Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 36

Thread: Rich the Tax....

  1. #1
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Van down by the river
    Posts
    22,445
    Post Thanks / Like

    Rich the Tax....

    Question to JI Pubs...


    If high taxes are so mean to the wealthy....


    How can they possibly still control over 90% of the nation's wealth.




    I mean, I say, I mean, er, uf, erg, uh...Obummer, Osama, Obuttocks, Zero, Hussein has been robbing these people [SIZE="7"][B]BLIND[/B][/SIZE]

    BLIND I TELL YOU!!!!!!!


    BLIND!!!

    ...since 2008.

    How can they have any $$$ left?





    Hasn't Communist Obama taken it all by now? :dunce:

    Hasn't he drained their bank accounts?

    I mean...only making 25 million a year instead of 32 million a year is KILLER!! It's horrible!

    Eating Raman and mac and cheese all the time.
    Last edited by PlumberKhan; 09-21-2011 at 10:48 PM.

  2. #2
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Van down by the river
    Posts
    22,445
    Post Thanks / Like
    Has anyone here been to an NFL game lately?


    Because of Obama...all the luxury boxes are empty.

    BMW has filed for bankruptcy because no one is buying their cars.

    All Caribbean resorts have closed because nobody is going on vacation.

    Northern Jersey is empty...everyone moves to Slovakia.

    The ski resorts this year have closed their doors.

    Golf courses have ALL been shut down and turned into Welfare courses.

    Rolex is out of business.



    Chaos. No money.

  3. #3
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    2,441
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=PlumberKhan;4153720]Question to JI Pubs...


    If high taxes are so mean to the wealthy....


    How can they possibly still control over 90% of the nation's wealth.




    I mean, I say, I mean, er, uf, erg, uh...Obummer, Osama, Obuttocks, Zero, Hussein has been robbing these people [SIZE="7"][B]BLIND[/B][/SIZE]

    BLIND I TELL YOU!!!!!!!


    BLIND!!!

    ...since 2008.

    How can they have any $$$ left?





    Hasn't Communist Obama taken it all by now? :dunce:

    Hasn't he drained their bank accounts?

    I mean...only making 25 million a year instead of 32 million a year is KILLER!! It's horrible!

    Eating Raman and mac and cheese all the time.[/QUOTE]

    by working hard or getting lucky.

    isn't that what you did when you quick your plumbing job and went to work in an office and busted your butt?

  4. #4
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Paris, France
    Posts
    12,770
    Post Thanks / Like
    Just be happy your not poor in Greece. If you're Greek and earning 5K € per year, you now qualify to pay income tax.

  5. #5
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    18,353
    Post Thanks / Like
    The 80 -20 rule exists in all industries. 20 percent of the people earn 80 percent of the income.

    If you ask the "other" 80 percent, they all say they work hard even though evidence disagrees.

    Most income is earned NOT inherited.


    Take a car dealership or plumbers as an example. 20 percent earn all the 80 percent of sales and of course pay MUCH more tax.

    Same with plumbers and CPA's..... most CPA's earn less than 90K. 20 percent earn well over 100K.

  6. #6
    All League
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    3,380
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=PlumberKhan;4153720]Question to JI Pubs...


    If high taxes are so mean to the wealthy....


    How can they possibly still control over 90% of the nation's wealth.




    I mean, I say, I mean, er, uf, erg, uh...Obummer, Osama, Obuttocks, Zero, Hussein has been robbing these people [SIZE="7"][B]BLIND[/B][/SIZE]

    BLIND I TELL YOU!!!!!!!


    BLIND!!!

    ...since 2008.

    How can they have any $$$ left?





    Hasn't Communist Obama taken it all by now? :dunce:

    Hasn't he drained their bank accounts?

    I mean...only making 25 million a year instead of 32 million a year is KILLER!! It's horrible!

    Eating Raman and mac and cheese all the time.[/QUOTE]

    Your ignorance of the free market is only exceeded by your inflated intellectual self image.;)

    The real question is not whether these people lifestyle's would be adversely affected by paying more in taxes. The question is how would that money be used. You should make no mistake about it, other than athletes and entertainment stars, rich people know exactly where their money is and know how to use it to make more money. So, let's take your example. Joe industrialist/entrepaneur makes 32 million dollars per year. What does he do with it? He doesn't just put it all in a bank account. No, he invests some providing valuable capital in the market. He also reinvests some into his ongoing concerns. He may start up another business. He could buy some Rental properties and lease them out and/or improve them. He'll also buy himself some luxury items -- a boat, plane, multiple houses, a luxury box at Met Life, etc... He may create a scholarship so a dissadvantaged minorty kid from Hawaii can go to Harvard.:P

    All of the things, Joe does with his money other than place it in a bank account would serve to create jobs and increase the tax base because Joe loves money, wants more, and knows the only way to get more is to put his money to work in the economy.

    Let's say you take $7 million away from Joefor taxes. Will it hurt him. Proabably not. But will the $7 million the bureaucrats take from Joe be better spent by government then it would by Joe? Will it have a lasting positive effect on jobs and the economy like it would if it was spent by Joe? No. It is beyond question that a dollar spent by the government is less productive than a dollar spent in the private sector. Government is inefficent and terribly wasteful. So, we need to shrink it. And we don't shrink the beast by feeding the beast.

    Also, guys like Joe are sitting on their money right now because they believe in 2012 we will get a new president who will create a more profitable environment for his dollar. Why put your money at risk today with a potential profit of 4%, when you can wait 16 months and possibly risk those same dollars for a potential profit of 8%.


    Note:
    Sadly guys like Joe have been forced to compete on unequal ground in certain markets against crony capitalist because over the years Pols have made it clear that the US market is not entirely a free market, certain segments, those over which the government can exercise some control, is strictly pay for play. Look no further than microsoft. The Feds were all over them and certain to prove it was an illegal monopoly. What didn't MS have at the time? Lobbyist. They hired a bunch of lobbyist and magically the investigations slowly died on the vine.

  7. #7
    All League
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    4,873
    Post Thanks / Like
    Wow Plumber now I am really depressed. I need a stimulus maybe a green job!

  8. #8
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Istanbul
    Posts
    2,087
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=RaoulDuke;4153811]Just be happy your not poor in Greece. If you're Greek and earning 5K per year, you now qualify to [B]dodge[/B] income tax.[/QUOTE]

    fixed

    :D

  9. #9
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Istanbul
    Posts
    2,087
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=SONNY WERBLIN;4153853]Your ignorance of the free market is only exceeded by your inflated intellectual self image.;)

    The real question is not whether these people lifestyle's would be adversely affected by paying more in taxes. The question is how would that money be used. You should make no mistake about it, other than athletes and entertainment stars, rich people know exactly where their money is and know how to use it to make more money. So, let's take your example. Joe industrialist/entrepaneur makes 32 million dollars per year. What does he do with it? He doesn't just put it all in a bank account. No, he invests some providing valuable capital in the market. He also reinvests some into his ongoing concerns. He may start up another business. He could buy some Rental properties and lease them out and/or improve them. He'll also buy himself some luxury items -- a boat, plane, multiple houses, a luxury box at Met Life, etc... He may create a scholarship so a dissadvantaged minorty kid from Hawaii can go to Harvard.:P

    All of the things, Joe does with his money other than place it in a bank account would serve to create jobs and increase the tax base because Joe loves money, wants more, and knows the only way to get more is to put his money to work in the economy.

    [B]Let's say you take $7 million away from Joefor taxes. Will it hurt him. Proabably not. But will the $7 million the bureaucrats take from Joe be better spent by government then it would by Joe? Will it have a lasting positive effect on jobs and the economy like it would if it was spent by Joe? No.[/B] [B]It is beyond question that a dollar spent by the government is less productive than a dollar spent in the private sector. Government is inefficent and terribly wasteful. So, we need to shrink it. And we don't shrink the beast by feeding the beast.[/B]

    Also, guys like Joe are sitting on their money right now because they believe in 2012 we will get a new president who will create a more profitable environment for his dollar. Why put your money at risk today with a potential profit of 4%, when you can wait 16 months and possibly risk those same dollars for a potential profit of 8%.


