User Tag List

+ Reply to Thread
Page 7 of 20 FirstFirst ... 3456789101117 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 195

Thread: The GOP circus is over. The clowns and elephants are all back in their cages.

  1. #61
    Points: 24,520, Level: 38
    Level completed: 14%, Points required for next Level: 1,130
    Overall activity: 0.1%
    Achievements:
    Social10000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Awryly's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    976
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    12,000 merciful miles from the US
    Posts
    3,031
    Points
    24,520
    Level
    38
    Thanks Given
    74
    Thanked 146x in 132 Posts
    Mentioned
    16 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by GrumpyDog View Post
    If one group of people have 2/3rds of the total wealth, land, assets, etc, which constitute the GDP, and the other group of people have 1/3rd of the total wealth, land, assets, etc, which constitute the GDP, then when it comes to how to proportion the funding for the yearly Federal Budget, the group which enjoys 2/3rds of GDP should pay 2/3rds of the budget, while the group that has 1/3rd of GDP, pays 1/3rd of the Fed.Budget.

    Simple logic really, which is probably why GOP/upside down elephants cannot grasp it.
    You scratching their tummies again?
    Come sit down beside me I said to myself
    And although it doesn't make sense
    I held my own hand as a small sign of trust
    And together I sat on the fence


    Anon. Very anon.

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to Awryly For This Useful Post:

    GrumpyDog (11-21-2012)

  3. #62
    Points: 10,706, Level: 24
    Level completed: 82%, Points required for next Level: 144
    Overall activity: 0.1%
    Achievements:
    SocialVeteran10000 Experience Points
    GrumpyDog's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    1044
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Civil Rights HQ
    Posts
    949
    Points
    10,706
    Level
    24
    Thanks Given
    70
    Thanked 210x in 170 Posts
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Awryly View Post
    You scratching their tummies again?

  4. #63
    Points: 10,706, Level: 24
    Level completed: 82%, Points required for next Level: 144
    Overall activity: 0.1%
    Achievements:
    SocialVeteran10000 Experience Points
    GrumpyDog's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    1044
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Civil Rights HQ
    Posts
    949
    Points
    10,706
    Level
    24
    Thanks Given
    70
    Thanked 210x in 170 Posts
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)



    Just prior that that....

  5. #64
    Points: 665,213, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 90.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialRecommendation Second ClassYour first GroupOverdrive50000 Experience PointsTagger First ClassVeteran
    Awards:
    Discussion Ender
    Chris's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    433307
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    197,542
    Points
    665,213
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    31,981
    Thanked 80,896x in 54,714 Posts
    Mentioned
    2011 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by GrumpyDog View Post
    If one group of people have 2/3rds of the total wealth, land, assets, etc, which constitute the GDP, and the other group of people have 1/3rd of the total wealth, land, assets, etc, which constitute the GDP, then when it comes to how to proportion the funding for the yearly Federal Budget, the group which enjoys 2/3rds of GDP should pay 2/3rds of the budget, while the group that has 1/3rd of GDP, pays 1/3rd of the Fed.Budget.

    Simple logic really, which is probably why GOP/upside down elephants cannot grasp it.
    You're logic is fine, except it's based on a hypothetical. Here's some problems with it.

    One, the 1/3s and 2/3s are not static but dynamic. By looking only at statistics you've abstracted yourself away from actual individuals who move in and out of those groups all the time.

    Two, the 1/3 do pay over 2/3s. You see, they contribute not only taxes but also to the generation of wealth everyone shares in.

    Three, it would be far better to instead of an income tax use a consumption tax, like the Fair Tax in order to get the incentives right.

    Those and other points seems to be beyond the grasp of liberals.

  6. #65
    Points: 24,520, Level: 38
    Level completed: 14%, Points required for next Level: 1,130
    Overall activity: 0.1%
    Achievements:
    Social10000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Awryly's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    976
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    12,000 merciful miles from the US
    Posts
    3,031
    Points
    24,520
    Level
    38
    Thanks Given
    74
    Thanked 146x in 132 Posts
    Mentioned
    16 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Chris View Post
    You're logic is fine, except it's based on a hypothetical. Here's some problems with it.

    One, the 1/3s and 2/3s are not static but dynamic. By looking only at statistics you've abstracted yourself away from actual individuals who move in and out of those groups all the time.

    Two, the 1/3 do pay over 2/3s. You see, they contribute not only taxes but also to the generation of wealth everyone shares in.

    Three, it would be far better to instead of an income tax use a consumption tax, like the Fair Tax in order to get the incentives right.

    Those and other points seems to be beyond the grasp of liberals.
    Wow! So a few people go from poor to rich. But not many, it seems..............

    studies have found that not only is the degree of social mobility in the US not large but it has either remained unchanged or decreased since the 1970s.[10][19][20][21]
    Even if the premise had any validity in the context in which it was presented, it turns out to be largely false.
    Last edited by Awryly; 11-21-2012 at 09:39 PM.
    Come sit down beside me I said to myself
    And although it doesn't make sense
    I held my own hand as a small sign of trust
    And together I sat on the fence


    Anon. Very anon.

  7. #66
    Original Ranter
    Points: 858,904, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 90.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialCreated Album picturesOverdrive50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Peter1469's Avatar Advisor
    Karma
    496516
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    NOVA
    Posts
    241,649
    Points
    858,904
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    153,205
    Thanked 147,526x in 94,387 Posts
    Mentioned
    2552 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by GrumpyDog View Post
    If one group of people have 2/3rds of the total wealth, land, assets, etc, which constitute the GDP, and the other group of people have 1/3rd of the total wealth, land, assets, etc, which constitute the GDP, then when it comes to how to proportion the funding for the yearly Federal Budget, the group which enjoys 2/3rds of GDP should pay 2/3rds of the budget, while the group that has 1/3rd of GDP, pays 1/3rd of the Fed.Budget.

    Simple logic really, which is probably why GOP/upside down elephants cannot grasp it.
    Public school education? You math is f'ed up. I can't help you until you get help.

  8. #67
    Points: 665,213, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 90.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialRecommendation Second ClassYour first GroupOverdrive50000 Experience PointsTagger First ClassVeteran
    Awards:
    Discussion Ender
    Chris's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    433307
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    197,542
    Points
    665,213
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    31,981
    Thanked 80,896x in 54,714 Posts
    Mentioned
    2011 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Awryly View Post
    Wow! So a few people go from poor to rich. But not many, it seems..............



    Even if the premise had any validity in the context in which it was presented, it turns out to be largely false.
    Wow! So a few people go from poor to rich. But not many, it seems..............
    Actually it's more than you think.

    Even if the premise had any validity in the context in which it was presented, it turns out to be largely false.
    Not if you bothered to follow your sources. [10] is about meritocracy, not economic mobility. Moreover, it does exactly what I pointed out is misleading, it looks at statistical groups, not individuals. Hell, you're always going to have a statistical top 1%, the point is the people in the group keep changing.

    I won't bother with the remaining sources since you obviously didn't bother to read them either.

  9. #68
    Points: 665,213, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 90.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialRecommendation Second ClassYour first GroupOverdrive50000 Experience PointsTagger First ClassVeteran
    Awards:
    Discussion Ender
    Chris's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    433307
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    197,542
    Points
    665,213
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    31,981
    Thanked 80,896x in 54,714 Posts
    Mentioned
    2011 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Re your source [10]:


  10. #69
    Points: 24,520, Level: 38
    Level completed: 14%, Points required for next Level: 1,130
    Overall activity: 0.1%
    Achievements:
    Social10000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Awryly's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    976
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    12,000 merciful miles from the US
    Posts
    3,031
    Points
    24,520
    Level
    38
    Thanks Given
    74
    Thanked 146x in 132 Posts
    Mentioned
    16 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Chris View Post
    Actually it's more than you think.



    Not if you bothered to follow your sources. [10] is about meritocracy, not economic mobility. Moreover, it does exactly what I pointed out is misleading, it looks at statistical groups, not individuals. Hell, you're always going to have a statistical top 1%, the point is the people in the group keep changing.

    I won't bother with the remaining sources since you obviously didn't bother to read them either.
    It's a quaint take that because some people in the top 1% change, they should not pay taxes.

    Not that many of them pay much in tax anyway.
    Come sit down beside me I said to myself
    And although it doesn't make sense
    I held my own hand as a small sign of trust
    And together I sat on the fence


    Anon. Very anon.

  11. #70
    Points: 62,451, Level: 61
    Level completed: 5%, Points required for next Level: 1,999
    Overall activity: 0.2%
    Achievements:
    SocialTagger First ClassVeteranRecommendation Second ClassOverdrive50000 Experience Points
    Calypso Jones's Avatar Banned
    Karma
    26181
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Shenandoah Valley, Virginia
    Posts
    14,239
    Points
    62,451
    Level
    61
    Thanks Given
    5,075
    Thanked 10,860x in 6,374 Posts
    Mentioned
    109 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Awryly View Post
    It's a quaint take that because some people in the top 1% change, they should not pay taxes.

    Not that many of them pay much in tax anyway.
    where do you get these ideas?

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts