My money... - Page 3 - Miata Turbo Forum - Boost cars, acquire cats.

Welcome to Miataturbo.net   Members
 


Current Events, News, Politics Keep the politics here.

Reply
 
 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 11-04-2010, 08:48 AM   #41
Elite Member
iTrader: (2)
 
fooger03's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Columbus, OH
Posts: 4,132
Total Cats: 187
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Savington View Post
Here's a little food for thought for the "tax the poor" crew: A majority of people, including a majority of rich people (250k+/yr), think that rich people should be taxed to reduce the deficit.

http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x1295.xml?ReleaseID=1438

Question 49. Do you think - raising income taxes on households making more than $250,000
...should or should not be a main part of any government approach to the deficit?

Households making >250k/yr: 64% YES
Households making 100-250k/yr: 51% YES
Households making 50-100k/yr: 61% YES
Households making <50k/yr: 64% YES
If rich people were taxed to reduce the deficit, the money would not be used to reduce the deficit. It would only increase gov't spending.
fooger03 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2010, 09:30 AM   #42
Boost Czar
iTrader: (61)
 
Braineack's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 72,833
Total Cats: 1,786
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by y8s View Post
Though to be fair, social security is taking in more than it gives away.
Is that why every president ever, including Clinton during his surplus, has dipped into SS funds?

Dump SS, dump welfare, and dump urban housing and you just freed up 41% of our Government's "budget". That's a lot of money that could stay in the "free" market.


FWIW, 250K a year is not rich. not remotely close. It's offense to believe that someone would think raising taxes on a select group of people, by force, is a just way to pretend to be doing good for another group of people. It's a great way to stay in power and give incentives for votes.

Higher taxes imposed on the rich (and the semi-rich) will not come out of their consumption expenditures, but out of their investment capital (i.e., their savings); that such taxes will mean less investment, i.e., less production, fewer jobs, higher prices for scarcer goods.

Those extra taxes most will surely hurt the economy and will increase the deficit. Find an ecomonist that says it s a good idea to tax the "rich" in a depression. All the extra taxes will pay for, however, is Obama's 200 million dollar a DAY trip to India with 3000 of his friends.

As far as the poll: #49 asks >250K and everyone says yes. #50 asks over 1mill and everyone says yes. #51 asks middle-class and everyone says no.

So what does that tell you? It tells you those that said yes think it's okay to force "rich" people to pay for their undeserved whatnots. So does that make it just?

Don't pretend to be a champion of minority rights and a champion of the people if you do it by force. No one’s rights can be secured by the violation of the rights of others. The ends do not justify the means. If some men are entitled by right to the products of the work of others, it means that those others are deprived of rights and condemned to slave labor.

Last edited by Braineack; 11-04-2010 at 10:16 AM.
Braineack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2010, 09:45 AM   #43
Elite Member
iTrader: (9)
 
TurboTim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Chesterfield, NJ
Posts: 6,482
Total Cats: 248
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Savington View Post
Here's a little food for thought for the "tax the poor" crew: A majority of people, including a majority of rich people (250k+/yr), think that rich people should be taxed to reduce the deficit.

http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x1295.xml?ReleaseID=1438

Question 49. Do you think - raising income taxes on households making more than $250,000
...should or should not be a main part of any government approach to the deficit?

Households making >250k/yr: 64% YES
Households making 100-250k/yr: 51% YES
Households making 50-100k/yr: 61% YES
Households making <50k/yr: 64% YES
Wait, I make WAY more than $250k/year and I'm no where near rich. WTF?!

EDIT: Damnit Braineak beat me to it one post up. And I just heard about Bama's india trip this morning, again, WTF?!

Quote:
Originally Posted by fooger03 View Post
If rich people were taxed to reduce the deficit, the money would not be used to reduce the deficit. It would only increase gov't spending.
So true.
TurboTim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2010, 10:16 AM   #44
Senior Member
iTrader: (10)
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Ohio
Posts: 800
Total Cats: 3
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TurboTim View Post
Wait, I make WAY more than $250k/year and I'm no where near rich. WTF?!
Are you serious?
soloracer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2010, 10:21 AM   #45
Supporting Vendor
iTrader: (10)
 
Reverant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Athens, Greece
Posts: 5,440
Total Cats: 198
Default

Out of curiosity, what's the average spending per month for you single guys over there? Rent/bills/insurance/food/commute? Married with children need not apply.
Reverant is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2010, 10:25 AM   #46
Boost Czar
iTrader: (61)
 
Braineack's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 72,833
Total Cats: 1,786
Default

Nearly my entire salary goes directly into a savings account...

and this is what my fridge looks like:

Attached Thumbnails
My money...-fridge.jpg  
Braineack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2010, 10:30 AM   #47
Elite Member
iTrader: (9)
 
TurboTim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Chesterfield, NJ
Posts: 6,482
Total Cats: 248
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by soloracer View Post
Are you serious?
No. My salary at 4 days a week is just over what I started at after college, which was just below the average starting salary amongst my peers. The absurdflow stuff helps out our the hobby/long weekend fund.

Fortunately my wife is doing well working for a large corporation, otherwise we'd be f*cked a long time ago. I make sure she doesn't get pregnant.
TurboTim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2010, 10:40 AM   #48
Supporting Vendor
iTrader: (10)
 
Reverant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Athens, Greece
Posts: 5,440
Total Cats: 198
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Braineack View Post
and this is what my fridge looks like:
Yay, that's worse than what my fridge looked like when I was in college.

Anyone else care to share the info?
Reverant is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2010, 11:05 AM   #49
Moderator
iTrader: (11)
 
sixshooter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Tampa, Florida
Posts: 15,653
Total Cats: 1,559
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Warned View Post
Not only was the government not intended to make a profit, they were not intended to create jobs, own companies or create welfare states. I donít need them to take my money and redistribute it to some lazy SOB that is three generation into welfare.

I say hide the food stamps under their work boots and let them starve to death.

And you can't give a tax "refund" to someone who doesn't pay taxes.
This guy gets it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by y8s View Post
from the "liberal" wikipedia:

I just reduced our expenditures by 62.88% by removing obvious illegitimate functions of our government. And I left the EPA, NASA, and most of the small budget departments alone. Can you imagine what an economic boom we would have if we reduced government back to its intended purpose? Wow!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki79 View Post
I'm very happy I don't have to struggle with the problems you have.

Tip of the day: Move to Norway.
I wish people who are dragging us to socialism would do just that. Instead of wrecking what we have by making it socialist, why don't these people move to a country that is already socialist and leave our freedoms alone. Some of us actually believe in the self-reliance and rugged individualism that this country was founded on.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki79 View Post
As for the health system, it all free in Norway with small deductables adding up to a maximum of about $300 a year. After that, -everything- is free exept dental care. They're even considering adding that into the health care system.
If a country is able to create jobs for everyone, health care systems like ours is no problem to maintain. Everyone pays tax, so everyone pays for the health care. And you never have to fear to not get treated or to get into debt for the rest of your life because your insurance assfucked you after you were hospitalized.
I almost vomitted after watching "Sicko", and even though it is extremities, situations like that should never happen.
Sicko was a propaganda film, the likes of which would make Dr. Joseph Goebbels proud. The "facts" are changed to suit the argument every time they don't agree with the script. Iran proved the Holocaust didn't actually happen, too.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Braineack View Post
Is that why every president ever, included Clinton during his surplus, has dipped into SS funds?

Dump SS, dump welfare, and dump urban housing and you just freed up 41% of our Government's "budget". That's a lot of money that could stay in the "free" market.
Don't stop there.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Braineack View Post
FWIW, 250K a year is not rich. not remotely close.
So true.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Braineack View Post
It's offense to believe that someone would think raising taxes on a select group of people, by force, is a just way to pretend to be doing good for another group of people. It's a great way to stay in power and give incentives for votes.
It actually does a disservice to both groups. Honestly, it is criminal.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Braineack View Post
Higher taxes imposed on the rich (and the semi-rich) will not come out of their consumption expenditures, but out of their investment capital (i.e., their savings); that such taxes will mean less investment, i.e., less production, fewer jobs, higher prices for scarcer goods.
I have dozens of customers that would hire more people if they had to pay less in taxes. And, as you point out, they would be able to do more work at a lower cost to the purchaser if the tax overhead was not so high. Our country would be more productive.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Braineack View Post
Don't pretend to be a champion of minority rights and a champion of the people if you do it by force.

No oneís rights can be secured by the violation of the rights of others.

The ends do not justify the means.


If some men are entitled by right to the products of the work of others, it means that those others are deprived of rights and condemned to slave labor.
I want to with your brain, Brain.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TurboTim View Post
Wait, I make WAY more than $250k/year and I'm no where near rich. WTF?!
Most people don't understand that the truly wealthy don't work for wages. It is a fallacy played out for the simple minded so that they may me exploited as a voting block.

Wealth envy is a sin.

Never forget that taxes not collected on entire blocks of society are a free handout as well.
sixshooter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2010, 12:07 PM   #50
Elite Member
iTrader: (2)
 
fooger03's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Columbus, OH
Posts: 4,132
Total Cats: 187
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Reverant View Post
Out of curiosity, what's the average spending per month for you single guys over there? Rent/bills/insurance/food/commute? Married with children need not apply.
Single, No children, Grandma's Boy.

Costs to me for housing, food, heating, water, electricity, commute, insurance (all of the 'necessities'): Total less than $600/ month.

Amount into savings: $550/month

Total income after taxes: $4600/month

Amount returned directly to the economy for the unneccesaries including phone/ internet/ cable/ excess cars and their 'investments' / entertainment/ wining and dining/ clothes/ etc./ etc.: The rest of the $4600.

A "living wage" to me, in the case of $600/month and a 40 hour work week, is about $3.38/hour after taxes. I've also taken personal responsibility for my employment to the tune of a savings account. Currently, I could live without a job for nearly a year and a half without asking the gov't for handouts... I'm sure I could find a job at my local McDonalds for minimum wage in less time than that.

I could probably get a job working for almost any company in the United States if they could hire me for $3.38/hr after taxes.

Edit: Ohio voters recently passed what is effectively a "stimulus plan" for military personnel who have deployed. IIRC, I qualify for a $1000 one time payment. I refused to submit for it on principal --> The people that voted for it aren't the ones who will be paying for it. If someone wants to give me money, they can hand it to me themselves instead of forcing someone else to give it to me.

Last edited by fooger03; 11-04-2010 at 12:20 PM.
fooger03 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2010, 12:26 PM   #51
Senior Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Port Orchard, WA
Posts: 620
Total Cats: 4
Default

Monthly cost for necessities for my wife and I (no kids) are about an even $2000 a month. Our rent alone (on a 900sq ft 2br house built in 1940) is over double Foogers total monthly necessities, and it's on the low side of average for this area.
Rennkafer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2010, 12:40 PM   #52
Supporting Vendor
iTrader: (10)
 
Reverant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Athens, Greece
Posts: 5,440
Total Cats: 198
Default

Can I feel depressed? $1500 average monthly salary over here. Employer gets to pay about $500 as a retirement & insurance fund towards a state fund institute - so you get insurance from the state and a pension after 65 or 40 years of work. The average rent is $600 per month, power/water/phone is another $200 at best. Basic groceries at $100 per week, gas at $2 per LITER.

Anyone looking for a talented programmer/EE that actually likes to work 14hrs per day?
Reverant is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2010, 01:15 PM   #53
Elite Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 6,454
Total Cats: 80
Default

Here's an easier to see graphic on the Fed Gov's 2010 budget:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv...budget2010.gif
JasonC SBB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2010, 01:43 PM   #54
Senior Member
iTrader: (4)
 
ThatGuy85's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Waldo, Ohio
Posts: 750
Total Cats: 8
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Reverant View Post
Out of curiosity, what's the average spending per month for you single guys over there? Rent/bills/insurance/food/commute? Married with children need not apply.
Mortgage: 830
Truck Payment: 444
TV/Internet: 120
Electricity: 50
Water: 50
Insurance: 150
The rest of my checks are usually spent on booze/miata parts/other fun stuff. I try to put back about 200 a month into my savings.

Making about 2800 a month after taxes.
ThatGuy85 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2010, 01:45 PM   #55
Boost Czar
iTrader: (61)
 
Braineack's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 72,833
Total Cats: 1,786
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Reverant View Post
Yay, that's worse than what my fridge looked like when I was in college.

yep. wants vs. needs are subjective. good things our government makes the choices for us...
Braineack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2010, 01:47 PM   #56
y8s
2 Props,3 Dildos,& 1 Cat
iTrader: (8)
 
y8s's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Fake Virginia
Posts: 19,038
Total Cats: 406
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sixshooter View Post
I just reduced our expenditures by 62.88% by removing obvious illegitimate functions of our government. And I left the EPA, NASA, and most of the small budget departments alone. Can you imagine what an economic boom we would have if we reduced government back to its intended purpose? Wow!

so lets say you axe social security.. you no longer spend 730B.

but you also no longer collect 934B.

it makes taxpayers happy because you lowered their (effective) tax rate but you also also increase your defecit by ~200B and now have a bunch of old people without any income to deal with.