    Note:
    Sadly guys like Joe have been forced to compete on unequal ground in certain markets against crony capitalist because over the years Pols have made it clear that the US market is not entirely a free market, certain segments, those over which the government can exercise some control, is strictly pay for play. Look no further than microsoft. The Feds were all over them and certain to prove it was an illegal monopoly. What didn't MS have at the time? Lobbyist. They hired a bunch of lobbyist and magically the investigations slowly died on the vine.[/QUOTE]

    It's easy to be more efficient than an entity that has obligations like building and maintaining infrastucture, defend-educate and protect its populace. Its apples and oranges. Of course it's better for the economy if there are no taxes for the reasons you set forth but only if you define "economy" as battling unemployment.

  10. #10
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    6,182
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=The Turk;4153873]It's easy to be more efficient than an entity that has obligations like building and maintaining infrastucture, defend-educate and protect its populace. Its apples and oranges. Of course it's better for the economy if there are no taxes for the reasons you set forth but only if you define "economy" as battling unemployment.[/QUOTE]

    Doesn't that mean that the government should stay out of the way and just do what they are good at? National defense is the big one but we spend more patting down little old ladies and fighting in Iraq, Afgan and Lybia that we do protecting our borders.

    States handle education, there is no reason for the Department of Education and since its inception and no child left behind nothing has improved but we are spending more and more every year and making silly mandates that inhibit school from doing what needs to be done.

  11. #11
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Istanbul
    Posts
    2,087
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=Trades;4153923]Doesn't that mean that the government should stay out of the way and just do what they are good at? National defense is the big one but we spend more patting down little old ladies and fighting in Iraq, Afgan and Lybia that we do protecting our borders.

    States handle education, there is no reason for the Department of Education and since its inception and no child left behind nothing has improved but we are spending more and more every year and making silly mandates that inhibit school from doing what needs to be done.[/QUOTE]

    To your first question; yes, of course but what does that have to do with how efficient gov. and private enterprise can be?

    To your second; I have no idea what no child left behind is so I can't comment on that.

    I was not making a distinction between state and federal government in the end they are both governments no? If there is both a state level dept. of education and a federal level one; one of them would of course be redundant.

    My original point still stands; a government can never be as efficient as a private enterprise because a governement has responsibilities to its citizens whereas a private enterprise does not have responsibilities or citizens.
    Last edited by The Turk; 09-22-2011 at 09:53 AM.

  12. #12
    All League
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    3,380
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=The Turk;4153873]It's easy to be more efficient than an entity that has obligations like building and maintaining infrastucture, defend-educate and protect its populace. Its apples and oranges. Of course it's better for the economy if there are no taxes for the reasons you set forth but only if you define "economy" as battling unemployment.[/QUOTE]

    I don't have any problem with the fact that taxes are needed to maintian infrastructure, eduaction, and the common defense. If that's all taxes were spent on, we'd be in the catbird seeat. The problem is government spemds money on way too many different wasteful things and it always seems to believe the solution is more money, when the real solution is to do things better and more efficiently. The fact is being the coffee contractor for the pentagon should be no more lucrative than being the coffee contractor for Facebook, but it is.

  13. #13
    All League
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    3,380
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=The Turk;4153969]
    My original point still stands; a government can never be as efficient as a private enterprise because a governement has responsibilities to its citizens whereas a private enterprise does not have responsibilities or citizens.[/QUOTE]

    I look at it this way, Private enterprise answers to its customers. It must deliver value for the price charged, or it will go out of business. Government answers to its citizens and it must deliver value for taxes collected. Unfortunately, when it doesn't it does not go out of business.

  14. #14
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    13,552
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=The Turk;4153969]To your first question; yes, of course but what does that have to do with how efficient gov. and private enterprise can be?

    To your second; I have no idea what no child left behind is so I can't comment on that.

    I was not making a distinction between state and federal government in the end they are both governments no? If there is both a state level dept. of education and a federal level one; one of them would of course be redundant.

