birdog1960 Posted August 5, 2011 Share Posted August 5, 2011 (edited) Untill you take a position on what fair share actually is, I can only assume from your postings that you will always define it as 'more,' regardless of whether they pay 50%, 80%, or 99% of their income. i've already answered while partially humoring a silly, juvenile attempted trap. and gg and d/c don't seem to get that deducting business expenses as well as the individual business owners personal expenses would be doubly unfair to nonbusiness owners. anyone with any inherent sense of fairness would see this but guess who doesn't have that sense? obviously, fairness is an arbitrary concept but one on which a sizable majority of people can usually agree. Edited August 5, 2011 by birdog1960 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted August 5, 2011 Share Posted August 5, 2011 obviously, fairness is an arbitrary concept but one on which a sizable majority of people can usually agree. Only in handoutville Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted August 5, 2011 Share Posted August 5, 2011 Only in handoutville wow, another potential member of the optimists club! Â i not so respectfully disagree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted August 5, 2011 Share Posted August 5, 2011 i've already answered while partially humoring a silly, juvenile attempted trap. and gg and d/c don't seem to get that deducting business expenses as well as the individual business owners personal expenses would be doubly unfair to nonbusiness owners. anyone with any inherent sense of fairness would see this but guess who doesn't have that sense? obviously, fairness is an arbitrary concept but one on which a sizable majority of people can usually agree. Â It's more juvenile that you don't get the question. Â The comparison is not whether a business owner can deduct his business vs personal expenses, but why is acceptable for a business owner to deduct business epxenses but any individual cannot deduct personal expenses. Â I'm sure you're old enough to remember a day when all personal interest expenses (student, auto, credit card) was deductible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted August 5, 2011 Share Posted August 5, 2011 And who gets to determine whether one set of deductions is more fair than another? Why is you paying an someone to answer your phone calls a deductible expense, while me paying a guy to fix a roof on my house is not? Sounds like a handout to business special interests to me. Â Â Damn corporate welfare. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted August 5, 2011 Share Posted August 5, 2011 It's more juvenile that you don't get the question. Â The comparison is not whether a business owner can deduct his business vs personal expenses, but why is acceptable for a business owner to deduct business epxenses but any individual cannot deduct personal expenses. Â I'm sure you're old enough to remember a day when all personal interest expenses (student, auto, credit card) was deductible. because we (the govt) uses tax laws to encourage or inhibit behavior (duh!) do we really want to encourage more auto, credit card and student debt at a time when personal debt just hit an all time high? do we want to encourage business investment? the trick is to mold the tax laws and behavior in a way that is perceived as fair, balanced (sad that it gags me to use this noble phrase) and is actually effective at attaining these goals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted August 5, 2011 Share Posted August 5, 2011 wow, another potential member of the optimists club! Â i not so respectfully disagree. I hate to burst your bubble, but you don't speak for the "majority" of Americans. Just sayin' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted August 5, 2011 Share Posted August 5, 2011 because we (the govt) uses tax laws to encourage or inhibit behavior (duh!) do we really want to encourage more auto, credit card and student debt at a time when personal debt just hit an all time high? do we want to encourage business investment? the trick is to mold the tax laws and behavior in a way that is perceived as fair, balanced (sad that it gags me to use this noble phrase) and is actually effective at attaining these goals. And consumer spending is 2/3 of GDP, so why wouldn't you want to promote that economic growth? Yet another reason why you think business deserves a bigger government handout than individual? Â So again, why is that more fair? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barry in KC Posted August 5, 2011 Author Share Posted August 5, 2011 i've already answered while partially humoring a silly, juvenile attempted trap. and gg and d/c don't seem to get that deducting business expenses as well as the individual business owners personal expenses would be doubly unfair to nonbusiness owners. anyone with any inherent sense of fairness would see this but guess who doesn't have that sense? obviously, fairness is an arbitrary concept but one on which a sizable majority of people can usually agree. Â Â I wanted to give this a little thought before I responded. Â So, if in your opinion, "fair" is defined by what the majority decides, then in any situation, what the "majority" decides is ALWAYS fair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Frenkle Posted August 5, 2011 Share Posted August 5, 2011 Untill you take a position on what fair share actually is, I can only assume from your postings that you will always define it as 'more,' regardless of whether they pay 50%, 80%, or 99% of their income. Ok, fair to who exactly? Â And WTF does fair have to do with our economic system. Isn't fair a rather subjective thing anyway? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
finknottle Posted August 5, 2011 Share Posted August 5, 2011 Ok, fair to who exactly? Â And WTF does fair have to do with our economic system. Isn't fair a rather subjective thing anyway? Â Don't ask me, ask the Left who has made demanding that the wealthy pay their fair share in taxes a mantra. And that's the point of this thread: an opportunity to let their advocates spell out exactly what that means. Â Do you support Obama's calls for the wealthy to pay their fair share? If so, what number is fair? Or are you rejecting his calls as devoid of meaning? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted August 5, 2011 Share Posted August 5, 2011 I wanted to give this a little thought before I responded. Â So, if in your opinion, "fair" is defined by what the majority decides, then in any situation, what the "majority" decides is ALWAYS fair. a fair and straightforward question that is not easy to answer....no, i don't think the majority is always right regarding the opinions they voice. i do however think that a significant majority have an inherent, internal sense of fairness (call it conscience or instinct) that they share. for instance, the vast majority of people don't think it's fair to steal from others, or to take out loans they can't possibly pay back or to default on those loans when they could possibly pay or to sell loans to people who they know will never be able to pay them back or to ... but do the majority of people act according to that conscience? usually, all though it seems less recently. nevertheless, we have what is ostensibly a representative govt. the majority's opinions should be acted upon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barry in KC Posted August 5, 2011 Author Share Posted August 5, 2011 a fair and straightforward question that is not easy to answer....no, i don't think the majority is always right regarding the opinions they voice. i do however think that a significant majority have an inherent, internal sense of fairness (call it conscience or instinct) that they share. for instance, the vast majority of people don't think it's fair to steal from others, or to take out loans they can't possibly pay back or to default on those loans when they could possibly pay or to sell loans to people who they know will never be able to pay them back or to ... but do the majority of people act according to that conscience? usually, all though it seems less recently. nevertheless, we have what is ostensibly a representative govt. the majority's opinions should be acted upon. The entire basis of the initial question was based on the talking point-"Fair Share" that is being used by the Democrats in almost all of their public speeches when discussing the economy. The point is that "Fair Share" is a talking point to convince the public that the current tax structure is not "Fair". As with most cases of what the left does in demonizing an economic class, a political party, or a network, there is a motive in convincing their followers that things are not "fair". That's when I continually hear the mantra "Fair Share" used. And what I think we've discovered in this particular discussion is that it is a talking point without any thoughtful, rational basis and that rational , well informed people should probably not use the term just because the the leaders of the Democratic party and the media, that is left leaning, use it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted August 5, 2011 Share Posted August 5, 2011 . And what I think we've discovered in this particular discussion you "discovered" nothing with your disingenuous question. you unsuccessfully attempted to illustrate your preconceived conclusion. nice try though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barry in KC Posted August 5, 2011 Author Share Posted August 5, 2011 (edited) you "discovered" nothing with your disingenuous question. you unsuccessfully attempted to illustrate your preconceived conclusion. nice try though. How can a question be "disingenuous"? Â Here's another question for you, one that you might find "disingenous"- Can people on the left have a rational, adult discussion without throwing insults? Edited August 5, 2011 by Barry in KC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted August 5, 2011 Share Posted August 5, 2011 How can a question be "disingenuous"? Â Here's another question for you, one that you might find "disingenous"- Can people on the left have a rational, adult discussion without throwing insults? look up the definition and then honestly ask yourself if the adjective is apt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barry in KC Posted August 5, 2011 Author Share Posted August 5, 2011 look up the definition and then honestly ask yourself if the adjective is apt It's not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted August 7, 2011 Share Posted August 7, 2011 It's not. well, i did say vast majority. you appear to be doing your part to support the "unconscience" outliers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keukasmallies Posted August 7, 2011 Share Posted August 7, 2011 I defined my fair share w/in the context of my family and economic circumstances at any given time. With that as a guide, I donated, volunteered, shared, gave back and, in general, acknowledged and supported those around me. I continued this approach into retirement. Â Now, however, I look around me and see waste, arrogance, mismanagement, and just plain lack of caring; so, I "dropped out." Since the various levels of government, and attendant agencies, don't appear to give a rat's @$$, I'm adopting their lead--I don't either. My new motto is screw 'em all, save six for pallbearers. Â Yeah, I know, my values and expectations were formed decades ago, so I'm woefully out of touch w/ vast segments of the American population that have been forced into a subsistence level lifestyle by my having taken their job for thirty-five years. Hell, I don't even have any tattoos or an iPod (Nor am I interested in funding same for indigents)! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary M Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 i've already answered while partially humoring a silly, juvenile attempted trap. and gg and d/c don't seem to get that deducting business expenses as well as the individual business owners personal expenses would be doubly unfair to nonbusiness owners. anyone with any inherent sense of fairness would see this but guess who doesn't have that sense? obviously, fairness is an arbitrary concept but one on which a sizable majority of people can usually agree. Â Then it is okay if I write off my corporate jet that I use to fly to DC to do some lobbying? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 Ok, fair to who exactly? Â Think about that. How does this question even remotely make any sense? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 Then it is okay if I write off my corporate jet that I use to fly to DC to do some lobbying? i suppose when you can only see in black and white, a corporate jet used for lobbying and paper for the copy machine are the same thing. nuance is not your strength. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 Then it is okay if I write off my corporate jet that I use to fly to DC to do some lobbying? Â Yes, if lobbying is your business. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 Yes, if lobbying is your business. lobbyists can't fly commercial? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 lobbyists can't fly commercial? Â You can't use Kinko's or FedEx Office? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 You can't use Kinko's or FedEx Office? more expensive than buying paper...nuance isn't your strong suit either...but what is? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 lobbyists can't fly commercial? Â Of course they can and most likely should. In fact it's possible that there are some IRS restrictions on certain deductions in which you might have to show "need" in order to deduct a private flight. Anyway, you should be able to deduct reasonable expenses in your efforts to make a living. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 more expensive than buying paper...nuance isn't your strong suit either...but what is? Â Not after you pro-rate the printer/copier costs, and annual maintenance therof, and cost of time... Â Â And nuance isn't OUR strong suit? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 (edited) Not after you pro-rate the printer/copier costs, and annual maintenance therof, and cost of time... Â Â And nuance isn't OUR strong suit? sure that's why most small business with heavy copier needs own their own copier Edited August 9, 2011 by birdog1960 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 sure that's why most small business with heavy copier needs own their own copier   Actually they don't. They lease their own copier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 Actually they don't. They lease their own copier. so do we,score one for nuance Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 sure that's why most small business with heavy copier needs own their own copier  Wants. Not needs. Wants.  Actually they don't. They lease their own copier.  Like most private plane "owners" lease their planes? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 Wants. Not needs. Wants. Â Â Â Like most private plane "owners" lease their planes? you are seriously making an analogy between copiers and corporate jets on the basis of need? you're working way too far into the limits of reason again...but i'm becoming accustomed to it. i get it ...they're both business expenses on an absolute level but i'm not an absolutist. that's what pushed into last weeks credit rating mess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 you are seriously making an analogy between copiers and corporate jets on the basis of need? you're working way too far into the limits of reason again...but i'm becoming accustomed to it. i get it ...they're both business expenses on an absolute level but i'm not an absolutist. that's what pushed into last weeks credit rating mess. Â Why do you need a copier, when you can hire an unemployed person and have them write out the invoices and type out them out. Why not use a mimeograph? Â Aren't business deductions great when they only relate to your business? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 you are seriously making an analogy between copiers and corporate jets on the basis of need?  You're seriously claiming copiers are a need????  you're working way too far into the limits of reason again...but i'm becoming accustomed to it. i get it ...they're both business expenses on an absolute level but i'm not an absolutist.  And yet...  here's an answer: a sliding scale percentage ( the current progressive tax scheme would do minus the bush tax cuts) of disposable income. after paying a median rent/mortgage, buying food and transportation and without loopholes    This is like shooting fish in a barrel full of fish sitting in the full hold of a fishing trawler. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Frenkle Posted August 10, 2011 Share Posted August 10, 2011 Think about that. How does this question even remotely make any sense? How does fair make sense in this context at all? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted August 10, 2011 Share Posted August 10, 2011 How does fair make sense in this context at all? Â It doesn't. I already said that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Frenkle Posted August 11, 2011 Share Posted August 11, 2011 It doesn't. I already said that. Then we're in agreement, dick. Does that make you want to re-think your position? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted August 11, 2011 Share Posted August 11, 2011 Then we're in agreement, dick. Does that make you want to re-think your position? Â What position? That your question made no sense? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Frenkle Posted August 11, 2011 Share Posted August 11, 2011 What position? That your question made no sense? I don't think I really said anything about fair, other than that life is unfair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts