Jump to content



Photo
- - - - -

The Fiscal Cliff


  • Please log in to reply
299 replies to this topic

#241 Clak

Clak

    Made of star stuff.

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 27 December 2012 - 08:46 PM

I still don't get that use of "mainstream" from fox. So let me get this straight, you're the news channel with the highest ratings in the country, but you aren't mainstream?

So just when exactly does the outsider become the mainstream?
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that. -George Carlin

“Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience.” -Mark Twain

“When a great genius appears in the world you may know him by this sign; that the dunces are all in confederacy against him." -Jonathon Swift

#242 UncleBob

UncleBob

Posted 02 January 2013 - 05:08 AM

http://www.washingto...346f_print.html

Taxes are raised and America is saved, right?
"The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral, begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy, instead of diminishing evil, it multiplies it."

#243 detectiveconan16

detectiveconan16

    Look at that deal. It's so great!

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 02 January 2013 - 12:15 PM

I do feel it's basically the same crap all over again, except incrementally worse. And hey, they screwed the Hurricane Sandy victims, denying them relief that could not only help them but could get the economy kicking some more.

Batsugunner.png


#244 Javery

Javery

    Drug-Dealer-Keeper-Awayer

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 02 January 2013 - 02:30 PM

It is a good compromise - $250k was just too low without taking into any cost of living adjustments but even in the super-expensive areas around here you are killing it if you are making $400k.

--- Bella's Arcade --- Donkey Kong + ---
___________________



#245 UncleBob

UncleBob

Posted 02 January 2013 - 02:48 PM

It's good to know that our nation's Motor Sports arenas are safe for another two years.

Keep up the people's work, Congress.
"The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral, begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy, instead of diminishing evil, it multiplies it."

#246 mykevermin

mykevermin

    Queen of Scotland

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 02 January 2013 - 03:31 PM

It is a good compromise - $250k was just too low without taking into any cost of living adjustments but even in the super-expensive areas around here you are killing it if you are making $400k.


Should taxes only go up on those who are "killing it"? How do we measure "killing it"?

Alternatively, what kind of substantive financial burdens would be imposed by raising taxes on those making $250,000 per year? What have we avoided in terms of economic impact (on the individual tax payer) by raising the threshold?
Posted Image

#247 RedvsBlue

RedvsBlue

    Rocket Science Level

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 02 January 2013 - 03:43 PM

Should taxes only go up on those who are "killing it"? How do we measure "killing it"?

Alternatively, what kind of substantive financial burdens would be imposed by raising taxes on those making $250,000 per year? What have we avoided in terms of economic impact (on the individual tax payer) by raising the threshold?


You read Javery's post in a much different way than I did. I figured he picked $250,000 as being "too low" because then it would have affected him, whereas $400,000 won't...

#248 mykevermin

mykevermin

    Queen of Scotland

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 02 January 2013 - 03:49 PM

Maserati class = "killing it."

Fully optioned Volkswagen CC class = "scraping by."

I guess that's the logic.

EDIT: But I do want to better understand what sorts of expenditures $250K earners would no longer be able to afford if their tax cuts expired.
Posted Image

#249 egofed

egofed

    CAGiversary!

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 02 January 2013 - 03:55 PM

How the hell did even this "emergency" legislation get loaded up with special interest bull crap? Our government is waaay corrupt and deceitful. I wouldn't trust most of these guys with a year's contribution to my IRA, let alone my kid's future.

I love the "let's stick it to the rich who pay 70% of all federal taxes already" mantra while, yet again, I helped a 23 year old lady living in subsidized housing deliver her 4th baby last night. How much do you want to bet that she gets a tax "refund" along with her TANF, food stamps, and medical aid coverage this year?

#250 UncleBob

UncleBob

Posted 02 January 2013 - 03:57 PM

How swell is it that now that a bill has passed, instead of actually discussing the bill that passed, "the usual suspects" are trying their best to derail the thread into anything but discussion of the final bill?

Sweet.

To be fair though, if the idiots I've been cheerleading for over the past while had pushed this bill through, I'd be trying to avoid discussing it as well.

http://www.washingto...cal-cliff-deal/

1. A $9 billion “sop for Wall Street banks and major multinationals”
[...]
3. Cheaper office space for Goldman Sachs
[...]
5. Treat coal from Indian lands as an “alternative energy source”
[...]
8. Subsidize Hollywood films


Doin' the people's work.

http://truth-out.org...isney-to-nascar

I like this one the best:

4) Help a brother mining company out – Sec. 307 and Sec. 316 offer tax incentives for miners to buy safety equipment and train their employees on mine safety. Taxpayers shouldn’t have to bribe mining companies to not kill their workers.


