Chef Jim Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 Three percent more, moron. Look at your math. You have someone making $250,000 taking home $242,500. I understand what you're saying but to say that a couple making $250k will take home only $7250 less is no big deal. Well that's more than $600 per month. There goes a lot of disposable cash that would help the economy. "Rich" people spend or invest that money which helps the economy. But in your eyes the government knows how to better spend my money than I do. After watching this government perform over the last few decades I take that as one hell of an insult. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 Rich" people spend or invest that money which helps the economy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 Sorry big kitty, don't get your point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 The same taxes paid by NPR. How bout that? Does NPR have overseas operations? So you're saying Coca Cola should pay the higher US tax no matter where the income is earned? And that would be a good policy to bring in more revenue? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bills_fan Posted February 26, 2009 Author Share Posted February 26, 2009 Look at your math. You have someone making $250,000 taking home $242,500. I understand what you're saying but to say that a couple making $250k will take home only $7250 less is no big deal. Well that's more than $600 per month. There goes a lot of disposable cash that would help the economy. "Rich" people spend or invest that money which helps the economy. But in your eyes the government knows how to better spend my money than I do. After watching this government perform over the last few decades I take that as one hell of an insult. If you take the increased Federal marginal rate of 39.6%, add the CA state rate 9.3% (I think) you are now almost at 50% without paying any local taxes, school taxes, property taxes etc. Thats a tough nut. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 Look at your math. You have someone making $250,000 taking home $242,500. I understand what you're saying but to say that a couple making $250k will take home only $7250 less is no big deal. Well that's more than $600 per month. There goes a lot of disposable cash that would help the economy. "Rich" people spend or invest that money which helps the economy. But in your eyes the government knows how to better spend my money than I do. After watching this government perform over the last few decades I take that as one hell of an insult. I have no problem with that $7,500 out of every $250,000 take home going to pay for things we desperately need right now. That is where it is going. It's not just being thrown away. It's not just going to people who hate and refuse to work. Some of it is going to poorer people who will spend it in the economy at least as quick or quicker than you. Some of it is going to pay down the debt. Some of it is going to pay for job creation and research that is part of this short and long term plan. My point was that it's not an enormous increase and that it's just going back to the rates where we were before and prospered. I understand the argument between what conservatives believe and what democrats believe. I also have seen a lot of stats that say the economy does better under democratic leadership than it does under republican leadership. http://www.eriposte.com/economy/other/demovsrep.htm Pages 15-23 http://www.business.unr.edu/econ/wp/papers...ECONWP06008.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 If you take the increased Federal marginal rate of 39.6%, add the CA state rate 9.3% (I think) you are now almost at 50% without paying any local taxes, school taxes, property taxes etc. Thats a tough nut. Yeah I realized it after I posted that I was being way to conservative. I need a raise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 Does NPR have overseas operations? So you're saying Coca Cola should pay the higher US tax no matter where the income is earned? And that would be a good policy to bring in more revenue? My question is do they even pay taxes? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 If you take the increased Federal marginal rate of 39.6%, add the CA state rate 9.3% (I think) you are now almost at 50% without paying any local taxes, school taxes, property taxes etc. Thats a tough nut. Oh, boo hoo. Cry me a river. They make a bunch of money. They should cough it up because...ummm....because...ummm...because they're wealthy. Yeah, that's it. My point was that it's not an enormous increase A little bit here. A little bit there. A little more here. A little more there. They're just little increases. Frankly, I hope this works, but if it doesn't, there is a part of me that looks forward to this administration suddenly realizing "Oh, wait...only 80% of you won't pay more taxes...not 95%. Oh, wait...only 60% of you won't pay more taxes. Oh, wait..." Love is fine, except when it's completely blind love. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 I have no problem with that $7,500 out of every $250,000 take home going to pay for things we desperately need right now. That is where it is going. It's not just being thrown away. It's not just going to people who hate and refuse to work. Some of it is going to poorer people who will spend it in the economy at least as quick or quicker than you. Some of it is going to pay down the debt. Some of it is going to pay for job creation and research that is part of this short and long term plan. My point was that it's not an enormous increase and that it's just going back to the rates where we were before and prospered. I understand the argument between what conservatives believe and what democrats believe. I also have seen a lot of stats that say the economy does better under democratic leadership than it does under republican leadership. http://www.eriposte.com/economy/other/demovsrep.htm Pages 15-23 http://www.business.unr.edu/econ/wp/papers...ECONWP06008.pdf It sounds like you don't make more than $250k but let me ask you would you be ok with the government taking more money from you if it was for the greater good? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bills_fan Posted February 26, 2009 Author Share Posted February 26, 2009 I have no problem with that $7,500 out of every $250,000 take home going to pay for things we desperately need right now. That is where it is going. It's not just being thrown away. It's not just going to people who hate and refuse to work. Some of it is going to poorer people who will spend it in the economy at least as quick or quicker than you. Some of it is going to pay down the debt. Some of it is going to pay for job creation and research that is part of this short and long term plan. Again, going back to LA's point...how is it better to take capital from productive, intelligent people and give it to the mathmatically challenged? Lets take an example...that $7500 will allow me to take my family to Disney for a few days. I was intelligent enough to figure out how to make money, prudent enough not to spend what I didn't have and have to buck up a portion of discretionary income that would have been spent in the US economy. Lets not get into how stimulative a trip to Disney actually is for the economy, spending cash on flights, hotels, park tickets, meals etc. All those people need jobs too. See the point? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 I have no problem with that $7,500 out of every $250,000 take home going to pay for things we desperately need right now. Except it's not $7500 out of every $250K. It's $7500 out of $250K only for the tiny fraction of the people who are already shouldering a huge percentage of the tax burden. And the vast majority of it isn't going to help any poor people. But I'm sure it'll create more useless Gov't bureaucracy that will need to be supported on a permanent basis via even more tax increases. Don't worry, someday they'll come for yours too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 Again, going back to LA's point...how is it better to take capital from productive, intelligent people and give it to the mathmatically challenged? Lets take an example...that $7500 will allow me to take my family to Disney for a few days. I was intelligent enough to figure out how to make money, prudent enough not to spend what I didn't have and have to buck up a portion of discretionary income that would have been spent in the US economy. Lets not get into how stimulative a trip to Disney actually is for the economy, spending cash on flights, hotels, park tickets, meals etc. All those people need jobs too. See the point? There are few things easier to find in this world than people who are ready to spend other people's money. What makes this more interesting is when these people actually think they can JUSTIFY spending other people's money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 I love how everyone is spazzed out of a budget summary when the actual budget won't be delivered until April. I love how everyone assumes it's all written in stone. Haven't any of you ever bought a car? I would love to sell you one, you probably walk onto the lot and pack sticker without negotiating.... Yeah, you're absolutely right. But typically you talk them down when your buying a car. If you think this budget is going anyplace but up, you're kidding yourself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 Does NPR have overseas operations? So you're saying Coca Cola should pay the higher US tax no matter where the income is earned? And that would be a good policy to bring in more revenue? If every American company like Coca Cola paid the American taxes, there would be such a mega spike is tax revenue for this country that income taxes could be all but nill. More money in American pockets means more spending, more spending means higher prices, badda bing, badda boom. Let's also not pretend that ALL of the 2/3 international revenue you mentioned comes from countries where taxes would be as lax as the country's where they set up their shelters to begin with. Again, we're talking about Coca Cola, a bit of an anomaly, don't you think? Cook Jim, my point was that rich people aren't more likely to SPEND than poor people, they're more likely to INVEST. So, if anything, there would only be incremental nicks in their portfolio, not their local Starbucks/Toys R Us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted February 27, 2009 Share Posted February 27, 2009 Cook Jim, my point was that rich people aren't more likely to SPEND than poor people, they're more likely to INVEST. So, if anything, there would only be incremental nicks in their portfolio, not their local Starbucks/Toys R Us. After spending many years working in the top restaurants in LA cooking for rich and now working with wealthy people to invest their money I can say with experience that you are in fact 100% WRONG! See rich people think of the future and they would think nothing of cutting back today to insure they have a nice comfortable future. But I'm not suprised you didn't know that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted February 27, 2009 Share Posted February 27, 2009 Again, going back to LA's point...how is it better to take capital from productive, intelligent people and give it to the mathmatically challenged? Lets take an example...that $7500 will allow me to take my family to Disney for a few days. I was intelligent enough to figure out how to make money, prudent enough not to spend what I didn't have and have to buck up a portion of discretionary income that would have been spent in the US economy. Lets not get into how stimulative a trip to Disney actually is for the economy, spending cash on flights, hotels, park tickets, meals etc. All those people need jobs too. See the point? And the point that YOU'RE missing is that with these tax increases comes tax CUTS. By the most conservative estimates, 80% of Americans will have MORE money than they've had. That's 4 people with more for every 1 person with less. That's four people who CAN go to Disney, for the one that can't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted February 27, 2009 Share Posted February 27, 2009 People are truly clueless as to what's transpiring right now. Been that way since television became such a big part of American life. If this keeps up we're going to lose more than a decade. We might just lose a nation. Too late, brother. Too late. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted February 27, 2009 Share Posted February 27, 2009 And the point that YOU'RE missing is that with these tax increases comes tax CUTS. By the most conservative estimates, 80% of Americans will have MORE money than they've had. That's 4 people with more for every 1 person with less. That's four people who CAN go to Disney, for the one that can't. Nice to know that in the few days I've been gone that your ability to process information is still lower than a worm's ass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted February 27, 2009 Share Posted February 27, 2009 After spending many years working in the top restaurants in LA cooking for rich and now working with wealthy people to invest their money I can say with experience that you are in fact 100% WRONG! See rich people think of the future and they would think nothing of cutting back today to insure they have a nice comfortable future. But I'm not suprised you didn't know that. Having close ties to a lot as-holes who work as investment bankers in NYC, I can tell you: no I'm not. A $500 meal to a rich person is the equivalent of a $25 meal to someone without money. The difference in amount does NOT reflect the difference in percentage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts