A schism is developing in the far right religious world, dividing those who hate gays from those who don’t hate gays enough: AFA: Glenn Beck and Ann Coulter Need To Hurry Up and Hate Gays Again.
1 |
jamesfirecat Sat, Aug 21, 2010 6:30:21pm |
Popcorn here, get your popcorn! See the amazing circular firing squad for one night only! Get your popcorn while its still hot!
| 2 |
Mad Prophet Ludwig Sat, Aug 21, 2010 6:30:27pm |
An entire movement dedicated to fear and hatred can only eat its own. I pray that there is enough sanity left in America so that they don't drag this nation along.
| 3 |
Velvet Elvis Sat, Aug 21, 2010 6:31:43pm |
I always figured this is where the rift between the socons and the ficons would start.
| 4 |
Mad Prophet Ludwig Sat, Aug 21, 2010 6:33:34pm |
Speaking of video metaphors for the crack in the right...
Here is a man, representing all of America, getting his head stuck in an elephant's bottom:
| 5 |
3eff Jeff Sat, Aug 21, 2010 6:34:12pm |
Supporting either civil unions or marriages based entirely on using the alimentary canal for sexual purposes is not conservative, period.
So we can have Marriage Equality for Lesbians, then?
| 6 |
Mad Prophet Ludwig Sat, Aug 21, 2010 6:34:25pm |
note: The footage in 4 is for real, potentially NSFW.
| 7 |
Aceofwhat? Sat, Aug 21, 2010 6:35:55pm |
If everyone to the right of Glenn Beck could line up over here...yeaaah...we need your electric impulses to help us create human batteries and this is apparently the only way that you'll ever contribute to society. One at a time, please...
| 8 |
Killgore Trout Sat, Aug 21, 2010 6:36:05pm |
“Marriages based entirely on using the alimentary canal for sexual purposes”?
Yikes!
| 11 |
Dark_Falcon Sat, Aug 21, 2010 6:38:11pm |
re: #7 Aceofwhat?
If everyone to the right of Glenn Beck could line up over here...yeaaah...we need your electric impulses to help us create human batteries and this is apparently the only way that you'll ever contribute to society. One at a time, please...
So, you're an AI machine?
/riff on The Matrix
| 13 |
Dark_Falcon Sat, Aug 21, 2010 6:42:20pm |
Also, while our overnight thread focused on something wrong at Fort Eustis, I wanted to mention that there is something very good there, too. Check out this article:
ERDC-CERL Fuel Cell
| 14 |
karmic_inquisitor Sat, Aug 21, 2010 6:46:34pm |
re: #3 Conservative Moonbat
I always figured this is where the rift between the socons and the ficons would start.
The Fiscons were crushed long ago. All that remains of them in the GOP is a fine white powder which, if found on a True Conservative's ® clothing, has said person accused of the 4 heresies - R - I - N - O.
This is a cognitive dissonance schism which good, old fashioned bible teachin' will surely fix. Leviticus will triumph!
| 16 |
theheat Sat, Aug 21, 2010 6:48:09pm |
So, you have the biblical haters that want gays dead, and the lesser haters that would treat them as common housecats or parakeets, and still embark in impassioned discourse between friends about how "silly" and "stupid" and "messy" they were.
Neither of the two wants to treat gays as equals, with equal rights. It's all still an intolerable version of acceptance.
| 17 |
Stanghazi Sat, Aug 21, 2010 6:48:57pm |
Sorry, talking to the youth today (and us liberal minded folk)
This is a joke of an issue. It will end.
Sexuality now a days:
wanted, not defined.
| 18 |
Jetpilot1101 Sat, Aug 21, 2010 6:49:39pm |
I'm a fiscal conservative who has no problem with gay people at all. I'm still trying to find which camp I belong in and haven't found one yet.
| 19 |
Mad Prophet Ludwig Sat, Aug 21, 2010 6:49:53pm |
| 20 |
Four More Tears Sat, Aug 21, 2010 6:50:18pm |
I bet both Beck and Coulter do or say something in the near future to reassure their base of their anti-gay street cred.
| 21 |
windsagio Sat, Aug 21, 2010 6:50:30pm |
re: #17 Stanley Sea
Sorry, talking to the youth today (and us liberal minded folk)
This is a joke of an issue. It will end.
Sexuality now a days:
wanted, not defined.
Requoted for being freaking brilliant!
| 22 |
Mad Prophet Ludwig Sat, Aug 21, 2010 6:50:35pm |
re: #18 Jetpilot1101
I'm a fiscal conservative who has no problem with gay people at all. I'm still trying to find which camp I belong in and haven't found one yet.
The sane people camp.
Hint: It has many ex republicans, but almost no current ones.
| 23 |
Four More Tears Sat, Aug 21, 2010 6:50:43pm |
re: #18 Jetpilot1101
I'm a fiscal conservative who has no problem with gay people at all. I'm still trying to find which camp I belong in and haven't found one yet.
Bi-curious, then?
| 24 |
Bubblehead II Sat, Aug 21, 2010 6:51:05pm |
re: #4 LudwigVanQuixote
Was that Newt working a part time job?
| 25 |
cliffster Sat, Aug 21, 2010 6:51:59pm |
re: #18 Jetpilot1101
I'm a fiscal conservative who has no problem with gay people at all. I'm still trying to find which camp I belong in and haven't found one yet.
why go camping?
| 26 |
Jetpilot1101 Sat, Aug 21, 2010 6:52:59pm |
re: #22 LudwigVanQuixote
I suppose you are right. I'm still a registered Republican but only because I'm too lazy to change my party affiliation. I'm honestly too busy right now to care about politics. All I really want is a balanced budget so whoever tells me they are going to push that kind of legislation gets my vote.
| 27 |
3eff Jeff Sat, Aug 21, 2010 6:53:56pm |
re: #18 Jetpilot1101
I'm a fiscal conservative who has no problem with gay people at all. I'm still trying to find which camp I belong in and haven't found one yet.
I tend to the fiscal conservative end as well (but with enough nuance that I am not a libertarian), and I'm strongly socially liberal. I've got my fingers crossed for the Whigs taking the baton for the next century. The US History geek in me loves the idea.
| 28 |
jamesfirecat Sat, Aug 21, 2010 6:54:00pm |
re: #26 Jetpilot1101
I suppose you are right. I'm still a registered Republican but only because I'm too lazy to change my party affiliation. I'm honestly too busy right now to care about politics. All I really want is a balanced budget so whoever tells me they are going to push that kind of legislation gets my vote.
Republicans will talk about balanced budgets a lot, but Democrats seem to come closer to actually providing them.
| 29 |
Stanghazi Sat, Aug 21, 2010 6:54:16pm |
| 30 |
cliffster Sat, Aug 21, 2010 6:55:15pm |
"Drawing on my find command of language, I said nothing."
-- Robert Charles Benchley
| 31 |
Four More Tears Sat, Aug 21, 2010 6:55:23pm |
re: #29 Stanley Sea
The best new term. I love polyamorous.
Just don't tell your husband that.
Unless...
| 32 |
Stanghazi Sat, Aug 21, 2010 6:55:37pm |
| 33 |
Gus Sat, Aug 21, 2010 6:55:40pm |
Dear Bryan Fischer and AFA:
Please crawl back into your hole and stay there. You're not welcome in the civilized world.
Sincerely,
Gus
| 34 |
Mad Prophet Ludwig Sat, Aug 21, 2010 6:56:07pm |
I have a lot of problems with MIchael Moore, but this is dead on, hilarious and truly epic:
See gay men mock Fred Phelps amongst other things....
| 35 |
theheat Sat, Aug 21, 2010 6:57:02pm |
re: #26 Jetpilot1101
They all say they're good with money. None are. Especially OPM. But right now, with the GOP, you get all kinds of crazy intellectual regression and social mandates, with a lot of hate sprinkled on top.
By 2012 the GOP will be burning witches or gone the way of the 6,000 year old dinosaur. Those are the only two outcomes, since reform is not on the calendar.
| 36 |
Racer X Sat, Aug 21, 2010 6:57:18pm |
re: #18 Jetpilot1101
I'm a fiscal conservative who has no problem with gay people at all. I'm still trying to find which camp I belong in and haven't found one yet.
No shit. Lately I feel like I'm in no-man's land.
| 37 |
What, me worry? Sat, Aug 21, 2010 6:58:09pm |
re: #27 3eff Jeff
I tend to the fiscal conservative end as well (but with enough nuance that I am not a libertarian), and I'm strongly socially liberal. I've got my fingers crossed for the Whigs taking the baton for the next century. The US History geek in me loves the idea.
You should talk to Ojoe. He's a Whig dude.
| 38 |
theheat Sat, Aug 21, 2010 6:59:37pm |
re: #34 LudwigVanQuixote
Michael Moore makes me puke. I'm sad to see he nailed this.
| 39 |
3eff Jeff Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:00:05pm |
re: #36 Racer X
No shit. Lately I feel like I'm in no-man's land.
I think there may be a lot of us hanging out around these parts. It's why I'm here.
| 40 |
TedStriker Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:00:56pm |
re: #33 Gus 802
Dear Bryan Fischer and AFA:
Please crawl back into your hole and stay there. You're not welcome in the civilized world.
Also, get fucked...
Sincerely,
Talon
Just had to improve your post a bit... ;-P
| 41 |
What, me worry? Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:01:16pm |
re: #34 LudwigVanQuixote
I have a lot of problems with MIchael Moore, but this is dead on, hilarious and truly epic:
See gay men mock Fred Phelps amongst other things...
[Video]
Priscella Queen of the Desert :>
| 44 |
TedStriker Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:01:59pm |
re: #38 theheat
Michael Moore makes me puke. I'm sad to see he nailed this.
Hey, even a broken clock is right twice a day...
| 45 |
aagcobb Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:02:21pm |
The SoCons are upset that the GOP hasn't gone into a frenzy of gay-bashing over the Prop 8 trial, however the GOP has decided that hating on teh Gay is so 2004, and the wedge issues du jour are demonizing immigrants and muslims. They need the INS to bust Mexican queers working at the construction site of the "Ground Zero" Mosque.
| 46 |
3eff Jeff Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:02:23pm |
| 47 |
Jetpilot1101 Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:02:46pm |
It is becoming more and more apparent to me that the choices that will be offered in November on both sides are going to royaly suck. On one hand I've got a Congress, (Repub and Dem) spending like drunken sailors in Bangkok and on the other hand, I've got a bunch of loony candidates telling me they'll make it all better. I really would appreciate a sane individual taking a principled stand so I'd have someone to support.
| 48 |
Killgore Trout Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:03:48pm |
re: #13 Dark_Falcon
Also, while our overnight thread focused on something wrong at Fort Eustis, I wanted to mention that there is something very good there, too. Check out this article:
ERDC-CERL Fuel Cell
I looked into solar panels again today. The technology isn't even close to being reasonable for the home owner yet. Takes about 20 years to pay for themselves and only have a 25 year life span. Bummer.
| 49 |
Stanghazi Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:04:11pm |
re: #45 aagcobb
The SoCons are upset that the GOP hasn't gone into a frenzy of gay-bashing over the Prop 8 trial, however the GOP has decided that hating on teh Gay is so 2004, and the wedge issues du jour are demonizing immigrants and muslims. They need the INS to bust Mexican queers working at the construction site of the "Ground Zero" Mosque.
terrorist babies.
| 51 |
Wayne A. Schneider Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:04:44pm |
re: #4 LudwigVanQuixote
Thanks for the laugh. That was hilarious. I assume he's okay now, if even a little skittish around elephants.
| 52 |
Mad Prophet Ludwig Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:06:05pm |
re: #51 Wayne A. Schneider
Thanks for the laugh. That was hilarious. I assume he's okay now, if even a little skittish around elephants.
Wouldn't you be?
Like I said, her really doe represent all of America right now... getting stuck in the crack in the right....
| 54 |
Aceofwhat? Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:06:18pm |
re: #29 Stanley Sea
The best new term. I love polyamorous.
...i grew up with/near their drummer, played with him a bit...
| 55 |
3eff Jeff Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:06:38pm |
re: #51 Wayne A. Schneider
Thanks for the laugh. That was hilarious. I assume he's okay now, if even a little skittish around elephants.
Nothing a good shower and about a thousand gallons of mouth wash won't cure.
| 57 |
Killgore Trout Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:08:01pm |
Koskidz have some nice zucchini recipes...
What's For Dinner v.5.4 - Zucchini
| 58 |
Mad Prophet Ludwig Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:08:10pm |
re: #48 Killgore Trout
I looked into solar panels again today. The technology isn't even close to being reasonable for the home owner yet. Takes about 20 years to pay for themselves and only have a 25 year life span. Bummer.
THat depends on which panels, and also many states have programs that will get your solar panels installed for free or near free.
In New Jersey, for example, between state and Federal funds, my sister had her house fully solarized- to the extent that it spends many days off grid - for free.
Mass and Pa have similar programs and the Federal one is nation wide.
| 60 |
Killgore Trout Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:10:37pm |
re: #58 LudwigVanQuixote
THat depends on which panels, and also many states have programs that will get your solar panels installed for free or near free.
In New Jersey, for example, between state and Federal funds, my sister had her house fully solarized- to the extent that it spends many days off grid - for free.
Mass and Pa have similar programs and the Federal one is nation wide.
Even with the subsidies (30% tax credit) it still doesn't make financial sense.
| 61 |
Mich-again Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:11:08pm |
re: #48 Killgore Trout
I looked into solar panels again today. The technology isn't even close to being reasonable for the home owner yet. Takes about 20 years to pay for themselves and only have a 25 year life span. Bummer.
One word of caution.. Check with the homeowners insurance for the rider and put that cost into the business case. Darn solar panels have a bit of a history of bursting into flames and the insurance companies have noticed.
| 62 |
Dark_Falcon Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:11:53pm |
re: #48 Killgore Trout
I looked into solar panels again today. The technology isn't even close to being reasonable for the home owner yet. Takes about 20 years to pay for themselves and only have a 25 year life span. Bummer.
Fuel Cells seem a better idea for places that are often cloudy or rainy. The Army is also rebuilding a pair of older M1A1 to test the use of Fuel cells in tanks. Naturally, the rebuild will also give them the newest fire control systems. Hopefully, it works well. If we could power our M1's that way, the Army would save on fuel costs and the operational ranges of ourt anks would be increased. It would also mean less CO2 getting pumped into the atmosphere, which would be a very good thing.
| 63 |
Killgore Trout Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:14:04pm |
re: #61 Mich-again
One word of caution.. Check with the homeowners insurance for the rider and put that cost into the business case. Darn solar panels have a bit of a history of bursting into flames and the insurance companies have noticed.
Yeah, that's another problem. A homeowner can install a panel or two just for fun but real systems require expensive professional installation. Very Dangerous.
| 64 |
allegro Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:14:45pm |
re: #48 Killgore Trout
I looked into solar panels again today. The technology isn't even close to being reasonable for the home owner yet. Takes about 20 years to pay for themselves and only have a 25 year life span. Bummer.
Have you taken into account the 30% no-limit tax credit?
| 65 |
Mad Prophet Ludwig Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:15:59pm |
re: #60 Killgore Trout
Even with the subsidies (30% tax credit) it still doesn't make financial sense.
Between state and federal programs, the entire house was solarized for free. I am talking about more than just the tax credit.
It does make sense for state and federal governments to do this because it takes tremendous strain off of the power grid. It is a win win win.
As to paying for themselves in 20 years, there are a lot of variables in such a calculation. Not every home is a good candidate for becoming solar. This is partially due to architecture and partially due to location and orientation of the roof.
Some homes pay for the installation in 5 years - particularly if they like to use a lot of AC in the summer.
| 66 |
What, me worry? Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:16:14pm |
re: #47 Jetpilot1101
It is becoming more and more apparent to me that the choices that will be offered in November on both sides are going to royaly suck. On one hand I've got a Congress, (Repub and Dem) spending like drunken sailors in Bangkok and on the other hand, I've got a bunch of loony candidates telling me they'll make it all better. I really would appreciate a sane individual taking a principled stand so I'd have someone to support.
See, I know lots of Democrats that don't suck. In fact, far from sucking, I like them a whole lot. U.S. Senator Bill Nelson. Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman-Schultz. Congressman Kendrick Meek. Lots more. Hopefully Alex Sink will become governor. All Floridians heh, but we have very good Dems here.
There's this fellow running to take Meek's seat when he leaves, Scott Galvin. I really like him just reading about him. He's getting popular, but it's a huge race for that seat, like 10 people.
Oh and he's out of the closet.
| 69 |
cliffster Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:17:54pm |
re: #51 Wayne A. Schneider
Thanks for the laugh. That was hilarious. I assume he's okay now, if even a little skittish around elephants.
| 71 |
Four More Tears Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:20:01pm |
| 72 |
karmic_inquisitor Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:20:56pm |
BTW -
On the subject of 'cracks" - re: #60 Killgore Trout
Even with the subsidies (30% tax credit) it still doesn't make financial sense.
FWIW I did it about 6 years ago.
My numbers made sense because my place was all electric and I was remodeling it and the cost of running gas into the kitchen was something I factored in. So as part of a complete remodel, it made sense to chuck the gas and simply stay all electric and get a new, high amperage cook top.
Another thing I factored into the numbers was inflation - I assumed that SDG&E would continue to ask for and get rate increases, which they have. My sunk cost remains the same so I a have a hedge of sorts against inflation.
Lastly, I am now off grid with the flip of a switch. Too bad I am not Glenn Beck or I could boast about my ability to outlast each of the four horsemen and cope with the imminent end times. But at least my house is lit and my servers run when there is a power outage or a wildfire.
| 73 |
Mich-again Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:21:05pm |
re: #63 Killgore Trout
Yeah, that's another problem. A homeowner can install a panel or two just for fun but real systems require expensive professional installation. Very Dangerous.
A lot of cities are realizing the building codes for the wiring are inadequate. I wouldn't be surprised if they went back and made people fix the problems in existing installations.
| 74 |
freetoken Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:21:20pm |
re: #65 LudwigVanQuixote
As to paying for themselves in 20 years, there are a lot of variables in such a calculation. Not every home is a good candidate for becoming solar. This is partially due to architecture and partially due to location and orientation of the roof.
The insolation in Portland would not make PV's a good idea, I would think. Passive solar for heating is probably a good idea, though, if it can be done without adding much cost to a house.
| 75 |
Wayne A. Schneider Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:22:49pm |
I still haven't figured out what useful purpose Coulter serves in our society, other than making herself the perfect subject of one of my song parodies (which I've already told you folks I write.)
Why is a group claiming it speaks for families promoting Hate of any kind? Does the AFA really think that homosexuals will "convert" enough straight people to bring about an end to humans? Or is Tony Perkins just afraid of someone shoving something into his pooper? (My own theory is that they don't fear gay men because they might get anally raped by them, but they fear that they might get anally raped by them and like it.)
And if promoting my own work on my blog is a no-no here at LGF, then I apologize. If not, I will try to say something related to the subject at hand while posting a link to my own blog. It's the least I can do. :)
| 77 |
Mad Prophet Ludwig Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:24:48pm |
OK everyone.. Time for Ludwig to go out, and dance a little! Have a great evening.
| 78 |
karmic_inquisitor Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:25:19pm |
re: #72 karmic_inquisitor
Whhoops - hey kt - I was starting a comment on the UCSD earthquake simmulation news today when I saw your post, so the "on the subject of cracks" preceded my hitting reply.
So I didn't mean to imply you are a "crack".
Sorry
| 79 |
Aceofwhat? Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:26:53pm |
re: #77 LudwigVanQuixote
OK everyone.. Time for Ludwig to go out, and dance a little! Have a great evening.
shake it, baby-
| 80 |
karmic_inquisitor Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:29:17pm |
OK - now - on the subject of cracks ....
This is very interesting to me and perhaps others:
LA JOLLA, Calif., Aug. 18 -- The University of California at San Diego issued the following news release: Seismologists have long been asking not if, but when 'The Big One' will strike southern California. Just how big will it be, and how will the amount of shaking vary throughout the region? Now we may be much closer to finding out the answer to at least the latter part of that question, and help prepare the Golden State's emergency response teams to better cope with such a potential disaster.
Researchers at the San Diego Supercomputer Center (SDSC) at the University of California, San Diego and San Diego State University (SDSU) have created the largest-ever simulation of a Magnitude 8.0 (M8) earthquake, primarily along the southern section of the San Andreas Fault. About 25 million people reside in that area, which extends as far south as Yuma, Arizona, and Ensenada, Mexico, and runs up through southern California to as far north as Fresno.
SDSC provided the high-performance computing (HPC) and scientific visualization expertise for the simulation, while the Southern California Earthquake Center (SCEC) at the University of Southern California (USC) was the lead coordinator in the project. The scientific details of the earthquake source were handled by researchers at San Diego State University (SDSU), and the Ohio State University (OSU) was also part of the collaborative effort.
The research was selected as a finalist for the Gordon Bell prize, awarded annually for outstanding achievement in high-performance computing applications at the annual Supercomputing Conference. This year's conference, called SC10 (Supercomputing 2010) will be held November 13-19 in New Orleans, Louisiana.
"This M8 simulation represents a milestone calculation, a breakthrough in seismology both in terms of computational size and scalability," said Yifeng Cui, a computational scientist at SDSC and lead author of Scalable Earthquake Simulation on Petascale Supercomputers. "It's also the largest and most detailed simulation of a major earthquake ever performed in terms of floating point operations, and opens up new territory for earthquake science and engineering with the goal of reducing the potential for loss of life and property." The simulation, funded through a number of National Science Foundation (NSF) grants, represents the latest in seismic science on several levels, as well as for computations at the petascale level, which refers to supercomputers capable of more than one quadrillion floating point operations, or calculations, per second.
I had read in a different article that there is a video that they produced of the different simulation scenarios showing the impacts of an 8.0 on different cities in So Cal. I have looked for that video but it doesn't seem to be posted anywhere - anyone seen it?
| 81 |
reine.de.tout Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:31:26pm |
re: #75 Wayne A. Schneider
The trying to be relevant thing is a good idea.
If posting to your own blog gets annoying, someone will tell you.
Otherwise . . . do whatcha think ya gotta do.
| 82 |
The Shadow Do Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:31:50pm |
Without taxpayer subsidy solar rarely if ever makes sense today. My son in law, the engineer, built a new home but waited until he had qualified for the limited availability of said subsidy (State) to install the system - which he is doing now. He lives in a solar friendly clime as well.
Home solar is simply is not presently affordable across the general population. Would you give a large tax credit to every buyer who purchases an electric or hybrid vehicle? Who would pay for that subsidy? How much damage would be done to the nations economy in such a scenario? The technology is not here yet.
| 83 |
What, me worry? Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:31:57pm |
| 84 |
karmic_inquisitor Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:32:56pm |
re: #74 freetoken
The insolation in Portland would not make PV's a good idea, I would think. Passive solar for heating is probably a good idea, though, if it can be done without adding much cost to a house.
Water heating is still viable for solar with a very quick payback for most scenarios. Problem is that there is maintenance involved which many end up not wanting to deal with.
| 85 |
freetoken Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:33:42pm |
re: #82 The Shadow Do
How much have we subsidized the oil and gas industry?
| 86 |
Dark_Falcon Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:33:49pm |
| 87 |
karmic_inquisitor Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:34:52pm |
re: #82 The Shadow Do
Without taxpayer subsidy solar rarely if ever makes sense today. My son in law, the engineer, built a new home but waited until he had qualified for the limited availability of said subsidy (State) to install the system - which he is doing now. He lives in a solar friendly clime as well.
Home solar is simply is not presently affordable across the general population. Would you give a large tax credit to every buyer who purchases an electric or hybrid vehicle? Who would pay for that subsidy? How much damage would be done to the nations economy in such a scenario? The technology is not here yet.
Another issue on tax credit based subsidies - if someone is not making enough money to itemize it rarely makes sense. So the subsidy usually goes to high income households because they are generally the ones able to use the credit.
If the credit were refundable then the numbers would change for a lot of people.
| 88 |
freetoken Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:35:16pm |
re: #84 karmic_inquisitor
Water heating is still viable for solar with a very quick payback for most scenarios. Problem is that there is maintenance involved which many end up not wanting to deal with.
Yeah, that's why I didn't mention solar thermal (heating of water/oil via sunlight) - I think for many people the idea of doing maintenance on yet another house hold item might be too much.
| 89 |
Obdicut Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:35:17pm |
re: #86 Dark_Falcon
[Link: weiner.house.gov...]
| 90 |
The Shadow Do Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:35:25pm |
re: #85 freetoken
How much have we subsidized the oil and gas industry?
Actually, that question should be turned around. How much has the oil and gas industry paid in taxes?
| 91 |
3eff Jeff Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:35:35pm |
re: #62 Dark_Falcon
Fuel Cells seem a better idea for places that are often cloudy or rainy. The Army is also rebuilding a pair of older M1A1 to test the use of Fuel cells in tanks. Naturally, the rebuild will also give them the newest fire control systems. Hopefully, it works well. If we could power our M1's that way, the Army would save on fuel costs and the operational ranges of ourt anks would be increased. It would also mean less CO2 getting pumped into the atmosphere, which would be a very good thing.
That should work great, actually. Fuel cells can run with up to 60-70% efficiency, and while hydrogen storage is a bit of an annoyance, a properly specified compressed H2 tank should work well. Also, the electric motors used for the drive system have exactly the right power and torque curves for a combat tank (full torque from zero RPM and laser level torque through most of the RPM range).
The other major problems with fuel cells aren't a big deal, because it's the military. I'm thinking primarily of the fuel distribution network issues (generating H2 and making it available at refueling station the below-average person can reasonably use).
Finally, there's some cool opportunities here. A next gen pebble bed reactor could be made small enough that you could package it up with a high-temperature high-efficiency electrolysis plant and drop ship it to a forward base with a ready water supply. No supply lines for your fuel. Normally, I'm an advocate for internal combustion and biofuels, but off the top of my head, hydrogen seems like it could be an excellent technology for the military.
| 92 |
What, me worry? Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:35:53pm |
re: #75 Wayne A. Schneider
I still haven't figured out what useful purpose Coulter serves in our society, other than making herself the perfect subject of one of my song parodies (which I've already told you folks I write.)
Why is a group claiming it speaks for families promoting Hate of any kind? Does the AFA really think that homosexuals will "convert" enough straight people to bring about an end to humans? Or is Tony Perkins just afraid of someone shoving something into his pooper? (My own theory is that they don't fear gay men because they might get anally raped by them, but they fear that they might get anally raped by them and like it.)
And if promoting my own work on my blog is a no-no here at LGF, then I apologize. If not, I will try to say something related to the subject at hand while posting a link to my own blog. It's the least I can do. :)
How much you wanna bet an Ann Coulter sex tape surfaces one of these days!
| 93 |
freetoken Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:36:03pm |
re: #90 The Shadow Do
Actually, that question should be turned around. How much has the oil and gas industry paid in taxes?
Why?
| 94 |
Idle Drifter Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:36:38pm |
Ron White--Do you like porn?
| 95 |
Wayne A. Schneider Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:36:47pm |
re: #82 The Shadow Do
Would you give a large tax credit to every buyer who purchases an electric or hybrid vehicle?
Why not? We already tried giving tax credits to people driving gas-guzzling SUVs.
| 96 |
Obdicut Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:37:01pm |
re: #90 The Shadow Do
Actually, that question should be turned around. How much has the oil and gas industry paid in taxes?
No, it really shouldn't be turned around.
We've provided huge subsidies to the energy industries. Huge.
| 97 |
Killgore Trout Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:37:50pm |
re: #87 karmic_inquisitor
Another issue on tax credit based subsidies - if someone is not making enough money to itemize it rarely makes sense. So the subsidy usually goes to high income households because they are generally the ones able to use the credit.
If the credit were refundable then the numbers would change for a lot of people.
Yeah, that's my issue. I'm low income and self employed so the Tax Credits won't do me much good. Even if there was a flat out cash subsidy it would have to be around 50% for it to make financial sense for me.
The technology just isn't there yet. Hopefully soon but it's just not economical at this point.
| 98 |
Aceofwhat? Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:39:26pm |
re: #92 marjoriemoon
How much you wanna bet an Ann Coulter sex tape surfaces one of these days!
if it does, i will not be watching it...
| 99 |
Wayne A. Schneider Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:39:42pm |
re: #92 marjoriemoon
How much you wanna bet an Ann Coulter sex tape surfaces one of these days!
But to whom would that be appealing? Gay men or straight men?
| 100 |
What, me worry? Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:39:54pm |
re: #98 Aceofwhat?
if it does, i will not be watching it...
Oh I'll watch it! And I'll laugh and laugh!
| 101 |
Obdicut Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:40:24pm |
re: #97 Killgore Trout
Solar really makes more sense as a large-scale deployment in high sunshine areas, than it does for personal use, I think. With the current technology, anyway. It'll take awhile for it to mature enough to be very viable for personal stuff.
Some friends of mine have a company working on it, specifically, working on software allowing anyone in the world to do the math on whether or not it is cost-effective for them, based on real sunlight data including albedo. It's pretty snazzy-- it figures out the optimal orientation for you, the advantage in a motorized system, etc.
| 102 |
cliffster Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:40:41pm |
re: #98 Aceofwhat?
if it does, i will not be watching it...
I will. Just being honest.
you would too, you lying sombich..
| 103 |
TedStriker Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:41:02pm |
re: #92 marjoriemoon
How much you wanna bet an Ann Coulter sex tape surfaces one of these days!
If so, it'd be funny if she does a Paris Hilton and fall asleep mid-session...
| 104 |
Killgore Trout Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:41:12pm |
I bought some of those cheap solar garden lights a few weeks ago. I paid about 2 bucks per light. They charge a AA battery and shine an LED light all night long. The technology is getting close.
| 106 |
reine.de.tout Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:42:48pm |
re: #104 Killgore Trout
I bought some of those cheap solar garden lights a few weeks ago. I paid about 2 bucks per light. They charge a AA battery and shine an LED light all night long. The technology is getting close.
I got some a few years ago, that did NOT work after about a week.
I've seen the ones you're talking about and thought I might try them again. They work OK?
| 107 |
3eff Jeff Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:43:01pm |
re: #102 cliffster
I will. Just being honest.
you would too, you lying sombich..
Oh hell no. She's made herself ugly enough with clothes on.
| 108 |
Dancing along the light of day Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:44:14pm |
re: #2 LudwigVanQuixote
There is enough sanity left in this world.
It just doesn't show in the press.
*waves*
| 109 |
Aceofwhat? Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:44:14pm |
| 110 |
What, me worry? Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:45:01pm |
re: #103 talon_262
If so, it'd be funny if she does a Paris Hilton and fall asleep mid-session...
hehehe I was gonna say, I'm a straight white woman and I would love to see it. What does that mean?
| 111 |
Killgore Trout Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:45:52pm |
re: #106 reine.de.tout
I got some a few years ago, that did NOT work after about a week.
I've seen the ones you're talking about and thought I might try them again. They work OK?
I'm surprised how well they work. The packaging says they'll work up to six hours but mine stay lit all night long. They get a little dim just before dawn but they're still on. The frogs love them. I think they hang out by them because the light attracts bugs.
Buy a few and try them out. They're dirt cheap.
| 112 |
What, me worry? Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:45:53pm |
| 113 |
cliffster Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:46:18pm |
re: #105 The Shadow Do
Good stuff. Oklahoma in particular cracks me up. Ton of oil there, and they fucking soak the people who pull it out. Plus, every major highway there it seems is a tollway. And I think they have an income tax too. wtf, you say? It's a shit place to live, they gotta make their money somehow...
| 114 |
Aceofwhat? Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:46:22pm |
re: #102 cliffster
I will. Just being honest.
you would too, you lying sombich..
nope. she's all knees, nose and trachea. it'd be like watching a crab do porn/
| 115 |
karmic_inquisitor Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:46:36pm |
re: #88 freetoken
Yeah, that's why I didn't mention solar thermal (heating of water/oil via sunlight) - I think for many people the idea of doing maintenance on yet another house hold item might be too much.
It is a no brainer for pool heating since the pool pumps have to be maintained anyway.
| 116 |
reine.de.tout Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:46:48pm |
re: #105 The Shadow Do
Oil & gas industry contributions to Louisiana economy (not FROM, as in subsidies).
What is the overall impact of the Oil and Gas Industry in Louisiana?
Oil and gas production directly and indirectly supported $12.7 billion in household earnings in the state, representing 15.4 percent of total Louisiana household earnings in 2005;
The industry supported, directly and indirectly, more than 320,000 jobs and $70.2 billion in business sale in Louisiana in 2005;
In 2006, more than 58,000 Louisianans worked in extraction, pipeline and refining jobs.
How much does the oil and gas industry contribute to Louisiana's state revenues?
For the 2006 fiscal year, the oil and gas industry paid more than 14 percent of total state taxes, licenses and fees collected by the state of Louisiana;
This revenue amounts to more than $1.4 billion - a substantial portion of Louisiana's budget;
Because this sector generated $12.7 billion in Louisiana household earnings, state government collected more than $890 million in related taxes in the 2006 fiscal year.
How much does the oil and gas industry contribute to local government revenues in Louisiana?
Using conservative estimates, the oil and gas industry paid more than $172 million in ad valorem taxes to local governments in Louisiana in 2005;
In 31 of Louisiana's 64 parishes, these taxes exceeded $1 million and in 12 Louisiana parishes they exceeded $5 million;
Because this sector generated $12.7 billion in household earnings, more than a half billion dollars ($560 million) was added to the treasuries of local governments in the 2006 fiscal year.
| 117 |
cliffster Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:47:09pm |
re: #114 Aceofwhat?
nope. she's all knees, nose and trachea. it'd be like watching a crab do porn/
she looks sexy holding a gun
| 118 |
Obdicut Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:47:16pm |
re: #113 cliffster
I'm confused. Is there some reason why they shouldn't be taxed, especially since, you know, they make their money from a naturally occurring resource which belongs to the nation at large?
What am I missing here?
| 119 |
The Shadow Do Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:47:26pm |
re: #96 Obdicut
No, it really shouldn't be turned around.
We've provided huge subsidies to the energy industries. Huge.
Is it your contention that the Fed subsidizes domestic E&P? Possible I suppose but a link would be helpful.
| 120 |
reine.de.tout Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:47:52pm |
re: #116 reine.de.tout
| 121 |
3eff Jeff Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:48:06pm |
re: #110 marjoriemoon
hehehe I was gonna say, I'm a straight white woman and I would love to see it. What does that mean?
Well, the AFA seems to think your thoughts on the sexuality Alimentary Canal are most important to your moral standing.
/I don't actually want to know...
| 122 |
Dark_Falcon Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:48:49pm |
re: #89 Obdicut
[Link: weiner.house.gov...]
I cheer Congressman Weiner for that. He understands the threat posed by Radical Islamist haters without being crazy about it.
| 123 |
Obdicut Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:48:59pm |
re: #119 The Shadow Do
Is it your contention that the Fed subsidizes domestic E&P? Possible I suppose but a link would be helpful.
Oh geez.
[Link: www.ucsusa.org...]
And a balanced view:
[Link: cleantech.com...]
| 124 |
Fat Bastard Vegetarian Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:49:22pm |
Well... I thought it was funny.
| 125 |
cliffster Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:49:52pm |
re: #118 Obdicut
What am I missing here?
Reasonableness. It's not the tax, although that's dubious at best. It's the rate. Oklahoma taxes. A lot. Other states get by, and they aren't sitting on an ocean of oil. How? It doesn't suck as much to live in those other states ;)
| 126 |
The Shadow Do Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:49:55pm |
re: #116 reine.de.tout
Perhaps I am misunderstood. My point exactly. O&G is a big source of revenue. "New" energy sources only come with a cost by contrast.
| 127 |
Stanghazi Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:50:10pm |
re: #65 LudwigVanQuixote
Between state and federal programs, the entire house was solarized for free. I am talking about more than just the tax credit.
It does make sense for state and federal governments to do this because it takes tremendous strain off of the power grid. It is a win win win.
As to paying for themselves in 20 years, there are a lot of variables in such a calculation. Not every home is a good candidate for becoming solar. This is partially due to architecture and partially due to location and orientation of the roof.
Some homes pay for the installation in 5 years - particularly if they like to use a lot of AC in the summer.
I have friends, lucky enough to have a rental. Southern California. They paid for the solar panels. The meter does run backwards. They cannot recoup yet, but they are green, and THEY ARE HAPPY. (so are their tenants)
| 129 |
Aceofwhat? Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:50:26pm |
| 130 |
freetoken Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:50:34pm |
re: #105 The Shadow Do
Here's the problem with your approach: it can be applied to any industry/interest that gets subsidies.
For example, agriculture. Ag gets subsidized big time (farmers and companies). Yet because they pay tax then, according to your argument, subsidies are fine.
We can go down the entire list of subsidies and do this.
Which is my point: subsidies are simply choices we make on how we want to live our collective lives.
Yes, choices.
Yet a big problem remains - inevitably the larger interests/corporations pull the greater weight in the centers of government and thus can easily destroy the idea of a "level playing field".
IMO the choice of the US to continue to design the lifestyles of this country around the use of oil is one fraught with numerous problems and potential disasters.
| 131 |
Dark_Falcon Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:50:58pm |
re: #91 3eff Jeff
That should work great, actually. Fuel cells can run with up to 60-70% efficiency, and while hydrogen storage is a bit of an annoyance, a properly specified compressed H2 tank should work well. Also, the electric motors used for the drive system have exactly the right power and torque curves for a combat tank (full torque from zero RPM and laser level torque through most of the RPM range).
The other major problems with fuel cells aren't a big deal, because it's the military. I'm thinking primarily of the fuel distribution network issues (generating H2 and making it available at refueling station the below-average person can reasonably use).
Finally, there's some cool opportunities here. A next gen pebble bed reactor could be made small enough that you could package it up with a high-temperature high-efficiency electrolysis plant and drop ship it to a forward base with a ready water supply. No supply lines for your fuel. Normally, I'm an advocate for internal combustion and biofuels, but off the top of my head, hydrogen seems like it could be an excellent technology for the military.
Thanks for that info. I hope the project succeeds. It could be a major step forwards.
| 132 |
Obdicut Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:51:15pm |
re: #125 cliffster
Reasonableness. It's not the tax, although that's dubious at best. It's the rate. Oklahoma taxes. A lot. Other states get by, and they aren't sitting on an ocean of oil. How? It doesn't suck as much to live in those other states ;)
Why is the tax dubious at best?
I'm not getting the bit about a higher tax because Oklahoma sucks more-- is this like the Alaska thing where you get paid from oil revenue because you live in the state?
| 133 |
3eff Jeff Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:51:41pm |
re: #129 Aceofwhat?
i laughed.
You people are sick and wrong for laughing at the desecration of a beloved childrens' movie.
/I laughed too. It's hilarious.
| 134 |
reine.de.tout Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:52:05pm |
re: #126 The Shadow Do
Perhaps I am misunderstood. My point exactly. O&G is a big source of revenue. "New" energy sources only come with a cost by contrast.
Sorry if I wasn't clear.
I was trying to support what you were saying with additional info.
In some links here, I've seen it claimed that government "subsidizes" the industry because of "preferential" tax rates. Imposing a lower rate of tax is NOT a subsidy.
| 135 |
cliffster Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:52:08pm |
re: #132 Obdicut
Why is the tax dubious at best?
I'm not getting the bit about a higher tax because Oklahoma sucks more-- is this like the Alaska thing where you get paid from oil revenue because you live in the state?
nope, not like that at all.
| 136 |
Aceofwhat? Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:52:25pm |
re: #133 3eff Jeff
You people are sick and wrong for laughing at the desecration of a beloved childrens' movie.
/I laughed too. It's hilarious.
that, and i fully cop to not being healthy or quite right in the head...i mean, look at my avatar...
| 137 |
3eff Jeff Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:53:03pm |
re: #131 Dark_Falcon
Thanks for that info. I hope the project succeeds. It could be a major step forwards.
I was largely speculating based on other knowledge. The efficiency stuff should be bang on, and the nuke reactor was an off-the-top-of-my-head idea for using this for better logistics.
| 138 |
Idle Drifter Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:53:04pm |
re: #124 Fat Bastard Vegetarian
So that was the Scarecrow getting off the bloody elevator.
| 139 |
cliffster Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:53:23pm |
re: #136 Aceofwhat?
I just looked. Never did before, I guess. stay away from my kids
| 140 |
Aceofwhat? Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:54:15pm |
re: #139 cliffster
I just looked. Never did before, I guess. stay away from my kids
i barely have enough time to raise mine right...i'm not looking after yours/
| 141 |
Obdicut Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:54:24pm |
re: #134 reine.de.tout
In some links here, I've seen it claimed that government "subsidizes" the industry because of "preferential" tax rates. Imposing a lower rate of tax is NOT a subsidy.
Actually, it is, Reine. Subsidies can take the form of tax breaks. That's an indirect subsidy; it's still a subsidy.
| 142 |
Lidane Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:54:55pm |
I've never, ever understood why gays are such a threat to anyone. It makes no damned sense.
On the other hand, watching the wingnuts turn on each other is always entertaining. I hope they keep doing it.
| 143 |
What, me worry? Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:55:35pm |
re: #121 3eff Jeff
Well, the AFA seems to think your thoughts on the sexuality Alimentary Canal are most important to your moral standing.
/I don't actually want to know...
Well actually the alimentary canal is the whole system from mouth to bum. It's called "The Digestive System".
Oh and what we could do with that.
| 144 |
Obdicut Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:55:37pm |
| 145 |
Nervous Norvous Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:56:54pm |
re: #143 marjoriemoon
Well actually the alimentary canal is the whole system from mouth to bum. It's called "The Digestive System".
Oh and what we could do with that.
Ailimentary my dear Watson
| 146 |
Nervous Norvous Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:57:19pm |
| 147 |
Dancing along the light of day Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:57:23pm |
re: #104 Killgore Trout
I bought some of those cheap solar garden lights a few weeks ago. I paid about 2 bucks per light. They charge a AA battery and shine an LED light all night long. The technology is getting close.
Bugs for frogs?
LOL!
Cheap feeders!
*waves*
| 148 |
The Shadow Do Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:57:24pm |
re: #123 Obdicut
* reduced corporate income taxes for the oil industry
* lower than average sales taxes on gasoline
* government funding of programs that primarily benefit the oil industry and motorists
* "hidden" environmental costs caused by motor vehicles, namely air, water, and noise pollution
Trust me, energy contributes a hell of a lot more $ than they take away in some oddball pseudo-economic stretch as taken from your first article. These are pejoratives, not economic facts.
But go ahead with the Big Oil is bad thing. It only provides your entire standard of living - assuming you don't reside in a tepee.
| 149 |
austin_blue Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:57:46pm |
re: #18 Jetpilot1101
I'm a fiscal conservative who has no problem with gay people at all. I'm still trying to find which camp I belong in and haven't found one yet.
Can he or she fly the aircraft? Do they understand that airspeed is their friend? Do they grok that the runway behind them and the sky above them don't really matter? Are they attentive to needle-ball-ripcord?
Then I really don't care with whom they have sex.
| 150 |
reine.de.tout Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:57:50pm |
re: #141 Obdicut
Actually, it is, Reine. Subsidies can take the form of tax breaks. That's an indirect subsidy; it's still a subsidy.
A break on an existing tax rate, could be considered a subsidy.
A lower tax rate to begin with is simply - a lower tax rate. It's NOT a subsidy.
It comes back to people, anyhow, in the form of jobs and income. Look at the info. I posted about Louisiana, and see how many households are supported, directly and indirectly, by the oil industry.
| 151 |
karmic_inquisitor Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:57:56pm |
re: #97 Killgore Trout
Yeah, that's my issue. I'm low income and self employed so the Tax Credits won't do me much good. Even if there was a flat out cash subsidy it would have to be around 50% for it to make financial sense for me.
The technology just isn't there yet. Hopefully soon but it's just not economical at this point.
Have you looked into a lease? There are companies that do the installation and own the equipment and lease the system to you. You pay the lease and any residual on the electric bill (they have no incentive to oversupply the house).
This is an interesting model because the solar company turns around and sells the paper immediately along with the tax credits. so there is a market for this paper. And the credit gets bought by someone who can use it.
Here is a link to a company that does it but it is by no means an endorsement of the company or the idea - there is obviously margin for the salesman. But it is something to look into if you haven't.
[Link: www.solarcity.com...]
| 152 |
sagehen Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:58:34pm |
re: #3 Conservative Moonbat
I always figured this is where the rift between the socons and the ficons would start.
And here I thought the schism would be between those who think the greatest threat to America is sexual deviants, and those who think the greatest threat to America is swarthy immigrants (who probably pray wrong).
So I guess those two groups are still allied?
| 153 |
Aceofwhat? Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:58:49pm |
re: #141 Obdicut
Actually, it is, Reine. Subsidies can take the form of tax breaks. That's an indirect subsidy; it's still a subsidy.
technically, you're right. however, there is a substantive difference between a partial tax benefit and an outright payment subsidy.
for example, indirect subsidies are granted for all sorts of reasons (e.g. "please put your headquarters in my state, i'll give you a tax break). however, because we generally dislike the energy industry, we tend to add up all of the subsidies and say "look, we subsidize these creeps".
with indirect subsidies, it's never that simple.
| 154 |
cliffster Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:58:52pm |
re: #150 reine.de.tout
taking less money from you is not "giving you money", it's "taking less money from you".
| 155 |
Obdicut Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:59:08pm |
re: #148 The Shadow Do
Trust me, energy contributes a hell of a lot more $ than they take away in some oddball pseudo-economic stretch as taken from your first article.
What the fuck, dude? I didn't say that they didn't 'contribute' more than they took away, so why the hell are you claiming I did?
But go ahead with the Big Oil is bad thing. It only provides your entire standard of living - assuming you don't reside in a tepee.
If this is your level of argument, I'm not really inclined to discuss anything further with you.
Weaksauce.
| 156 |
reine.de.tout Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:59:14pm |
re: #111 Killgore Trout
I'm surprised how well they work. The packaging says they'll work up to six hours but mine stay lit all night long. They get a little dim just before dawn but they're still on. The frogs love them. I think they hang out by them because the light attracts bugs.
Buy a few and try them out. They're dirt cheap.
I'm gonna do it next week. I've been thinking about it for a couple of weeks now; so it's time. Thanks for the info!
| 157 |
Nervous Norvous Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:59:27pm |
re: #150 reine.de.tout
A break on an existing tax rate, could be considered a subsidy.
A lower tax rate to begin with is simply - a lower tax rate. It's NOT a subsidy.
It comes back to people, anyhow, in the form of jobs and income. Look at the info. I posted about Louisiana, and see how many households are supported, directly and indirectly, by the oil industry.
That's assuming that the lower tax rate doesn't have to be made up elsewhere. The jobs and income don't always materialize, in which case, everybody else's taxes go up to subsidize the company that got the tax break whether it's on top of a current rate or low in the first place.
| 158 |
reine.de.tout Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:59:34pm |
re: #154 cliffster
taking less money from you is not "giving you money", it's "taking less money from you".
Well, yeah.
duh.
That's exactly right.
| 159 |
cliffster Sat, Aug 21, 2010 7:59:51pm |
re: #144 Obdicut
Okay. Well, I'm confused.
You mentioned that once before. Must be the Heffvision ;)
| 160 |
cliffster Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:01:31pm |
| 161 |
reine.de.tout Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:01:31pm |
re: #157 PT Barnum
That's assuming that the lower tax rate doesn't have to be made up elsewhere. The jobs and income don't always materialize, in which case, everybody else's taxes go up to subsidize the company that got the tax break whether it's on top of a current rate or low in the first place.
Well, here's how it works here:
Because this sector generated $12.7 billion in Louisiana household earnings, state government collected more than $890 million in related taxes in the 2006 fiscal year.
Because this sector generated $12.7 billion in household earnings, more than a half billion dollars ($560 million) was added to the treasuries of local governments in the 2006 fiscal year.
That's income to the state and local jurisdictions resulting from employment.
| 162 |
sagehen Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:01:45pm |
re: #27 3eff Jeff
I tend to the fiscal conservative end as well (but with enough nuance that I am not a libertarian), and I'm strongly socially liberal. I've got my fingers crossed for the Whigs taking the baton for the next century. The US History geek in me loves the idea.
Not that they've actually balanced the budget, but the Dems did pass PAYGO (on a strict party-line vote with zero Republican support).
There'd actually been PAYGO during more than half of the Clinton administration, but Congress let it expire during the Bush years (because otherwise they couldn't have done Medicare D).
| 163 |
elbruce Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:01:59pm |
re: #148 The Shadow Do
Trust me, energy contributes a hell of a lot more $ than they take away in some oddball pseudo-economic stretch as taken from your first article.
Are you counting these "contributions" as including all economic activity to the GDP (jobs, etc) or taxation only? The former doesn't count as a counterargument to government subsidies.
re: #148 The Shadow Do
But go ahead with the Big Oil is bad thing. It only provides your entire standard of living - assuming you don't reside in a tepee.
I don't think it's at all hypocritical to say that we should start trying to get our energy from elsewhere.
| 164 |
Obdicut Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:02:24pm |
re: #150 reine.de.tout
I'm really not understanding, this, Reine. I'm not just talking about a 'lower tax rate'. I'm talking about many other subsidies, from guaranteed loans, to federal insurance programs, to the federal government shouldering the cost for a lot of the environmental damage from the oil companies.
I'm not saying anything in the least bit controversial. We've subsidized the energy industry. I am not making the claim that we've subsidized them to a greater degree than we've collected taxes from them-- though the true economic cost of burning coal and oil is, with AGW unchecked, an unknown, that's not really an original fault of the oil or gas companies. It's the whole society's regard.
I'm not sure what it is I'm saying you actually have a problem with.
| 165 |
Nervous Norvous Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:02:36pm |
| 166 |
windsagio Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:02:42pm |
re: #161 reine.de.tout
That just says that in this case its worth it to them to lower taxes to encourage more of the business.
...
Which is what subsidies are for >>
| 168 |
windsagio Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:03:32pm |
re: #164 Obdicut
I think the problem, honestly, is that 'subsidies' is a bad word to people.
| 169 |
Obdicut Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:03:49pm |
re: #158 reine.de.tout
Well, yeah.
duh.
That's exactly right.
If you owe me $1000, and I tell you that I'm forgiving you $200 of it, I really am giving you money by doing so.
Taxes are real obligations. Tax breaks really are relief from actual fiscal obligations.
| 170 |
Killgore Trout Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:03:51pm |
re: #151 karmic_inquisitor
Have you looked into a lease?
I did notice lease options in my searches today but I ignored it. Leases are scams (to my thinking) because car leases are such a scam. I just don't dig the whole concept.
| 171 |
cliffster Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:04:33pm |
re: #165 PT Barnum
I'm sorry..but you need more intestinal fortitude.
my intestines could kick your intestines' ass
| 172 |
Idle Drifter Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:04:33pm |
A tax cut means you keep your money without some dudes and dudets deciding by committee to give you back some of the money they took from you in the first place. How much money do we save by cutting out the middleman?
| 173 |
Nervous Norvous Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:04:44pm |
re: #166 windsagio
That just says that in this case its worth it to them to lower taxes to encourage more of the business.
...
Which is what subsidies are for >>
Doesn't it all come down to whether the benefits gained by providing subsidies (in whatever form) are more than the total costs of the industry (economic, environmental, societal)?
If not then it's not worth it. However, people rarely look beyond the immediate effects.
| 174 |
reine.de.tout Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:05:11pm |
re: #153 Aceofwhat?
technically, you're right. however, there is a substantive difference between a partial tax benefit and an outright payment subsidy.
for example, indirect subsidies are granted for all sorts of reasons (e.g. "please put your headquarters in my state, i'll give you a tax break). however, because we generally dislike the energy industry, we tend to add up all of the subsidies and say "look, we subsidize these creeps".
with indirect subsidies, it's never that simple.
Louisiana is on a program to attract the film industry to film movies here. They do it by granting "tax credits" to the production companies - some sort of program where these can be "traded" or whatever, I'm not certain of the exact details of how it works.
At any given time, there are 3 or 4 or more movies being filmed in Louisiana. With crews. Needing food, lodging, peripheral services. People here in Baton Rouge have built and are adding onto a movie set (a new business - that hires people with families to feed).
Tax "credits", tax "subsidies", and just plain reduced rates, WORK to move money into the hands of people.
| 175 |
windsagio Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:05:35pm |
re: #173 PT Barnum
Not at all talking about whether they're justified or not, that's a big toughie.
More aiming at the denial that they're subsidies at all.
| 176 |
Nervous Norvous Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:05:39pm |
re: #171 cliffster
my intestines could kick your intestines' ass
You might think you killed 'em but you will only have rectum.
| 177 |
elbruce Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:05:59pm |
re: #154 cliffster
taking less money from you is not "giving you money", it's "taking less money from you".
If I take substantially less money from you than I take from everybody else, then yeah, you're getting a break. And they're paying for it.
| 178 |
Dancing along the light of day Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:06:03pm |
| 179 |
Obdicut Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:06:11pm |
re: #172 Idle Drifter
The money itself, of course, only exists and is worth anything because of those 'dudes and dudettes' in the government in the first place.
We shouldn't forget that. We have one of the best governments on the planet, and one of the most stable currencies. It's provided all of us with a huge amount of comfort in our lives. That stability comes from the hard work of all of us, but it also comes from the excellent structure of our government, and, believe it or not, some pretty wise governance over the years.
| 180 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:06:12pm |
re: #17 Stanley Sea
Sorry, talking to the youth today (and us liberal minded folk)
This is a joke of an issue. It will end.
