Enjoy an Ads-Free Jets Insider - Become a Jets Insider VIP!
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 65

Thread: Bar Stool Taxation

  1. #41
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    2,375
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by southparkcpa View Post
    I did not read Palmettos post, just yours. As a conservative... I think I agree with you on tax increases. Many of my self employed clients make over 250K or there about.... They pay their own health insurance, provide their own NON GUARATEED pension etc... I can ABSOLUTELY tell you that my buddies that went on to become cops and teachers are (in the big picture) wealthier than myself and clients. My buddy Jim, a retired cop, receives almost 70K and full health insurance since age 43.

    250K simply isn't enough to even equalize oneself to a mid level retired government worker. However...once you are over say 350K.... a 39 percent rate is FAIR GAME in my view.

    Real problem....you could raise the taxes 100 percent and it wont matter.

    Government will waste it. Why do we have 17 military bases in Japan?

    This will never end until it ends badly like Greece or Spain.
    We agree about cop pensions and benefits - though I only know of Nassau and Suffolk county cops here on LI, don't know how it is in the rest of the country - but it's absolutely unacceptable to retire in your early forties with a balloon payment after having taken all their OT in the final 3 years and getting full bennies for life. That's just unacceptable.

    And we agree about closing bases around the world. We could close a 1/3 of our bases around the world AND cut the military budget by a 1/3 and still be the world's lone superpower.

    And I'm not crazy about the 250k threshold, I'd much rather have it be 500k or even a million.

    But if we're talking about government spending and cleaning up the waste, along with, and more importantly, restructuring our institutions (social security, healthcare, welfare programs), that can only be done by compromise of BOTH parties.

    Even if the GOP were to win in this next election, and take Congress along with the White House, the rules in the Senate will deny them the same sweeping reform that Obama and his party wanted to enact.

    The problem needs to be diagnosed before it can be solved. Therefore, the American public needs to know that regardless of who you vote for or what your views are, nothing will ever get done so long as obstructionism is more politically expedient than legislators doing their f***ing jobs.

  2. #42
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Van down by the river
    Posts
    21,931
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Warfish View Post
    Since we're playing the analogy game, here is mine:

    1. I worked 8 hours today to make enough for a Pizza.

    2. I buy that Pizza.

    3. The State tells me I owe 4 slices (of 8) to them. Because they built (with my money) the roads the pizza ingredients had to travel on and the public school teacher who taught the Pizza maker math.

    4. My 4 slices still taste good. It's good to have them.

    5. Of my lost 4 slices, 2 are lost in transit by beaurocracy, fraud and waste.

    6. My two ramaining lost slices are sliced and diced down to 100 minislices and spread around, another 70 minislcies are lost in this due to beaurocracy, fraud and waste.

    Of whats left, about 10 of the minislices are enjoyed by others, 8 out of the 10 of whom are able-bodied and could and should have worked for their own Pizza.

    Of the 2 little minislices who legitimately went to the needy, I have no qualms.

    It's the rest that bugs me.
    You can still eat your whole pizza.

    It'll just cost you $16.20 for the whole pie instead if an even $15. And the pie costs me and Bill Gates the...*gasp*...same amount of money!!

  3. #43
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    2,375
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by palmetto defender View Post
    Please be more specific on my BS analogy. I am usually well informed, especially on taxes (though not like sp cpa). I like to pay attention when my tax payments go to support parasites and losers. I'll be happy to duel if you provide specifics.
    How about every citizen pays some taxes. And eliminate the grossly abused food stamp program. And student subsized loans. And subsidized home loans. And a myriad of "vote for me, here's money" programs.
    Sounds like you are outside a rich man's house with a pitchfork - figuratively speaking.
    Perhaps not strictly an analogy, but the same line-of-thought "Obama and Liberals hate and want to kill the rich".

    This is your post in the '35 questions Romney' thread:

    Quote Originally Posted by palmetto defender View Post
    Hmmm. Class warfare. Obama is the current king of class warfare. I have read about a master of class warfare from many years ago.
    Instead of "the rich are the cause of our problems" and "they are bringing us down" - Then it was "The Jews are the cause of our problems" "They are rich and we need to take away everything they have".
    The beneficiary then as now were those who were lazy and of poor character. The multitude of others really didn't care.
    Of course, Obama hasn't cleed for death camps. Just crippling the rich si HIS legacy "can last a thousand years".
    Obama - today's Fuhrer. Look at his record, Mein Herrs.
    Your post was in response to my post:

    I don't give a flying f*** about Bain capital. I am not voting for Romney and I don't care about his investment group.

