what's a river plate?
It's my football team. Damn it's one of the most important teams in the World.kr@cker wrote:
what's a river plate?
Last edited by sergeriver (2006-11-15 08:37:34)
granted, communist china and russia made some good leaps here and there, but that wouldn't have happened had they not been in COMPETITION with NATO nations like the us, uk, and such. competition itself being the cornerstone of capitalism and communism the effort to remove competition altogetherIG-Calibre wrote:
can you name me all these Capitalist Nations?Stingray24 wrote:
Capitalism spurs innovation. Why bother trying to develop something that could change the world if I'm only bringing more tax burden on myself? That's why capitalist nations have developed the advances in medicine and technology, people like self-determination with the government involved as little as possible in their business.
do you not mean Boca Juniorssergeriver wrote:
It's my football team. Damn it's one of the most important teams in the World.kr@cker wrote:
what's a river plate?
Nahhh, Boca only started winning in 2000. Before they were under the rocks.IG-Calibre wrote:
do you not mean Boca Juniorssergeriver wrote:
It's my football team. Damn it's one of the most important teams in the World.kr@cker wrote:
what's a river plate?
This mindset of entitlement to fairness is a cancer to society. Life isn't fair, most of us learn that very early in life, but apparently a segment of our society has not. People need to go get better jobs if they want more money. Worked for me. Wasn't the of my dreams right away, but hey, it was a foot in the door. I hope to be one of those "rich" people someday if I play my cards right. Until then, I still see no reason to tax the crap out of successful people simply because of their success. One percentage across the board would be fair if that's what we're shooting for. And the government would still get more money as people grow in wealth because of the percentage aspect.sergeriver wrote:
Because you need to allow the people earning a minimum wage to pay their bills. That's why the VAT is so unfair, the rich and the poor pay the same. The income tax needs to be gradually increased, let's say a person earning 25k a year doesn't pay income tax, a person earning 25k-50k pays 10% of the second 25k, a person earning 50k-100k pays 10% for the second 25k and 15% for the second 50k, a person earning 100k-200k pays 10% for the second 25k, 15% for the second 50k and 20% for the second 100k, and a person earning more than 200k pays all that and 25% for the excedent of 200k. Something like this should be fair.kr@cker wrote:
then why not just tax based on pure percentages? 20 percent across the board? the people making 10 dollars an hour pay 2 dollars in taxes, the people making 100 dollars pay 20, there, the "evil rich" people are paying ten times what the poor widdle factory worker pays, but since there are thousands of factory workers to each "master" the tax revenue actually goes up. not enough to hurt the factory worker, but they do get to benefit from the "all knowing" government's having more tax funding for it's programs. instead, you want the person making 100 dollars to pay 30 percent, someone making 200 to pay 40%, someone making 300 to pay 50%, therefore you are punishing them for being successful, no propaganda about it. try explaining how it's fair for the top 1 percent of earners to pay more than a third of the tax base, or the top 50 percent to fund more than 95% of the tax base (that's the way it's currently distributed in america, despite what you hear about "tax breaks for the wealthy").
And what about all the technical and medical innovation that comes from socialist Europe then?kr@cker wrote:
granted, communist china and russia made some good leaps here and there, but that wouldn't have happened had they not been in COMPETITION with NATO nations like the us, uk, and such. competition itself being the cornerstone of capitalism and communism the effort to remove competition altogetherIG-Calibre wrote:
can you name me all these Capitalist Nations?Stingray24 wrote:
Capitalism spurs innovation. Why bother trying to develop something that could change the world if I'm only bringing more tax burden on myself? That's why capitalist nations have developed the advances in medicine and technology, people like self-determination with the government involved as little as possible in their business.