Sexuality now a days:
wanted, not defined.
cheers :D
| 181 |
Dark_Falcon Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:06:33pm |
re: #166 windsagio
That just says that in this case its worth it to them to lower taxes to encourage more of the business.
...
Which is what subsidies are for >>
Yes, but lower taxes are much better than subsidies whenever possible. They let they person or business keep more of their money, whereas a subsidy involves the government dolling the money out. This rule doesn't work in all cases, but it does work in the great majority of them.
| 182 |
Dancing along the light of day Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:06:33pm |
re: #170 Killgore Trout
I did notice lease options in my searches today but I ignored it. Leases are scams (to my thinking) because car leases are such a scam. I just don't dig the whole concept.
And, rightly so!
| 183 |
3eff Jeff Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:07:16pm |
re: #162 sagehen
Not that they've actually balanced the budget, but the Dems did pass PAYGO (on a strict party-line vote with zero Republican support).
There'd actually been PAYGO during more than half of the Clinton administration, but Congress let it expire during the Bush years (because otherwise they couldn't have done Medicare D).
The only time the budget has been balanced in my lifetime was under Clinton. I vote for democrats often enough, but I have my reservations about the party as a whole. I'm actually pretty happy with Obama, and have every intention of voting for him again in 2012.
| 184 |
Dark_Falcon Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:07:35pm |
| 185 |
windsagio Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:07:38pm |
re: #181 Dark_Falcon
That's a political/economic hteory thing, and aside from whether tax-cuts are subsidies or not.
The problem here seems to be that tax cuts are good, and subsidies are bad.
| 186 |
webevintage Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:07:39pm |
re: #111 Killgore Trout
I'm surprised how well they work. The packaging says they'll work up to six hours but mine stay lit all night long. They get a little dim just before dawn but they're still on. The frogs love them. I think they hang out by them because the light attracts bugs.
Buy a few and try them out. They're dirt cheap.
I got some in the spring and they worked great until the trees leafed out...
Forgot all about the fact that the front of my house is all shaded.
They still work to mark out the sidewalk, but it is a dim light.
| 187 |
Dancing along the light of day Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:08:09pm |
re: #174 reine.de.tout
LA is very agressive with their "tax cuts" for films.
Don't get me started on the permit process.
I can rant all night!
| 188 |
cliffster Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:08:19pm |
re: #177 elbruce
If I take substantially less money from you than I take from everybody else, then yeah, you're getting a break. And they're paying for it.
really? So any amount of money that I actually get to keep, you are paying for? Thanks, elbruce, very nice of you.
| 189 |
What, me worry? Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:08:26pm |
re: #176 PT Barnum
You might think you killed 'em but you will only have rectum.
lol I think you won.
Btw, I haven't logged on yet. Don't hate me.
| 190 |
justaminute Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:08:34pm |
o/t We received a call from our largest food supplier today, Sysco, who sell to a restaurants nationwide, asking if we buy eggs from them. No we don't.
But it seems their very concerned with their egg supply. If you're going out for breakfast Sunday morning or later tonight, try and stay away from over easy eggs. This should just last a day or two, I hope.
| 191 |
Obdicut Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:08:43pm |
re: #181 Dark_Falcon
Lower taxes are a subsidy. You can choose not to call it a subsidy, but tax breaks are a form of indirect subsidy.
If you just don't like calling them subsidies, that's okay, but it's going to confuse a lot of people who are used to calling it subsidies.
Hell, it was good for us to subsidize the oil and gas industry. I'm glad we did it.
| 192 |
The Shadow Do Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:08:44pm |
My apologies for any and all posts made by me this evening. I am neither reading nor writing with any lucidity. I am not very good on a good day and this is not a good day.
My bride of 28 years has informed me she is leaving me. I have no business communicating with anyone at this time.
Goodnight.
| 193 |
karmic_inquisitor Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:08:52pm |
re: #170 Killgore Trout
I did notice lease options in my searches today but I ignored it. Leases are scams (to my thinking) because car leases are such a scam. I just don't dig the whole concept.
Well the market exists for the paper. I have no idea whether there is a sort of person-to-person market for this kind of instrument like there actually is on mortgages, but you may be able to find one. Now that I am thinking about it, I am going to start looking into it too. If it doesn't exist it might be worth setting up one.
| 194 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:09:01pm |
re: #188 cliffster
really? So any amount of money that I actually get to keep, you are paying for? Thanks, elbruce, very nice of you.
way to intentionally miss his point
| 195 |
reine.de.tout Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:09:49pm |
re: #164 Obdicut
I'm really not understanding, this, Reine. I'm not just talking about a 'lower tax rate'. I'm talking about many other subsidies, from guaranteed loans, to federal insurance programs, to the federal government shouldering the cost for a lot of the environmental damage from the oil companies.
I'm not saying anything in the least bit controversial. We've subsidized the energy industry. I am not making the claim that we've subsidized them to a greater degree than we've collected taxes from them-- though the true economic cost of burning coal and oil is, with AGW unchecked, an unknown, that's not really an original fault of the oil or gas companies. It's the whole society's regard.
I'm not sure what it is I'm saying you actually have a problem with.
By law, BP is responsible for the clean-up of the environment. I posted a page the other day, an interview with Thad Allen, about how he can work with BP, and how BP has been writing WEEKLY checks to cover costs.
What I have a problem with is this:
Calling something a "subsidy", when it is nothing more than an established tax rate that happens to be lower.
Some people in this country are taxed at a higher rate than others.
Does that mean the folks being taxed at a lower rate are being "subsidized"? I don't think so. It just means they are taxed at a lower rate.
Now, subsidies would seem to be where the Gov't gives money to something for nothing - like paying farmers to leave fields idle.
"Tax breaks" are just that - breaks, not subsidies.
The use of the term 'subsidy" to describe a process where government takes less from you than they do from someone else is just - odd, and well, it annoys me.
| 196 |
Killgore Trout Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:10:00pm |
BTW, It's probably about time for gardening lizards to start their winter veg gardens. I'll try to put up a page later this week of winter garden tips.
| 197 |
cliffster Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:10:01pm |
re: #176 PT Barnum
You might think you killed 'em but you will only have rectum.
I'd show you what's up if instead of these old knees, I had kidneys
| 198 |
Obdicut Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:10:05pm |
| 199 |
Nervous Norvous Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:10:30pm |
re: #189 marjoriemoon
lol I think you won.
Btw, I haven't logged on yet. Don't hate me.
Don't worry about it...let me know when you have a chance via email and we'll set up a time to play.
| 200 |
Killgore Trout Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:10:38pm |
re: #192 The Shadow Do
Bummer. Sorry to hear that.
| 201 |
cliffster Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:10:41pm |
| 202 |
Nervous Norvous Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:11:06pm |
re: #192 The Shadow Do
My apologies for any and all posts made by me this evening. I am neither reading nor writing with any lucidity. I am not very good on a good day and this is not a good day.
My bride of 28 years has informed me she is leaving me. I have no business communicating with anyone at this time.
Goodnight.
Sorry to hear it guy...been there..not any fun at all.
| 203 |
reine.de.tout Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:11:25pm |
re: #173 PT Barnum
Doesn't it all come down to whether the benefits gained by providing subsidies (in whatever form) are more than the total costs of the industry (economic, environmental, societal)?
If not then it's not worth it. However, people rarely look beyond the immediate effects.
You're correct.
And what I'm saying, is that in the case of the oil & gas industry, there are huge benefits to the states and local communities from the oil and gas industry that exceed the benefit of collecting more directly from the oil & gas industry.
| 204 |
Dancing along the light of day Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:11:38pm |
re: #192 The Shadow Do
Best wishes for you both.
I don't know what else to say.
Regards, and be well.
| 205 |
Nervous Norvous Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:11:47pm |
re: #201 cliffster
way to intentionally miss my point
way to intentionally miss my point
(I don't have a point, really, just wanted to throw that out there.
| 206 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:12:09pm |
re: #201 cliffster
way to intentionally miss my point
Your point isn't an intellectual point, it's an ideological talking point. Big difference there.
| 207 |
cliffster Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:12:23pm |
re: #196 Killgore Trout
BTW, It's probably about time for gardening lizards to start their winter veg gardens. I'll try to put up a page later this week of winter garden tips.
winter means cucumbers out the ass here in texas. (That's different from, you know, cucumbers IN.. never mind). And broccoli. I'm going to try and get some tomatoes this winter. I know people who get it done, but I haven't been able to do it.
| 208 |
3eff Jeff Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:12:24pm |
re: #192 The Shadow Do
Damn. Sorry to hear that, I hope the wind starts blowing better for you soon. Take care of yourself in the meantime.
| 209 |
reine.de.tout Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:12:25pm |
re: #192 The Shadow Do
My apologies for any and all posts made by me this evening. I am neither reading nor writing with any lucidity. I am not very good on a good day and this is not a good day.
My bride of 28 years has informed me she is leaving me. I have no business communicating with anyone at this time.
Goodnight.
Oh, my.
So very sorry.
Been there, it is indeed painful.
You will, however, be OK - but getting through this will be hard.
| 210 |
Aceofwhat? Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:12:31pm |
re: #177 elbruce
If I take substantially less money from you than I take from everybody else, then yeah, you're getting a break. And they're paying for it.
not really. if you offer me a 10-year tax reduction to move my headquarters to your state, your state income is higher than it was before. no one is paying for it.
| 211 |
elbruce Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:12:33pm |
re: #188 cliffster
really? So any amount of money that I actually get to keep, you are paying for? Thanks, elbruce, very nice of you.
If your taxes get reduced (because you're a film company or whatever) and mine don't, then yeah I am. If there isn't enough revenue to cover expenses, then that gets added to the national debt. Since I'm not getting your tax break, I'm on the hook for proportionally more of that too. You're welcome, I guess.
| 212 |
webevintage Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:12:35pm |
re: #192 The Shadow Do
{{{{{{{{{{{{ The Shadow Do }}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}
| 213 |
What, me worry? Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:12:41pm |
re: #190 justaminute
o/t We received a call from our largest food supplier today, Sysco, who sell to a restaurants nationwide, asking if we buy eggs from them. No we don't.
But it seems their very concerned with their egg supply. If you're going out for breakfast Sunday morning or later tonight, try and stay away from over easy eggs. This should just last a day or two, I hope.
Hillandale Farms is the name of the egg producer with a salmonella problem. That article says where the eggs were going, but it's probably a good idea not to eat eggs out at all until they get it under control.
How does that happen anyway? Unfresh eggs? Dirty conditions?
| 214 |
austin_blue Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:12:46pm |
re: #192 The Shadow Do
My apologies for any and all posts made by me this evening. I am neither reading nor writing with any lucidity. I am not very good on a good day and this is not a good day.
My bride of 28 years has informed me she is leaving me. I have no business communicating with anyone at this time.
Goodnight.
Jeez.
{{{Shadow}}}
| 215 |
Obdicut Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:13:07pm |
re: #195 reine.de.tout
Some people in this country are taxed at a higher rate than others.
Does that mean the folks being taxed at a lower rate are being "subsidized"? I don't think so. It just means they are taxed at a lower rate.
People aren't taxed at different rates. Various levels of income are. Various types of income are. But people aren't.
Now, subsidies would seem to be where the Gov't gives money to something for nothing - like paying farmers to leave fields idle.
They also include 'indirect subsidies', which include things like tax breaks, negotiated trade agreements-- i.e. getting another country to not import a bunch of its stuff here, so that people here will buy American-- providing cheap insurance, providing debt forgiveness, providing help with exploration costs-- which the US does a ton of-- and many other things beyond direct subsidies.
"Tax breaks" are just that - breaks, not subsidies.
They're both.
The use of the term 'subsidy" to describe a process where government takes less from you than they do from someone else is just - odd, and well, it annoys me.
It's not the least bit odd, it's perfectly common economic terminology. I'm sorry that it annoys you, but if the government gives you a tax break when you install solar panels-- then yes, they really are subsidizing solar panel use.
| 216 |
Nervous Norvous Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:13:11pm |
re: #207 cliffster
winter means cucumbers out the ass here in texas.
THere's probably a porn site for stuff like that...Rule 34 and all
| 217 |
cliffster Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:13:25pm |
re: #206 WindUpBird
Your point isn't an intellectual point, it's an ideological talking point. Big difference there.
I'm sure you believe that's true. Good for you.
| 218 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:13:32pm |
re: #188 cliffster
really? So any amount of money that I actually get to keep, you are paying for? Thanks, elbruce, very nice of you.
this isn't an argument, this completely ignores the idea of a distributed tax burden. if the government needs ten bucks to run, and ten people normally pay a buck apiece, then one person gets a break, everyone is paying $1.11 apiece.
Easy stuff.
| 219 |
reine.de.tout Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:13:56pm |
re: #187 Floral Giraffe
LA is very agressive with their "tax cuts" for films.
Don't get me started on the permit process.
I can rant all night!
LA or La.?
We seriously have a really great thing going here, over the past few years.
| 220 |
3eff Jeff Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:14:06pm |
re: #216 PT Barnum
THere's probably a porn site for stuff like that...Rule 34 and all
That's pretty garden variety, all things considered.
| 221 |
windsagio Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:14:14pm |
re: #218 WindUpBird
It's not a subsidy because lowering taxes always more than pays for itself in productivity. Where were you in 1980?
| 222 |
cliffster Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:14:27pm |
re: #192 The Shadow Do
My apologies for any and all posts made by me this evening. I am neither reading nor writing with any lucidity. I am not very good on a good day and this is not a good day.
My bride of 28 years has informed me she is leaving me. I have no business communicating with anyone at this time.
Goodnight.