"The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral, begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy, instead of diminishing evil, it multiplies it."

#251 camoor

camoor

    Jams on foot fires

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 02 January 2013 - 04:04 PM

It is a good compromise - $250k was just too low without taking into any cost of living adjustments but even in the super-expensive areas around here you are killing it if you are making $400k.


I figured that bumping it up from 250K to 400K was to protect small business job creators, and I think it's a load of crap.

If we're going to give breaks for job creators, we should make them have to prove that they are creating jobs.

How many jobs have you created Javery?

#252 UncleBob

UncleBob

Posted 02 January 2013 - 04:09 PM

http://truth-out.org...scal-cliff-deal

Who won in the fiscal cliff deal? The lawyers won.

Well, not just the lawyers. The lawyers, the doctors, the dentists, the middle managers, the advertising executives, the whole MBA crowd.

[...]

The fiscal cliff deal is not a bad deal. But it’s not a progressive deal. It’s a deal for the comfortable, not a deal for the struggling and the poor. Those of us with good jobs and advanced degrees can be satisfied. For the 80% of Americans who don’t, it’s just more bad news.


Just doin' the people's work.

So, we got no significant spending cuts and the 'evil rich' still made out like bandits. That whole "Compromise: where both sides don't get what they want" thing seems to play here real well.
"The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral, begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy, instead of diminishing evil, it multiplies it."

#253 Javery

Javery

    Drug-Dealer-Keeper-Awayer

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 02 January 2013 - 04:40 PM

You read Javery's post in a much different way than I did. I figured he picked $250,000 as being "too low" because then it would have affected him, whereas $400,000 won't...


Of course! It is OK to set the bar at whatever they want as long as it doesn't affect me.

EDIT: But I do want to better understand what sorts of expenditures $250K earners would no longer be able to afford if their tax cuts expired.


I don't know how other people spend their money but co-workers and friends were concerned with mortgage payments, after school-care payments for the kids, college tuition, saving for retirement and things like that - nothing really to do with fancy cars or vacations or electronics but it would affect things that have been budgeted based on the current system. Could they "survive" on a tighter budget? Of course. Should they have to? I guess that's the argument.

How many jobs have you created Javery?


Who claimed that I am creating jobs? I'm not sure what is so confusing about my position on this - I want more money in my pocket and less money not in my pocket.

--- Bella's Arcade --- Donkey Kong + ---
___________________



#254 camoor

camoor

    Jams on foot fires

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 02 January 2013 - 05:08 PM

Who claimed that I am creating jobs? I'm not sure what is so confusing about my position on this - I want more money in my pocket and less money not in my pocket.


Right that's why the narrative of job creators - and raising the bar on this bill - is bullshit.

I like any bill that increases taxes on the rich - but we can do better.

#255 mykevermin

mykevermin

    Queen of Scotland

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 02 January 2013 - 05:14 PM

Should they have to?


Yep.

Maybe we could juxtapose the list of items you've overheard being discussed versus egofed's poverty-shaming the past few days and think about that for a moment w/r/t taxation and spending.
Posted Image

#256 egofed

egofed

    CAGiversary!

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 02 January 2013 - 05:18 PM

Yep.

Maybe we could juxtapose the list of items you've overheard being discussed versus egofed's poverty-shaming the past few days and think about that for a moment w/r/t taxation and spending.



If only these people had any shame. I wish I could call em out and not get fired. How can you defend someone who is willing to bring more lives into such a crappy cycle of "mooching" just to pad their wallets a little more?

#257 mykevermin

mykevermin

    Queen of Scotland

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 02 January 2013 - 05:19 PM

Hey, shouldn't you be busy defending a company who wishes to reduce access to birth control?

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
Posted Image

#258 Javery

Javery

    Drug-Dealer-Keeper-Awayer

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 02 January 2013 - 05:47 PM

Yep.


So they should also be forced to uproot their families and move somewhere cheaper? Why does no one take cost of living into consideration when throwing out arbitrary numbers? Just look at this (I picked a random state in the mid-west and this is the first city that came up). Housing is 82% LESS!!!

Posted Image

--- Bella's Arcade --- Donkey Kong + ---
___________________



#259 dohdough

dohdough

    Sum Dum Guy

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 02 January 2013 - 05:53 PM

Who claimed that I am creating jobs? I'm not sure what is so confusing about my position on this - I want more money in my pocket and less money not in my pocket.