    The "class warfare" is why I'm responding. While I don't care about Bain, I do care about Romney's positions on cutting taxes and deregulation. Generally, I think taxes are too low now, especially for those making over a million a year, and I think deregulation/failure to enforce regulation has hurt the middle class. If that makes me a supporter of "class warfare policies", then so be it.

    Some might consider the deregulation and tax breaks for the wealthy as class warfare on the middle class.
    There's the context, and there's you taking what I said and painting me as a pitchfork holdin' fascist on Kristallnacht outside Mitt Romney's house, just because I want return to mid 1990's tax policy and financial regulation.

    And it's just like this "bar stool taxation" BS, although to be fair to Chiefs, he did not go nearly as far as you did.

  4. #44
    Board Moderator
    Jets Insider VIP
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    State Location Here
    Posts
    7,737
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by SafetyBlitz View Post
    There's the context, and there's you taking what I said and painting me as a pitchfork holdin' fascist on Kristallnacht outside Mitt Romney's house, just because I want return to mid 1990's tax policy and financial regulation.
    It's real easy to be a college student yelling for tax hikes. Get back to me in 5 years when (hopefully) you're gainfully employed, paying a mortgage and trying to raise a family.

    You might see things a bit differently then.

  5. #45
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    2,375
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by shakin318 View Post
    It's real easy to be a college student yelling for tax hikes. Get back to me in 5 years when (hopefully) you're gainfully employed, paying a mortgage and trying to raise a family.

    You might see things a bit differently then.
    If I make over 500k or a mil in 5 years, than I'll be happy to pay 40%.

    FWIW, I work in sales now for a small business. Have been since I moved back from CO, where I worked in construction, and before that briefly for Wells Fargo before I quit. Before that I worked in landscaping after I graduated.

    In a month I'll be in Law School.
    Last edited by SafetyBlitz; 07-26-2012 at 02:49 PM.

  6. #46
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    18,226
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by SafetyBlitz View Post
    We agree about cop pensions and benefits - though I only know of Nassau and Suffolk county cops here on LI, don't know how it is in the rest of the country - but it's absolutely unacceptable to retire in your early forties with a balloon payment after having taken all their OT in the final 3 years and getting full bennies for life. That's just unacceptable.

    The problem needs to be diagnosed before it can be solved. Therefore, the American public needs to know that regardless of who you vote for or what your views are, nothing will ever get done so long as obstructionism is more politically expedient than legislators doing their f***ing jobs.
    Its not really about cops per se.. that is almost a carve out due to the risk. That was an example only. we have so many professions who are able to retire at 55 with pensions , bennies etc..when the equivalent job in the private sector has only a 401K.

  7. #47
    All League
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    4,850
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by SafetyBlitz View Post
    Perhaps not strictly an analogy, but the same line-of-thought "Obama and Liberals hate and want to kill the rich".

    This is your post in the '35 questions Romney' thread:



    Your post was in response to my post:



    There's the context, and there's you taking what I said and painting me as a pitchfork holdin' fascist on Kristallnacht outside Mitt Romney's house, just because I want return to mid 1990's tax policy and financial regulation.

    And it's just like this "bar stool taxation" BS, although to be fair to Chiefs, he did not go nearly as far as you did.

    I really do think Obama hates people who have achieved wealth. His "nobody does it by themself" concept is evidenc of that.
    I am not opposed to tax hikes. He wants to injure people of wealth. If this moron gets his way my taxes go up 165%. That fair? While people who are parasitic pay absolutely NOTHING.
    Sorry, I earned what I have. I WILL keep it.
    Just a hint: in discussions with my broker(he thinks Obama will be reelected and the market factored that in 80%) watch various financial segments. Tax free bonds have been showing strength through the last couple months. Those with money are hedging.
    The corporate layoffs are increasing and will continue. Hiring will remain light. Uncertainty will lead to stagnation. Investment will increase overseas.
    Money will find its way offshore both for corporations and individuals.
    My Nazi references are merely (as I pointed out in that thread) a use of hyperbole which is attention grabbing. Although the Hitler, Goebbels, Himmler trio is fun to match against Obama, Axelrod and Holder. Is not Geithner somewhat like Albert Speer?

