Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Jan 12, 2016 - 05:29pm PT
|
^^^Chicken.^^^^
|
|
Norton
Social climber
|
|
|
Jan 12, 2016 - 05:37pm PT
|
No offense Norton
oh no offense taken!
so who did you vote for in 08 and 12, McCain, Romney, or Obama?
simple questions, very easy to answer, so why not answer and not deflect?
|
|
Escopeta
Trad climber
Idaho
|
|
|
Jan 12, 2016 - 05:40pm PT
|
Because its more fun when you don't get what you ask for. No other reason really.
It was a good guess apparently.
|
|
Escopeta
Trad climber
Idaho
|
|
|
Jan 12, 2016 - 06:09pm PT
|
I'm too busy watching the Blue Notes and the Devils on tape delay to bother with that mishegas.
|
|
Ken M
Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
|
|
|
Jan 12, 2016 - 06:24pm PT
|
wealth distribution is the wealthy pay for more then their fair share.
It is definitely not.
We've gone through a period now, where the redistribution has been TO the wealthy.
However, "fair" is a very loose term. The way you use it seems to say "more than they want to pay"
But the wealthy get a very dispropotionate share of gov't services: They get a free police force to protect their properties and persons.
(for some reason, gangs don't carry out kidnappings on poor people)
They get free court systems to protect their business interests
They get free transportation infrastructure to move their goods service and people around
They get a gov't that negotiates tariffs and treaties that allow them to accumulate international wealth.
The poor have little use for most of that, but the wealthy have a lot to be thankful for.
|
|
John M
climber
|
|
|
Jan 12, 2016 - 06:27pm PT
|
I don't believe in using the legal system to impose Christian morality generally on non-believers.
John,
what is your stance on abortion? I can't remember what position that you have taken.
and thanks for the kind words.
|
|
thebravecowboy
climber
The Good Places
|
|
|
Jan 12, 2016 - 07:05pm PT
|
Notice how the entire red side of the aisle remained seated through standing ovation when BHO said: "it's time to reduce the influence of money in politics." .....
|
|
SteveW
Trad climber
The state of confusion
|
|
|
Jan 12, 2016 - 07:21pm PT
|
Notice Kim Davis, county clerk from Kentucky sitting in the crowd
at the State of the Union. . .
What am I missing here????
|
|
Escopeta
Trad climber
Idaho
|
|
|
Jan 12, 2016 - 07:34pm PT
|
Did they bring a rope for her?
|
|
HighDesertDJ
Trad climber
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Jan 12, 2016 - 07:37pm PT
|
Escopeta posted SNAP, TANF, Lifeline, WIC. They sound neat and cool and invigorating. What are they?
I think you answered your own question.
thebravecowboy posted Notice how the entire red side of the aisle remained seated through standing ovation when BHO said: "it's time to reduce the influence of money in politics." .....
I didn't catch it yet. I'm assuming they basically stayed seated for the whole thing. Showing a modicum of respect for a non-Republican President is grounds for persecution these days.
SteveW posted Notice Kim Davis, county clerk from Kentucky sitting in the crowd
at the State of the Union. . .
What am I missing here????
Maybe the last 6 or 7 years of politics I guess? Where have you been?
|
|
HighDesertDJ
Trad climber
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Jan 12, 2016 - 07:52pm PT
|
John posted And John M and HDDJ, I take issue with the idea that the highest incomes don't pay their "fair share" because they pay a much greater share of their income than I do. I'm quite firmly entrenched in the middle class since my depression ended my legal career, but I don't see what gives me the right to say that people who involuntarily devote a greater percentage, not merely amount, of their income than I, should pay more so I can pay less. While I agree that to whom much is given, much is required, I also believe that I should not impose a higher burden on others than I shoulder myself.
If you want to be Biblical, the standard was proportional giving (i.e. a flat tax), except for the temple tax, which was a poll tax. Maybe if I made it to the highest marginal rates, I would feel differently about imposing it on others, but I find it hypocritical - and therefore wrong - for me to seek to impose a higher burden on others than I pay myself.
I didn't claim that they didn't pay their "fair share" but let's assume I did. I find it a little absurd that someone who clearly understands some slightly above basic economics wouldn't also know that value changes with income. $10 is $10 but $10 is "worth" very different amounts to different people depending on how much money they currently have. The wealthy are not wealthy because they somehow require more money to meet their basic needs. Trying to argue that 15% of your income is as "equal" to a millionaire as it is to a single mother making $15,000/year is absurd economically, much less morally.
The only people arguing for a Biblical tax are Biblically oriented people. You'll note that the tithe did not cover the taxes the government imposed, that was just the money the church demanded from it's worshipers.
I do not see a problem with asking those that are benefiting by our economic and political system be the ones who pay to keep it running. In fact, that seems like the only morally sound way to do it.
John M posted nd HDDJ.. you have been smoking hot lately. Very right on. I highly appreciate your input. You have a big heart which I appreciate very much.
JohnE posted And I hate to admit it, HDDJ, but your posts have been excellent of late, even if your reasoning leads you to the wrong conclusions.
;-)
Awwww you guys are embarrassing me. I just really appreciate that you both are willing to engage in earnest debate.
|
|
Escopeta
Trad climber
Idaho
|
|
|
Jan 12, 2016 - 08:00pm PT
|
I would just as soon not put the government in a position to make morality decisions. Regardless of the context.
|
|
HighDesertDJ
Trad climber
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Jan 12, 2016 - 08:01pm PT
|
dirtbag posted Fivethirtyeight.com state projections are now out.
Thanks for this. Cruz at 49% which means he is the most likely individual candidate to win but it is still more likely someone else will win. Gotta love it.
|
|
HighDesertDJ
Trad climber
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Jan 12, 2016 - 08:03pm PT
|
Escopeta posted I would just as soon not put the government in a position to make morality decisions. Regardless of the context.
You're right. Let's make sure the government isn't deciding when to go to war or how to prosecute criminals or how to punish them or how policing should be enacted or anything that might put a government official into a situation where morality might be involved. We should leave that to religion.
|
|
Escopeta
Trad climber
Idaho
|
|
|
Jan 12, 2016 - 08:06pm PT
|
What on earth do any those things have to do with morality?
|
|
T?S
Trad climber
Reno, NV
|
|
|
Jan 12, 2016 - 08:08pm PT
|
60 Years ago, when the Russians beat us into space, we didn't deny that Sputnik was up there, we didn't argue about the science, or shrink our research and development budget... We built a space program almost overnight and 12 years later we were walking on the moon.
-President Obama
|
|
Splater
climber
Grey Matter
|
|
|
Jan 13, 2016 - 12:15am PT
|
RE: highest incomes tax rate:
Generally the income tax system is roughly progressive except for many of the extremely rich (top 400) who mostly have investment earnings and not much ordinary income. Capital gains is taxed at a much lower rate.
So their average tax rate dropped from 28% in the early 90s to 18% under the Bush giveaway and has risen back to 23% today with recent hikes.
https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/13intop400.pdf
The three recent hikes were:
1. The ACA also imposed the Medicare tax on investment income at a rate of 3.8%. investment income can come from capital gains, dividends, interest, rental income and annuities. Applies to whichever is less -- your investment income or the amount that your modified adjusted gross income (AGI) exceeds the high-income threshold.
2. A higher top income tax rate: For those with taxable income over $400,000 ($450,000 if married), the fiscal cliff deal raised their top income tax rate to 39.6%, up from 35% previously.
3. Higher capital gains and dividend tax rates: For those with taxable income over $400,000 ($450,000 if married), their rate on dividends and long-term capital gains is now 20%, up from 15% previously.
Of course that comparison doesn't include most of the Soc. Sec tax, which hits the middle income earners the hardest.
Nor does it include the highly regressive sales tax system, which means the rich often pay a lower percent of total taxes than their share of earnings.
For the moderately rich (top 5-15%) - Federal income tax rate goes up, but they don't pay Soc. Sec tax beyond the first $118,000 in earnings.
|
|
Escopeta
Trad climber
Idaho
|
|
|
Jan 13, 2016 - 05:11am PT
|
I find it rather amusing how many pepole trot out their tired arguments and platitudes opposing Republicans - who for the record are only interested in their brand of government expansion- but really don't have good answers for arguments opposing anyone that advocates for a return to real individual liberty, actual freedom and a reduction in the overal size and influence of the government.
|
|
HighDesertDJ
Trad climber
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Jan 13, 2016 - 05:23am PT
|
I find it amusing when Lois says "who is this Lois person? Please, tell me about him!"
Louiscopeta posted I find it rather amusing how many pepole trot out their tired arguments and platitudes opposing Republicans - who for the record are only interested in their brand of government expansion- but really don't have good answers for arguments opposing anyone that advocates for a return to real individual liberty, actual freedom and a reduction in the overal size and influence of the government.
Then stop trotting out tired arguments and not having good answers. Give and ye shall receive, my friend.
Splater posted For the moderately rich (top 5-15%) - Federal income tax rate goes up, but they don't pay Soc. Sec tax beyond the first $118,000 in earnings.
Thanks for a solid content post, Splater. That's probably the segment hit the hardest by taxes proportionate to income though they do get a break on the entitlements. They make enough to pay the highest rate but not enough to start engineering tax shelters and whatnot.
Most economists seem to agree that killing a lot of the deductions that we give (including the mortgage interest deduction) and then lowering overall rates is the way to go and I'm all for that so long as the effective rates stay progressive and revenue is projected to be neutral. The problem is that Republicans see this as a way to give out massive tax cuts to the wealthiest (as evidenced by literally every tax plan by Ryan and the Repub presidential candidates).
SOTU: This was a great moment. Even Ryan dug it.
http://youtu.be/wuI0fP4kc64?t=894
The section correcting the absurd rhetoric around America's strength and ISIL's relative threat to our country was a breath of fresh air.
http://youtu.be/wuI0fP4kc64?t=1951
I kinda dug the tough guy talk too. "If you come after Americans, we will come after you. It may take some time but we have long memories and our reach has no limit." In the context of the rest of what he's said it sounded appropriate.
SOTU Response:
Props to Nikki Haley for a bit of humility and reality in her speech. She and Obama basically said the same thing about Washington being broken and the tone of politics.
http://youtu.be/LNz40oI17ts?t=132
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!