If you kept your argument strictly to this, you wouldn't get half the grief you get for saying shit like this, especially the bolded part:

I don't know how other people spend their money but co-workers and friends were concerned with mortgage payments, after school-care payments for the kids, college tuition, saving for retirement and things like that - nothing really to do with fancy cars or vacations or electronics but it would affect things that have been budgeted based on the current system. Could they "survive" on a tighter budget? Of course. Should they have to? I guess that's the argument.

If I alone, were making $300k a year, I could live almost anywhere I want in Boston metro while doing all the bullshit that you do with your money and Boston has some of the most expensive real estate in the country...I could live smack dab in the middle of it. In matter of fact, I know people that do.

I don't remember if you mentioned if you grew up poor, but you don't really have a realistic or healthy perspective on what luxury is anymore. That list of things you gave? A vast majority of the population doesn't have access to that and it's partially because of the mantra that you parrot about taxes...a good part of it actually. Sorry (well not really), but a guy making $300k that bitches about paying another $5k(1.6%) in taxes can go Fuck off while whining about his expenses living in a high COL neighborhood.

Why don't people think of the HENRY's?? Q_Q

Honestly, I wouldn't even give that much of a shit if you thought that others that put in an honest 40 a week should have a taste of that stuff, but no, it's all about your socio-economic peers. This is exactly why it rings hallow as Fuck when you say that you're no better off than some blue collar worker if something bad happens like a serious medical condition. I might disagree with everything you say, but I could at least respect honesty. Although, that "fuck you; got mine" reply you gave camoor is as honest you've been about it in recent memory, so good for you.

#260 mykevermin

mykevermin

    Queen of Scotland

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 02 January 2013 - 05:53 PM

Making a hair under $100K per year in the midwest is not going to get you any sympathy from me, if that's the sort of thing you're aiming for.
Posted Image

#261 egofed

egofed

    CAGiversary!

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 02 January 2013 - 05:54 PM

Hey, shouldn't you be busy defending a company who wishes to reduce access to birth control?

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:



Why should they pay for this? Don't want to get pregnant, then don't have sex. How in the hell should your employer even be involved. If its a recreational activity to you, as it is to me, then fine, but I don't demand that my employer pays for my sunscreen or bike helmet. This is freakin gov't over reach in the worst way. Don't you also think that insurance companies are just gonna pass this new expenditure off on their rates? Buy your own dang condoms, or should I come over and Fuck your girlfriend for you also?

#262 RedvsBlue

RedvsBlue

    Rocket Science Level

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 02 January 2013 - 06:07 PM

Why should they pay for this? Don't want to get pregnant, then don't have sex. How in the hell should your employer even be involved. If its a recreational activity to you, as it is to me, then fine, but I don't demand that my employer pays for my sunscreen or bike helmet. This is freakin gov't over reach in the worst way. Don't you also think that insurance companies are just gonna pass this new expenditure off on their rates? Buy your own dang condoms, or should I come over and Fuck your girlfriend for you also?


You're doing a fantastic job of talking out of both sides of your mouth.

#263 Javery

Javery

    Drug-Dealer-Keeper-Awayer

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 02 January 2013 - 06:44 PM

I'm not sure when I haven't been "honest" about my position on this. I generally want more money and I want to be taxed less (what a crazy position to take!). This would apply whether I made $50,000, $500,000 or $5,000,000 per year (notwithstanding what I could "afford"). I'm also in favor of a change to the tax system if COL is taken into consideration, including raising the minimum threshold for taxing the "poor". No one has an answer as to why COL isn't factored in to any of these decisions.

Making a hair under $100K per year in the midwest is not going to get you any sympathy from me, if that's the sort of thing you're aiming for.


No, I was using the comparison to point out that someone making $100k in OK wouldn't get dinged by the tax increase like someone in the same economic position living in NY.

--- Bella's Arcade --- Donkey Kong + ---
___________________



#264 soulvengeance

soulvengeance

    Beating dead horses

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 02 January 2013 - 06:56 PM

I'm not sure when I haven't been "honest" about my position on this. I generally want more money and I want to be taxed less (what a crazy position to take!). This would apply whether I made $50,000, $500,000 or $5,000,000 per year (notwithstanding what I could "afford"). I'm also in favor of a change to the tax system if COL is taken into consideration, including raising the minimum threshold for taxing the "poor". No one has an answer as to why COL isn't factored in to any of these decisions.



