i'd rather get rid of poor people than suicide the country


so how do we go about getting rid of all those poor people anyways

6/10/2008 2:20:05 PM

I believe that the majority of millionare are self made, first time millionares in this country. Ill try to find the article. No better country to improve your life if willing.

6/10/2008 2:21:50 PM

Actually, eye, the government IS going to dictate my salary. They're gonna pay it, but it's not going to be anywhere close to 45k a year. AND I'M GONNA TEACH YOUR KIDS! Unless you pay extra to send them to private school where they'll be sure to continue to continue pushing social darwinism to students.

I'm not outright opposing a flat tax rate. It'd probably be better than what we're working with now. I'm trying to point out the flaws in the justification that by demanding the same thing of everyone now, we're going to actually make things equal. Most of us in here are college grads or students, statistically speaking, we start off with many advantages of social, intellectual, and economic capital. That makes it easier for more of us to get further, not because we're smarter or more driven, but because we started ahead of them. It's not that they like being poor, it's often that they run and run just to maintain their place, and no one has told them how to do better.

I've got no problem with you making money. I'll be glad for you if you do, and I'm planning on doing some saving and investing myself. But if we're comparing someone who's struggling to make ends meet as it is should have to give up, say, their kids' chance of going to college, or not having to sell their house and move to a crappy project, while you have give up buying a new car until two years from now, then there's no comparison.

[Edited on June 10, 2008 at 2:26 PM. Reason : what reason?]

6/10/2008 2:24:08 PM

nvm too smart for me lol

[Edited on June 10, 2008 at 2:25 PM. Reason : .]

6/10/2008 2:24:55 PM

So apparently I was wrong to assume that we could all agree that all people should pay an equal burden?

This is rather interesting.

Any arguments for why rich people should bear less of the tax burden?

6/10/2008 2:30:31 PM

prater, you make a good point. My point is that its not hte govts job to dictate your lifestyle. Im saying that the govt should treat everyone as equals, even with taxes. What we have now is a growing "free ride" minded society who is becoming less productive. If everyone takes home the same percentage of pay..then how can one claim they are being taxed unfairly or discriminated against? It also keeps people from getting the free ride mentality of we need that, just dont look at me to pay for it attitude.

Here is a study on middle class millionaires:

7.6% of American households, or 8.4 million households are middle-class millionaires

The average middle-class millionaire works 70 hours per week

Middle-class millionaires are five times more likely than the average worker to say they are always available for work

89% believes that anyone can attain wealth through hard work

62% believes that networking, or knowing many people, is the key to financial success

Nine out of 10 middle-class millionaires say they made a bad career or business move, but almost three-fourths say that was crucial to their business success

They are five times more likely than the average middle-class person to continue on in the same business course in spite an earlier failure

65% of middle-class millionaires characterize their approach to negotiating as "doing whatever you need to do to win"

They say they need a net worth of $24 million to feel wealthy, and $13.4 million to be considered rich.



There are reasons why some make alot of money and the majority is hardwork and responsible decisions....not luck like many assume with thier envy.


Boone, not less of a tax burden.. an equal burden. THey will stay take home the same percentage of pay, but pay more in dollars than lesser earners.

[Edited on June 10, 2008 at 2:33 PM. Reason : .]

6/10/2008 2:32:12 PM

hahah "middle class millionaire" ...gtfo

6/10/2008 2:33:17 PM

As an aside, this is depressing:

Quote :

"62% believes that networking, or knowing many people, is the key to financial success"

And kinda negates all the other things you listed.

6/10/2008 2:35:47 PM

Quote :

"AND I'M GONNA TEACH YOUR KIDS!"

Naw, HELLZ naw, son. You don't ever get to spew your putrid, egalitarian filth at my kids. Sorry.

6/10/2008 2:38:55 PM

why is that boone?


DNL

Those with a net worth of between $1 million and $10 million -- that they have earned rather than inherited -- are being dubbed "middle-class millionaires," a group that has grown on the heels of the economic boom over the past couple decades.

http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/rise-middle-class-millionaire-reshaping-us/story.aspx?guid=%7B6CF2AF9B-7A4C-487E-8AD1-8B49A6A87104%7D

6/10/2008 2:41:34 PM

My point here is that even a flat tax rate is slightly flawed, because the people on the bottom are being disproportionately penalized. The poverty income in this country, the last time I saw it, was around 19k per year, and if I'm not mistaken, that pretty much takes into account the costs of parents getting to and from work, kids getting new clothes every couple of years, and room and board. That's pretty close to it. That puts an increasing number of people in a service economy (where pay is crap) at the bottom, often barely making enough to stay above the poverty line as industrial jobs go away thanks to everybody's favorite corporations, and reduces that middle class as which we tend to self-identify.

All that said, flat tax is probably the best we're going to come up with, and it's relatively fair. It's never really going to get perfectly even.

Like I said, Megaloman, it's your right. You're still paying the same taxes. I guess it would be a shame if everybody grew up thinking that the people around them had value beyond their economic worth. I could put them onto some Ayn Rand if you want?

[Edited on June 10, 2008 at 2:46 PM. Reason : Just for Megaloman]

[Edited on June 10, 2008 at 2:50 PM. Reason : Needed another edit, you guys post a lot while I'm thinking.]

6/10/2008 2:44:15 PM

why not have everyone pay 15% percent? prater. What you are trying to do is determine how much people need thier money. There was a study that showed the average "poor" person in the US has two cars, cable, AC, etc.. You dont need to look any farther than your walmart at teh first of the month to see people arent starving to death.

My thing is that the govt should have one set of rules for us all. Then, how well you do in life is up to you. Everyone is playing by the rules, no one has an advantage.

I am reading a book on investing and half of this thing is education on the taxes and avoiding penalities esp in the higher brackets. For example.

If two people both put in 1k in an I bond at 1.75% for 20 years and a standard rate of inflation of 4%. After 20 years that 1k will be worth 1135 for the 10% bracket and 962 for the 35% bracket. Thats BS. The second guy LOST money for doing the exact same investment. All im asking for is equality. Nothing more or less.

6/10/2008 2:53:24 PM

Quote :

"why is that boone?"

The majority of rich people acknowledge that the key to being rich is to have rich friends/family.

6/10/2008 2:53:27 PM

I think we can definitively state that people who have little need what they do have more. Fifty dollars to a young couple who just had their first kid is a lot bigger deal than it is to an established, middle-aged office supervisor.

I'll agree that financial success is mostly a matter of education about finance, but you've got to get it from somewhere, or even find out that you need to learn it from somewhere. We seem to be largely convinced we're already supposed to know what to do with money, even though the last couple of years have showed a lot of us don't. I'd say 15% is a fairly reasonable amount of tax to pay. Heck, it might be possible to make it 10% or 12%. I'd personally like to see some small reduction of that burden on the bottom rungs of society, just so we don't have to tax people into near-poverty in the name of total equality, but I agree we should all pay our share.

I think Boone is right. We're really close to agreeing here. Our argument is over small details.

6/10/2008 3:03:44 PM

Quote :

"as industrial jobs go away thanks to everybody's favorite corporations"

This is why you don't get to teach my kids. Behind your "soak the rich" hostility, there's a complete lack of understanding. Don't you think burdensome taxes and regulations might have something to do with the loss of industrial jobs overseas? Do you know what foreign manufacturers are going to do with the dollars they get from American customers? Are they going to paper their walls with them, or do you think that maybe, just maybe, they might be tempted to spend them - in America.?

6/10/2008 3:04:38 PM

come on, thats not what that says. It doesnt say shit about knowing rich people or having rich family. These are the ones that worked for it. Networking is important for most businesses.

What the majority of people would take from the article is that they are very hard working and willing people. 90% believe they can attain wealth through hardwork, but you seem to focus on being a victim bc you dont know anyone rich. Am i overstating it? That is how it appears.

6/10/2008 3:05:34 PM

Quote :

"Here is a study on middle class millionaires: 7.6% of American households, or 8.4 million households are middle-class millionaires The average middle-class millionaire works 70 hours per week Middle-class millionaires are five times more likely than the average worker to say they are always available for work 89% believes that anyone can attain wealth through hard work 62% believes that networking, or knowing many people, is the key to financial success Nine out of 10 middle-class millionaires say they made a bad career or business move, but almost three-fourths say that was crucial to their business success They are five times more likely than the average middle-class person to continue on in the same business course in spite an earlier failure 65% of middle-class millionaires characterize their approach to negotiating as "doing whatever you need to do to win" They say they need a net worth of $24 million to feel wealthy, and $13.4 million to be considered rich "

link? its hard to believe the mean (average) worker works 70 hours a week.

6/10/2008 3:06:38 PM

link is a couple posts up steve.

6/10/2008 3:07:55 PM

Just for the record, if anyone cares, I do not agree with you all.

