Welcome to ECCIE, become a part of the fastest growing adult community. Take a minute & sign up!

Welcome to ECCIE - Sign up today!

Become a part of one of the fastest growing adult communities online. We have something for you, whether you’re a male member seeking out new friends or a new lady on the scene looking to take advantage of our many opportunities to network, make new friends, or connect with people. Join today & take part in lively discussions, take advantage of all the great features that attract hundreds of new daily members!

Go Premium

Go Back   ECCIE Worldwide > General Interest > The Sandbox - National
test
The Sandbox - National The Sandbox is a collection of off-topic discussions. Humorous threads, Sports talk, and a wide variety of other topics can be found here.

Most Favorited Images
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
Most Liked Images
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
Top Reviewers
cockalatte 649
MoneyManMatt 490
Still Looking 399
samcruz 399
Jon Bon 397
Harley Diablo 377
honest_abe 362
DFW_Ladies_Man 313
Chung Tran 288
lupegarland 287
nicemusic 285
Starscream66 281
You&Me 281
George Spelvin 270
sharkman29 256
Top Posters
DallasRain70812
biomed163461
Yssup Rider61114
gman4453307
LexusLover51038
offshoredrilling48750
WTF48267
pyramider46370
bambino42977
The_Waco_Kid37283
CryptKicker37225
Mokoa36497
Chung Tran36100
Still Looking35944
Mojojo33117

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 11-24-2012, 09:39 PM   #1
Sidewinder
Lifetime Premium Access
 
Join Date: Jan 3, 2010
Location: Huntsville AL
Posts: 1,428
Default "Fair Share"?

From an editorial

"But income taxes, taken in isolation, do not tell the whole story, because lower-income Americans do pay payroll taxes. But even taking into account all forms of taxation, the top 1 percent still paid 22 percent of federal taxes while earning just 13.4 percent of household income. The top 5 percent paid 40 percent of all federal taxes, despite earning only 26 percent of all income. No matter how you slice the numbers, it's hard to understand why anyone would think the wealthy aren't already shouldering a burden commensurate with their blessings."

The editorial goes on to ask: just what SHOULD be their "fair share"?
Sidewinder is offline   Quote
Old 11-24-2012, 10:22 PM   #2
Little Stevie
Valued Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 4, 2009
Location: North Texas
Posts: 2,011
Encounters: 26
Default

First of all, not all government expenditures benefit all people. The SEC might never be worth a single cent to someone who has nothing to invest and little to gain or lose if he is a day laborer whose income goes from hand to mouth.

Likewise, a handicapped person who is chronically unemployed or underemployed might not always derive anything from having the benefit being protected by a strong military or police force.

A sightless person who seldom travels and has little income might not experience personal benefit from an interstate highway system other than its ability to transport the goods he consumes.

The depth of the editorial does not fathom the question far enough to ponder that the pie chart can be cut into many slices but not all people eat a significant amount of the pie. In addition a pie chart has no way to communicate cost of the paper on which it is drawn even though it (or a monitor) is necessary as the platform for the chart to be shown.

The earth is a single planet but it relies ever so slightly on the unseen gravitational forces of other bodies around it and not just the Sun to function in the manner it functions.


In other words, there is far more to examining the equation than simply computing the percentage of return to either the smallest or the largest taxpayer.
Little Stevie is offline   Quote
Old 11-24-2012, 10:36 PM   #3
Guest032516
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Apr 1, 2009
Location: TBD
Posts: 7,435
Encounters: 33
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Little Stevie View Post
First of all, not all government expenditures benefit all people. The SEC might never be worth a single cent to someone who has nothing to invest and little to gain or lose if he is a day laborer whose income goes from hand to mouth.

Likewise, a handicapped person who is chronically unemployed or underemployed might not always derive anything from having the benefit being protected by a strong military or police force.

A sightless person who seldom travels and has little income might not experience personal benefit from an interstate highway system other than its ability to transport the goods he consumes.

The depth of the editorial does not fathom the question far enough to ponder that the pie chart can be cut into many slices but not all people eat a significant amount of the pie. In addition a pie chart has no way to communicate cost of the paper on which it is drawn even though it (or a monitor) is necessary as the platform for the chart to be shown.

The earth is a single planet but it relies ever so slightly on the unseen gravitational forces of other bodies around it and not just the Sun to function in the manner it functions.


In other words, there is far more to examining the equation than simply computing the percentage of return to either the smallest or the largest taxpayer.
And yet, despite all this alleged complexity, the left always somehow knows that people with large incomes must pay more.
Guest032516 is offline   Quote
Old 11-24-2012, 10:40 PM   #4
Guest032516
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Apr 1, 2009
Location: TBD
Posts: 7,435
Encounters: 33
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Little Stevie View Post
First of all, not all government expenditures benefit all people. The SEC might never be worth a single cent to someone who has nothing to invest and little to gain or lose if he is a day laborer whose income goes from hand to mouth.

Likewise, a handicapped person who is chronically unemployed or underemployed might not always derive anything from having the benefit being protected by a strong military or police force.

A sightless person who seldom travels and has little income might not experience personal benefit from an interstate highway system other than its ability to transport the goods he consumes.
What exactly is the connection between who takes from the public treasury and who pays into it?

Even if we assume what you wrote about the day laborer, the blind guy, and the cripple (that they don't benefit as much from government spending) is true, won't it still be true if the top 5% pay 35% or 45% of taxes, instead of 40%?

And, for what it is worth, I don't think your examples hold water. The blind guy and the cripple will receive far more government support than the average healthy person. And the day laborer. like all low-income people, will receive far more in Social Security benefits and Medicare/Medicaid benefits that he will ever pay into the system.