This is what we mean by you don't give a fuck about people, we do.. the endStingray24 wrote:
This mindset of entitlement to fairness is a cancer to society. Life isn't fair, most of us learn that very early in life, but apparently a segment of our society has not. People need to go get better jobs if they want more money. Worked for me. Wasn't the of my dreams right away, but hey, it was a foot in the door. I hope to be one of those "rich" people someday if I play my cards right. Until then, I still see no reason to tax the crap out of successful people simply because of their success. One percentage across the board would be fair if that's what we're shooting for. And the government would still get more money as people grow in wealth because of the percentage aspect.sergeriver wrote:
Because you need to allow the people earning a minimum wage to pay their bills. That's why the VAT is so unfair, the rich and the poor pay the same. The income tax needs to be gradually increased, let's say a person earning 25k a year doesn't pay income tax, a person earning 25k-50k pays 10% of the second 25k, a person earning 50k-100k pays 10% for the second 25k and 15% for the second 50k, a person earning 100k-200k pays 10% for the second 25k, 15% for the second 50k and 20% for the second 100k, and a person earning more than 200k pays all that and 25% for the excedent of 200k. Something like this should be fair.kr@cker wrote:
then why not just tax based on pure percentages? 20 percent across the board? the people making 10 dollars an hour pay 2 dollars in taxes, the people making 100 dollars pay 20, there, the "evil rich" people are paying ten times what the poor widdle factory worker pays, but since there are thousands of factory workers to each "master" the tax revenue actually goes up. not enough to hurt the factory worker, but they do get to benefit from the "all knowing" government's having more tax funding for it's programs. instead, you want the person making 100 dollars to pay 30 percent, someone making 200 to pay 40%, someone making 300 to pay 50%, therefore you are punishing them for being successful, no propaganda about it. try explaining how it's fair for the top 1 percent of earners to pay more than a third of the tax base, or the top 50 percent to fund more than 95% of the tax base (that's the way it's currently distributed in america, despite what you hear about "tax breaks for the wealthy").
Why wouldn't this be fair? You are not explaining it. You are just saying what you want to achieve in life.Stingray24 wrote:
This mindset of entitlement to fairness is a cancer to society. Life isn't fair, most of us learn that very early in life, but apparently a segment of our society has not. People need to go get better jobs if they want more money. Worked for me. Wasn't the of my dreams right away, but hey, it was a foot in the door. I hope to be one of those "rich" people someday if I play my cards right. Until then, I still see no reason to tax the crap out of successful people simply because of their success. One percentage across the board would be fair if that's what we're shooting for. And the government would still get more money as people grow in wealth because of the percentage aspect.sergeriver wrote:
Because you need to allow the people earning a minimum wage to pay their bills. That's why the VAT is so unfair, the rich and the poor pay the same. The income tax needs to be gradually increased, let's say a person earning 25k a year doesn't pay income tax, a person earning 25k-50k pays 10% of the second 25k, a person earning 50k-100k pays 10% for the second 25k and 15% for the second 50k, a person earning 100k-200k pays 10% for the second 25k, 15% for the second 50k and 20% for the second 100k, and a person earning more than 200k pays all that and 25% for the excedent of 200k. Something like this should be fair.kr@cker wrote:
then why not just tax based on pure percentages? 20 percent across the board? the people making 10 dollars an hour pay 2 dollars in taxes, the people making 100 dollars pay 20, there, the "evil rich" people are paying ten times what the poor widdle factory worker pays, but since there are thousands of factory workers to each "master" the tax revenue actually goes up. not enough to hurt the factory worker, but they do get to benefit from the "all knowing" government's having more tax funding for it's programs. instead, you want the person making 100 dollars to pay 30 percent, someone making 200 to pay 40%, someone making 300 to pay 50%, therefore you are punishing them for being successful, no propaganda about it. try explaining how it's fair for the top 1 percent of earners to pay more than a third of the tax base, or the top 50 percent to fund more than 95% of the tax base (that's the way it's currently distributed in america, despite what you hear about "tax breaks for the wealthy").
all he's saying is you're telling people they don't have to work to receive anything, if you don't contribute to society why should society coddle you? I'd rather see the tax base broadened and have more tax funded programs to improve a worker's job marketability so they can earn more than tell them "you just stay behind that cash register at kfc forever, we'll let the person that actually put forth the effort to build kfc take care of you for life".