Quote :

"If two people both put in 1k in an I bond at 1.75% for 20 years and a standard rate of inflation of 4%. After 20 years that 1k will be worth 1135 for the 10% bracket and 962 for the 35% bracket. Thats BS. The second guy LOST money for doing the exact same investment. All im asking for is equality. Nothing more or less."

Right, and the guy who makes so much money is going to invest in the same I bond. The more money you have the greater return you get per unit.

Before you start harping on all the redistributions from the rich to the poor, how about the distributions we have from the poor to the rich? Yeah, they exist, and there are a lot of them. Simply, the more complex the system is, the more it favors those with more money - in regards to taxes, investments, and general finances.

6/10/2008 3:26:42 PM

Quote :

"Facing the facts, some of the top 1% or so squander the money they have on completely retarded shit, because there is simply no reasonable way to spend that amount of money on one's self. But more than those people, there are lots that will eventually just die and give their money to charity. If you are a true 'robber baron', I think you should have the real say-so in where your money goes. Face it, if the government took more of Bill Gate's money, they would be starving the Bill & Melenda Gates Foundation (where charity money was efficiently allocated and managed by a relatively free market) to pay for the irresponsibility of the federal government. "

you are blending in your upper middle class and the aristocratic top 1% elite. what about the fact taht the bottom two quintiles have an effective tax rate of approx 0% and yet receive a majority of the gov't funded social as well as entitlement programs. Prater argues that a flat tax is flawed b.c people making 19K need their money more then someone making more. This would be true if the social welfare programs and entitlement programs did not exist. With the current system a large amount of what the people making 19K/year do pay in taxes (which is not much considering their income tax approaches 0% especially when they start popping out babies); they end up getting back through various gov't assistance programs at some point in their lives. They might not always be living on the gov't but i almost guarantee at some point they will be on welfare, live on food stamps, or have their medical expenses paid for during retirement by medicare. Effectively the taxes the lowest quintile or two does pay is essentially a forced investment by the gov't in services they would not be responsible enough to pay for them selves.

Quote :

"think we can definitively state that people who have little need what they do have more. Fifty dollars to a young couple who just had their first kid is a lot bigger deal than it is to an established, middle-aged office supervisor. "

well maybe they should re-evaluate having children. I shouldn't be forced to pay so lower class people can fucking breed like rabbits.

[Edited on June 10, 2008 at 3:30 PM. Reason : l]

6/10/2008 3:27:47 PM

Why spend them in America? They go further everywhere else, Megaloman. "Burdensome taxes" are one thing, and I won't act like I know much about corporate tax policy. But it's also got a lot to do with the fact that you can pay someone in Mexico or Vietnam a couple of bucks a day to do the same work you'd pay an American 10-12 bucks an hour to do. Damn that regulation, not letting them keep people in dirty tenement houses and work them into an early grave with brown lung or something. You seeming surprised that I'm for regulation of business at that point would be like me not realizing how into the free market you are. I'm not totally sure why you're interested in this thread about whether taxes should be fixed or not at all, given that you think they're immoral and shouldn't exist to begin with.

Why do you think I care if you're rich? It doesn't matter to me, except to be glad you've done well and be curious whether you're remotely interested in helping your fellow man. Hell, it actually does benefit me a little if you're doing well for yourself. I just think maybe as a part of society, we have some obligation to support that society. Go! Be capitalist! Make money! But don't do it at the expense of others and expect me not to object.

HUR, I guess you raise a good point about that. I should change my position to the ones who are just above that line for assistance. As far as what happens to their taxes, I thought the whole point was that we're gonna cut all that nonsense out, start at our reasonable flat rate, and then debate whether it's a good idea or not. Also, for a conservative not into government interference in private life, (genuine curiosity) I'm curious how you think this reduction in birth rate would be effected? I wouldn't want to see that level of interference at the same time that we definitely need to start thinking about how to keep a sustainable population.

[Edited on June 10, 2008 at 3:39 PM. Reason : you know]

6/10/2008 3:34:29 PM

^ you are using your resentment of the uber rich top 1% to rationalize a tax policy that fucks over a large chunk of the hard working, economic building, wealthy americans.

6/10/2008 3:37:04 PM

man i wish i was rich like yall....then i might understand why it sucks to be rich

6/10/2008 3:39:03 PM

^^Not on purpose, I promise. I swear I'm not quite the slavering, mad-eyed tree-hugging uber-liberal I seem to come across as.

My point isn't that we should put the screws to them. Flat tax rate is a pretty good idea. Eye and I had this conversation. I think that it'd be nice, if it can be done without hurting anyone much, if we could take it easy on the people who are struggling to improve their lot. As in, they pay a couple of hundred less in taxes than you, because they get maybe a 1 to 3% break on their 10-15% tax, that would go a long way toward making their lives easier.

[Edited on June 10, 2008 at 3:44 PM. Reason : arrows]

6/10/2008 3:43:20 PM

Quote :

"Someone making >$250k/yr does have an abundance of expendable income"

Someone making 250 K a year may be making that much because they went to medical or law school

Thus, they may have upwards of 150 K in school loans alone that are accruing interest while they work 60+ hours a week in a hospital.

Should we punish this person MORE than a mcdonalds manager who has no school loans?

Let's just take away half of their income so they struggle to pay back their student loans, that sounds fair. We don't really need them, they're just doctors, anybody could do their job.

6/10/2008 3:43:21 PM

Quote :

"man i wish i was rich like yall....then i might understand why it sucks to be rich"

Nothing to do with being rich thats the problem. I well be making 60K+ starting out of college and will be burdened with an effective tax rate approaching 40%. What is my money paying for. A lot will be gonig towards Bush's war for oil. However, 50% will be paying for lazy americans who feel it is the gov't job to take care of them. This money paying for those not responsible enough to pay for retirement, those who decide not to work, those who do work but want more money for [insert discretionary spending item here] so they use their kids in order to get food stamp money, and those who are not responsible enough foregoing health insurance so they can buy more booze/rims/drugs/tv.

[Edited on June 10, 2008 at 3:44 PM. Reason : l]

6/10/2008 3:43:39 PM

frog I gave you a very real example of how BS the tax structure is and how one LOSES money with the exact same investment over the exact same amount of time. You offer..."Right, and the guy who makes so much money is going to invest in the same I bond."

Thanks

Quote :

"man i wish i was rich like yall....then i might understand why it sucks to be rich "

Why do you feel its ok to discriminate agaisnt them?

6/10/2008 3:45:41 PM

JPrater

Yes, you can spend your dollars practically anywhere. But why would a Brazilian, or a German accept your dollars? They're not legal tender in his country. Why would anyone accept dollars if not for the fact that they can be spent in America?

6/10/2008 3:46:03 PM

So wait. We do still mostly agree? Because I'll bet good money people making significantly more than you under the current system are paying similar or lower taxes, thanks to exceptions in the tax code and nimble-fingered accounting.

If someone would delete that last if it's annoying people, I'd appreciate it.

Megaloman, I'm not sure what your last post was supposed to do, except make me point out that certain kinds of money can be exchanged for other kinds of money. The imprecision is my fault, though. Let's switch "dollars" to "money"?

[Edited on June 10, 2008 at 3:51 PM. Reason : No reason to stop now.]

6/10/2008 3:46:53 PM

[Edited on June 10, 2008 at 3:49 PM. Reason : Double post, my fault]

6/10/2008 3:48:31 PM

Quote :

"But if we're comparing someone who's struggling to make ends meet as it is should have to give up, say, their kids' chance of going to college, or not having to sell their house and move to a crappy project, while you have give up buying a new car until two years from now, then there's no comparison. "

Do you have a new car? Hell, if you have one with less than 180K miles on it that's younger than my 98, I think you should sell it and get a crappy beater so I can eat something other than toast, hotdogs, and ramen. There's no comparison between you having a nice car and me getting to eat something that has nutritional value, right?

6/10/2008 3:50:21 PM

^I've actually got a 1990 with 200k on it, and do most of the work myself and with family. I hope you're able to get a good job and start making this money soon, though. I'm hoping to get another couple of years out of mine.

As far as your actual point, then...no. But I don't see what that's got to do with taxes? Shouldn't you be working cleaning floors at night while going to school to better yourself in the long run, rather than worrying about it?

If you and a couple of hundred thousand other people were in danger of not having a place to go, a way to get to work, or having good food to eat in the long run, and someone said "Hey, by charging them less in taxes, they could do these things!", then...yeah, absolutely.

