The honeymoon is ALREADY over? Shocking numbers

#226
#226
StepCross said:
If the % is 100, that would be fair, I suppose, but stupid. Then no one would have anything...bad plan, no?

My dad (a deeply religious man) used to tell me that "fair" would be everyone dies for their sins, because we all sin.

I guess 0% across the board would also be fair but stupid, because then we wouldn't have a country.

I guess you could say it's fair no matter the percentages, but some make a lot more sense than others. We want it to be both fair and practical.
Click to expand...

so in your opinion higher taxes for teh rich aren't a negative incentive for people to generate new wealth?
 
#227
#227
StepCross said:
Not really.

In fact, the two hardware store owners would pay the exact same rate on the first 100k they made. Then if one topped out there, he's done. If the other guy makes more, then his rate on the "more" goes up.




That's the point.

An idiot loser is going to have a bad life in any system.

But a talented, wise person will have a great life in a free society, and a terrible life in an oppressive, starving society.

Just look at the research posted in the education thread...in poor families, environmental factors basically end up controlling the educational prospects of the kids. Things are so bad that the kids' natural ability can't come out--they're screwed no matter what.

But in middle-to-wealthy families, environment basically stops mattering, and natural ability takes over.

This is the whole point: the successful, beyond a doubt, benefit more from a free society because they're just better at life. To say they're not getting any benefit is so far wrong it's almost comical!
Click to expand...

I'm not sure it was touched upon in the education thread regarding environmental factors, but lead is the perfect example. Lead stole about a trillion IQ points up to about the year 2000, and poor children today still endure a much sharper lead burden.

I think you just have to :salute: SC. Much like the "Who owns UT?" question, it will be rationalized with all kinds of foolishness to justify an already locked-in value assessment.
 
#228
#228
droski said:
so in your opinion higher taxes for teh rich aren't a negative incentive for people to generate new wealth?
Click to expand...

This is silly.

Taxes NEVER affect wealth generation. No one ever says, "I'm not going to do this piece of profitable business because I'll get taxed for it." No one says, "I'm not going to file this patent - think of the taxes on the business it will create!"

And if they do, they are completely irrational.
 
#229
#229
utgibbs said:
This is silly.

Taxes NEVER affect wealth generation.
Click to expand...

you keep saying this and it's rather ridiculous.

the higher your income and investments are taxed the less wealth you generate. it's really not very complicated. you act like taxes are paid out of monopoly money or something.
 
#230
#230
utgibbs said:
I'm not sure it was touched upon in the education thread regarding environmental factors, but lead is the perfect example. Lead stole about a trillion IQ points up to about the year 2000, and poor children today still endure a much sharper lead burden.
Click to expand...

wow, I'd like to see you prove that number
 
#231
#231
utgibbs said:
No one ever says, "I'm not going to do this piece of profitable business because I'll get taxed for it." No one says, "I'm not going to file this patent - think of the taxes on the business it will create!"

And if they do, they are completely irrational.
Click to expand...

exhibit Z you aren't a business owner. higher taxes can make a profitable business unprofitable. please google opportunity cost and IRR. thanks much.
 
#232
#232
droski said:
you keep saying this and it's rather ridiculous.

the higher your income and investments are taxed the less wealth you generate. it's really not very complicated. you act like taxes are paid out of monopoly money or something.
Click to expand...

And, you're wrong again.

Taxes are a cost of doing business. That is all.

:hi:
 
#235
#235
utgibbs said:
And, you're wrong again.

Taxes are a cost of doing business. That is all.

:hi:
Click to expand...

ok and taxes don't differ by different investments? and those tax differences don't have any effect on asset allocation?

still don't understand how "everyone has to pay taxes" is an argument that higher taxes don't make you poorer.
 
#236
#236
#237
#237
utgibbs said:
This is silly.

Taxes NEVER affect wealth generation. No one ever says, "I'm not going to do this piece of profitable business because I'll get taxed for it." No one says, "I'm not going to file this patent - think of the taxes on the business it will create!"

And if they do, they are completely irrational.
Click to expand...

No. They just offshore to cheaper labor countries or place the job of two people on one person and downsize. This is were you start talking out of your azz.
 
#238
#238
droski said:
ok and taxes don't differ by different investments? and those tax differences don't have any effect on asset allocation?

still don't understand how "everyone has to pay taxes" is an argument that higher taxes don't make you poorer.
Click to expand...

One example would be in health care. :)
 
#239
#239
Ihatethebuckeyes said:
No. They just offshore to cheaper labor countries or place the job of two people on one person and downsize. This is were you start talking out of your azz.
Click to expand...

not possible. no one makes decisions based on taxes. so therefore lower labor taxes in other countries couldnt' possibly drive decisionmaking.
 
#240
#240
Ihatethebuckeyes said:
No. They just offshore to cheaper labor countries or place the job of two people on one person and downsize. This is were you start talking out of your azz.
Click to expand...

Didn't happen when the rate was 90% to fund the NSA-64 under Truman.

Did happen under neoliberalism with a rate of about ? no more than 10% real rate of taxation on corporations (last year was 7% if I recall).

There is a very easy solution to the outsourcing problem.
 
#242
#242
truman? really? ya think worldwide competition might be a little steeper these day? and i'd love proof of your 10% rate of taxation on corporations.
 
#243
#243
utgibbs said:
Didn't happen when the rate was 90% to fund the NSA-64 under Truman.

Did happen under neoliberalism with a rate of about ? no more than 10% real rate of taxation on corporations (last year was 7% if I recall).

There is a very easy solution to the outsourcing problem.
Click to expand...

Yeah and offshoring was such an option then. Please don't use an old business model to base current business models upon. It is a way to really get burned. What worked back then does not work now. Step into 2011. Marx isn't alive anymore.
 
#244
#244
droski said:
truman? really? ya think worldwide competition might be a little steeper these day? and i'd love proof of your 10% rate of taxation on corporations.
Click to expand...

U.S._Federal_Receipts_-_FY_2007.png


For 2007. SHAZAM!
 
#245
#245
Ihatethebuckeyes said:
Droski don't you know his life opinion trumps your CFA? Give it up. You know nothing.
Click to expand...

it's really mindblowing. i did feasibility studies for 3 years when i first came out of college. the tax rates or incentives between different locations REGURALLY were what made the decision.
 
#247
#247
Ihatethebuckeyes said:
Yeah and offshoring was such an option then. Please don't use an old business model to base current business models upon. It is a way to really get burned. What worked back then does not work now. Step into 2011. Marx isn't alive anymore.
Click to expand...

I'm not.

But Reagan and Thatcher and Milton Friedman wanted it that way.

And, yes, Clinton signed NAFTA.

I am not your enemy here. There were easy fixes. China fixed it, and that's why they have leapt upwards since the Asian crisis.
 
#249
#249
utgibbs said:
U.S._Federal_Receipts_-_FY_2007.png


For 2007. SHAZAM!
Click to expand...

sweet jesus. how is this showing the tax rate is 10%? are you really this dumb? don't you realize that corporations lost billions in 09? ya think that might have something to do with tax receipts dropping.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top