View Single Post
      07-02-2012, 09:46 PM   #101
txz4
Major
txz4's Avatar
18
Rep
1,098
Posts

 
Drives: 2006 M coupe
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: san antonio, texas

iTrader: (3)

Quote:
Originally Posted by ScotchAndCigar View Post
I understand the reference, as well as everything you all have repeated ad-nauseum. What I said was that it made no sense for you to imply that my way of measuring one thing (tax burden) should be applied to the pricing of personal consumer items. One has nothing to do with another, you only did it as a distraction from the argument. I'll give you some advice; next time you're tempted to say that the person debating you "doesn't know anything", stop.
Again, you're making the mistake of trying to tell me how you believe I think, rather than just understanding what I actually say. I don't give a flying f'k how well anybody lives; that has zero to do with anything. I'll say it again for you: We have a graduated tax system, and for a good reason. Those with low incomes (and no discretionary) pay lower rates, while higher incomes are taxed at higher rates as discretionary income rises. It's unbelieveable that I need to keep reiterating this.

I pay a higher rate than those who make less, fair enough - but only if those making more than me do likewise, or else it's not fair. OK? Can it be any simpler? When someone making five times my income pays the same (or lower) rate than me, that's not fair. The fact that they're paying more tax dollars than me is simply because they have a lot more income to tax, so again, that doesn't help.

Another patronizing blowhard. We all got the point about a year ago in this thread. Your premise that I "enjoy" the F-16 as much as you, despite paying less taxes towards it is a seriously disturbed way of looking at the world, and wrong too. My kids are out of public school, so how can I "enjoy" the 83% of my property taxes that go to the schools? Here's what I do enjoy though. The more money I make, the more I get to keep, and the more I can spend or invest. Same for you, same for everybody.

Here's a thought: make our graduated taxes graduated, all the way up. Not just until it gets to my income level, because like I said, that's not fair. So then after paying for F-16s and everything else in "raw dollars", if there's money left over, give the middle class a tax cut. And if that causes business owners to move out of the US, then f'k 'em.

He said all the way to the unemployment line.

If you work for someone else, the only "f you" you're going to hear is the one your boss tells you on his way to more profitable horizons without you. If a employer leaves, jobs leave.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MiddleAgedAl View Post
He was clearly illustrating how percentages are not as important as raw dollars. If you cannot see that, then that perhaps explains why you apparently think that raw dollars are meaningless.

Let me try and explain it differently.

Why does the gov collect taxes? To pay for the services they render.

Those services cost money. RAW DOLLARS. The costs of those do not vary based upon who is consuming them. It costs x dollars to buy an F-16, for example.

Scotch, when you see an F-16, you should realize that the "whiny, millionaire business owners" have paid for a much bigger piece of that airplane than you have, yet you both enjoy the freedoms it defends. The RAW dollars they rich contibute are a much larger piece of the tax revenue pie than the middle class.

Without the rich, it's fair to say that the F-16 would simply not be in the air at all. It's not as if the gov would go to General Dynamics and say, "the ability to pay of our taxpayer base simply cannot afford to pay any more, so we're gonna need you to sell us that jet at 25 cents on the dollar. That wouldnt happen, General Dynamics would lose their shirt, so the jet simply wouldnt be there at all. Percentages and ability to pay are irrelevant; the gear costs a lot of raw dollars, regardless of who it protects.

Not sure how make that basic arithmetic concept any simpler...

Of course, you can make them suffer the same hardship as the middle class by jacking up the tax rates, but unlike the last time we did that, this is 2012, and there are a LOT of other options around the globe that were not there before. They will take their money, and invest it elsewhere. You think job offshoring of jobs is bad now, just tax them more. It ain't 1960 anymore. People have choices, dont encourage them to exercise those choices...
Really well put middleagedal. I dont know how many different ways people have said that to him, he doesn't care. At the end of the day, whatever the rich pay will never be enough so long as they can still be called rich, according to him and EVERYTHING he's said.