Lucky... 0 #26 October 21, 2009 QuoteI'm actually a big fan of Switzerland. If it was even remotely possible for me to acquire Swiss citizenship, I'd be moving there. Why, the US is the best country in the world? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TomAiello 25 #27 October 21, 2009 QuoteQuoteSure. But by far the biggest contributor is massive government borrowing, mostly to fund military adventurism in far flung places. Not really, it's big but not as big as undertaxing the rich. Our tax system burdens the top earners far more than any other country in the industrialized world. (Source). If we wanted to be more like the rest of the world, we'd need to reduce taxes on the wealthy.-- Tom Aiello [email protected] SnakeRiverBASE.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TomAiello 25 #28 October 21, 2009 QuoteWhy, the US is the best country in the world? You may think that, but I don't. There are many things I'd like to change about the US. That's not to say that it's terrible (or ideal). Given a choice of living anywhere (with citizenship) the US would be in my top five, worldwide.-- Tom Aiello [email protected] SnakeRiverBASE.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 0 #29 October 21, 2009 You guys are being viciously unfair. This isn't like 20 years ago when most American beer was of the Bud class. There are excellent American micro-brews, as well as craft-quality brews, some of which have gone mainstream nation-wide, like Sam Adams, Dock Street, Rogue, etc., which even if they're not gourmet quality are still very good. You're both so mean. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TomAiello 25 #30 October 21, 2009 Rogue Dead Guy is very good. I like their Imperial Stout, too. I actually drink mostly American micro-brew type beers. I've drank beer all over the world, and hands down the best beer I've ever had was the (not available in stores) microbrew at the Main Street Brewery in the dusty little town of Cortez, Colorado.-- Tom Aiello [email protected] SnakeRiverBASE.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #31 October 21, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteSure. But by far the biggest contributor is massive government borrowing, mostly to fund military adventurism in far flung places. Not really, it's big but not as big as undertaxing the rich. Our tax system burdens the top earners far more than any other country in the industrialized world. (Source). If we wanted to be more like the rest of the world, we'd need to reduce taxes on the wealthy. Per what, an anti-taxation group? I love the origin of their data: Source: Computations based on OECD income distribution questionnaire. A qustionaire.....hmmm, I wonder who they questioned: homeless people perhaps....no, maybe it was multi-millionaires. Tom, show me objective data pls. Of course the rich pay virtually all of the taxes, why not, they hold 93% of all cash and 85% of all cash and asset. And still the wealth disparity spreads........ hence we need to tax them to at least stop the spreading, stop the homlessness. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TomAiello 25 #32 October 21, 2009 QuotePer what, an ant-taxation group? Um, the OECD isn't exactly an anti-taxation group.-- Tom Aiello [email protected] SnakeRiverBASE.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #33 October 21, 2009 QuoteQuoteWhy, the US is the best country in the world? You may think that, but I don't. There are many things I'd like to change about the US. That's not to say that it's terrible (or ideal). Given a choice of living anywhere (with citizenship) the US would be in my top five, worldwide. That was sarcasm. I know you're not a typical conservative nationalist. That was more for others than it was for you. Certainly, the US is in my top 10, no where near the top of the top 10 tho. We need to realize this countries shortcomings in order to fix them and wealth disparity and an overbuilt military are right up there. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #34 October 21, 2009 QuoteQuotePer what, an ant-taxation group? Um, the OECD isn't exactly an anti-taxation group. OK, I don't know of it, but a questiuonaire? Come on, can't they use raw data? I think if they did they wouldn't get their desired result. The Tax Foundation isn't as blatant as The Heritage, but it has an agenda. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tokter 0 #35 October 21, 2009 Quote 1 question: Why the hell are here in this mess? Woman that did not feel like learning german, so we moved here...divorce...still here, yea Quote I'm actually a big fan of Switzerland. If it was even remotely possible for me to acquire Swiss citizenship, I'd be moving there. Work visa, marriage or lots of money would do the trick hehe Quote Our tax system burdens the top earners far more than any other country in the industrialized world. (Source). If we wanted to be more like the rest of the world, we'd need to reduce taxes on the wealthy. Yes, but you also pay your middle and especially your lower class much less. So what other choice do you have? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TomAiello 25 #36 October 21, 2009 Inequality of wealth distribution is not necessarily a problem. Leaving aside good old fashioned jealousy (which I think is probably a major motivator for those calling for more taxation), it hurts you not at all if your neighbor makes a million dollars a year. The real issue that people ought to be concerned with is where the bottom of the curve lies, not the top. It's all good if there are a ton of people taking home millions. What we don't want is a ton of people only taking home $10k/yr. Eliminating the latter is a noble goal. Eliminating the former is a sop to petty jealousy. If you could guarantee everyone in the US $50k/yr in income, but you'd have to give up 15% of the tax rate on the top earners, would you do it? Look into yourself, ask that question, and answer it honestly, then evaluate your motivations. Is there really not a trace of jealousy in there?-- Tom Aiello [email protected] SnakeRiverBASE.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 0 #37 October 21, 2009 QuoteI actually drink mostly American micro-brew type beers. Yeah; to hell with Lucky; talk about things that are important. I particularly like micro-brew restaurants, as you can usually order the "sampler" (all their different varieties lined up in smaller glasses). Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #38 October 21, 2009 QuoteWoman that did not feel like learning german, so we moved here...divorce...still here, yea Ahh, the ultimate fatal error - chasing a woman. I have scars to show my errors. QuoteYes, but you also pay your middle and especially your lower class much less. So what other choice do you have? Right, it's about a relative comparison, just like relative wind as you exit the acft. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #39 October 21, 2009 QuoteInequality of wealth distribution is not necessarily a problem. That's true, provided the rich are willing to pay much higher tax rates. If they aren't, then wealth disparity is indeed a problem. We can't have it both ways.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TomAiello 25 #40 October 21, 2009 QuoteQuote...the OECD isn't exactly an anti-taxation group. OK, I don't know of it, but a questiuonaire? The OECD sends those questionnaires out to the governments of it's member nations--not the citizens. OECD web site. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development information from wikipedia.-- Tom Aiello [email protected] SnakeRiverBASE.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TomAiello 25 #41 October 21, 2009 QuoteQuoteInequality of wealth distribution is not necessarily a problem. That's true, provided the rich are willing to pay much higher tax rates. If they aren't, then wealth disparity is indeed a problem. We can't have it both ways. ??? Would you rather live in a country where everyone makes $1 per year (perfect income equality), or one where the lowest earner makes $100k/yr, but the highest makes $100,000k/yr (higher income, but with much less equity)? Trying to tear down the top earners simply because they make more than you is just pettiness.-- Tom Aiello [email protected] SnakeRiverBASE.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #42 October 21, 2009 QuoteInequality of wealth distribution is not necessarily a problem. Did teh end of your sentence not make it: IF YOU'RE RICH. QuoteLeaving aside good old fashioned jealousy (which I think is probably a major motivator for those calling for more taxation),... No, it has more to do with my 96 Geo Metro with 200k miles. Perhaps it's my unavailability to acquire HC too. Quote..it hurts you not at all if your neighbor makes a million dollars a year. It hurts that I cannot get medical issues fixed and that jobs pay shit; I'm nowhere near the, "i want a new Hummer stage." QuoteThe real issue that people ought to be concerned with is where the bottom of the curve lies, not the top. It's all good if there are a ton of people taking home millions. What we don't want is a ton of people only taking home $10k/yr. Eliminating the latter is a noble goal. Eliminating the former is a sop to petty jealousy. We ought to be concerned with a fair distribution so we have our rich and hopefully we can make it one day, but we need a baseline that will be supported by the tax system and/or borrowing to ensure a descent bottom standard for everyone. QuoteIf you could guarantee everyone in the US $50k/yr in income, but you'd have to give up 15% of the tax rate on the top earners, would you do it? When you say 'give up' what does that mean? QuoteLook into yourself, ask that question, and answer it honestly, then evaluate your motivations. Is there really not a trace of jealousy in there? Not at all, I want to buy a modest house, have a descent but modest car and get HC when I need it. You don't evvveeen know me. I'm not a luxury whore, I see a system that has been run by elites, pandering to elites and the lower 80%, lower 50% are just there because tehy cannot find a way to get rid of them. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TomAiello 25 #43 October 21, 2009 QuoteQuoteIf you could guarantee everyone in the US $50k/yr in income, but you'd have to give up 15% of the tax rate on the top earners, would you do it? When you say 'give up' what does that mean? Reduce their taxes by 15%. If you could guarantee everyone a minimum income of 50k/yr, but had to reduce taxes on the top earners to do so, would you do it? Or is your jealousy so great that you must punish those evil rich people, even if it means you hurt the poor, as well? I don't expect you to answer that question honestly here. I'm just asking you to consider it privately, and candidly examine your own motivations.-- Tom Aiello [email protected] SnakeRiverBASE.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #44 October 21, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuote...the OECD isn't exactly an anti-taxation group. OK, I don't know of it, but a questiuonaire? The OECD sends those questionnaires out to the governments of it's member nations--not the citizens. OECD web site. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development information from wikipedia. It just sounds like a method that is prone to bias. Why not set up a study using raw gov data. As well, that group is basically an anti-taxation group. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #45 October 21, 2009 Quote Quote Quote Inequality of wealth distribution is not necessarily a problem. That's true, provided the rich are willing to pay much higher tax rates. If they aren't, then wealth disparity is indeed a problem. We can't have it both ways. ??? Would you rather live in a country where everyone makes $1 per year (perfect income equality), or one where the lowest earner makes $100k/yr, but the highest makes $100,000k/yr (higher income, but with much less equity)? Trying to tear down the top earners simply because they make more than you is just pettiness. If you don't understand economics well enough to realize that you can't get blood from a turnip, then we're not going to get very far with this discussion. If the rich possess most of the income and wealth of a nation, then they will have to carry a larger tax burden than the poor and middle class. Nice realistic numbers you chose, BTW. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,450 #46 October 21, 2009 >We'll now have to pay more for our Fosters! No loss there! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TomAiello 25 #47 October 21, 2009 QuoteIf you don't understand economics well enough to realize that you can't get blood from a turnip, then we're not going to get very far with this discussion. Why do we need to get blood from anyone? How about we stop spending all that blood, so it doesn't need to be extracted from people? You're viewing the economics in a frozen time frame. Over time, a broad wealth distribution correlates with an increase in overall societal wealth, because it encourages new production. So, which do you want, a bigger pie, with larger slices for all, or a smaller pie, with perfectly equal, but small, pieces for everyone? Are you so jealous of the other guy's big piece of pie that you'd be willing to take a smaller one yourself (and give your kids a smaller one) if only you could knock his down a bit? What kind of crazy reasoning is that?-- Tom Aiello [email protected] SnakeRiverBASE.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,450 #48 October 21, 2009 > If it comes in a can, I'm pretty much not going to be drinking it. You may want to think about that. Oskar Blues, Maui Brewing, Butternuts, New Belgium and Sly Fox are all canning now. Canning can offer better protection from sunlight and air (both deadly to beer) and it's cheaper. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TomAiello 25 #49 October 21, 2009 Quote > If it comes in a can, I'm pretty much not going to be drinking it. You may want to think about that. Oskar Blues, Maui Brewing, Butternuts, New Belgium and Sly Fox are all canning now. Canning can offer better protection from sunlight and air (both deadly to beer) and it's cheaper. I might think about it. But someone is going to have to buy me some cans to try to convince me. If you want, I can PM you my shipping address. -- Tom Aiello [email protected] SnakeRiverBASE.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,450 #50 October 21, 2009 > But someone is going to have to buy me some cans to try to convince me. What sort of beer do you prefer? Maui Coconut Porter is pretty interesting. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