edit: i'm all for a hand-up, not a hand-out
edit: i'm all for a hand-up, not a hand-out
Last edited by kr@cker (2006-11-15 08:49:00)
You assume a lot. I do "give a fuck" and want people to get off their butts and take advantage of the opportunity available in the US. I do not see the government as the solution, instead individual determination should be increasing income. There is no reason to reward people for staying in an entry level job by boosting their income artificially. They will never have any motivation to improve their skills if raises keep coming from the government while they're doing the same job.IG-Calibre wrote:
This is what we mean by you don't give a fuck about people, we do.. the endStingray24 wrote:
This mindset of entitlement to fairness is a cancer to society. Life isn't fair, most of us learn that very early in life, but apparently a segment of our society has not. People need to go get better jobs if they want more money. Worked for me. Wasn't the of my dreams right away, but hey, it was a foot in the door. I hope to be one of those "rich" people someday if I play my cards right. Until then, I still see no reason to tax the crap out of successful people simply because of their success. One percentage across the board would be fair if that's what we're shooting for. And the government would still get more money as people grow in wealth because of the percentage aspect.sergeriver wrote:
Because you need to allow the people earning a minimum wage to pay their bills. That's why the VAT is so unfair, the rich and the poor pay the same. The income tax needs to be gradually increased, let's say a person earning 25k a year doesn't pay income tax, a person earning 25k-50k pays 10% of the second 25k, a person earning 50k-100k pays 10% for the second 25k and 15% for the second 50k, a person earning 100k-200k pays 10% for the second 25k, 15% for the second 50k and 20% for the second 100k, and a person earning more than 200k pays all that and 25% for the excedent of 200k. Something like this should be fair.
Last edited by Stingray24 (2006-11-15 08:51:45)
My Income Tax Proposal:
By sergeriver
Annual Incomes Calculation Tax
0-25k 0% 0
50k 0% of 25k + 10% of 25k 2500
100k 0% of 25k + 10% of 25k + 15% of 50k 10000
200k 0% of 25k + 10% of 25k + 15% of 50k + 20% of 100k 30000
400k 0% of 25k + 10% of 25k + 15% of 50k + 20% of 100k + 25% of 200k 80000
Percentages are theorical, it should be more. It's only to show how it works.
By sergeriver
Annual Incomes Calculation Tax
0-25k 0% 0
50k 0% of 25k + 10% of 25k 2500
100k 0% of 25k + 10% of 25k + 15% of 50k 10000
200k 0% of 25k + 10% of 25k + 15% of 50k + 20% of 100k 30000
400k 0% of 25k + 10% of 25k + 15% of 50k + 20% of 100k + 25% of 200k 80000
Percentages are theorical, it should be more. It's only to show how it works.
Last edited by sergeriver (2006-11-15 08:52:52)
I'm not saying the current tax structure is completely fair, but it does favor the wealthy. By the time they have their accountants and tax attorneies get done with every loophole, and hiding money in questionable ways, the percentage of their income they pay in taxes is nowhere near what the default percentage is based on the IRS tax brackets. The fact that the wealthy are showing as paying such a large part of the taxes collected is not so much about their excessive tax burden as it is about the fact that the wealthy are getting much wealthier, and most of the rest of America is slowly losing ground.kr@cker wrote:
if you're earning minimum wage and paying bills you should be drug out in the street and shot, MW is for teens living at home. how is it fair to allow some people not to pay taxes by forcing someone else to pay their taxes for them?sergeriver wrote:
Because you need to allow the people earning a minimum wage to pay their bills. That's why the VAT is so unfair, the rich and the poor pay the same. The income tax needs to be gradually increased, let's say a person earning 25k a year doesn't pay income tax, a person earning 25k-50k pays 10% of the second 25k, a person earning 50k-100k pays 10% for the second 25k and 15% for the second 50k, a person earning 100k-200k pays 10% for the second 25k, 15% for the second 50k and 20% for the second 100k, and a person earning more than 200k pays all that and 25% for the excedent of 200k. Something like this should be fair.kr@cker wrote:
then why not just tax based on pure percentages? 20 percent across the board? the people making 10 dollars an hour pay 2 dollars in taxes, the people making 100 dollars pay 20, there, the "evil rich" people are paying ten times what the poor widdle factory worker pays, but since there are thousands of factory workers to each "master" the tax revenue actually goes up. not enough to hurt the factory worker, but they do get to benefit from the "all knowing" government's having more tax funding for it's programs. instead, you want the person making 100 dollars to pay 30 percent, someone making 200 to pay 40%, someone making 300 to pay 50%, therefore you are punishing them for being successful, no propaganda about it. try explaining how it's fair for the top 1 percent of earners to pay more than a third of the tax base, or the top 50 percent to fund more than 95% of the tax base (that's the way it's currently distributed in america, despite what you hear about "tax breaks for the wealthy").
edit: i see perhaps i shall have to pontificate like i used to and explain the "fair tax" concept. until i get a chance to do so this is a good start
http://fairtax.org/
http://www.perfectlylegalthebook.com/sample.htm
amen, i hated working minimum wage jobs and even hourly jobs. but it was part of my motivation for starting my own business and being happier with what i do everyday than answering to a thousand bosses. but the point is that i made that happen, sure i had a little help from a couple family members and some good friends, but i put the effort in. im the one that stands in front of a forge all day, i dont want other people to enjoy my money. but i do believe that working one of those horrible jobs for a period of time helps to inspire and motivate anyone questioning their future.
