| Welcome to The New Coffee Room. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| The Debate | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Sep 25 2016, 02:00 PM (2,891 Views) | |
| Luke's Dad | Sep 27 2016, 02:37 PM Post #126 |
![]()
Emperor Pengin
|
One basic underlying flaw in your argument. You are looking at Mr. Rich as taking a percentage of the nation's wealth instead of generating wealth. Oh, and it's not us taking a percentage off the nation's wealth, it's the nation taking a percentage of our personal wealth. |
| The problem with having an open mind is that people keep trying to put things in it. | |
![]() |
|
| Copper | Sep 27 2016, 03:38 PM Post #127 |
|
Shortstop
|
|
|
The Confederate soldier was peculiar in that he was ever ready to fight, but never ready to submit to the routine duty and discipline of the camp or the march. The soldiers were determined to be soldiers after their own notions, and do their duty, for the love of it, as they thought best. Carlton McCarthy | |
![]() |
|
| George K | Sep 27 2016, 03:49 PM Post #128 |
|
Finally
|
He has a job to do. Leave Lester alone (even if he is a registered Republican). |
|
A guide to GKSR: Click "Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08 Nothing is as effective as homeopathy. I'd rather listen to an hour of Abba than an hour of The Beatles. - Klaus, 4/29/18 | |
![]() |
|
| Axtremus | Sep 27 2016, 03:54 PM Post #129 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
Not at all. I used the word "grown." |
![]() |
|
| Axtremus | Sep 27 2016, 03:59 PM Post #130 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
It's pretty easy to understand, no? With no real growth, a 10% of $1000 total tax is $100 as an absolute number. Factor in 10% inflation, the $1100 becomes $1100 post inflation, and 10% of that becomes $110 as an absolute number. $110 as an absolute number is greater than $100 as an absolute number. |
![]() |
|
| George K | Sep 27 2016, 04:23 PM Post #131 |
|
Finally
|
No. Because, the percentage of total taxes paid is greater for the numbers cited. The top 0.1% and 1% paid more of the total tax burden than the lower 99% during that time period. You're conflating absolute tax paid with the percentage. Which do you wish to discuss? Did the top 1% pay more of the total over the 4 years 2003-2007? Yes, they did. Their share went up about 20%. Did they pay more in absolute dollars? Yes, again. By about 40%. You can inflation adjust if you wish, but the percentages won't change. Pick a baseline, and we can discuss. Show your work. |
|
A guide to GKSR: Click "Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08 Nothing is as effective as homeopathy. I'd rather listen to an hour of Abba than an hour of The Beatles. - Klaus, 4/29/18 | |
![]() |
|
| John D'Oh | Sep 27 2016, 05:01 PM Post #132 |
|
MAMIL
|
I'm a little puzzled by Trump's after-debate behavior. He's come out saying next time he's going to hit Clinton harder, and be nastier etc. If that's the plan, why give it away ahead of time? Or is he perhaps sending a message to his team that he thinks they messed up with their approach? |
| What do you mean "we", have you got a mouse in your pocket? | |
![]() |
|
| George K | Sep 27 2016, 05:02 PM Post #133 |
|
Finally
|
He's following the Obama strategery for Iraq and Afghanistan. |
|
A guide to GKSR: Click "Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08 Nothing is as effective as homeopathy. I'd rather listen to an hour of Abba than an hour of The Beatles. - Klaus, 4/29/18 | |
![]() |
|
| Axtremus | Sep 27 2016, 05:17 PM Post #134 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
