blaen99

iTrader: (6)

Ah, that would be the fault of your formatting then. Bad Scrappy, bad. I couldn't figure out how I wasn't getting 55,500 on the first one either, but I went with your posted numbers.

(Edit) I still can't make sense of those numbers, Scrappy. I get 6105 for Romney and 7215 under the current system (A large tax decrease, yes, but not as large as the one you posted). This can't be a rounding error, so what does your spreadsheet do that my calculator doesn't?

Scrappy Jack

iTrader: (2)

I can't be bothered to check your math but - unless I have made another typo in putting this together so quickly - the problem is likely that you don't know how to calculate tax obligations (see: not understanding the way itemized vs standard deductions work). That's not a dig, most people don't. That's why they have CPAs or TurboTax. The rates are bracketed: you can't just take your marginal rate or effective rate and apply it toward your final income level.

Under current law, you pay 10% on every dollar of taxable income over $0 up to $17,400, 15% on every dollar over $17,400 up to $70,700, 25% on every dollar over $70,700 up to $142,700, etc.

The formula for my 2012 number looks something like this:

=$1740+(15%*(55,500-$17,400)

The formula for my "Romney version" looks like this:

=$1392+(12%*($55,500-$17,400)

blaen99

iTrader: (6)

Fuuuuuuuuuuuuuu.....

I see why you spreadsheet that now, and why it's so hard to get similar results for me. I'm going to have to actually research this topic to try to even verify goddamn numbers, aren't I?

Scrappy Jack

iTrader: (2)

A) Yes. Taxes are complicated and confusing and most people talking or writing about them are missing something. Knowing is half the battle.

or...

B) No. Just assume I am the closest thing to an expert on the subject of personal (not corporate) finance and taxes you know, being educated formally in and dealing with them on a daily basis, and trust my numbers and interpretations.* #AppealtoAuthority




* Unless Joe Perez corrects me on something that I concede to or I correct myself on a typo or clerical error.

jeff_man

iTrader: (7)

At first I thought the person with the miata turbo cat avatar was flip flopping almost as bad as Mitty. Then I saw you all just had the same icon.

tl;dr

All your debating matters nothing. I'm the normal guy on the street that watches Fox so I'm voting Mitty,

Now I'm normal guy that's on the street that does not watch Fox, I'm voting for Obama.

More people vote how there parents or church / place of warship tell them to then make educated chooses on the facts.

That's how this works and no about of talking will change that. 2 party systems don't work when you are focused to only be able to vote for clone a or clone b.

Braineack

iTrader: (62)

~ Senator Barack H. Obama, March 2006

blaen99

iTrader: (6)

If anyone here is seriously convinced that Romney has a good chance of winning, odds have hit 4:1 against him in several betting establishments.

Go bet on him. Seriously. You'll make a absolute metric butt-ton of money if he wins.

Braineack

iTrader: (62)

he has a good shot at winning; far greater than ron paul.

but it's doubtful he will, because people love a black president that cant get **** done in four years and need four more years of doing nothing.

Scrappy Jack

iTrader: (2)

Talk to me about the past accuracy of those betting establishments at predictig the winner of a presidential race, at least 2 months out.

Braineack

iTrader: (62)

Blaen is just butt-hurt that his muslim-savior might get unseated by a mormon.

Braineack

iTrader: (62)

blaen99

iTrader: (6)

Fivethirtyeight.com (Not A Betting Establishment I'm referring to here)? Top notch, actually.

Scrappy Jack

iTrader: (2)

You said the betting establishments have Romney at a 4:1 underdog, implying that has some predictive power. I'm asking if it does.

If you want to change the point to, "fivethirtyeight.com has Obama as the favorite and they have a good track record of predictions based on results X,Y and Z" that's different.

blaen99

iTrader: (6)

Go to Vegas. I have no idea as to what the specific betting establishments are, beyond they are making the rounds of various righty news sources I visit to "Go to Vegas and start laying money down for Romney to win, the odds are 4:1" and similar.

As for fivethirtyeight, yeah. They are currently the most accurate pollster/poll aggregator/predictor/whatever out there as per the 2008 and 2010 elections I'd say. That's what I use if I'm going to make any bets (And I've started to bet heavily on Obama at certain prediction markets now. Once Obama crossed the 75% threshold on 538, that was enough for me to start laying small wagers of Miata money that I won't miss, but wagers that if they are won, will finance a **** ton of Miata mods.)

mgeoffriau

iTrader: (7)

On sportsbook.ag, Romney is +160 and Obama is -185. This means you have to bet $1 to win $1.60 on Romney to win, or bet $1.85 to win $1 on Obama to win.

You can also bet individual state elections.

bovada.lv has the Democratic Party at -205 and the Republican Party at +165.

ReplaceDisplace

I don't think there's need for argument. Really I think we should study the OP. We can make an exhibit of him and his post as "What happens when someone who believes no one on television would ever lie and campaign advertisements have some sort of journalistic standard tries to make a political statement based on random television bits in broad unspecific terms" I think that's what he means when he gets the impression that he's done something really bad and he's a horrible person but can't quite seem to figure out why he thinks that.....

thenuge26

iTrader: (2)

I don't know if he is a horrible person. I just know that I don't agree with the few policies he has actually taken a stand on (Iran/foreign policy in general, marijuana legalization) and know absolutely nothing else about any of his other positions. What is his position on health care reform? I don't know, he says something different every day. First all of the ACA was going to be repealed. Then some of the parts would stay, but not the Individual Mandate (which is impossible btw, the only reason that all the fun parts of the ACA are possible is the Individual Mandate). Then it would all be repealed again.

Luckily, I live in Indiana, so thanks to the Electoral College, my vote doesn't count. Since Romney has a 15 point lead, I may as well stay home. HOORAY FOR DEMOCRACY!

Braineack

iTrader: (62)

You could take three minutes and like, I dunno, research?

Personally, I like the electoral college, it's the 17th admendment that needs to be repealed. That and everything else the regressive mob-party ruined.

Braineack

iTrader: (62)

here's a few quotes from the last day or two from romney that make me like him:

'Palestinians have no interest in peace'
Obama supporters are: 'Dependent on government'
'Obama Plan Attractive To Those Who Don't Pay Taxes'


quotes that make me not like obama:

'I think when you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody'
'i want to fundamentally change america'
'UPS and FedEx are doing just fine, right? It's the Post Office that's always having problems'
'I've now been in 57 states -- I think one left to go'
'I do think at a certain point you've made enough money.'
'I don’t want a government that’s wasting money. It’s gotta be lean, it’s gotta be mean, and it’s gotta make sure that its focused on the people who are needing a ladder up.'

or anything he's ever said ever.

ReplaceDisplace

You've got some good ones...but there are so many to choose from...

"You didn't build that (buisness). Someone else made that happen"

"Egypt is neither an ally nor an enemy"

"This is the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and the planet began to heal"

This "you didn't build that" comment is worst out of all of them I think.... it and everything it implies I find absolutely repulsive and wrong.