Half of U.S. pays no federal income tax

[dreamdancer 0]

taxing low income workers is a disincentive to work. you need a warm sun rather than a cold wind policy
(increase the minimum wage - you know it makes sense)

stay away from moving propellers - they bite
blue skies from thai sky adventures
good solid response-provoking keyboarding

[DrewEckhardt 0]

Quote

taxing low income workers is a disincentive to work. you need a warm sun rather than a cold wind policy
(increase the minimum wage - you know it makes sense)

Most people would rather have 90% of something than 100% of nothing.

[Amazon 7]

Quote

>Tax everyone so nobody is left out.

Agreed! We should make sure that everyone pays into Social Security and Medicare.

And then make sure that the bottom feeders in Washington repay that which has been taken out since it started in 1983... and can't ever touch the money for other programs again.

[dreamdancer 0]

Quote

Quote

taxing low income workers is a disincentive to work. you need a warm sun rather than a cold wind policy
(increase the minimum wage - you know it makes sense)

Most people would rather have 90% of something than 100% of nothing.

not if taking that 10% puts you below the poverty line

stay away from moving propellers - they bite
blue skies from thai sky adventures
good solid response-provoking keyboarding

[billvon 2,478]

>not if taking that 10% puts you below the poverty line

What happens when you "go below the poverty line?" Do thugs come and beat the crap out of you?

[dreamdancer 0]

Quote

>not if taking that 10% puts you below the poverty line

What happens when you "go below the poverty line?" Do thugs come and beat the crap out of you?

you're not going to keep working for less than nothing
(are you)

stay away from moving propellers - they bite
blue skies from thai sky adventures
good solid response-provoking keyboarding

[billvon 2,478]

>you're not going to keep working for less than nothing

Do you think that someone making less than $10,000 a year is making "less than nothing?" As an experiment, try eating for $250 a month, then try eating for $0 a month. See which works out better for you.

>(are you)

I did in college, so apparently some people think $10,000 is greater than $0.

[dreamdancer 0]

Quote

CHIMPS recognise unfairness, even when it involves individuals other than themselves. This sense of unfairness towards others may be a rudimentary form of the social justice that characterises human societies.

In earlier studies several apes, monkeys and even dogs responded negatively when they received a meagre reward for the same task that earned others a more lavish pay-off. But none of these animals apparently recognised unfairness directed at others.

Sarah Brosnan, a primate behaviourist at Georgia State University in Atlanta, and her colleagues trained captive chimps to exchange tokens for a food reward, then tested how same-sex pairs of chimps reacted to various levels of reward. As expected, chimps were more likely to reject a boring carrot when their partner got a yummy grape for the same token. Surprisingly, the chimps were also more likely to reject a grape if their partner only got a carrot (Animal Behaviour, DOI: 10.1016/j.anbehav.2010.02.019).

In previous experiments, other groups of chimps showed no sensitivity towards unfairness directed at others. Perhaps Brosnan's animals rejected their "undeserved" grapes in part because they sat right next to their less fortunate partner and may have feared retaliation for their windfall, the researchers suggest.

But the chimps' awareness of the mistreatment of others as well as themselves also lays the groundwork for complex social interactions more like those of human groups, they note.

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20627554.800-chimps-reject-unfairness-to-their-fellows.html

stay away from moving propellers - they bite
blue skies from thai sky adventures
good solid response-provoking keyboarding

[billvon 2,478]

Quote

Octopuses are highly intelligent, likely more so than any other order of invertebrates. The exact extent of their intelligence and learning capability is much debated among biologists, but maze and problem-solving experiments have shown that they do have both short- and long-term memory. Their short lifespans limit the amount they can ultimately learn. There has been much speculation to the effect that almost all octopus behaviors are independently learned rather than instinct-based, although this remains largely unproven. They learn almost no behaviors from their parents, with whom young octopuses have very little contact.

An octopus has a highly complex nervous system, only part of which is localized in its brain. Two-thirds of an octopus's neurons are found in the nerve cords of its arms, which have a remarkable amount of autonomy. Octopus arms show a wide variety of complex reflex actions arising on at least three different levels of the nervous system. Unlike vertebrates, the complex motor skills of octopuses in their higher brain are not organized using an internal somatotopic map of its body. Some octopuses, such as the mimic octopus, will move their arms in ways that emulate the movements of other sea creatures.

In laboratory experiments, octopuses can be readily trained to distinguish between different shapes and patterns. They have been reported to practice observational learning, although the validity of these findings is widely contested on a number of grounds. Octopuses have also been observed in what some have described as play: repeatedly releasing bottles or toys into a circular current in their aquariums and then catching them. Octopuses often break out of their aquariums and sometimes into others in search of food. They have even boarded fishing boats and opened holds to eat crabs.

In some countries, octopuses are on the list of experimental animals on which surgery may not be performed without anesthesia. In the UK, cephalopods such as octopuses are regarded as honorary vertebrates under the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 and other cruelty to animals legislation, extending to them protections not normally afforded to invertebrates.

The octopus is the only invertebrate which has been conclusively shown to use tools. At least four specimens of the Veined Octopus (Amphioctopus marginatus) have been witnessed retrieving discarded coconut shells, manipulating them, and then reassembling them to use as shelter. This discovery was documented in the journal Current Biology and has also been caught on video.

[dreamdancer 0]

Quote

Quote

Octopuses are highly intelligent, likely more so than any other order of invertebrates. The exact extent of their intelligence and learning capability is much debated among biologists, but maze and problem-solving experiments have shown that they do have both short- and long-term memory. Their short lifespans limit the amount they can ultimately learn. There has been much speculation to the effect that almost all octopus behaviors are independently learned rather than instinct-based, although this remains largely unproven. They learn almost no behaviors from their parents, with whom young octopuses have very little contact.

An octopus has a highly complex nervous system, only part of which is localized in its brain. Two-thirds of an octopus's neurons are found in the nerve cords of its arms, which have a remarkable amount of autonomy. Octopus arms show a wide variety of complex reflex actions arising on at least three different levels of the nervous system. Unlike vertebrates, the complex motor skills of octopuses in their higher brain are not organized using an internal somatotopic map of its body. Some octopuses, such as the mimic octopus, will move their arms in ways that emulate the movements of other sea creatures.

In laboratory experiments, octopuses can be readily trained to distinguish between different shapes and patterns. They have been reported to practice observational learning, although the validity of these findings is widely contested on a number of grounds. Octopuses have also been observed in what some have described as play: repeatedly releasing bottles or toys into a circular current in their aquariums and then catching them. Octopuses often break out of their aquariums and sometimes into others in search of food. They have even boarded fishing boats and opened holds to eat crabs.

In some countries, octopuses are on the list of experimental animals on which surgery may not be performed without anesthesia. In the UK, cephalopods such as octopuses are regarded as honorary vertebrates under the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 and other cruelty to animals legislation, extending to them protections not normally afforded to invertebrates.

The octopus is the only invertebrate which has been conclusively shown to use tools. At least four specimens of the Veined Octopus (Amphioctopus marginatus) have been witnessed retrieving discarded coconut shells, manipulating them, and then reassembling them to use as shelter. This discovery was documented in the journal Current Biology and has also been caught on video.

but nothing to do with the topic

stay away from moving propellers - they bite
blue skies from thai sky adventures
good solid response-provoking keyboarding

[billvon 2,478]

>but nothing to do with the topic

Neither did yours, but both were sorta interesting.

[dreamdancer 0]

Quote

>but nothing to do with the topic

Neither did yours, but both were sorta interesting.

the fact that a basic awareness of 'fairness' is virtually hardwired into us is relevant to the topic
(real economics - not bean counting for business)

stay away from moving propellers - they bite
blue skies from thai sky adventures
good solid response-provoking keyboarding

[Bolas 5]

Quote

Quote

CHIMPS recognise unfairness, even when it involves individuals other than themselves. This sense of unfairness towards others may be a rudimentary form of the social justice that characterises human societies.

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20627554.800-chimps-reject-unfairness-to-their-fellows.html

http://www.southparkstudios.com/clips/267346

Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting
If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

[mirage62 0]

Quote

When the top 1% owns 42.2% of the financial wealth of the USA, the top 20% owns 93% of the wealth of the USA, leaving the remaining 80% with just 7% of the financial wealth (2007 data) it seems to me that the "rich" are getting off pretty lightly

John of course it does to you because of your simple belief that they didn't EARN it

Kevin Keenan is my hero, a double FUP, he does so much with so little

[Rstanley0312 1]

Quote

Quote

Quote

I mean that MUST be true - I have NEVER met a CEO, a plumber, an electrician, an IT guy, a skydiving instructor, a teacher, a pilot, a bus driver, a carpenter who was previously in the military - they simply don't exist......

Didn't make that claim, but you're right - I mean, with all those employers offering signing bonuses at hire since they can't find enough applicants to fill the positions, I'm POSITIVE they'll be snapped right up....

Fortune very recently had soldiers on the cover - the Fortune 100 (and beyond) are very interested in soldiers that are returning to civilian life. They've rediscovered this pool of differently qualified managers, who bring experience that no business school supplies. If you believe that a good manager takes incomplete data and makes a good decision now, rather than a 'perfect' decision in 6 months, they very well suited (though often need finishing on the business aspects of the job).

The Bay Area got hammered with base closures in the early 90s, but then moved ahead with the tech boom. While that had it's own bubble and bust, the fortunes of this region no longer rely on the US maintaining a massive military.

You don't abruptly cut the military in half. That would be more disruptive than the Peace Dividend of the first Bush Administration. But it's not nearly so trying if you just start reducing the numbers of new recruits and allow the current members of the military to leave at their typical rate of attrition. This decade or two long process also gives the other nations, the ones that leach off our efforts, to decide how much they value that help.

But unless those others want to send us billions to keep it up, America cannot afford to continue to be the world's military force. We have nukes and ocean + two friends as borders. We don't have the same needs as a country like Poland or Israel would. It's time to figure out what we want for 2040 and how to get to it.

That was a great article.

Life is all about ass....either you're kicking it, kissing it, working it off, or trying to get a piece of it.
Muff Brother #4382 Dudeist Skydiver #000
www.fundraiseadventure.com

[kallend 1,683]

Quote

Quote

When the top 1% owns 42.2% of the financial wealth of the USA, the top 20% owns 93% of the wealth of the USA, leaving the remaining 80% with just 7% of the financial wealth (2007 data) it seems to me that the "rich" are getting off pretty lightly

John of course it does to you because of your simple belief that they didn't EARN it

Paris Hilton

The Kennedys

G.W. Bush

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kallend 1,683]

Quote

Quote

Since the bottom 40% only has 0.2% of the wealth, I think you're suggesting getting blood from turnips. Squeezing turnips may make you feel better, but it's not a very productive activity.

1) As of 2006, the bottom 40% had 11% of the income.

.

Ability to pay depends on how much you HAVE, not on how much you earn in any given year.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[FallingOsh 0]

Quote

Since the bottom 40% only has 0.2% of the wealth, I think you're suggesting getting blood from turnips. Squeezing turnips may make you feel better, but it's not a very productive activity.

I'm suggesting that we don't send checks in the mail to 40% of the population. Since the spread between the rich and poor continues to increase, handouts are obviously not a productive activity.

--------------------------------------------------
Stay positive and love your life.

[DrewEckhardt 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Since the bottom 40% only has 0.2% of the wealth, I think you're suggesting getting blood from turnips. Squeezing turnips may make you feel better, but it's not a very productive activity.

1) As of 2006, the bottom 40% had 11% of the income.

.

Ability to pay depends on how much you HAVE, not on how much you earn in any given year.

Ability to pay depends on how much you EARN in excess of what it takes to cover your expenses, not how much you have.

Owning a modest 1500 square foot 3-bedroom ranch some place expensive adds $1.5M to your balance sheet but doesn't help to pay the bills (although hopefully a hot job market goes with the inflated property values, and that helps).

A retiree with a $1-$2M investment portfolio earns enough to support a middle class lifestyle and pay taxes, but might be eating cat food without the assets.

[kallend 1,683]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Since the bottom 40% only has 0.2% of the wealth, I think you're suggesting getting blood from turnips. Squeezing turnips may make you feel better, but it's not a very productive activity.

1) As of 2006, the bottom 40% had 11% of the income.

.

Ability to pay depends on how much you HAVE, not on how much you earn in any given year.

Ummm - NO. If you are a multi millionaire and earn nothing you can still afford to live an affluent lifestyle AND pay taxes AND have a lot left over.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[billvon 2,478]

>A retiree with a $1-$2M investment portfolio earns enough to support a
>middle class lifestyle and pay taxes, but might be eating cat food without
>the assets.

Given that even a conservative portfolio will pay out 3-4% annually, that's not quite true; most people can live on $60,000 a year pretty comfortably without having to eat cat food.

(Now, add in a mortgage, or new cars, and that might not hold true - but that's all part of planning for retirement.)

[rhaig 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Since the bottom 40% only has 0.2% of the wealth, I think you're suggesting getting blood from turnips. Squeezing turnips may make you feel better, but it's not a very productive activity.

1) As of 2006, the bottom 40% had 11% of the income.

.

Ability to pay depends on how much you HAVE, not on how much you earn in any given year.

am I understanding that you object to the possession of large sums of money? do you think we should tax wealth and not income?

--
Rob

[kallend 1,683]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Since the bottom 40% only has 0.2% of the wealth, I think you're suggesting getting blood from turnips. Squeezing turnips may make you feel better, but it's not a very productive activity.

1) As of 2006, the bottom 40% had 11% of the income.

.

Ability to pay depends on how much you HAVE, not on how much you earn in any given year.

am I understanding that you object to the possession of large sums of money? do you think we should tax wealth and not income?

I have no objection at all to the possession of large sums of money come by honestly, preferably by hard work, skill and talent.

Yes, I think there SHOULD be a wealth tax, for both practical (good way of raising needed revenue) and social (the incredible disparity in wealth right now is unhealthy for the country) reasons.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[rhaig 0]

Quote

I have no objection at all to the possession of large sums of money come by honestly, preferably by hard work, skill and talent.

so you just don't want people to inherit their relative's wealth? That would be a massive inheritance tax you're wanting (double taxation). And could be a way out of poverty for some.

Quote

Yes, I think there SHOULD be a wealth tax, for both practical (good way of raising needed revenue) and social (the incredible disparity in wealth right now is unhealthy for the country) reasons.

that right there is the first step to plain and simple wealth redistribution. The next step is to increase welfare programs. The next is "from each according to their ability to each according to their need".

--
Rob

[kallend 1,683]

Quote

Quote

I have no objection at all to the possession of large sums of money come by honestly, preferably by hard work, skill and talent.

so you just don't want people to inherit their relative's wealth? That would be a massive inheritance tax you're wanting (double taxation). And could be a way out of poverty for some.

STRAW MAN. I didn't say that. But yes, there should be an inheritance tax. And your silly "double taxation" argument has been debunked repeatedly.

Quote

Yes, I think there SHOULD be a wealth tax, for both practical (good way of raising needed revenue) and social (the incredible disparity in wealth right now is unhealthy for the country) reasons.

that right there is the first step to plain and simple wealth redistribution. The next step is to increase welfare programs. The next is "from each according to their ability to each according to their need".