super blue carpet padding" from near the bottom of the commission structure, all the way up to the very top.
You see, Greg was making an incredible amount of money because he was selling products based on the commission structure (which was published to the entire sales force whenever changes were made). Greg was able to pick and choose which products he pushed based upon how much money he would make in the sale.
Yeah, I know.... "cool story, bro"
How does this relate to the "ultra-high income earners"?
Well you see, the ultra-high income earners know what types of income are most profitable for them - and since many methods are relatively similar in income earning potential, a lot of times these tax "loopholes" (as we call them) mean that a certain opportunity is more profitable than another, and this helps determine which opportunities that an income earner pursues. The "loopholes" are actually designed as government incentives to get people to use their money in certain ways, and since the income-earners are using these incentives, the "loopholes" are serving their purpose exactly as intended. Just as our carpet and tile salesman used the commission structure to determine exactly which products he was going to promote, the high-earner is using the tax code to help him determine the most profitable investments of his time and money.
Thus, the ultra-high income-earner is not "earning a high income and then finding tax loopholes which allows him to keep most of it", but rather, he is "finding tax loopholes and integrating them into his investment decision making process". You see, he is not "evading taxes", he is making sound business decisions. He is maximizing profits, and as all democrats instictively know, profits are the root of all evil.
In the end, the effective tax rate of these high income-earners is significantly decreased because they can choose how they will earn their incomes. On the flip side median income earners generally earn the vast majority of their income as wage-earners, and I should note that there is little or no government incentive to be a "wage earner" and thus, the median income earner doesn't get to exploit any "loopholes".
On a different note, "charitable contributions" are generally exempt from taxation, up to a certain threshold. Compare how likely a median-earner is to make a large charitable donation versus an ultra-high earner. This is a "loophole" that I, (definitely not a high-income earner) am very unlikely to exploit.
#685
Boost Czar
Thread Starter
iTrader: (62)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 79,501
Total Cats: 4,079
tax loopholes aren't making or breaking them. why do you care if they pay more? what benefit do YOU get?
What if I said everyone who's black should pay 5% extra in taxes because they use the system more?
What if I said everyone who's black should pay 5% extra in taxes because they use the system more?
#686
Is Drew Brees's fair share higher than Bill the Layman's?
I would argue that if Drew is making 100x more than Bill, then his fair share is 100x more than Bill
Bill, on the other hand, is arguing that Drew's fair share is 500x more than Bill's.
There would be a financial incentive to undergo plastic surgery in order to change skin color from black to white. The high-earning blacks would have much more incentive than the low-earning blacks, and would thus be much more likely to undergo the process. The low-earning blacks would then claim that the high-earning blacks are gaming the system so that they don't have to pay their "fair share"
#687
Boost Czar
Thread Starter
iTrader: (62)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 79,501
Total Cats: 4,079
(Sent from phone via capitalism)
Fair share is subjective. **** fair share. Fair share = you want more than equal rights
But very good answer
Fair share is subjective. **** fair share. Fair share = you want more than equal rights
But very good answer
Last edited by Braineack; 12-27-2011 at 06:33 PM.
#689
Boost Czar
Thread Starter
iTrader: (62)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 79,501
Total Cats: 4,079
MILES CITY, Mont. (AP) — Montana authorities say a man shot himself in the ankle after hospital staff refused to give him painkillers for his back.
The Miles City police chief says the 48-year-old man was upset when left Holy Rosary Healthcare hospital Monday night, so he grabbed a gun from his car and shot himself in the hospital parking lot to get treatment.
Prosecutors are reviewing the case to determine whether to charge the man, whose name was not released.
The Miles City police chief says the 48-year-old man was upset when left Holy Rosary Healthcare hospital Monday night, so he grabbed a gun from his car and shot himself in the hospital parking lot to get treatment.
Prosecutors are reviewing the case to determine whether to charge the man, whose name was not released.
#690
Boost Czar
Thread Starter
iTrader: (62)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 79,501
Total Cats: 4,079
But that finally changed last week, when Gov. Rick Snyder signed a bill that will increase the cap to 300 charter schools in 2012, 500 in 2014 and eliminate limits altogether starting in 2015. That means school choice is on the march in Michigan, and traditional public schools will face increased pressure to measure up or lose thousands of students and millions of dollars of state funding.
I expect Michigan not the be the laughing stock of education anymore.
#691
http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2011/im.../topstate3.pdf
99. Are you an ignorant American?
Yes 99%
No 1%
100. Do you need to grow some ***** and vote for the person that agrees most with your values?
Yes 99%
No 1%
5. Overall, which Republican candidate do you think best represents the personal characteristics and qualities that you think a President should have?