Oh good lord, I'm so sorry.
let me repeat - I'm so sorry..
| 224 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:15:02pm |
re: #215 Obdicut
People aren't taxed at different rates. Various levels of income are. Various types of income are. But people aren't.
I'm starting to sense a point where someone needs to bring up that only the additional income above a certain tax bracket is taxed at a higher rate.
| 225 |
Nervous Norvous Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:15:04pm |
re: #221 windsagio
It's not a subsidy because lowering taxes always more than pays for itself in productivity. Where were you in 1980?
You forgot the snark tag...
| 226 |
What, me worry? Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:15:19pm |
re: #192 The Shadow Do
Oh no! Come back if you get lonely. We're always open.
| 227 |
Aceofwhat? Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:15:21pm |
re: #185 windsagio
That's a political/economic hteory thing, and aside from whether tax-cuts are subsidies or not.
The problem here seems to be that tax cuts are good, and subsidies are bad.
which is why we'd probably be better off keeping the terms separate. a tax cut isn't always good (ow, the republican in me just pinched a little), but it CAN be.
that is different than a direct subsidy,which is overt pecuniary assistance that necessarily comes from the government's budget...
| 229 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:15:39pm |
re: #221 windsagio
It's not a subsidy because lowering taxes always more than pays for itself in productivity. Where were you in 1980?
ahahahahahahaha
ALL HAIL THE ETERNAL SUN EMPEROR, THE EXALTED REAGAN RONALD
| 230 |
cliffster Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:15:44pm |
re: #218 WindUpBird
this isn't an argument, this completely ignores the idea of a distributed tax burden. if the government needs ten bucks to run, and ten people normally pay a buck apiece, then one person gets a break, everyone is paying $1.11 apiece.
Easy stuff.
nope. complicated stuff. how much does the government need to run? And who gets to say?
| 231 |
reine.de.tout Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:16:13pm |
re: #215 Obdicut
People aren't taxed at different rates. Various levels of income are. Various types of income are. But people aren't.
Yes, that's what I meant. I was typing fast to get the thought out. I figured it would be assumed I was talking about income. My bad.
They also include 'indirect subsidies', which include things like tax breaks, negotiated trade agreements-- i.e. getting another country to not import a bunch of its stuff here, so that people here will buy American-- providing cheap insurance, providing debt forgiveness, providing help with exploration costs-- which the US does a ton of-- and many other things beyond direct subsidies.
They're both.
It's not the least bit odd, it's perfectly common economic terminology. I'm sorry that it annoys you, but if the government gives you a tax break when you install solar panels-- then yes, they really are subsidizing solar panel use.
OK.
| 232 |
Nervous Norvous Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:16:14pm |
re: #223 windsagio
Sea cucumbers? I can do that.
Actually sea cucumbers reaction to a threat is to shoot their internals out as a way of deterring the attacker. Given that their main predator is people, how does gutting themselves make them less likely to be eaten?
| 233 |
Aceofwhat? Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:16:57pm |
re: #192 The Shadow Do
let us know what you need, friend. for now, prayer will have to do-
| 234 |
karmic_inquisitor Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:17:02pm |
re: #169 Obdicut
If you owe me $1000, and I tell you that I'm forgiving you $200 of it, I really am giving you money by doing so.
Taxes are real obligations. Tax breaks really are relief from actual fiscal obligations.
One aspect to consider is discretionary economic activity.
A tax break can get someone to engage in an activity that s/he may not have otherwise. So the result can actually be more revenue to the government. For example, an incentive for a tax rebate to people who sell automobiles can be used to get a auto dealership to open in a given jurisdiction because, with the rebate, it is then profitable enough to take the risk of opening. So the jurisdiction starts getting revenue on each car sold even at a diminished rate.
Such incentives can actually simply result in a shift of activity from one jurisdiction to another, but not always.
Another example is a reduction in a rate for a short period. When capital gains were cut the treasury saw an uptick in capital gains revenue because it caused many to sell something that they had planned to hold on to and there was uncertainty as to how long the rate would last.
Point is that tax policy is not the zero sum game that both sides of the aisle like to treat it as.
| 235 |
Obdicut Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:17:03pm |
re: #227 Aceofwhat?
The terms are already separate. You've got direct subsidies, which are kind of rare, and indirect subsidies, which are very common.
For example, nuclear power plants need the indirect subsidy of government-provided insurance, since no private insurer has the wherewithal or desire to provide them with insurance. It's a subsidy. An indirect one.
| 236 |
windsagio Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:17:24pm |
re: #227 Aceofwhat?
Let me try putting it this way:
It seems to me that this whole discussion is based on a distinction between whether taxes are what you owe the government for various things vs. them being what the government takes from you for various things.
If you owe it, its really clearly a subsidy. If its just the government taking what's rightfully yours, its not.
| 237 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:17:29pm |
re: #230 cliffster
nope. complicated stuff. how much does the government need to run? And who gets to say?
And now you're moving the goalposts right out of the arena, you're dodging and then trying to muddy a very simple concept with GOP boilerplate, sorry I'm not going to play talking point tennis with you
| 238 |
Nervous Norvous Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:17:39pm |
re: #228 windsagio
Sometimes its self-evident :p
We hold these snarks to be self evident. That all men (and women) are endowed by their creator with the right to snark, levity and the pursuit of sarcasm.
| 239 |
goddamnedfrank Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:17:55pm |
re: #164 Obdicut
I'm really not understanding, this, Reine. I'm not just talking about a 'lower tax rate'. I'm talking about many other subsidies, from guaranteed loans, to federal insurance programs, to the federal government shouldering the cost for a lot of the environmental damage from the oil companies.
I'm not saying anything in the least bit controversial. We've subsidized the energy industry. I am not making the claim that we've subsidized them to a greater degree than we've collected taxes from them-- though the true economic cost of burning coal and oil is, with AGW unchecked, an unknown, that's not really an original fault of the oil or gas companies. It's the whole society's regard.
The biggest government subsidy to the Oil Industry comes in the form of military spending. The vast sums of money spent staging and maintaining assets around the Persian Gulf is primarily designed to project enough force to ensure that the oil keeps flowing. If the Oil companies had to pay mercenaries for protection their product couldn't possibly compete on a per cost basis for energy.
"All it [Corporate Society] asks - all it has ever asked - is for anyone not to interfere with management decisions."
-Mr. Bartholomew, Rollerball
| 240 |
Wayne A. Schneider Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:18:05pm |
re: #170 Killgore Trout
I did notice lease options in my searches today but I ignored it. Leases are scams (to my thinking) because car leases are such a scam. I just don't dig the whole concept.
My understanding is that very wealthy people (like Rockefeller) said "Buy what appreciates and lease what depreciates." That, anyway, is the general concept. Not saying I agree with it, just passing it along.
| 241 |
cliffster Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:18:39pm |
re: #237 WindUpBird
And now you're moving the goalposts right out of the arena, you're dodging and then trying to muddy a very simple concept with GOP boilerplate, sorry I'm not going to play talking point tennis with you
there should be a WUB mad libs book. And it should have lots of ALL CAPS.
| 242 |
Lidane Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:18:48pm |
re: #192 The Shadow Do
Oh wow. I'm so, so sorry. That's awful.
I don't know what else to say without sounding trite. I hope things look up for you soon.
| 244 |
elbruce Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:19:08pm |
re: #210 Aceofwhat?
not really. if you offer me a 10-year tax reduction to move my headquarters to your state, your state income is higher than it was before. no one is paying for it.
It does depend on what you're comparing the reduced tax to (paying full taxes or not even being there). I don't really have a problem with temporary reductions targeted to ramp up business, or temporary subsidies to develop new large-scale technologies. It's industries that rely on these sorts of cut-rate deals in the long term that I find objectionable.
But it's still cutting that company a break whether it's a targeted tax reduction or a subsidy. I'd agree that in most cases the former is better than the latter, but in some industries, such as new technology development which isn't seeing revenue yet, subsidies would be more effective.
But in no case does it make sense to claim that a specific company or industry getting a specific targeted tax break doesn't count as getting something that others aren't. That's exactly what it is.
| 245 |
cliffster Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:19:27pm |
re: #232 PT Barnum
Actually sea cucumbers reaction to a threat is to shoot their internals out as a way of deterring the attacker. Given that their main predator is people, how does gutting themselves make them less likely to be eaten?
admittedly their strategy needs to be tweaked a bit..
| 246 |
3eff Jeff Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:19:29pm |
re: #240 Wayne A. Schneider
I did notice lease options in my searches today but I ignored it. Leases are scams (to my thinking) because car leases are such a scam. I just don't dig the whole concept.
My understanding is that very wealthy people (like Rockefeller) said "Buy what appreciates and lease what depreciates." That, anyway, is the general concept. Not saying I agree with it, just passing it along.
Best thing to do with good advice?
| 247 |
Obdicut Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:19:32pm |
re: #234 karmic_inquisitor
I agree with that. But for the individual concerned, if they had an obligation and they are forgiven that obligation, that is worth money. Real money. And taxes are not something that the government steals from you, they are legal, decided upon by our representatives, and we really are honor-bound by them. Government is not, and cannot be, free.
How we tax is worthy of a lot of debate. Saying that all your money is 'yours' and the the government 'takes' some muddies the debate a great deal. If I make a deal with someone that while I'm on their land, I'll give them one out of every ten fish that I catch, that tenth fish is theirs the moment I catch it. It's never mine.
| 248 |
Nervous Norvous Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:19:41pm |
re: #236 windsagio
Let me try putting it this way:
It seems to me that this whole discussion is based on a distinction between whether taxes are what you owe the government for various things vs. them being what the government takes from you for various things.
If you owe it, its really clearly a subsidy. If its just the government taking what's rightfully yours, its not.
Most libertarians like to claim it's all yours.
| 249 |
justaminute Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:19:44pm |
re: #213 marjoriemoon
Hillandale Farms is the name of the egg producer with a salmonella problem. That article says where the eggs were going, but it's probably a good idea not to eat eggs out at all until they get it under control.
How does that happen anyway? Unfresh eggs? Dirty conditions?
It's larger than that one producer, I afraid. Not to scare you, but it's hard to get eggs that are not contaminated. That's why health departments are so important. Refrigerated systems can be off by little as 2 degrees and contamination can run wild. We just spent a fantastical amount redoing our kitchen. We started this project because our walk-in was off by 1 degree and we could not get it up there.
| 250 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:19:47pm |
re: #236 windsagio
Let me try putting it this way:
It seems to me that this whole discussion is based on a distinction between whether taxes are what you owe the government for various things vs. them being what the government takes from you for various things.
If you owe it, its really clearly a subsidy. If its just the government taking what's rightfully yours, its not.
This mental acrobatics where everyone thinks 100% of their money is their money in a society, it's really something
I worked for this money!
I mean I built the internet and the phone infrastructure
and I kept the currency stable
and I hired the police to keep me safe
and I hired those guys to build roads and traffic signals
It's my money! I paid all those guys to do those things so I could make a buck at my flabby middle management job pushing paperwork! It's MY MONEY
:D
| 251 |
windsagio Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:20:12pm |
re: #248 PT Barnum
Most libertarians like to claim it's all yours.
Most libertarians are also effing crazy :p
| 252 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:20:15pm |
re: #241 cliffster
there should be a WUB mad libs book. And it should have lots of ALL CAPS.
this would have been funnier if I had actually been using all caps for that post
| 253 |
reine.de.tout Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:20:22pm |
re: #169 Obdicut
If you owe me $1000, and I tell you that I'm forgiving you $200 of it, I really am giving you money by doing so.
Taxes are real obligations. Tax breaks really are relief from actual fiscal obligations.
No, you're not "giving" me money, to tell me that you're going to allow me to keep $200 of what I've earned.
You are simply not taking as much as you could.
I'm not arguing that taxes are not real obligations, of course they are.
Nor am I arguing that breaks are relief from those obligations. They are, of course.
I'm arguing that if I've earned it, it's MINE. And allowing me to keep more of it than before, is NOT subsidizing ME. It's just taking less away from me.
| 254 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:20:38pm |
re: #248 PT Barnum
Most libertarians like to claim it's all yours.
Libertarians also believe that a blimp could get a man elected president
RIMSHOT
| 255 |
Nervous Norvous Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:20:40pm |
re: #245 cliffster
admittedly their strategy needs to be tweaked a bit..
I learned that in a very funny book. It's called Bonk by Mary Roach. She is very very funny and writes about science in all sorts of forms.
| 256 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:20:52pm |
re: #254 WindUpBird
See, now's when you should have used the madlibs line, Cliff
| 257 |
windsagio Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:21:45pm |
re: #256 WindUpBird
School of the internet is now in session! The walking clockwork bird will be your instructor for this class.
| 258 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:21:49pm |
re: #247 Obdicut
I agree with that. But for the individual concerned, if they had an obligation and they are forgiven that obligation, that is worth money. Real money. And taxes are not something that the government steals from you, they are legal, decided upon by our representatives, and we really are honor-bound by them. Government is not, and cannot be, free.
How we tax is worthy of a lot of debate. Saying that all your money is 'yours' and the the government 'takes' some muddies the debate a great deal. If I make a deal with someone that while I'm on their land, I'll give them one out of every ten fish that I catch, that tenth fish is theirs the moment I catch it. It's never mine.
"muddy" is a rather charitable way of saying shit :D
| 259 |
Obdicut Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:21:58pm |
re: #253 reine.de.tout
I'm arguing that if I've earned it, it's MINE. And allowing me to keep more of it than before, is NOT subsidizing ME. It's just taking less away from me.