And why exactly would a crippled person who is unemployed or underemployed not get the benefit of a police force or the military? Can he or she not still be raped, robbed, or murdered? The overwhelming majority of the violent felons in this country are themselves unemployed or underemployed people who victimized people in their own socioeconomic group. Ghetto thugs and trailer park bums don't normally beat and stab people from Turtle Creek. They attack folks right in their own neighborhood.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Little Stevie View Post
The earth is a single planet but it relies ever so slightly on the unseen gravitational forces of other bodies around it and not just the Sun to function in the manner it functions.
Wow, man. That is like TOTALLY deep. Can I get a hit off that, man?
Guest032516 is offline   Quote
Old 11-24-2012, 11:13 PM   #5
Chica Chaser
Premium Access
 
Chica Chaser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 18, 2009
Location: Mesaba
Posts: 31,149
Encounters: 7
Default

So in your opinion, what's the number that IS their fair share Stevie?
At what number does it become fair? 50%, 60%, 70%, 80% of those rich folks incomes?
Should capital gains income be taxed at the exact sames rates as earned income is? Its all income after-all right?

If one 1% of all the people in the US are paying 22% of all the money coming into the treasury, how much more do they need to pay in, to be fair...their fair share?

And if 5% of all people in the US are paying 40% of all the money coming into the treasury, how much more do they need to pay in, as their fair share?

That leaves 95% of all the other folks in the country to pay the remaining 60% of all the rest of the money coming in. So if the rich folks have to pay more, then the 60% of the rest of us can pay less, right? How much less? Or should the Congress simply increase their federal spending to make up for the windfall from the rich folks?
Chica Chaser is offline   Quote
Old 11-24-2012, 11:44 PM   #6
Yssup Rider
Valued Poster
 
Yssup Rider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 3, 2010
Location: Clarksville
Posts: 61,114
Encounters: 67
Default

Fuck the SEC! The Aggies walked in there and punked them for 10 wins. and they're fucking AGGIES!

Hold on ...

You're not talking about THE SEC?

NEVER MIND! !
Yssup Rider is offline   Quote
Old 11-25-2012, 01:17 AM   #7
oden
Valued Poster
 
oden's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 4, 2010
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 830
Default

Ever thought about lowering spending to closer to historical norms?
oden is offline   Quote
Old 11-25-2012, 01:23 AM   #8
CJ7
Valued Poster
 
CJ7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 9, 2010
Location: Here
Posts: 14,191
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yssup Rider View Post
Fuck the SEC! The Aggies walked in there and punked them for 10 wins. and they're fucking AGGIES!

Hold on ...

You're not talking about THE SEC?

NEVER MIND! !
PUNKED my ass ... 10 asswhippins ... roll the schedule back, bring out LSU and Florida, and, Notre Dumb would be 13

birds fly over Oklahoma upside down because it aint worth shittin on
CJ7 is offline   Quote
Old 11-25-2012, 01:29 AM   #9
Yssup Rider
Valued Poster
 
Yssup Rider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 3, 2010
Location: Clarksville
Posts: 61,114
Encounters: 67
Default

LMAO!
Yssup Rider is offline   Quote
Old 11-25-2012, 02:54 AM   #10
Sidewinder
Lifetime Premium Access
 
Join Date: Jan 3, 2010
Location: Huntsville AL
Posts: 1,428
Default

Little Stevie, I must be really slow tonight, but I cannot see how what you posted has the slightest inkling of connection to what I posted.

Could you explain it, please?
Sidewinder is offline   Quote
Old 11-25-2012, 03:08 AM   #11
Randy4Candy
Valued Poster
 
Randy4Candy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 30, 2009
Location: Hwy 380 Revisited
Posts: 3,333
Encounters: 11
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by oden View Post
Ever thought about lowering spending to closer to historical norms?
Great plan! Just be sure to raise tax rates to their historical norm as well.
Randy4Candy is offline   Quote
Old 11-25-2012, 04:05 AM   #12
TexTushHog
Professional Tush Hog.
 
TexTushHog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 27, 2009
Location: Here and there.
Posts: 8,962
Encounters: 7
Default

Don't look at income, look at wealth. What percent of assets do the top 1%, etc. have? That's the relevant question. Plus, taxes SHOULD be progressive.
TexTushHog is offline   Quote
Old 11-25-2012, 04:56 AM   #13
Guest040616
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Dec 23, 2009
Location: Central Texas
Posts: 15,047
Encounters: 8
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CJ7 View Post
birds fly over Oklahoma upside down because it aint worth shittin on
That was funny!
Guest040616 is offline   Quote
Old 11-25-2012, 06:55 AM   #14
LexusLover
Valued Poster
 
LexusLover's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 16, 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 51,038
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TexTushHog View Post
Don't look at income, look at wealth.
Why?

"We" gonna start filing "Inventories" with the IRS?
LexusLover is offline   Quote
Old 11-25-2012, 09:29 AM   #15
WTF
Lifetime Premium Access
 
WTF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 1, 2010
Location: houston
Posts: 48,267
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ExNYer View Post
And yet, despite all this alleged complexity, the left always somehow knows that people with large incomes must pay more.



I know simple math.

There are Three big Federal government expenses. SS, Medicare, Defense

SS and Medicare are in a surplus.

So either raise taxes or cut Defense.
Quit using SS and Medicare's surplus to pay for Defense.You then should adjust SS and Medicare to take into account that people are living longer. But you should not do what was done in 1986, which was adjust SS and Medicare and then just spend that huge surplus on Defense. If you want to police the world (rich people) do not take from SS and Medicare (poor people's saving).


WTF is offline   Quote
Reply



AMPReviews.net
Find Ladies
Hot Women

Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright © 2009 - 2016, ECCIE Worldwide, All Rights Reserved