Already explained the reasoning in post #119. If you ask me to pick a baseline, then consistent with post #119, I would pick this: Fraction of taxes paid (relative to that paid by the entire population) proportionally adjusted to fraction of wealth owned (relative to total wealth of the entire population). Define: T(X) as fraction of taxes paid by "the rich" relative to the taxes paid by the entire population in year X. W(X) as fraction of wealth owned by "the rich" relative to the wealth owned by the entire population in year X. Then for any given time period between year X1 and year X2 where X2 > X1, "the rich" is said to have paid "lower taxes" if the following is true: T(X1)/W(X1) > T(X2)/W(X2) The rest is just about finding the data to plug into T(X) and W(X). (If you’re wondering what happened to "absolute number" or "inflation," the formulation above deals with proportions, so no worry about "absolute number" or "inflation." If you go back and look, post #119 also does not say anything about "absolute number" or "inflation.") It’s hard to find good data source for wealth distribution over the years, so for expedience, the remainder of this post will use income as a proxy for wealth instead. Define: W’(X) as the fraction of income received by "the rich" relative the total income received by the entire population in year X Using data from http://taxfoundation.org/article/summary-latest-federal-income-tax-data and defining "the rich" as the "top 1%," we have the following: T(2003) = $251B/$746B = 33.64% T(2007) = $443B/$1112B = 39.84% W’(2003) = $1030B/$6150B = 16.75% W’(2007) = $1971B/$8622B = 22.86% T(2003)/W’(2003) = 33.64%/16.75% = 2.001 T(2007)/W’(2007) = 39.84%/22.86% = 1.743 Since T(2003)/W’(2003) > T(2007)/W’(2007) , "the rich" is therefore said to have paid "lower taxes" going from year 2003 to 2007. Would love to see how the number turns out for more recent years, but haven’t find data set that I can conveniently use to plug into the model above. If you come across such data sets, let me know. |
![]() |
|
| George K | Sep 27 2016, 05:35 PM Post #135 |
|
Finally
|
But the rabbit hole you led to is in post #122. |
|
A guide to GKSR: Click "Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08 Nothing is as effective as homeopathy. I'd rather listen to an hour of Abba than an hour of The Beatles. - Klaus, 4/29/18 | |
![]() |
|
| Axtremus | Sep 27 2016, 05:49 PM Post #136 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
You brought up "absolute number." Post #122 tells you that it's a bad idea to go with "absolute numbers." |
![]() |
|
| George K | Sep 27 2016, 05:54 PM Post #137 |
|
Finally
|
And you brought up inflation. And the "absolute dollar amount" was brough up in the article I quoted (post #115). But, all that aside, is it your thesis that the top 1% paid less in taxes (as a proportion of total taxes paid) in 2007 than 2003? Pick a standard - actual dollars, inflation-adjusted dollars, or percent of all taxes paid. |
|
A guide to GKSR: Click "Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08 Nothing is as effective as homeopathy. I'd rather listen to an hour of Abba than an hour of The Beatles. - Klaus, 4/29/18 | |
![]() |
|
| Jolly | Sep 28 2016, 04:45 AM Post #138 |
![]()
Geaux Tigers!
|
Regardless of Ax's favorite rabbit hole, what I do know with utter certainty is this: Money is like water. Meeting too much resistance, it will simply flow to another place of lesser resistance, possibly leaving dryness in its wake. The perfect example is how the Feds killed the yacht building business in the U.S. The 10% luxury tax, on top of everything else, cost 100,000 jobs that never came back. But it put a lot of money into foreign boat builder's pockets. So go ahead, Hill, tax the Hell out of the rich. |
| The main obstacle to a stable and just world order is the United States.- George Soros | |
![]() |
|
| John D'Oh | Sep 28 2016, 04:48 AM Post #139 |
|
MAMIL
|
To be honest, the concept of trickle-down economics always makes me think of a different fluid than water. |
| What do you mean "we", have you got a mouse in your pocket? | |
![]() |
|
| Larry | Sep 28 2016, 05:00 AM Post #140 |
![]()
Mmmmmmm, pie!
|
Actually, "trickle down economics" not only works, it's the very reason there's any middle class at all. |
|
Of the Pokatwat Tribe | |
![]() |
|
| Aqua Letifer | Sep 28 2016, 05:05 AM Post #141 |
|
ZOOOOOM!
|
Have you even looked at her tax plan or are you just reading silly stuff? She does not plan on taxing the Hell out of "the rich"; For the vast, vast majority of the rich in America, their taxes will not change. Taxes will go up for the ridiculously rich, that's true, but aren't you all worried about the deficit? |
| I cite irreconcilable differences. | |
![]() |
|
| Larry | Sep 28 2016, 05:20 AM Post #142 |
![]()
Mmmmmmm, pie!