    Instead of tax increase how about budget cuts. A little too much on vote getting social programs. No? I do agree about cutting military spending, especially on foreign bases. A humorous note from a military person I saw yesterday. The Navy now has more admirals than ships. We are top heavy with admin. Government is run amok. Cutting time.

  8. #48
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    18,226
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by shakin318 View Post
    It's real easy to be a college student yelling for tax hikes. Get back to me in 5 years when (hopefully) you're gainfully employed, paying a mortgage and trying to raise a family.

    You might see things a bit differently then.
    Did you type that with your left hand on a pina colada from Saratoga you wealthy right winger

    Share the wealth...spread it around.

  9. #49
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    36,676
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by SafetyBlitz View Post
    If I make over 500k or a mil in 5 years, than I'll be happy to pay 40%.
    Ah, the great and consistent flaw in logic.

    Nothing is stopping anyone from paying 40%, 50% or 90% right now if they want to.

    If you believe in 40% taxation, pay 40%.

    Lead by example.

    But if you only support 40% if others have to pay that 40%, and you will not pay a single cent more until everyone is forced to pay more, thats a VERY easy position to take.

    After all, being stridently for others paying more takes no effort from you outside whatever it takes to type the words.

    If you truly believe we citizens do not pay enough, by all means, go ahead any pay more.

    FWIW, I work in sales now for a small business. Have been since I moved back from CO, where I worked in construction, and before that briefly for Wells Fargo before I quit. Before that I worked in landscaping after I graduated.

    In a month I'll be in Law School.
    So it's safe to say you exist in the $30->$50K a year area of income. In other words, you're either a net taker from the system, or a very small net giver (based on averages of course).

    So the tax increase you prefer wouldn't afect you, outiside a possible net gain to yoruself.
    Last edited by Warfish; 07-26-2012 at 03:24 PM.

  10. #50
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    2,375
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by palmetto defender View Post
    I really do think Obama hates people who have achieved wealth. His "nobody does it by themself" concept is evidenc of that.
    I am not opposed to tax hikes. He wants to injure people of wealth. If this moron gets his way my taxes go up 165%. That fair? While people who are parasitic pay absolutely NOTHING.
    Sorry, I earned what I have. I WILL keep it.
    Just a hint: in discussions with my broker(he thinks Obama will be reelected and the market factored that in 80%) watch various financial segments. Tax free bonds have been showing strength through the last couple months. Those with money are hedging.
    The corporate layoffs are increasing and will continue. Hiring will remain light. Uncertainty will lead to stagnation. Investment will increase overseas.
    Money will find its way offshore both for corporations and individuals.
    My Nazi references are merely (as I pointed out in that thread) a use of hyperbole which is attention grabbing. Although the Hitler, Goebbels, Himmler trio is fun to match against Obama, Axelrod and Holder. Is not Geithner somewhat like Albert Speer?

    Instead of tax increase how about budget cuts. A little too much on vote getting social programs. No? I do agree about cutting military spending, especially on foreign bases. A humorous note from a military person I saw yesterday. The Navy now has more admirals than ships. We are top heavy with admin. Government is run amok. Cutting time.
    This President proposed cuts in exchange for letting the Bush tax cut expire on the wealthiest Americans.

    Even that isn't the perfect solution that you want, jesus man, you and many others on this site refuse to acknowledge that it actually happened. Your party is beholden to an unrealistic pledge that taxes can NEVER be raised regardless of the situation.

    And the hate/mischaracterization of Obama is insane. Even though I hated Bush, I never parroted bullsh*t about him - the reality was critical enough and could be summed up in two sentences - Why did we invade Iraq? Why did we cut taxes while fighting two wars?

    I didn't need to speculate on who Bush hates or any other bullsh*t that is unprovable.

    And never, ever bring up Nazism in a political debate unless theirs actual genocide involved in what you're talking about.