[Edited on June 10, 2008 at 3:57 PM. Reason : habit]

6/10/2008 3:53:08 PM

Quote :

"Why do you feel its ok to discriminate agaisnt them?"

i think there is a brick wall we are not getting past....i dont feel they are being discriminated...so like idk

6/10/2008 3:55:24 PM

the richest people in the country already pay the majority of taxes that the entire country pays (which in turn funds the majority of government expenditures)...lets tax them some more...they probably won't mind, after all they're rich! they don't have a care in the world! except for which multibillion dollar vacation to take this weekend amirite...they should have to pay for all of us...those rich motherfuckers

6/10/2008 4:02:30 PM

how so dnl?

Would you admit that there is a different set of rules for one group and not the other? That one group pays a bigger percentage of thier salary in taxes than the other?

Its the fucking definition of discrimination.

6/10/2008 4:13:41 PM

Quote :

"Someone making 250 K a year may be making that much because they went to medical or law school Thus, they may have upwards of 150 K in school loans alone that are accruing interest while they work 60+ hours a week in a hospital."

I bet there are quite a few teachers in the country who would love it if (annual salary) > (total student loans).

Quote :

"Should we punish this person MORE than a mcdonalds manager who has no school loans?"

Not necessarily-- and that's the whole point of this thread

I don't believe that progressive taxation punishes the rich more than the poor. Re-read my first post, but replace "burden" with "punish," if it will help you to understand things better.

The thread was made in response to the "why should we punish people for success!" argument. I believe that progressive taxation doesn't punish success.

6/10/2008 4:46:50 PM

all men are created equal

except rich men...they should be taxed at a higher percentage

6/10/2008 4:53:09 PM

amen

6/10/2008 4:55:04 PM

Again, missing the point.

Surprise!


I'm asking whether an equal percentage really means true equality.

But maybe you already have realized that, and now you're just trolling.

Either that, or you have high functioning autism.


I'd say the odds are 50/50.

6/10/2008 5:15:50 PM

this thread is just whining about how you're jealous of rich people

maybe try thinking with reason and logic instead of emotion next time, k

6/10/2008 5:16:31 PM

I hate successful people rabel rabel rabel; lets tax them more so we can give it to poor people so they can have more money for drugs, sound systems, and tickets to the next kanye west concert.

6/10/2008 6:29:48 PM

you are a TKE? living up to the sterotype douchy southern frat guy stereotype are we?

racist? check
stupid arguments of the causation of social problems? check
parents pay for all your bills? probably check
majoring in something like business? probably check



[Edited on June 10, 2008 at 6:39 PM. Reason : .]

6/10/2008 6:38:05 PM

Scuba, you sure do a good job of promoting diversity and accepting people different from yourself

6/10/2008 6:39:58 PM

i just cant stand how rich people act like its the end of the world that they are rich

6/10/2008 6:42:45 PM

lol, I was a douchy southern frat guy at one point

I got tired of making up justifications to hate everything that wasn't like me and moved on

[Edited on June 10, 2008 at 6:52 PM. Reason : not that frats are in themselves bad things]

6/10/2008 6:52:24 PM

Quote :

"I believe that progressive taxation doesn't punish success. "

What if we taxed everyone that made under 40K at 10%, and everyone who made over 40K at 92%? That's a progressive tax, right?

It's unfair and punished success. At what point and percentages does it become "fair"? Any difference in how you tax a group of people is discrimination and punitive.

6/10/2008 7:45:46 PM

Income tax is what wasn't fair. What government service did you use to warrant the taxing of working?

That person who made over 40k still paid the same 10% as everybody else for his/her first 40k.

Your assertions that income tax should be uniformly taxed for everyone are for a different world. The government already moved wealth around and changed the structure of society before this. Now there's no other option to have a healthy society. I'm not a fan of living in a world where 99% live only by the 'good grace' of the top 1%.

6/10/2008 8:06:10 PM

Check it out I'm going to school to have the ability to stack cheddar to the ceiling and I mean I love a big TV as much as the next guy, I might have a couple of them in fact, but I also enjoy things like living in a country with things like good infrastructure and education system. So I'm good with tossin' a little cash that way as well. Welp, see ya.

6/10/2008 8:19:26 PM

Quote :

"Your assertions that income tax should be uniformly taxed for everyone are for a different world."

True, I think a different political system is needed for this to work. Ours isn't working, I wouldn't exactly call our society "healthy". It's time for something else.

6/10/2008 8:19:49 PM

To be fair though, I'm in no way saying this for our nation specifically. The constitution has been thrown in the garbage on many accounts. But the entire world took certain directions through the industrial revolution, and to do a full early-America style taxing in a digital world would be an interesting experiment, but there's nothing to suggest that will happen anywhere.

6/10/2008 8:34:09 PM