I certainly understand your position, and I have to say you've been pretty honest about where you're coming from. However, as far as COL, you could technically move to a cheaper area if you can't afford that area. I mean, just using your area as an example, you could move to PA and commute, no?
mytradelist:
http://www.cheapassg...864#post2614864

Calls this what you may, but I would say that Blacks actually benefited from the slavery. Comparing the current lives of many African Americans to Africans, one can see that the former live in much better conditions with greater freedoms and opportunities.


#265 cancerman1120

cancerman1120

    CAGiversary!

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 02 January 2013 - 07:05 PM

How the hell did even this "emergency" legislation get loaded up with special interest bull crap? Our government is waaay corrupt and deceitful. I wouldn't trust most of these guys with a year's contribution to my IRA, let alone my kid's future.

I love the "let's stick it to the rich who pay 70% of all federal taxes already" mantra while, yet again, I helped a 23 year old lady living in subsidized housing deliver her 4th baby last night. How much do you want to bet that she gets a tax "refund" along with her TANF, food stamps, and medical aid coverage this year?


You are getting pretty old. Why do you even help people if you seem to hate them so much?

#266 cancerman1120

cancerman1120

    CAGiversary!

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 02 January 2013 - 07:14 PM

I don't know how other people spend their money but co-workers and friends were concerned with mortgage payments, after school-care payments for the kids, college tuition, saving for retirement and things like that - nothing really to do with fancy cars or vacations or electronics but it would affect things that have been budgeted based on the current system. Could they "survive" on a tighter budget? Of course. Should they have to? I guess that's the argument.


I am surprised no one has just done the Math. An individual making 400,000 will pay $6,900 less on the $150,000 between the 250k and 400k with this compromise. That represents 1.7% of the person's gross income. If you mean to tell me that someone is unable to get by because taxes were raise at 250k instead is just dishonest or greedy.

The federal poverty line for an individual is $11,170 in 2012. I would think those people have a lot more to worry about.

Edit: I see Doh was doing some math above...my bad.

Edit 2: I dd see Capital gains was raised to 20% also so that is a start to get all income on more equal footing.

Edit 3: Looking things over I think my Math is incorrect.

Ok the real difference based on the 2012 tax rates for that $150,000 would be $9,686. This is because the tax rate for 250k to 388k is 33% and not 35% so for that income is a 6.6% tax increase. So that represent 2.4% of gross income. Although a bigger chunk than I thought before I still feel like people making that much money have less to complain about than a person at poverty level even with all those "benefits".

Edited by cancerman1120, 02 January 2013 - 07:31 PM.


#267 camoor

camoor

    Jams on foot fires

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 02 January 2013 - 07:15 PM

I'm not sure when I haven't been "honest" about my position on this. I generally want more money and I want to be taxed less (what a crazy position to take!).


This is the TLDR version of Javery (and really all you need to know about 99.999% of rich people)

They don't create jobs, they don't do great things for the economy, they just want to extract as much wealth as possible and give back as little as possible.

They are the takers. They don't want to pay taxes, let alone their fair share.

Fuck that.

#268 egofed

egofed

    CAGiversary!

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 02 January 2013 - 07:39 PM

This is the TLDR version of Javery (and really all you need to know about 99.999% of rich people)

They don't create jobs, they don't do great things for the economy, they just want to extract as much wealth as possible and give back as little as possible.

They are the takers. They don't want to pay taxes, let alone their fair share.

Fuck that.



Hahhahahahahhahhhehhehehehehehehehehhhahahahahahha......woooo...even if that was true, any money they make through legal means is theirs. Whatever insane % you want them to pay would not be their "fair share", it would be them picking up the less successful people's slack. You want to make me, by force and threat of imprisonment, my brother's keeper. Sounds like freedom to me:roll:....


By your definition, can I rightfully call those in generational poverty "Takers" also?

#269 usickenme

usickenme

    I'm the a-hole

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 02 January 2013 - 07:44 PM

I generally want more money and I want to be taxed less (what a crazy position to take!). .



not crazy but incredibly simplistic. I'm really, really

#270 Javery

Javery

    Drug-Dealer-Keeper-Awayer

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 02 January 2013 - 07:48 PM

Um, I do pay my "fair share" - I probably pay more in taxes than some people earn in a year. How is that not fair? I should just keep paying and paying and paying and paying and paying, right? I can "afford" it so why not? Fuck that.

It also has nothing to do with "giving back" - this is a ridiculous argument. Maybe I'll just stop making charitable donations (on nos! tax deduction!) or volunteering to help out with school programs and coaching soccer and basketball, etc. I'm perfectly content with how much I give. I don't want the government dictating how I spend my money.

--- Bella's Arcade --- Donkey Kong + ---
___________________