Please see above. I find this way of thinking to be fallacious. You didn't expect to keep all the money when you earned it, you knew you were operating under a system where, in return for the civil society provided, the government took taxes-- so in what sense was ALL of the money yours? Part of it is very legitimately the governments when you earn it. It's a a real debt.
| 260 |
Nervous Norvous Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:22:19pm |
re: #253 reine.de.tout
No, you're not "giving" me money, to tell me that you're going to allow me to keep $200 of what I've earned.
You are simply not taking as much as you could.
I'm not arguing that taxes are not real obligations, of course they are.
Nor am I arguing that breaks are relief from those obligations. They are, of course.I'm arguing that if I've earned it, it's MINE. And allowing me to keep more of it than before, is NOT subsidizing ME. It's just taking less away from me.
Except that you gain from a safe society and the infrastructure that is maintained by government, so no, it's not being taken away from you, you are contributing to the greater good.
| 261 |
Stanghazi Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:22:23pm |
re: #190 justaminute
o/t We received a call from our largest food supplier today, Sysco, who sell to a restaurants nationwide, asking if we buy eggs from them. No we don't.
But it seems their very concerned with their egg supply. If you're going out for breakfast Sunday morning or later tonight, try and stay away from over easy eggs. This should just last a day or two, I hope.
Hello? Notice this?
| 262 |
What, me worry? Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:22:42pm |
re: #249 justaminute
It's larger than that one producer, I afraid. Not to scare you, but it's hard to get eggs that are not contaminated. That's why health departments are so important. Refrigerated systems can be off by little as 2 degrees and contamination can run wild. We just spent a fantastical amount redoing our kitchen. We started this project because our walk-in was off by 1 degree and we could not get it up there.
Ah, well we haven't bought any anyway in the last week or so. I just don't recall this happening before on such a scale.
Thanks for the info.
| 263 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:23:14pm |
re: #257 windsagio
School of the internet is now in session! The walking clockwork bird will be your instructor for this class.
All right, class! Who can tell me where "Do Not Want" came from?
| 264 |
Aceofwhat? Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:23:19pm |
re: #236 windsagio
Let me try putting it this way:
It seems to me that this whole discussion is based on a distinction between whether taxes are what you owe the government for various things vs. them being what the government takes from you for various things.
If you owe it, its really clearly a subsidy. If its just the government taking what's rightfully yours, its not.
whereas i am trying to highlight what i think is a more important distinction: is the subsidy actually costing us anything?
ebruce is making the mistake of presuming that all subsidies cost something. that's not necessarily true. all direct subsidies cost something.
when we add up the subsidies for a particular industry, we don't usually do a good job of separating the subsidies offered at the taxpayers' expense from the subsidies offered to entice additional activity, and thereby revenue.
did that come out in english?
| 265 |
reine.de.tout Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:23:47pm |
re: #260 PT Barnum
Except that you gain from a safe society and the infrastructure that is maintained by government, so no, it's not being taken away from you, you are contributing to the greater good.
Yes, of course that's true!
But deciding to take LESS away from me isn't subsidizing me. It's simply taking less.
| 266 |
Varek Raith Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:23:49pm |
SOCIALIST EMTS!
SOCIALIST COPS!
SOCIALIST FIREFIGHTERS!
SOCIALIST MILITARY!...whoops.
:P
| 267 |
Stanghazi Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:23:55pm |
| 269 |
Dancing along the light of day Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:24:04pm |
re: #262 marjoriemoon
Salmonella isn't pretty.
Just avoid eggs for a bit...
My 2 cents worth...
| 270 |
Aceofwhat? Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:24:18pm |
re: #238 PT Barnum
We hold these snarks to be self evident. That all men (and women) are endowed by their creator with the right to snark, levity and the pursuit of sarcasm.
i pledge allegiance
to the snark
of the united Lizards of internettia
| 271 |
cliffster Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:24:19pm |
re: #256 WindUpBird
See, now's when you should have used the madlibs line, Cliff
damn, if only I'd waited..
| 272 |
windsagio Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:24:24pm |
re: #266 Varek Raith
SOCIALIST EMTS!
SOCIALIST COPS!
SOCIALIST FIREFIGHTERS!
SOCIALIST MILITARY!...whoops.
:P
+++ +++ +++ +++ +++
Awesome :D
| 273 |
Nervous Norvous Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:24:51pm |
re: #264 Aceofwhat?
whereas i am trying to highlight what i think is a more important distinction: is the subsidy actually costing us anything?
ebruce is making the mistake of presuming that all subsidies cost something. that's not necessarily true. all direct subsidies cost something.
when we add up the subsidies for a particular industry, we don't usually do a good job of separating the subsidies offered at the taxpayers' expense from the subsidies offered to entice additional activity, and thereby revenue.
did that come out in english?
However that additional activity may or may not result in additional revenue. That's the point. Corporations do this all the time. Collect all sorts of incentives but then fail to deliver on the promised jobs and economic activity, or then move as soon as they get a better deal elsewhere.
| 274 |
reine.de.tout Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:24:51pm |
re: #264 Aceofwhat?
whereas i am trying to highlight what i think is a more important distinction: is the subsidy actually costing us anything?
ebruce is making the mistake of presuming that all subsidies cost something. that's not necessarily true. all direct subsidies cost something.
when we add up the subsidies for a particular industry, we don't usually do a good job of separating the subsidies offered at the taxpayers' expense from the subsidies offered to entice additional activity, and thereby revenue.
did that come out in english?
Yes, thank you.
I need to be quiet, I can't speak eloquently enough on this to make sense (as Obdi pointed out, I said we tax people when I'm fully aware we tax income).
| 275 |
Obdicut Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:24:59pm |
re: #264 Aceofwhat?
It came out fine, but you also then have to ask if some taxes-- or rather, some expenditures that rely on tax money-- are really costing you anything. It's the flip side of that coin. Many things that tax money is spent on bring more value to us than the dollar spent on them.
| 276 |
justaminute Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:25:02pm |
re: #261 Stanley Sea
Hello? Notice this?
I'm not really understanding what you mean. We've been out an had a couple of cocktails. I'm slow.//
| 277 |
windsagio Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:25:14pm |
re: #264 Aceofwhat?
I understand what you're saying, but its a different issue. A subsidy can come out ahead, but it's still a subsidy.
| 278 |
Nervous Norvous Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:25:25pm |
re: #265 reine.de.tout
Yes, of course that's true!
But deciding to take LESS away from me isn't subsidizing me. It's simply taking less.
Not if more has to be taken from others in order to cover the shortfall.
| 279 |
cliffster Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:25:40pm |
re: #255 PT Barnum
I learned that in a very funny book. It's called Bonk by Mary Roach. She is very very funny and writes about science in all sorts of forms.
I hope that that book talked about praying mantis chicks eating their mate's head after sex, because that shit's funny.
| 280 |
windsagio Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:26:12pm |
re: #278 PT Barnum
When I let WUB off on that money he owes me for the work he never finished, that was totally a subsidy >>
*ZING*!
| 281 |
elbruce Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:26:15pm |
re: #221 windsagio
It's not a subsidy because lowering taxes always more than pays for itself in productivity.
Except for how it never has.
re: #221 windsagio
Where were you in 1980?
Watching Reagan raise taxes. firedoglake.com...]>You heard me right.
| 282 |
jamesfirecat Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:26:42pm |
re: #248 PT Barnum
Most libertarians like to claim it's all yours.
Is a man not entitled to the sweat of his brow?
| 284 |
Obdicut Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:26:53pm |
re: #279 cliffster
It's about human sexuality. And it is hilarious, and is five feet away from my left foot, as are the rest of her books.
I met her at the Exploratorium. Gives a good talk in person. Reminds me of the actress that played the Poet Laureate in that one West Wing Episode.
| 285 |
Nervous Norvous Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:27:07pm |
re: #279 cliffster
I hope that that book talked about praying mantis chicks eating their mate's head after sex, because that shit's funny.
No, it was more about human sexuality, but very interesting. Roach is a very funny writer with a dry sense of humor.
| 286 |
What, me worry? Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:27:11pm |
re: #250 WindUpBird
There's a video of Ayn Rand on youtube in one of her last (or last) interviews with Phil Donahue. She's 75 or 80 already. It's in 5 parts.
Anyway, she believed the government should pay for police and military defense. I think one other thing, but I can't recall it.
Good thing she thought of the police because there would be a whole lotta rioting going on.
| 288 |
Nervous Norvous Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:28:00pm |
| 289 |
reine.de.tout Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:28:12pm |
re: #259 Obdicut
Please see above. I find this way of thinking to be fallacious. You didn't expect to keep all the money when you earned it, you knew you were operating under a system where, in return for the civil society provided, the government took taxes-- so in what sense was ALL of the money yours? Part of it is very legitimately the governments when you earn it. It's a a real debt.
I'm legally obligated to pay what has been decided I should pay on my income - or on the things I buy, or whatever. And I pay it gladly.
But no, Obdi - if I've earned the money, it's mine. And I gladly and voluntarily pay my taxes. And if the government decides it needs less of my money, that is not a subsidy to me.
| 290 |
cliffster Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:28:56pm |
re: #250 WindUpBird
This mental acrobatics where everyone thinks 100% of their money is their money in a society, it's really something
I worked for this money!
I mean I built the internet and the phone infrastructure
and I kept the currency stable
and I hired the police to keep me safe
and I hired those guys to build roads and traffic signals
It's my money! I paid all those guys to do those things so I could make a buck at my flabby middle management job pushing paperwork! It's MY MONEY
:D
It's beyond me why people who are intelligent enough to understand what you just wrote, are not insightful enough to understand that it works both ways. Yes, saying that the "government can't take any of my money: is stupid. So, to, is to presume that this means that all of your money is up for grabs.
| 291 |
elbruce Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:29:07pm |
re: #265 reine.de.tout
Yes, of course that's true!
But deciding to take LESS away from me isn't subsidizing me. It's simply taking less.
Only if you define "subsidize" as an actual transfer of cash. Which nobody but you does.
| 292 |
Aceofwhat? Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:29:35pm |
re: #273 PT Barnum
However that additional activity may or may not result in additional revenue. That's the point. Corporations do this all the time. Collect all sorts of incentives but then fail to deliver on the promised jobs and economic activity, or then move as soon as they get a better deal elsewhere.
psssht. then you have a government of idiots. i've negotiated these things on behalf of my company in a prior role (from a 'what can we legitimately promise' perspective). any snot-nosed newbie lawyer can draft a clause to take the money back...they're called "clawbacks".
whatever story you heard where company A got away with X does not impact what happens thousands of times each day. the additional activity is promised, and if delivered, earns a tax break...which does not necessarily require an extra cut from someone else's pie.
| 293 |
reine.de.tout Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:29:51pm |
re: #278 PT Barnum
Not if more has to be taken from others in order to cover the shortfall.
I suspect if there's going to be a shortfall, the government is not going to be offering to lower my taxes.
So the fact that I pay a lower rate of tax because of my income, than someone else who makes more than I do, is NOT A SUBSIDY.
| 294 |
Varek Raith Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:29:56pm |
Let's just get rid of money all together.
Problem solved.
///
| 295 |
goddamnedfrank Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:30:06pm |
re: #253 reine.de.tout
No, you're not "giving" me money, to tell me that you're going to allow me to keep $200 of what I've earned.
You are simply not taking as much as you could.
I'm not arguing that taxes are not real obligations, of course they are.
Nor am I arguing that breaks are relief from those obligations. They are, of course.I'm arguing that if I've earned it, it's MINE. And allowing me to keep more of it than before, is NOT subsidizing ME. It's just taking less away from me.
Cancellation of a legal debt is compensation for tax purposes, and you have to report it as income and pay taxes on it. So you were given something with a specific value, measured in money, if not money itself. If your tax obligation is lessened, your bottom line is similarly benefited, semantic distinctions notwithstanding.
| 296 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:30:07pm |
re: #253 reine.de.tout
No, you're not "giving" me money, to tell me that you're going to allow me to keep $200 of what I've earned.
You are simply not taking as much as you could.
I'm not arguing that taxes are not real obligations, of course they are.
Nor am I arguing that breaks are relief from those obligations. They are, of course.I'm arguing that if I've earned it, it's MINE. And allowing me to keep more of it than before, is NOT subsidizing ME. It's just taking less away from me.
I simply do not understand how you can believe this. Philosophically or not.
You only have the ability to prosper in this society because of the trillions and trillions of dollars of infrastructure that has created America in the first place. All this society you see around you, it all costs money. And I don't get how anyone can take it for granted, especially if they know a helpful government employee personally, like a cop, or a teacher, or a fireman, or anyone.
You couldn't earn the same paycheck in an undeveloped country. Go to Somalia or Haiti or Rwanda or any other country with far less and far weaker government than we have here, and try to earn the same coin. It's not 100% yours.
hell, I couldn't earn a paycheck at all where it not for the internet. I literally would have no income without the internet. Which was paid for with tax dollars, military research, arpanet, etc etc. Without government tax dollars, there would be no internet. Packet switching tech wouldn't exist. So I don't kvetch about paying my taxes.
| 297 |
Obdicut Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:30:18pm |
re: #289 reine.de.tout
I'm legally obligated to pay what has been decided I should pay on my income - or on the things I buy, or whatever. And I pay it gladly.
But no, Obdi - if I've earned the money, it's mine. And I gladly and voluntarily pay my taxes. And if the government decides it needs less of my money, that is not a subsidy to me.
I'm sorry, Reine, but this thinking seems strange to me. If you acknowledge you're legally obligated to pay it, in what sense is it yours? If some of it is legally some one else's, how is that portion of it yours?
| 298 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:30:55pm |
re: #280 windsagio
When I let WUB off on that money he owes me for the work he never finished, that was totally a subsidy >>
*ZING*!