@ agent
that's why you get rid of all the loopholes with the fairtax, with it you can't purchase a single thing without paying taxes (as it's basically a national sales tax) everything ends up costing about the same as it gets rid of all the embedded taxes in each product which currently equal about 23%, and no one, that's no one, drug dealers, illegals, prostitutes, can escape paying into the tax base, unless they never buy anything their entire life
that's why you get rid of all the loopholes with the fairtax, with it you can't purchase a single thing without paying taxes (as it's basically a national sales tax) everything ends up costing about the same as it gets rid of all the embedded taxes in each product which currently equal about 23%, and no one, that's no one, drug dealers, illegals, prostitutes, can escape paying into the tax base, unless they never buy anything their entire life
The VAT is unfair, it's the same for rich and poor people. Why do I have to pay 21% more for a bottle of milk? A fair Income Tax system is the best way to tax people.kr@cker wrote:
@ agent
that's why you get rid of all the loopholes with the fairtax, with it you can't purchase a single thing without paying taxes (as it's basically a national sales tax) everything ends up costing about the same as it gets rid of all the embedded taxes in each product which currently equal about 23%, and no one, that's no one, drug dealers, illegals, prostitutes, can escape paying into the tax base, unless they never buy anything their entire life
Last edited by sergeriver (2006-11-15 09:21:51)
Well all that socialism ensures is a hand-up, and also that medical treatment is available for all who live in our society and an education too. Then when you benefit from these, all is asked is that you contribute something back to the society - even to the poor crack hoes as you so eloquently put it. Everyone is encouraged to succeed in society, but we don't punish those who don't and allow they to fall into poverty, however, they sure don't enjoy a comfortable lifestyle until they do start to succeed..kr@cker wrote:
all he's saying is you're telling people they don't have to work to receive anything, if you don't contribute to society why should society coddle you? I'd rather see the tax base broadened and have more tax funded programs to improve a worker's job marketability so they can earn more than tell them "you just stay behind that cash register at kfc forever, we'll let the person that actually put forth the effort to build kfc take care of you for life".
edit: i'm all for a hand-up, not a hand-out
that is a gross exaggeration put forth by the tax's opponents (usually lobbyists and special interest groups as it basically makes them impotent, another plus), there are already embedded taxes in that gallon of milk, the last figure i heard is that it hovers around 20%, enacting the fair tax abolishes those embedded taxes, making the "cost" basically 80% of what it is now, THEN the fairtax is tacked on at 23%, so the cost basically breaks even. the main difference is that NOTHING is deducted from your paycheck, so you can buy more gallons of milk than ever before.sergeriver wrote:
The VAT is unfair, it's the same for rich and poor people. Why do I have to pay 21% more for a bottle of milk? A fair Income Tax system is the best way to tax people.kr@cker wrote:
@ agent
that's why you get rid of all the loopholes with the fairtax, with it you can't purchase a single thing without paying taxes (as it's basically a national sales tax) everything ends up costing about the same as it gets rid of all the embedded taxes in each product which currently equal about 23%, and no one, that's no one, drug dealers, illegals, prostitutes, can escape paying into the tax base, unless they never buy anything their entire life
it's like this:
gallon of milk=$1.00
$1.00 x .80= $.80
$.80 x 1.23 = $.98
$.98 < $1.00
so the gallon of milk actually costs you less, and you still have 100% of your paycheck to buy it with, no deductions
I have also contributed to some misinformation on this, in the fairtax bill there is a provision so you can claim your purchases of basic necessities such as milk, bread, etc. and get a refund on what you bought. The best part is that those operating outside the grid on this, illegal immigrants, drugdealers, etc., can't report their purchases and can't get their refund and actually end up contributing more to the tax base (percent income per person) than anyone else.
it's a bulletproof plan, the opponents of which relying on misinformation, if people knew the truth it would be unstoppable, that's why alot of our political ads here used lines like "Mac Collins supports a 23% sales tax on everything you buy!!!". fomenting the belief that it makes everything cost 23% more.