|
I'm worried about the deficit. But taxing the top 1% isn't going to do anything to help with the deficit - in fact, if you took 100% of the top 1%'s assets away from them and left them homeless with absolutely nothing, it wouldn't help reduce the deficit at all. In fact, if you took 100% of all the money over 1 million a year from everyone, and made 1 million dollars the absolute most anyone could keep for themselves, it wouldn't pay a third of the deficit created this year alone. It isn't about taxing - it's about spending. Money earned belongs to those who earned it, not the government. It makes some people feel good to think "Yeah, let's take all the money away from those rich people", but the truth is, it does more harm than good. |
|
Of the Pokatwat Tribe | |
![]() |
|
| John D'Oh | Sep 28 2016, 05:21 AM Post #143 |
|
MAMIL
|
The class system's always been there in one form or another. In the good old days some people used to be wealthy land-owners. Some people were well educated, and some people were manual labourers and servants. The people who did all the actual work were the middle class and lower classes. The wealthy land-owners got their positions due to accidents of birth and mostly sat around telling everybody else what to do and drinking expensive port and so on. The one thing that has united all the classes since time immemorial is the need for a good healthy bowel movement. Without the middle and working classes, the aristocrats would have had to clean up their own sh!t, which was clearly out of the question. Hence - trickle-down. |
| What do you mean "we", have you got a mouse in your pocket? | |
![]() |
|
| Axtremus | Sep 28 2016, 05:27 AM Post #144 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
Already did in post #134. You just don't like the standard I picked. |
![]() |
|
| Larry | Sep 28 2016, 05:34 AM Post #145 |
![]()
Mmmmmmm, pie!
|
Post 134 is an example of what's called "mental masturbation". Or like asking someone who has been blind from birth describe the color blue. You probably got an erection from typing all those math formulas, but other than that, it was pretty much worthless. |
|
Of the Pokatwat Tribe | |
![]() |
|
| Aqua Letifer | Sep 28 2016, 07:08 AM Post #146 |
|
ZOOOOOM!
|
It's not even that. She's not even proposing to tax the top 1%. More like the top 0.5%. (Again, I'm not voting for Clinton, but we might as well get her plan straight.)
Way I see it, the rich won't go poor or middle-class from the taxes. They'll still stay ridiculously rich, especially because of so many tax shelters and other loopholes. They're not at all at risk of anything, because we're not talking about people who have a lot of money, like Jolly's yachting industry example. Those people will have the same tax rates. We're talking about the top 0.5%. I have no problem raking in more taxes from those people. They can more than afford it and still remain filthy-wealthy. I start asking questions when it comes time to spend the money. |
| I cite irreconcilable differences. | |
![]() |
|
| Mikhailoh | Sep 28 2016, 07:12 AM Post #147 |
|
If you want trouble, find yourself a redhead
|
And I am fine with raising taxes AFTER the required spending cuts are made. Until that time we are just throwing good money after bad. |
|
Once in his life, every man is entitled to fall madly in love with a gorgeous redhead - Lucille Ball | |
![]() |
|
| John D'Oh | Sep 28 2016, 07:16 AM Post #148 |
|
MAMIL
|
I see zero chance of any genuine spending reduction from either candidate. |
| What do you mean "we", have you got a mouse in your pocket? | |
![]() |
|
| bachophile | Sep 28 2016, 07:25 AM Post #149 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
this is absolutely post #149 absolutely |
| "I don't know much about classical music. For years I thought the Goldberg Variations were something Mr. and Mrs. Goldberg did on their wedding night." Woody Allen | |
![]() |
|
| Axtremus | Sep 28 2016, 01:26 PM Post #150 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
Michael Moore Declares That Donald Trump 'Won' The Debate http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/michael-moore-trump-won-debate_us_57ebc7c5e4b024a52d2ba5e2 |
![]() |
|
|
|
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · The New Coffee Room · Next Topic » |











4:59 PM Jul 10