  11. #51
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    36,676
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by SafetyBlitz View Post
    This President proposed cuts in exchange for letting the Bush tax cut expire on the wealthiest Americans.
    Since the idea is to raise rates to the Clinton Era, did he offer to cut spending to the Clinton Era as well (as a % of GDP of course)?

    If so, I could support such a proposal.

    Your party is beholden to an unrealistic pledge that taxes can NEVER be raised regardless of the situation.
    I agree, the "pledge" is and was a very bad, political-based, idea on the right.

    And the hate/mischaracterization of Obama is insane. Even though I hated Bush, I never parroted bullsh*t about him
    But no shortage of people did. More, IMO, than today and Obama.

    After all, no one feared being called a racist for any criticism of Bush's policies and ideaology.

    Why did we invade Iraq?
    Bad Intel and general mismanagement/rush to judgement/post 9/11 pressure.

    But you'll never believe it was that. You're convinced it was a conspiracy.

    Why did we cut taxes while fighting two wars?
    A very good question.

    And never, ever bring up Nazism in a political debate unless theirs actual genocide involved in what you're talking about.
    You don't get to dictate to others what they can and cannot "bring up". The Nazi (and the Communists as well) were about more than genocide, after all.

    With that said, I find P's comparison to be less than apt.
    Last edited by Warfish; 07-26-2012 at 04:06 PM.

  12. #52
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    2,375
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Warfish View Post
    Since the idea is to raise rates to the Clinton Era, did he offer to cut spending to the Clinton Era as well (as a % of GDP of course)?

    If so, I could support such a proposal.
    I support that proposal.

    Here's the most detailed account of that almost-deal I've read:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/01/ma...pagewanted=all

    Forgive me if it's the NYT, but at least read the article before you b*tch about the source.


    Quote Originally Posted by Warfish View Post
    Bad Intel.

    But you'll never believe it was that. You're convinced it was a conspiracy.
    I don't think it was a conspiracy, not in the slightest. I think it was arrogance AND bad intel. Arrogance in that the dissenting opinions about Iraq within the administration and National Security team were drowned out and those outside the administration who were critical were marginalized throughout the country by those who supported their administration.

    Furthermore, the way the war was fought - which is on the Commander in Chief - without a 5:1 buildup like the first Persian Gulf, without a clear exit strategy and with MORE troops deployed in Iraq rather than AFghanistan, illustrated a sh*t strategic mind.


    Quote Originally Posted by Warfish View Post
    You don't get to dictate to others what they can and cannot "bring up". The Nazi (and the Communists as well) were about more than genocide, after all.

    With that said, I find P's comparison to be less than apt.
    About the only thing I dictate on these boards is don't call me, or other liberals, Nazi-like or Communist, because that's absolutely f***ing ridiculous.

    And if you don't like that, than you can GFY

  13. #53
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    36,676
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by SafetyBlitz View Post
    I support that proposal.

    Forgive me if it's the NYT, but at least read the article before you b*tch about the source.
    I read the Washington Post, listen to Sirius Left and read the Daily KOS. I have no issue with liberal news sources, as I am well aware of the bias in their writing (same as for the right/FOX/Sirius Patriot/etc).

    I think it was arrogance AND bad intel. Arrogance in that the dissenting opinions about Iraq within the administration and National Security team were drowned out and those outside the administration who were critical were marginalized throughout the country by those who supported their administration.

    Furthermore, the way the war was fought - which is on the Commander in Chief - without a 5:1 buildup like the first Persian Gulf, without a clear exit strategy and with MORE troops deployed in Iraq rather than AFghanistan, illustrated a sh*t strategic mind.
    Generally speaking, agreed.

    About the only thing I dictate on these boards is don't call me, or other liberals, Nazi-like or Communist, because that's absolutely f***ing ridiculous.

    And if you don't like that, than you can GFY
    I could GFM. Or I could just call you a Commu-Nazi and stroll on by.

  14. #54
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    2,375
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Warfish View Post

    Or I could just call you a Commu-Nazi and stroll on by.
    It might be easier that way, but it's certainly not constructive, nor the truth.

    In fact, it is usually the death of rational discourse.