Last edited by kr@cker (2006-11-15 10:14:51)
I don't see how can you get enough taxes with this system to maintain the governement spendings.kr@cker wrote:
that is a gross exaggeration put forth by the tax's opponents (usually lobbyists and special interest groups as it basically makes them impotent, another plus), there are already embedded taxes in that gallon of milk, the last figure i heard is that it hovers around 20%, enacting the fair tax abolishes those embedded taxes, making the "cost" basically 80% of what it is now, THEN the fairtax is tacked on at 23%, so the cost basically breaks even. the main difference is that NOTHING is deducted from your paycheck, so you can buy more gallons of milk than ever before.sergeriver wrote:
The VAT is unfair, it's the same for rich and poor people. Why do I have to pay 21% more for a bottle of milk? A fair Income Tax system is the best way to tax people.kr@cker wrote:
@ agent
that's why you get rid of all the loopholes with the fairtax, with it you can't purchase a single thing without paying taxes (as it's basically a national sales tax) everything ends up costing about the same as it gets rid of all the embedded taxes in each product which currently equal about 23%, and no one, that's no one, drug dealers, illegals, prostitutes, can escape paying into the tax base, unless they never buy anything their entire life
it's like this:
gallon of milk=$1.00
$1.00 x .80= $.80
$.80 x 1.23 = $.98
$.98 < $1.00
so the gallon of milk actually costs you less, and you still have 100% of your paycheck to buy it with, no deductions
I have also contributed to some misinformation on this, in the fairtax bill there is a provision so you can claim your purchases of basic necessities such as milk, bread, etc. and get a refund on what you bought. The best part is that those operating outside the grid on this, illegal immigrants, drugdealers, etc., can't report their purchases and can't get their refund and actually end up contributing more to the tax base (percent income per person) than anyone else.
100% of the population paying 100% of the taxes, and as someone pointed out earlier all current tax plans are full of loopholes allowing people to escape paying taxes, this eliminates those loopholes. to put it succinctly, it's the most efficient form of taxation ever devised. and yes it remains fair as you are refunded for necessities, and if the poor people don't want to pay taxes on their new 20 inch rims, gold teeth, and leather jackets (i always thought it funny that the line at the welfare office was full of these when i can't afford them), they don't fucking buy them and put that money toward something useful like a trade school. check out the site, hell if you want i'll send you an autographed copy of the book, already planning on using it for a couple of christmas presents.
oh, almost forgot, removal of all embedded taxes makes everything cheaper for the government as well (granted the fed already doesn't pay taxes, but there are less paid manhours tied up in each product's billing trying to sort that out), and the fed doesn't have to pay the 23% tax on anything as it would basically be paying itself, so that gallon of milk in the mess tent only cost $.80.
so you have more tax revenue, less cost to federal government, budget deficits are nigh on impossible to create
oh, almost forgot, removal of all embedded taxes makes everything cheaper for the government as well (granted the fed already doesn't pay taxes, but there are less paid manhours tied up in each product's billing trying to sort that out), and the fed doesn't have to pay the 23% tax on anything as it would basically be paying itself, so that gallon of milk in the mess tent only cost $.80.
so you have more tax revenue, less cost to federal government, budget deficits are nigh on impossible to create
Last edited by kr@cker (2006-11-15 10:26:51)
I want a copy. The autograph is yours, right?
no, but i'll sign it if you want
Ok, I want it signed. Fedex will be fine, thx.kr@cker wrote:
no, but i'll sign it if you want
A drudgery of step-by-step semantics. Nothing's stopping anyone from going out and starting their own business except, of course, debilitating taxes and penalties.sergeriver wrote:
While I don't agree with this article conclusion, I find it very interersting.
Paul Lafargue
Simple Socialist Truths
(1903)
Worker. But if there were no masters, who would give me work?
Socialist. That’s a question I am often asked; let us examine it. In order to work, three things are required: a workshop, machines, and raw material.
etc.
I agree, that's what I did. 9 to 5 employments are not for me.unnamednewbie13 wrote:
A drudgery of step-by-step semantics. Nothing's stopping anyone from going out and starting their own business except, of course, debilitating taxes and penalties.sergeriver wrote:
While I don't agree with this article conclusion, I find it very interersting.
Paul Lafargue
Simple Socialist Truths
(1903)
Worker. But if there were no masters, who would give me work?
Socialist. That’s a question I am often asked; let us examine it. In order to work, three things are required: a workshop, machines, and raw material.
etc.