Romney 25%
Paul 19%
Santorum 18%
Perry 12%
Gingrich 11%
Bachmann 10%
Huntsman 2%
Someone else (vol.) *
None/ No one (vol.) 1%
No opinion 2%
6. Which Republican candidate is most likely to agree with you on the issues that matter most to you?
Paul 22%
Romney 18%
Santorum 17%
Gingrich 13%
Bachmann 12%
Perry 12%
Huntsman 1%
Someone else (vol.) *
None/ No one (vol.) 2%
No opinion 4%
Romney 25%
Paul 19%
Santorum 18%
Perry 12%
Gingrich 11%
Bachmann 10%
Huntsman 2%
Someone else (vol.) *
None/ No one (vol.) 1%
No opinion 2%
6. Which Republican candidate is most likely to agree with you on the issues that matter most to you?
Paul 22%
Romney 18%
Santorum 17%
Gingrich 13%
Bachmann 12%
Perry 12%
Huntsman 1%
Someone else (vol.) *
None/ No one (vol.) 2%
No opinion 4%
99. Are you an ignorant American?
Yes 99%
No 1%
100. Do you need to grow some ***** and vote for the person that agrees most with your values?
Yes 99%
No 1%
#695
"Fair share" is only this for me: If someone makes more than me, I should not be paying more in taxes than them.
I strongly feel that I should not be paying a greater tax burden then someone that makes more than me.
Do you agree or disagree with this, Brainy?
Now here's the shocker about the fair share argument: Okay, so the top X pay Y%. I feel the Z% I pay should be no more than Y%.
To put it more simply: I think any "tax loopholes" someone has access to should apply to everyone. Not just an elite few.
Loopholes are fine - but only if they apply to everyone, not just a few people. Then again, I also think most of the US pays too much in taxes and we should close loopholes in favor of lowering everyone's tax rate.
#696
for the millionaires and donating thing
didn't we already argue that on here once?
meh i must have been discussing that once somewhere else
all i have to say bout that is
i can NOT respect those men because they do not lead by example
i CAN respect Ron Paul because he DOES lead by example
sure his refusal of the overly generous congressional health care and pension doesn't hardly help the government to balance its budget
but the Dr. leads by example
in response to FRT_fun's question about having a chance at winning
well so far he is doing excellent in Iowa where he has alot of tv ads running
i think he has a great chance at winning minus his foreign policy
unfortunately most people still think terrorists hate us because we are "free"
and not because of our military action in the middle east well before 9-11
i have never seen such widespread support for Ron Paul until now. people are finally starting to understand how far we have strayed from what our founding fathers intended. the question is have enough people waken up
there are two other major problems with Ron Pauls chances i see
JFK was killed shortly after speaking out against the federal reserve
and the fact that this here exists
didn't we already argue that on here once?
meh i must have been discussing that once somewhere else
all i have to say bout that is
i can NOT respect those men because they do not lead by example
i CAN respect Ron Paul because he DOES lead by example
sure his refusal of the overly generous congressional health care and pension doesn't hardly help the government to balance its budget
but the Dr. leads by example
in response to FRT_fun's question about having a chance at winning
well so far he is doing excellent in Iowa where he has alot of tv ads running
i think he has a great chance at winning minus his foreign policy
unfortunately most people still think terrorists hate us because we are "free"
and not because of our military action in the middle east well before 9-11
i have never seen such widespread support for Ron Paul until now. people are finally starting to understand how far we have strayed from what our founding fathers intended. the question is have enough people waken up
there are two other major problems with Ron Pauls chances i see
JFK was killed shortly after speaking out against the federal reserve
and the fact that this here exists
Last edited by jared8783; 12-29-2011 at 07:55 PM.
#699
Wikipedia has an excellent article on that.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sixteen...s_Constitution
Cliffs: Repeatedly supported by the supreme court, amendment properly ratified across 42 states, power granted in the constitution.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sixteen...s_Constitution
Cliffs: Repeatedly supported by the supreme court, amendment properly ratified across 42 states, power granted in the constitution.
#700
Boost Czar
Thread Starter
iTrader: (62)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 79,501
Total Cats: 4,079
Show me an example of one classical liberal in Washington. Ron Paul?
"Fair share" is only this for me: If someone makes more than me, I should not be paying more in taxes than them.
I strongly feel that I should not be paying a greater tax burden then someone that makes more than me.
but you look at your %
Do you agree or disagree with this, Brainy?
I strongly feel that I should not be paying a greater tax burden then someone that makes more than me.
but you look at your %
Do you agree or disagree with this, Brainy?
Now here's the shocker about the fair share argument: Okay, so the top X pay Y%. I feel the Z% I pay should be no more than Y%.
To put it more simply: I think any "tax loopholes" someone has access to should apply to everyone. Not just an elite few.
Loopholes are fine - but only if they apply to everyone, not just a few people. Then again, I also think most of the US pays too much in taxes and we should close loopholes in favor of lowering everyone's tax rate.
Loopholes are fine - but only if they apply to everyone, not just a few people. Then again, I also think most of the US pays too much in taxes and we should close loopholes in favor of lowering everyone's tax rate.
Yes, I agree the tax code is too complicated. It should be easy and equal to all groups.
Last edited by Braineack; 12-30-2011 at 09:42 AM.