I Am Bored

Loads of viral videos, games, memes, lists and social networking for when you're bored. Updated every day, so visit often.
LatestPopularMost BookmarkedMost EmailedTop RatedMy FavoritesRandomChat
AllGamesFunnyEntertainmentQuizzesWeirdTechLifestyle, Arts & Lit.News & PoliticsScienceSportsMisc
Submit Content  





rss

friendsmore friends | add your site
Asylum

Holy Taco

Funny Videos

BuzzFeed

NothingToxic

Oddee

Mousebreaker

Online Games

Eat Liver

Online Games

Gorilla Mask

Full Downloads

Norway Games

Damn Cool Pics

Kontraband

Extreme Humor

X Hollywood

I Dont Like You

123 Games

Hollywoodtuna

Funny Games

Cool Stuff

Viva La Games

X - Vids

Smit Happens

Funny Videos

Funny Stuff

ebaumsworld



Back to Listing

Newsweek Magazine: Obama's Gotta Go [Pic+]

Hits: 9210 | Rating: (2.5) | Category: News & Politics | Added by: fancylad
Page: 1 2 3 4 Next >   Jump to: Bottom    Last Post
HumanAction
Male, 18-29, Midwest US
 2353 Posts
Tuesday, August 21, 2012 1:54:42 PM
@patchgrabber: would be to do it on a smaller level, i.e. municipal, maybe state

Now you're speaking my kind of language! I am a federalist and states rights advocate afterall. If it was up to me, there would be no federal income tax at all. The federal government would levy a flat tax against all of the states and the states would collect taxes as they see fit.

I just don't agree that we would necessarily need to migrate the best method to the federal government. The states would observe others and adopt the best policies.

patchgrabber
Male, 30-39, Canada
 5717 Posts
Tuesday, August 21, 2012 1:51:00 PM
@HA: While I'm not necessarily saying that trying new things is bad, I'm just saying that something as big as the US economy might be something too big to risk with. Also, being a scientist, I'm more convinced by empirical evidence and things that can be tested. So what I would do, if I were wanting to test out a new system, would be to do it on a smaller level, i.e. municipal, maybe state. Then if that microcosm model succeeded or was better, you could grow it to the mesocosm and more.

HumanAction
Male, 18-29, Midwest US
 2353 Posts
Tuesday, August 21, 2012 1:38:19 PM
@patchgrabber: You can't just say it will and then be sure that it will unless you're a genie or something


I think this would be a good time to state that I actually happen to be a genie.

HumanAction
Male, 18-29, Midwest US
 2353 Posts
Tuesday, August 21, 2012 1:36:50 PM
@patchgrabber: It was supposed to be funny... The problem with your logic is that there is no room for improvement - ever. You cannot try anything new because "what if it doesn't work out?" Everything in this world includes some risks and some benefits. If we are too afraid to take the risks, then we are doomed to continue maintaining status quo. We never improve.

patchgrabber
Male, 30-39, Canada
 5717 Posts
Tuesday, August 21, 2012 1:30:20 PM
@HA: Excuse me while I lol. What I meant was exactly that: What if it doesn't? You can't just say it will and then be sure that it will unless you're a genie or something. Your only response now is that if it doesn't, then you'll "try something else." Well what if that doesn't work as you think it will? How long can the US economy continue to exist off of your assumptions that may or may not pan out?

HumanAction
Male, 18-29, Midwest US
 2353 Posts
Tuesday, August 21, 2012 1:26:27 PM
@patchgrabber: How wouldn't accountability go up? Even if it failed, we would try something else. Keep trying until you find something that works... Isn't that what we are supposed to do?

If a woman is beaten by her husband everyday and has been for many years, is she supposed to just say "it is what it is..."? No, she is supposed to leave him and keep trying to find a husband that will treat her well. We should be leaving our husbands here, because this relationship is abusive and isn't working.

patchgrabber
Male, 30-39, Canada
 5717 Posts
Tuesday, August 21, 2012 1:19:43 PM
The point is that spending would go down because accountability would go up. Therefore, the tax would fall as well.

That's your assumption, with no basis in fact. What would you do if accountability didn't go up?

HumanAction
Male, 18-29, Midwest US
 2353 Posts
Tuesday, August 21, 2012 1:18:33 PM
@patchgrabber: ... and because your numbers are wrong - as I've also indicated in previous posts.

HumanAction
Male, 18-29, Midwest US
 2353 Posts
Tuesday, August 21, 2012 1:17:37 PM
@patchgrabber: However we weren't talking about business, just median income specifically per household. This doesn't even account for things like sales tax and other ones. So I'd like to see you explain how, with no deductions, a family making less than $50,000 is supposed to pay $20,000 in income tax alone.


See my previous comment(s). Spending would fall as more people become invested in the game.

patchgrabber
Male, 30-39, Canada
 5717 Posts
Tuesday, August 21, 2012 1:16:34 PM
However we weren't talking about business, just median income specifically per household. This doesn't even account for things like sales tax and other ones. So I'd like to see you explain how, with no deductions, a family making less than $50,000 is supposed to pay $20,000 in income tax alone.

HumanAction
Male, 18-29, Midwest US
 2353 Posts
Tuesday, August 21, 2012 1:12:48 PM
@patchgrabber: You still miss the overall point; until you grasp that, we're just treading water. The point is that spending would go down because accountability would go up. Therefore, the tax would fall as well.

Like I said before, you're focused entirely on the revenue aspect of this, and not at all consider the problem: spending; let's address spending. How do we do this? Make wasteful and excessive spending antagonistic to more people.

How do we make wasteful government spending antagonistic to the population? The only way I can think of is to get more people involved. How do we get more people involved? Make them pay into the system.

If you use the roads, bridges, public system in general, then you should pay for them. The free ride nonsense (~51%!) needs to stop.

patchgrabber
Male, 30-39, Canada
 5717 Posts
Tuesday, August 21, 2012 1:12:25 PM
Nevermind, I thought I had seen you write that people without an income are still responsible but now I can't find it, so forget that one.

patchgrabber
Male, 30-39, Canada
 5717 Posts
Tuesday, August 21, 2012 1:07:48 PM
@HA: >40% was just the median income, that says nothing of those earning less than the median income. And how is someone without a job supposed to pay $10,365 worth of tax? It's also comforting that someone who made $1 million would pay only 1% of their total income as income tax. A flat tax as you suggest is just ludicrous. People at the bottom would drown, and those below the poverty line would have something like $5000 to spend for the whole year.

HumanAction
Male, 18-29, Midwest US
 2353 Posts
Tuesday, August 21, 2012 1:00:15 PM
@patchgrabber: I didn't use TOTAL population. I used TOTAL ADULT population. It's in there, you just have a hard time reading and comprehending sometimes. I would expect all adults to pay this regardless of their employment status.

Also, my tax rate is almost perfectly 40% (self-employed must pay the other half of FICA). Nice try though pleading to the population.

patchgrabber
Male, 30-39, Canada
 5717 Posts
Tuesday, August 21, 2012 12:56:28 PM
@HA: Nice numbers you used there, too bad they're slightly wrong. You can't use total US population. According to US Department of Labor - Bureau of labor statistics, for 2008 (I had a hard time finding more recent data, but hopefully it hasn't changed too much) there were 120,589,850 employed citizens. The revenue from personal income tax for 2008 was $1.25 trillion. Now, that means that each working adult must contribute $10,365 in income tax to equal the current income tax situation, close to the number you cited. Median household income in the US in 2008 was about $50,000. In 2005 (again, hard time finding data for one year) the census reported that 42% of ALL households were two income (this also takes into account seniors etc. so the actual percent is likely larger). So I'm sure the median Americans who would pay $20,000 in taxes on $50,000 worth of income would like to thank you for their >40% tax rate.

HumanAction
Male, 18-29, Midwest US
 2353 Posts
Tuesday, August 21, 2012 12:56:17 PM
@patchgrabber: Now, if we remove half the collection of FICA taxes (currently businesses pay half and we didn't include that in our calculation), Excise taxes, customs duties, estate and gift taxes, and other misc. receipts then the current status quote budget becomes 1.6665t. Per US adult, that leaves us paying $7,104.67 each annually to the government.

For comparison, a single person with no additional deductions and credits would pay ~$7,145.00 annually with an income of $53,000.

So, given this system, to maintain status quo, each adult (18 and over) would be responsible for paying $7,104.67 annually.

Then, let's get rid of the fighting in Afghanistan ($108b) - now we are down to $6,644.24 each. I think you can see where I'm going with this.

patchgrabber
Male, 30-39, Canada
 5717 Posts
Tuesday, August 21, 2012 12:53:29 PM
@HA: Nice numbers you used there, too bad they're slightly wrong. You can't use total US population. According to US Department of Labor - Bureau of labor statistics, for 2008 (I had a hard time finding more recent data, but hopefully it hasn't changed too much) there were 120,589,850 employed citizens. The revenue from personal income tax for 2008 was $1.25 trillion. Now, that means that each working adult must contribute $10,365 in income tax to equal the current income tax situation, close to the number you cited. Median household income in the US in 2008 was about $50,000. In 2005 (again, hard time finding data for one year) the census reported that 42% of ALL households were two income (this also takes into account seniors etc. so the actual percent is likely larger). So I'm sure the median Americans who would pay $20,000 in taxes on $50,000 worth of income would like to thank you for their >40% tax rate.

