Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
MasterPo

Money = Freedom (try not to get too upset)

344 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

questionmark
Flat tax sounds good. Realistically, however - you're not going to get either of those, this election, at least.

... and probably not immediately after next ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dusty Digital
Still waiting for someone to site the moral or ethical basis for taking money out of my pocket and giving it to someone else just because I may have a bit more than they.

Utilitarism would be one. If the total utility created by taking money out of your pocket and giving it to someone else causes a higher aggregate utility than would exist were you to keep all the money, then from a utilitarian standpoint it would be ethically sound to take some of that money.

To make this clearer, I'll give you a very pronounced example. If you have a hundred apples, and I have none, and both our utility functions are concave (I get more utility from getting my first apple than you from getting your (for example) 80th apple since I'm starving and you're already sick of apples), from a utilitarian standpoint there would certainly be basis for a third player to take some apples from you and give them to me to maximize total utility

edit: and it might even improve your utility since I would have less incentive to murder you for your delicious apples ;)

Edited by Dusty Digital

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BlindMessiah
Flat tax sounds good. Realistically, however - you're not going to get either of those, this election, at least.

Because our politicians are:

a) Corrupt

c) Stupid

d) Corrupt and stupid

(B makes a smiley face so...)

Edited by BlindMessiah

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MasterPo
Utilitarism would be one. If the total utility created by taking money out of your pocket and giving it to someone else causes a higher aggregate utility than would exist were you to keep all the money, then from a utilitarian standpoint it would be ethically sound to take some of that money.

I didn't know that Eminant Domain extends to my wallet. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Splodgenessabounds
Because our politicians are:

a) Corrupt

c) Stupid

d) Corrupt and stupid

(B makes a smiley face so...)

I'd put it as,

1) Corrupt

2) Stupid

3) Nothing else

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AzTide
Go live in the wilderness if you're so afraid of paying a little bit more than someone on minimum income.

Actually why is it my fault if someone is living on minimum income? I did my share of that and scratched my way up let them do the same.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
questionmark
Actually why is it my fault if someone is living on minimum income? I did my share of that and scratched my way up let them do the same.

It is not your fault, but if those of minimum income are the majority it always ends in revolution. Therefore: if you want to stay rich don't behave like Scrooge McDuck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MasterPo
It is not your fault, but if those of minimum income are the majority it always ends in revolution. Therefore: if you want to stay rich don't behave like Scrooge McDuck.

I support "minimum income" people and not-so-minimum income people when I buy things. Whether I buy a new suit or a pizza someone is making a living.

That's the right way to do it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AzTide
I support "minimum income" people and not-so-minimum income people when I buy things. Whether I buy a new suit or a pizza someone is making a living.

That's the right way to do it!

When I messed up in school and bad grades my dad use to say "Keep it up the world needs ditch diggers also". His way of saying it's your choice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
questionmark
I support "minimum income" people and not-so-minimum income people when I buy things. Whether I buy a new suit or a pizza someone is making a living.

That's the right way to do it!

Proven by the fact that you are polemic against somebody earning 300K a year having to pay $125 extra in taxes...we know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MasterPo
Proven by the fact that you are polemic against somebody earning 300K a year having to pay $125 extra in taxes...we know.

40% more tax on top of his current tax.

Yea, that's OK. He worked hard but really doesn't need it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
questionmark
40% more tax on top of his current tax.

Yea, that's OK. He worked hard but really doesn't need it.

You better get a new calculator, if $150 is 40% more taxes that would mean that somebody who earns $300.000 only pays $312.15 a year in taxes... If that is the case I have been cheated the last ten years...but as I am a good sport I'll donate it towards paying the national deficit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MasterPo
You better get a new calculator, if $150 is 40% more taxes that would mean that somebody who earns $300.000 only pays $312.15 a year in taxes... If that is the case I have been cheated the last ten years...but as I am a good sport I'll donate it towards paying the national deficit.