    My original point still stands; a government can never be as efficient as a private enterprise because a governement has responsibilities to its citizens whereas a private enterprise does not have responsibilities or citizens.[/QUOTE]

    Because government can never be as efficient as the private sector, does that mean we should just throw our hands in the air and not make any effort to improve it? So if government can only strive to ever be 70% as efficient, then why not make it 30%? Got it.

    A lot of those responsibilities you speak of ARE redundant in this country. And a lot of what we spend doesn't fall under the category of responsibilities, but rather under the category of vote-gathering activity.

  15. #15
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    37,701
    Post Thanks / Like
    How much tax dod you pay in 2010 PK? And how much was your tax return?

    In the interest of full disclosure, it would be important to know (in the general terms) if you yourself are "rich", "poor" or other, if you pay any net income taxes each year, if you are a giver or a recipient under the current system.

    Because I'm going to guess that you, like most of us here, are probably a very tiny giver into the system, when tax vs. return/benefits/public use is calculated out.

  16. #16
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Istanbul
    Posts
    2,087
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=SONNY WERBLIN;4153982]I don't have any problem with the fact that taxes are needed to maintian infrastructure, eduaction, and the common defense. If that's all taxes were spent on, we'd be in the catbird seeat. The problem is government spemds money on way too many different wasteful things and it always seems to believe the solution is more money, when the real solution is to do things better and more efficiently. The fact is being the coffee contractor for the pentagon should be no more lucrative than being the coffee contractor for Facebook, but it is.[/QUOTE]

    Agreed

    [QUOTE=SONNY WERBLIN;4153988]I look at it this way, Private enterprise answers to its customers. It must deliver value for the price charged, or it will go out of business. Government answers to its citizens and it must deliver value for taxes collected. Unfortunately, when it doesn't it does not go out of business.[/QUOTE]

    and agreed

    [QUOTE=JetPotato;4154001]Because government can never be as efficient as the private sector, does that mean we should just throw our hands in the air and not make any effort to improve it? [B]So if government can only strive to ever be 70% as efficient, then why not make it 30%? Got it.[/B]

    A lot of those responsibilities you speak of ARE redundant in this country. And a lot of what we spend doesn't fall under the category of responsibilities, but rather under the category of vote-gathering activity.[/QUOTE]

    I was not saying don't try to improve government inefficiency; I was saying it can never be as efficient as the private sector no matter how much it improves.

    Also, I can only comment on the principles as I see them I cannot comment on the everyday practicalities in the US because I simply don't know them. I don't live in the US and I don't presume to know how efficient or populist is your government, so I can't comment on your second paragraph.

  17. #17
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    6,182
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=The Turk;4153969]To your first question; yes, of course but what does that have to do with how efficient gov. and private enterprise can be?

    To your second; I have no idea what no child left behind is so I can't comment on that.

    I was not making a distinction between state and federal government in the end they are both governments no? If there is both a state level dept. of education and a federal level one; one of them would of course be redundant.

    My original point still stands; a government can never be as efficient as a private enterprise because a governement has responsibilities to its citizens whereas a private enterprise does not have responsibilities or citizens.[/QUOTE]

    The problem is the government is taking on new responsibilities while they aren't even properly handling the ones they are constitutionally bound to uphold. How about they figure out how to protect the borders before they try to assume a quarter of the US economy by taking over health care?

    It is all a power grab in a system that was designed to be small and by the people. The US has a strong constituion, we should uphold that and stop pretending to be Europe.

  18. #18
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Philly
    Posts
    38,782
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=SONNY WERBLIN;4153853]Your ignorance of the free market is only exceeded by your inflated intellectual self image.;)
    [/QUOTE]

    yes because when I think of Plumber i think intellectual

  19. #19
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    37,701
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=bitonti;4154075]yes because when I think of Plumber i think intellectual[/QUOTE]

    Be honest, does anyone here really scram "intellectual"?:P

  20. #20
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    LI
    Posts
    20,248
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=bitonti;4154075]yes because when I think of Plumber i think intellectual[/QUOTE]

    really? I think bi-chix and great titties. :alien:

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us