  15. #55
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    36,676
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by SafetyBlitz View Post
    It might be easier that way, but it's certainly not constructive, nor the truth.

    In fact, it is usually the death of rational discourse.
    Well, it was a joke, as I thought the smiley might point out.



    But no worries either way.

  16. #56
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    2,375
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Warfish View Post
    Ah, the great and consistent flaw in logic.

    Nothing is stopping anyone from paying 40%, 50% or 90% right now if they want to.

    If you believe in 40% taxation, pay 40%.

    Lead by example.

    But if you only support 40% if others have to pay that 40%, and you will not pay a single cent more until everyone is forced to pay more, thats a VERY easy position to take.

    After all, being stridently for others paying more takes no effort from you outside whatever it takes to type the words.

    If you truly believe we citizens do not pay enough, by all means, go ahead any pay more.
    Volunteering to pay more taxes, without mandate, has never happened in any substantive way in American history.


    Quote Originally Posted by Warfish View Post
    So it's safe to say you exist in the $30->$50K a year area of income. In other words, you're either a net taker from the system, or a very small net giver (based on averages of course).

    So the tax increase you prefer wouldn't afect you, outiside a possible net gain to yoruself.
    That would be an accurate assessment of my income.

    Clinton, Bush I and Reagan tax rates did not dissuade the wealthy from achievement in the past nor would it do so in the future.

    And do the wealthy not benefit from restoring America's credit rating and rebuilding America's infrastructure?

  17. #57
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    36,676
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by SafetyBlitz View Post
    Volunteering to pay more taxes, without mandate, has never happened in any substantive way in American history.
    Hmm.

    So it hasn't.

    Funny that.

    Clinton, Bush I and Reagan tax rates did not dissuade the wealthy from achievement in the past nor would it do so in the future.
    On the contrary, in his stump work, Obama directly links those rates with the success of the wealthy. As if the two were tied together.

    And do the wealthy not benefit from restoring America's credit rating and rebuilding America's infrastructure?
    The proposed Tax Increase will not effect our National credit rating, will not "rebuild Americas infrastructure" in any meaningful way not already being done, nor will it pay down the debt which will be higher with or without the increase.

    Talking points are nice, but realism is better.

  18. #58
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    2,375
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Warfish View Post

    The proposed Tax Increase will not effect our National credit rating, will not "rebuild Americas infrastructure" in any meaningful way not already being done, nor will it pay down the debt which will be higher with or without the increase.

    Talking points are nice, but realism is better.
    Rebuilding our infrastructure and restoring our credit rating need to happen. And to do so, we'll need more revenue.

    Standard and Poors just "threatened" to lower our credit rating again if we don't get our sh*t together.

    Any sweeping debt reduction will include raising revenue - that's not just my position, that's fact.

    But one party absolutely refuses to raise revenue. Why is it "both sides are guilty"?
    Last edited by SafetyBlitz; 07-27-2012 at 08:03 AM.

  19. #59
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    18,226
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by SafetyBlitz View Post
    Rebuilding our infrastructure and restoring our credit rating need to happen. And to do so, we'll need more revenue.

    Standard and Poors just "threatened" to lower our credit rating again if we don't get our sh*t together.

    Any sweeping debt reduction will include raising revenue - that's not just my position, that's fact.

    But one party absolutely refuses to raise revenue. Why is it "both sides are guilty"?
    Think of the country as a pyramid. We keep squeezing the very tip. The base below, much wider is doing nothing but literally and figuratively living off the tip.

    Tax rates should be raised, non sensical earned income credits dropped and spending dramatically cut.

    What OBAMA is proposing is white wash.

    In other countries in Europe...mandatory enlistment exists for young men. REAL tangible commitment to country. Yet we allow 1/2 of our people to pay nothing and ask for more.

  20. #60
    All League
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    4,850
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by southparkcpa View Post
    Did you type that with your left hand on a pina colada from Saratoga you wealthy right winger

    Share the wealth...spread it around.

    No spreading. Horde. LOL.
    Saratoga is the best racing venue I have ever been at. In the summer 45 years ago and last just a couple years ago. Suits still required (couple years ago) in the boxes.
    I think the traditional drink there is Gin and Tonic.

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