125/300 = 40%. (42% actually)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
questionmark
125/300 = 40%. (42% actually)

Yeh, right.... (this one tests my patience) again, somebody who earns $300.000, after using all possible deductibles, pays about $51.000 in taxes. With Obama's proposal he would pay $51.125. Where is that 40%?

Indiscreet question: You flunked math, didn't you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AzTide
Yeh, right.... (this one tests my patience) again, somebody who earns $300.000, after using all possible deductibles, pays about $51.000 in taxes. With Obama's proposal he would pay $51.125. Where is that 40%?

Indiscreet question: You flunked math, didn't you?

Why argue about the guy making 300 they get all of their tax money back and then some.

How about people like us that make between 75 and 125k we are the ones in trouble guys....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MasterPo
Yeh, right.... (this one tests my patience) again, somebody who earns $300.000, after using all possible deductibles, pays about $51.000 in taxes. With Obama's proposal he would pay $51.125. Where is that 40%?

Indiscreet question: You flunked math, didn't you?

Did you mean $125 or $125,000?

If the former, my misunderstanding.

NTL, I still reiterate a prior point:

With a $1 trillion dollar debt, war debt, $700 billion bail out and other bail outs, plus he wants to implement universal national health care, $1000 per child savings bond, etc etc.

Do you really think 95% of people will see taxes go down??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
questionmark
Why argue about the guy making 300 they get all of their tax money back and then some.

How about people like us that make between 75 and 125k we are the ones in trouble guys....

sorry, had my calculator on European... they use commas to separate the fractions and points to separate the thousand, so again:

Yeh, right.... (this one tests my patience) again, somebody who earns $300,000, after using all possible deductibles, pays about $51,000 in taxes. With Obama's proposal he would pay $51,125. Where is that 40%?

Indiscreet question: You flunked math, didn't you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fluffybunny

[quote name='MasterPo' date='Oct 23 2008, 07:45 PM' post='2568248'

Do you really think 95% of people will see taxes go down??

Who said 95% of people will see taxes go down??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Splodgenessabounds
Indiscreet question: You flunked math, didn't you?

Subtle :tu:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
questionmark
Did you mean $125 or $125,000?

If the former, my misunderstanding.

NTL, I still reiterate a prior point:

With a $1 trillion dollar debt, war debt, $700 billion bail out and other bail outs, plus he wants to implement universal national health care, $1000 per child savings bond, etc etc.

Do you really think 95% of people will see taxes go down??

Oh, I don't expect the taxes to actually go down. No matter who the prez will be they will have to go up as I said in many post before. The party is over, time to pay the bill...and that includes those who have less than their share of the government expenses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MasterPo
Who said 95% of people will see taxes go down??

B. Hussein Obama is supposed to give tax cuts to 95% of people and "only" increase taxes on 5%.

What did I miss?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Godsnmbr1
B. Hussein Obama is supposed to give tax cuts to 95% of people and "only" increase taxes on 5%.

What did I miss?

I can't believe you keep using the middle name...

classic :tu:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MasterPo
Oh, I don't expect the taxes to actually go down. No matter who the prez will be they will have to go up as I said in many post before. The party is over, time to pay the bill...and that includes those who have less than their share of the government expenses.

So why on Earth then vote for someone promising to raise taxes??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
questionmark
B. Hussein Obama is supposed to give tax cuts to 95% of people and "only" increase taxes on 5%.

What did I miss?

The fact that only 1.5% earn more than $250,000 a year...that means that that either somebody did the math wrong or was way to optimistic about the earning potential in the USA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MasterPo
The fact that only 1.5% earn more than $250,000 a year...that means that that either somebody did the math wrong or was way to optimistic about the earning potential in the USA

So rather than try to expand people into the upper income ranges, public policy is to tare down those in the 1.5% to the lower ranks.

Nice. Very constructive. :td:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.