HumanAction
Male, 18-29, Midwest US
 2353 Posts
Tuesday, August 21, 2012 12:16:34 PM
@patchgrabber: This wouldn't be any more of a poll tax than the current income tax system in the US. In both cases, if you have an income and use public works, you are expected to furnish contributions for those services.

Either way, since you want numbers. Using an estimated adult population of 234,564,000 and a TOTAL federal budget of $2.469t each adult would need to contribute $10,525.91. Now, that is status quo, and does not include any contributions from businesses or corporations.

At this point we need to discuss business/corporate taxes. How much should we expect to collect there? As that number increases, the expected contributions from each individual will fall.

patchgrabber
Male, 30-39, Canada
 5717 Posts
Tuesday, August 21, 2012 11:49:25 AM
@HA: one example of how the usps is losing money and fed ex is doing good is still merely an anecdote. how about YOU provide a scholarly study?

Also, a poll tax, which is basically what you're arguing for, needs to have a specific value associated with it. you said this would be "arbitrary" but when you're working with theoretical systems, the only way you fan hope to argue for or against is if you run numbers. You can't claim more revenue without assigning a specific value.

HumanAction
Male, 18-29, Midwest US
 2353 Posts
Tuesday, August 21, 2012 11:16:58 AM
@patchgrabber: Unfounded claim is unfounded. Do you have anything to add besides wishful thinking and abstract concepts that cannot be proven or disproven? It's exceedingly easy to point out the errors in systems that exist when you can't see the faults of the theoretical systems you propose.


I'd rather suggest an unproven but reasonable approach rather than perpetuate a system that has never worked. If you can provide me with a single instance in which Keynesian economics has been fruitful for the long-term, then you'll be famous.

HumanAction
Male, 18-29, Midwest US
 2353 Posts
Tuesday, August 21, 2012 11:13:44 AM
@patchgrabber: Hang on now. I found some things for you to look at.

USPS $5.2b Quarterly Loss
FedEx Still Profitting

As for increasing the amount of people that pay taxes, how would this lead to a drop in revenue? You would be increasing the base considerably.

patchgrabber
Male, 30-39, Canada
 5717 Posts
Tuesday, August 21, 2012 11:00:48 AM
(which would drastically increase revenue)

Unfounded claim is unfounded. Do you have anything to add besides wishful thinking and abstract concepts that cannot be proven or disproven? It's exceedingly easy to point out the errors in systems that exist when you can't see the faults of the theoretical systems you propose.

HumanAction
Male, 18-29, Midwest US
 2353 Posts
Tuesday, August 21, 2012 10:59:12 AM
@patchgrabber: As for your references (the one's I was able to get ahold of at least), it seems that we are running into the same thing - no standard of measurement.

USPS delivers mail on Saturdays - this is probably great for most people. Many people would tend to rate that as excellent (many of these "studies" as well). But it's also costly and the revenue from Saturday's does not cover the cost.

We are using different units/standards of measurement here so an argument is futile. I am not interested in debating whether the government can provide more conveniences (they can - they have "unlimited" funds). I am interested in which entity can provide the best "bang for the buck."

patchgrabber
Male, 30-39, Canada
 5717 Posts
Tuesday, August 21, 2012 10:57:59 AM
How the hell did you come to this conclusion?

Because I asked you why and you ignored it. Thus I assume you have no response to it.

patchgrabber
Male, 30-39, Canada
 5717 Posts
Tuesday, August 21, 2012 10:57:03 AM
@HA: I have read a few of those references, actually (well parts), but that doesn't invalidate them or their results. Besides, it's easy to point out problems with my referencing when you do none of your own.

Page: 1 2 3 4 Next > 

You Must be Signed in to Add a Comment

If you've already got an I-Am-Bored.com account,
click here to sign in.

If you don't have an account yet,
Click Here to Create a Free Account
 

Back to Listing ^top


Bored | Suggest a Link | Advertise | Contact I Am Bored | About I Am Bored | Link to I Am Bored | Live Submission | Privacy | TOS | Ad Choices | Copyright Policy |
© 2014 Demand Media, Inc. All rights reserved.