Looks like trickle down works after all

[turtlespeed 212]

1 hour ago, yobnoc said:

That's a strawman argument and you should know it.  First, there is no way for private citizens to forfeit extra income individually to the federal coffers, short of being convicted of the crime of tax evasion a la Manafort.  That is why the GoFundMe for the border wall (for example) was so stupid in the first place, and ultimately had to be taken down and the donors got reimbursed their money; all except for the 2.3 Million or whatever that GoFundMe took in fees.  They didn't get that money back.  Really 'owned the libs' there, eh?  Second, no single citizen can solve this problem alone.  The "ultra wealth" tax that Warren is proposing would, however, completely cover the cost of subsidizing higher education, which is a long-term value-add to our economy.  Roughly 50,000 families in America - the richest of the rich - would pay an additional 2% of their income to fund the program. 

Don't sidestep with the juvenile argument of "Go ahead and set the example."  The system doesn't work that way and you come across as snide when you suggest it, though maybe that's what you're aiming for.

Not at all.

Start being the example and give yours and your wife's income away so that you are equal with the lowest level of poverty that you are comfortable with.

What level would that be?

At what amount annually would you be comfortable living?

 

Be the example - I'm sure people will line right up and follow you.  They will won't they?

Something like the great majority - especially those that tout all that equality.

 

Be the example - everyone that agrees with you politically would fall right in behind you - I have faith.

[yobnoc 142]

41 minutes ago, turtlespeed said:

Not at all.

Start being the example and give yours and your wife's income away so that you are equal with the lowest level of poverty that you are comfortable with.

What level would that be?

At what amount annually would you be comfortable living?

 

Be the example - I'm sure people will line right up and follow you.  They will won't they?

Something like the great majority - especially those that tout all that equality.

 

Be the example - everyone that agrees with you politically would fall right in behind you - I have faith.

Oh, a double down. Wasn’t expecting that. *yawn*

[headoverheels 291]

4 hours ago, yobnoc said:

You must be referring to the break-point for AMT?  Because the top tax rate of 24% starts to apply to income much, much lower than the number you referenced.

Tax rates for 2019 -- top is 37%

Yeah, AMT always hit me for the past 15+ years, but that lower rate eliminated a lot of deductions.  Not sure of the effect any more, with the cap on state and local taxes for schedule A, and mortgage not so high.   Also, I see that I would has still have had a marriage penalty, since the AMT didn't eliminate that like the regular tax rates did.    But now unemployed, I can report up to ~$100k of joint income (dividends, capital gains) and pay zero federal income taxes.

Edit:  ran test cases on 2018 tax software.  Added an additional $600k of interest income and found fed tax.  Increased that a bit, recalculated tax to find a marginal tax rate of 40.5%.  This corresponds correctly to a 37% maximum tax bracket, plus an additional investment income tax (starts at $250k) of 3.8%.

 

 

Edited May 8, 2019 by headoverheels

[brenthutch 383]

On 5/6/2019 at 6:39 PM, yobnoc said:

This is such a misleading statistic.  If I make 1,000,000/year and get a 1% wage increase, it's disingenuous to look someone in the eye who makes 30,000/year who gets a 4% raise and say "hey what are you mad about; you got a bigger pay increase than I did!"

On another thread you said that you lean libertarian.  I don’t think you know what “libertarian” means.

[turtlespeed 212]

7 hours ago, yobnoc said:

Oh, a double down. Wasn’t expecting that. *yawn*

In other words - "Do as I say, not as I do."

Typical - 

Force others to pay as long as you don't have to feel any impact on your life. 

[gowlerk 1,912]

1 hour ago, turtlespeed said:

In other words - "Do as I say, not as I do."

Typical - 

Force others to pay as long as you don't have to feel any impact on your life. 

Now you're just talking bullshit. The man clearly indicated a willingness to pay a share. We all pay a share, the theory is that we pay some share partly according to our ability to pay. It will always be a never ending battle how much that will be. The bottom line is that no one gets rich without a society based on rules. The fairer the rules are the more wealth will be generated. Less corruption equals more wealth overall. 

[turtlespeed 212]

1 hour ago, gowlerk said:

Now you're just talking bullshit. The man clearly indicated a willingness to pay a share. We all pay a share, the theory is that we pay some share partly according to our ability to pay. It will always be a never ending battle how much that will be. The bottom line is that no one gets rich without a society based on rules. The fairer the rules are the more wealth will be generated. Less corruption equals more wealth overall. 

No - I'm pointing out the hypocrisy.

I admit that I like the money I have to stay in my accounts.

I admit that I want to keep what I work for.

I also admit that I despise others telling me to what and how they are going to spend my money.

I see most others tiptoeing around that and not admitting that is how they feel.

 

[gowlerk 1,912]

4 minutes ago, turtlespeed said:

I also admit that I despise others telling me to what and how they are going to spend my money.

It's not your money. It's Caesar's money. That's why you will go to jail if you cheat on it. 

[billvon 2,400]

46 minutes ago, turtlespeed said:

No - I'm pointing out the hypocrisy.

I admit that I like the money I have to stay in my accounts.

I admit that I want to keep what I work for.

I also admit that I despise others telling me to what and how they are going to spend my money.

In another thread you said "we could simply pay our teachers more and get better quality teachers. Its been proven that paying more = better performance."  To put your suggestion in right winger terms, you want to reach into people's wallets, grab more of their hard-earned money and spend it on your socialist agenda.

Does that mean you despise yourself?

[turtlespeed 212]

33 minutes ago, billvon said:

In another thread you said "we could simply pay our teachers more and get better quality teachers. Its been proven that paying more = better performance."  To put your suggestion in right winger terms, you want to reach into people's wallets, grab more of their hard-earned money and spend it on your socialist agenda.

Does that mean you despise yourself?

You should focus on the part where it says - "Its been proven" . . . 

I get picked apart for statements that go against or seem to go against the liberal philosophies.

I get fact checked and my grammar is dissected -  

BUT - on this - no one even disputed the claim - Its almost wholly untrue - More money has rarely been the catalyst for someone to increase their performance on a salary based system. (Piece work - yes) 

 

Why is it that that fact was let go by?

Was it something that felt like it was true?

I googled "Do higher wages equal better performance"

this was at the top of the page:

https://www.halorecognition.com/does-high-pay-equal-high-performance/

Edited May 8, 2019 by turtlespeed
tried to edit before - but no joy - Edited to add article

[normiss 622]

8 minutes ago, turtlespeed said:

You should focus on the part where it says - "Its been proven" . . . 

I get picked apart for statements that go against or seem to go against the liberal philosophies.

I get fact checked and my grammar is dissected -  

BUT - on this - no one even disputed the claim - Its almost wholly untrue - More money has rarely been the catalyst for someone to increase their performance on a salary based system. (Piece work - yes) 

 

Why is it that that fact was let go by?

Was it something that felt like it was true?

I googled "Do higher wages equal better performance"

this was at the top of the page:

https://www.halorecognition.com/does-high-pay-equal-high-performance/

ALL of the financial industry companies I have worked for or with have long understood the drive that money provides.

Schwab was one of the best. I miss those Spot awards - or as well spelled them "$pot Award$"

[turtlespeed 212]

3 minutes ago, normiss said:

ALL of the financial industry companies I have worked for or with have long understood the drive that money provides.

Schwab was one of the best. I miss those Spot awards - or as well spelled them "$pot Award$"

Those were given AFTER the productivity and performance happened, right?

Were you Union at Schwab?

 

[jakee 1,254]

4 hours ago, turtlespeed said:

In other words - "Do as I say, not as I do."

Typical - 

Force others to pay as long as you don't have to feel any impact on your life. 

None of what you said in the last two posts logically follows from Yobnoc's position. You're arguing against a strawman, and doing it in a dickish way.

 

One can only conclude that the things he is saying make you too uncomfortable to honestly assess your own views on the topic.

[gowlerk 1,912]

18 minutes ago, turtlespeed said:

BUT - on this - no one even disputed the claim - Its almost wholly untrue - More money has rarely been the catalyst for someone to increase their performance on a salary based system. (Piece work - yes) 

 

"More money" is merely a stand in phrase for more resources and a greater emphasis. Like everything in life you get out of the education system according to what you invest. Money is a large, but not exclusive part of that.

[jakee 1,254]

1 hour ago, turtlespeed said:

No - I'm pointing out the hypocrisy.

What hypocrisy?

 

He said he's happy to pay more than people who make less than him. He said he's happy to pay a greater percentage than people who make less than him. He said he's happy to pay more than he pays now.

Sounds pretty damn consistent to me.

 

[yobnoc 142]

6 hours ago, brenthutch said:

On another thread you said that you lean libertarian.  I don’t think you know what “libertarian” means.

Or not all my eggs are in one basket.  Are you suggesting that I can't have ideas that differ on different subjects?

[billvon 2,400]

58 minutes ago, turtlespeed said:

I googled "Do higher wages equal better performance"

this was at the top of the page:

https://www.halorecognition.com/does-high-pay-equal-high-performance/

I have no doubt that is true, and I would support such a move.

However, given that you just claimed that you "despise others telling me to what and how they are going to spend my money" I find your vehemence amusing.  Apparently you only despise others telling you what and how to spend your money when it's spent on something that does not support your agenda; when it is something that does support your agenda you are fine with it.

Welcome to the attitude of  . . . . pretty much everyone in the US, including all those liberals you are always attacking.

[gowlerk 1,912]

21 minutes ago, billvon said:

Welcome to the attitude of  . . . . pretty much everyone in the US, including all those liberals you are always attacking.

Yes, it is universal to complain about taxes. Always has been and always will be.

[SkyDekker 1,122]

16 hours ago, brenthutch said:

Don’t you understand that the main driver of out of control education costs is government subsidizes?

To paraphrase a wise man, “if you think college is expensive now, just wait until it’s free”

True. Trump University gave no subsidies and clearly provided a top notch education.

[brenthutch 383]

2 hours ago, yobnoc said:

Or not all my eggs are in one basket.  Are you suggesting that I can't have ideas that differ on different subjects?

There is something to be said for intellectual consistency.

[kallend 1,623]

17 hours ago, brenthutch said:

Don’t you understand that the main driver of out of control education costs is government subsidizes?

To paraphrase a wise man, “if you think college is expensive now, just wait until it’s free”

Must be why they don't have free tuition in:

Austria

Brazil

CzechRepublic

Denmark

Egypt

Finland

France

Germany

Greece

Iceland

Kenya

Luxembourg

Malaysia

Morocco

Norway

Panama

Poland

Scotland

Slovenia

Spain

Sweden

Turkey

Oh, wait, they ALL have free college tuition.

 

[yobnoc 142]

12 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

There is something to be said for intellectual consistency.

Also intellectual honesty.  There are certain issues I lean more libertarian on.  I never claimed I was a "Capital L" Libertarian. 

[brenthutch 383]

7 minutes ago, kallend said:

Must be why they don't have free tuition in:

Austria

Brazil

CzechRepublic

Denmark

Egypt

Finland

France

Germany

Greece

Iceland

Kenya

Luxembourg

Malaysia

Morocco

Norway

Panama

Poland

Scotland

Slovenia

Spain

Sweden

Turkey

Oh, wait, they ALL have free college tuition.

 

And that is why they all pay to come to the US for higher education 

[kallend 1,623]

On 5/3/2019 at 1:47 PM, brenthutch said:

New York (CNN Business)The US labor market keeps getting stronger. 

Employers added 263,000 jobs in April, another surprisingly strong month of hiring. Economists surveyed by Refinitiv expected the economy to add only 185,000 jobs last month.

The unemployment rate fell to 3.6%, the lowest level since December 1969.

Indications of strength of the labor market could be found throughout the report. The average hourly wage was up 3.2% compared to a year ago, well above the 1.9% rise in prices, meaning real gains in the paychecks of average workers.

Meanwhile the national debt increased at roughly 5% for the year, and the rate of increase is accelerating.

So wage increases are not keeping pace with borrowing.

It's easy to give the appearance of wealth when it's just borrowed.

[kallend 1,623]

6 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

And that is why they all pay to come to the US for higher education 

"ALL"    I think you exaggerate.  A LOT.