Of course on the latter point, I now have an extra few hundred dollars a month to cover the cost of the old folks home for mom and dad... if I'm feeling generous. Or better yet, they could have saved it for their future (everyone has savings, RIGHT?)
y8s is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2010, 01:48 PM   #57
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Round Pond, ME
Posts: 708
Total Cats: 18
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JasonC SBB View Post
Here's an easier to see graphic on the Fed Gov's 2010 budget:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv...budget2010.gif
Makes me want to kill myself. Or somebody.
So, what that indicates is that we would need to eliminate ALL military and other "Discretionary" spending to approximately balance income and spending.
Or we could chop SS and other entitlements, which will never happen. No one in any national office will have the *****.

Ultimately, this has to mean that I will end up paying more tax - probably significantly more. And, once means-testing is implemented, I will be ineligible for the SS I've been paying into because I've been living within my means and saving for retirement.

Is this a great country or what?
xturner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2010, 01:54 PM   #58
Boost Czar
iTrader: (61)
 
Braineack's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 72,833
Total Cats: 1,786
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by y8s View Post
Of course on the latter point, I now have an extra few hundred dollars a month to cover the cost of the old folks home for mom and dad... if I'm feeling generous. Or better yet, they could have saved it for their future (everyone has savings, RIGHT?)
exactly.

in 200 short years US become nothing to the best place on earth simply derived from a principle never seen in the world's existence...today we are fighting for some of the same reasons we signed the declaration of independence...
Braineack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2010, 02:05 PM   #59
Crumple Zone Tester
iTrader: (7)
 
mgeoffriau's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Jackson, MS
Posts: 7,656
Total Cats: 447
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by y8s View Post
so lets say you axe social security.. you no longer spend 730B.

but you also no longer collect 934B.
Where are these figures coming from?




Quote:
Social Security expenditures are expected to exceed tax receipts this year for the first time since 1983. The projected deficit of $41 billion this year (excluding interest income) is attributable to the recession and to an expected $25 billion downward adjustment to 2010 income that corrects for excess payroll tax revenue credited to the trust funds in earlier years. This deficit is expected to shrink substantially for 2011 and to return to small surpluses for years 2012-2014 due to the improving economy. After 2014 deficits are expected to grow rapidly as the baby boom generationís retirement causes the number of beneficiaries to grow substantially more rapidly than the number of covered workers. The annual deficits will be made up by redeeming trust fund assets in amounts less than interest earnings through 2024, and then by redeeming trust fund assets until reserves are exhausted in 2037, at which point tax income would be sufficient to pay about 75 percent of scheduled benefits through 2084. The projected exhaustion date for the combined OASI and DI Trust Funds is unchanged from last yearís report.
http://www.ssa.gov/OACT/TRSUM/index.html
mgeoffriau is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2010, 02:26 PM   #60
Elite Member
iTrader: (2)
 
fooger03's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Columbus, OH
Posts: 4,132
Total Cats: 187
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mgeoffriau View Post
Where are these figures coming from?






http://www.ssa.gov/OACT/TRSUM/index.html
"Will return a small surplus for the years 2012-2014 due to the improving economy"
Wow, do they already know the future, or are they saying the economy is going to improve because they will it to...you'd think Obama was the president or something...

The SSA is not going to report "we're failing and we need to cut the SSA and our jobs immediately before we kick the nation (which we've already brought to its knees) in the nuts."

That would be silly, and people would lose their jobs.
fooger03 is offline   Reply With Quote
 
 
Reply

Related Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
6 speed bellhousing replaceable? Twodoor Suspension, Brakes, Drivetrain 9 07-04-2014 07:27 AM
Sticking it to the man Joe Perez Insert BS here 196 04-09-2014 06:02 PM
Does Layaway have a purpose? skidude Insert BS here 21 12-14-2011 07:59 PM
1994 Miata - $1200 (Humble) mgeoffriau Miata parts for sale/trade 18 09-14-2010 11:19 AM


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

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



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:50 AM.