I'M STILL GOING TO DO THAT
| 299 |
sagehen Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:30:59pm |
re: #87 karmic_inquisitor
Another issue on tax credit based subsidies - if someone is not making enough money to itemize it rarely makes sense. So the subsidy usually goes to high income households because they are generally the ones able to use the credit.
If the credit were refundable then the numbers would change for a lot of people.
It makes more sense for cities. My building went green a few years ago (solar panels and windmills on the roof, hooked the garbage incinerator to the water heater) and knocked 40% off our utility bills. Plus the city tossed us a property tax abatement to help out. The refit paid for itself in less than 4 years.
| 300 |
cliffster Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:31:01pm |
| 301 |
reine.de.tout Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:31:13pm |
re: #291 elbruce
Only if you define "subsidize" as an actual transfer of cash. Which nobody but you does.
| 302 |
Aceofwhat? Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:31:14pm |
re: #277 windsagio
I understand what you're saying, but its a different issue. A subsidy can come out ahead, but it's still a subsidy.
only semantically. as soon as we get into a "we should subsidize X less", whether we're coming out ahead becomes the most important question in the room.
| 303 |
Obdicut Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:31:43pm |
re: #300 cliffster
Stiff is another book by Roach, and it's also sitting near my left foot. As I said, I've got all of hers there.
Her next one is about astronauts.
| 304 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:32:18pm |
re: #290 cliffster
It's beyond me why people who are intelligent enough to understand what you just wrote, are not insightful enough to understand that it works both ways. Yes, saying that the "government can't take any of my money: is stupid. So, to, is to presume that this means that all of your money is up for grabs.
"all of your money". All?
This is the most amazing use of a straw man I've ever seen
Bravo sir
| 305 |
elbruce Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:32:21pm |
re: #283 windsagio
It was sarcasm >>
Sorry, I'm used to people knowing my persona by now :D
Oh, sarcasm. I've heard of that. Sorry, I haven't really had the chance to discuss anything but the FILTHY ZIONIST LAND STEALING ZIONIST CRIMINALS up to now.
>_>
| 306 |
windsagio Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:32:23pm |
re: #298 WindUpBird
I'M STILL GOING TO DO THAT
I know but we can't be friends if I don't diss you :D
Anyways I owe you the fuckofalot right now for getting me most excellent Gorillaz tickets :D
| 307 |
cliffster Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:32:59pm |
re: #303 Obdicut
Stiff is another book by Roach, and it's also sitting near my left foot. As I said, I've got all of hers there.
Her next one is about astronauts.
hehe, I just laughed out loud in my living room. I thought that might be the author, but I wasn't going to say it, and I'm too lazy right now to look it up. If it's the same lady, I'll definitely read it.
| 308 |
Nervous Norvous Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:33:01pm |
| 309 |
sagehen Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:33:11pm |
re: #92 marjoriemoon
How much you wanna bet an Ann Coulter sex tape surfaces one of these days!
She used to date Bob Guccione Jr, so it's almost a given that such a tape exists.
| 310 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:33:23pm |
man I totally just argued that the government should be able to take all of my money, why did I say that?
Oh wait I totally didn't argue that
That's right, now I remember, cliffster was making shit up again
Whew
| 311 |
Aceofwhat? Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:33:25pm |
re: #291 elbruce
Only if you define "subsidize" as an actual transfer of cash. Which nobody but you does.
and the dictionary. don't be an ass to Reine, especially with your questionable economic chops. "someone must be paying for it" my ass. spoken like a mopey liberal.
[Link: dictionary.reference.com...]
| 312 |
Obdicut Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:33:32pm |
re: #302 Aceofwhat?
only semantically. as soon as we get into a "we should subsidize X less", whether we're coming out ahead becomes the most important question in the room.
I wouldn't say it's the most important thing. If we could make shitloads of money when subsidizing things that are otherwise dangerous to the nation, we still shouldn't do them.
In addition, subsidies can block new technology; Nuclear power would be more economically viable if the subsidies for oil and gas weren't in place. Of course, nuclear power itself, as I said, depends on subsidies.
| 313 |
Idle Drifter Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:33:34pm |
re: #179 Obdicut
I wasn't taking anything from the government of the United States of America. A tax break is a tax break. A subsidy is a subsidy. Why come up with this crazy equivalence of a tax break is a subsidy or a tax credit is a tax break when it's really a subsidy aka refund which like all subsidies involves certain conditions and proper paper work to be filed or else you are out the money.
| 314 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:33:40pm |
re: #306 windsagio
I know but we can't be friends if I don't diss you :D
Anyways I owe you the fuckofalot right now for getting me most excellent Gorillaz tickets :D
GONNA BE SWEET
| 315 |
windsagio Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:33:42pm |
re: #305 elbruce
Oh, sarcasm. I've heard of that. Sorry, I haven't really had the chance to discuss anything but the FILTHY ZIONIST LAND STEALING ZIONIST CRIMINALS up to now.
>_>
SAUCY!
| 316 |
Aceofwhat? Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:33:42pm |
| 317 |
windsagio Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:34:13pm |
re: #311 Aceofwhat?
that was a little saucy too, but less funny >>
| 318 |
Nervous Norvous Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:34:15pm |
re: #303 Obdicut
Stiff is another book by Roach, and it's also sitting near my left foot. As I said, I've got all of hers there.
Her next one is about astronauts.
Just finished reading it and it is just as funny as the others. A little gross, as it discusses in graphic detail the effects of being locked in an incredibly small cabin with no bathroom facilites.
| 319 |
reine.de.tout Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:34:24pm |
re: #297 Obdicut
I'm sorry, Reine, but this thinking seems strange to me. If you acknowledge you're legally obligated to pay it, in what sense is it yours? If some of it is legally some one else's, how is that portion of it yours?
And what seems strange to me, is the thought that the income I make, is somehow not mine, but belongs to someone else. Sorry. I find that odd and honestly, unnerving.
| 320 |
Obdicut Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:34:26pm |
re: #290 cliffster
So, to, is to presume that this means that all of your money is up for grabs.
Nobody is saying that, though.
The amount of your money 'up for grabs' is a known factor. It's not going to be "all".
| 322 |
Aceofwhat? Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:34:30pm |
re: #312 Obdicut
I wouldn't say it's the most important thing. If we could make shitloads of money when subsidizing things that are otherwise dangerous to the nation, we still shouldn't do them.
In addition, subsidies can block new technology; Nuclear power would be more economically viable if the subsidies for oil and gas weren't in place. Of course, nuclear power itself, as I said, depends on subsidies.
sure. nothing to disagree with there...i was being pretty general with my statement.
| 323 |
swamprat Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:35:20pm |
re: #237 WindUpBird
And now you're moving the goalposts right out of the arena, you're dodging and then trying to muddy a very simple concept with GOP boilerplate, sorry I'm not going to play talking point tennis with you
Obama is currently pushing a tax cut. A tax cut for small businesses, but a cut none the less. He is blaming the republicans for blocking it.
1. I am glad economic realities are finally competing with the previous strategy of spending money so the government can suckle us poor needy piggies.
2. I don't doubt for a minute that the republicans are trying to keep the democrats from actually doing something that will benefit America.
3. Why the heck didn't they do this from the very start? ( I know I am grousing, but this seems as obvious as rain on carwash day.)
The realities of economics are no more "boilerplate" than the discussions John Adams had about "guns versus butter". There should be no argument that we need government. The discussion of "how much" is fair game in my book.
| 324 |
jaunte Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:35:21pm |
re: #319 reine.de.tout
And what seems strange to me, is the thought that the income I make, is somehow not mine, but belongs to someone else. Sorry. I find that odd and honestly, unnerving.
It seems to be a negotiable quantity.
| 325 |
cliffster Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:35:29pm |
re: #310 WindUpBird
nope, it's the sarcasm and snark that you use that implies what you say I claim you said. you probably know that, but yet you go on the way you do just the same. it's a shame, really.
| 326 |
Obdicut Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:35:38pm |
re: #313 Idle Drifter
I wasn't taking anything from the government of the United States of America. A tax break is a tax break. A subsidy is a subsidy.
Tax breaks can also be subsidies. Things can be more than one thing at once. Its rather handy.
I would appreciate it if people stopped calling me odd and crazy for using completely normal economic terminology.
| 327 |
reine.de.tout Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:35:46pm |
re: #311 Aceofwhat?
and the dictionary. don't be an ass to Reine, especially with your questionable economic chops. "someone must be paying for it" my ass. spoken like a mopey liberal.
[Link: dictionary.reference.com...]
Hell, my own economic chops are questionable. I really need to do what I said I was gonna do, and shut up.
| 328 |
Aceofwhat? Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:35:50pm |
re: #317 windsagio
that was a little saucy too, but less funny >>
dude, it's 11:30 here...daddy's wearing down;)
weird. 34yrs old. i feel too young to be a daddy.
| 329 |
What, me worry? Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:36:24pm |
re: #309 sagehen
She used to date Bob Guccione Jr, so it's almost a given that such a tape exists.
Well I'll be LOL I'm just glad it isn't Glenn Beck because then, I really don't think I could watch.
| 330 |
Varek Raith Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:36:29pm |
re: #328 Aceofwhat?
dude, it's 11:30 here...daddy's wearing down;)
weird. 34yrs old. i feel too young to be a daddy.
What ever you say, gramps.
/
| 331 |
Idle Drifter Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:36:57pm |
re: #229 WindUpBird
ahahahahahahaha
ALL HAIL THE ETERNAL SUN EMPEROR, THE EXALTED REAGAN RONALD
| 332 |
Obdicut Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:37:28pm |
re: #319 reine.de.tout
And what seems strange to me, is the thought that the income I make, is somehow not mine, but belongs to someone else. Sorry. I find that odd and honestly, unnerving.
Some of it is not yours. Some of it, as you said, legally belongs to someone else. I don't know what's unnerving about that. I understand, when I work, that I owe some of that money to the government. I like living in a civil society, so, while I'm very concerned about the ways that money is spent, the mere concept of 'government needs money and gets some of that money from me, a beneficiary of that government' isn't the least bit unnerving.
| 333 |
Nervous Norvous Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:37:36pm |
re: #328 Aceofwhat?
dude, it's 11:30 here...daddy's wearing down;)
weird. 34yrs old. i feel too young to be a daddy.
YHou never feel old enough to be a father.
| 334 |
Four More Tears Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:37:36pm |
re: #328 Aceofwhat?
dude, it's 11:30 here...daddy's wearing down;)
weird. 34yrs old. i feel too young to be a daddy.
Christ, we're even the same age.
| 335 |
Kragar Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:37:39pm |
| 336 |
karmic_inquisitor Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:37:51pm |
re: #247 Obdicut
I agree with that. But for the individual concerned, if they had an obligation and they are forgiven that obligation, that is worth money. Real money. And taxes are not something that the government steals from you, they are legal, decided upon by our representatives, and we really are honor-bound by them. Government is not, and cannot be, free.
How we tax is worthy of a lot of debate. Saying that all your money is 'yours' and the the government 'takes' some muddies the debate a great deal. If I make a deal with someone that while I'm on their land, I'll give them one out of every ten fish that I catch, that tenth fish is theirs the moment I catch it. It's never mine.
I agree that government isn't free and needs to be paid for.
Back before the Federal Government got the ability to levy income taxes, most taxes were on trade. Individuals were taxed from time to time via capitations. Income tax opened a new frontier even though it was initially intended to only tax rich people. The ability to motivate individual economic activity via the tax code was quickly discovered.
Think about it - home ownership as a means of building a storing wealth for the middle class was a social and economic policy implemented via the income tax system. It would make an interesting book to write a political history of the US' 20th century in terms of tax policy.
People alter their behavior all of the time (and even irrationally) because of taxation. i have a friend who 1) constantly tells me how WalMart is destroying my town, and 2) has bought just about everything he needs via the internet over the last 5 years to avoid sales tax. At least WalMart collects sales tax for my town.
I get and agree with the rhetoric of "my money" being over the top. But we really do need to do some serious thinking in this country about what activity we want to incentivize and what we don't. and the top-of-mind moral analysis has to which invites rhetoric like "tax the rich" needs to be punctured. We should be figuring out ways to get the rich (and the wannabe rich) taking risks and investing in business creation.
We don't tell major league pitchers to go pitch a no hitter, but warn them that if they do we will amputate a finger so as to even the playing field for the next game. Instead we pay them big fat bonuses which motivates them and other players to play their best.
| 337 |
elbruce Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:38:17pm |
re: #301 reine.de.tout
: a grant or gift of money: as a : a sum of money formerly granted by the British Parliament to the crown and raised by special taxation b : money granted by one state to another c : a grant by a government to a private person or company to assist an enterprise deemed advantageous to the public
Grant =/= cash transfer. As has been exhaustively and repeatedly pointed out, cancelling a portion of a legal debt consitutes a subsidy.
| 338 |
cliffster Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:38:20pm |
re: #320 Obdicut
Nobody is saying that, though.
The amount of your money 'up for grabs' is a known factor. It's not going to be "all".
When you ridicule the statement that "the government is spending MY money to fund XYZ", because, er, the government pays for lots of stuff that you used to make that money, then yes it calls into question exactly how much of YOUR money is actually YOURS. That's the problem with sarcasm and snark, it makes a point without actually putting a cap on your point.
| 339 |
reine.de.tout Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:38:21pm |
re: #296 WindUpBird
I simply do not understand how you can believe this. Philosophically or not.
You only have the ability to prosper in this society because of the trillions and trillions of dollars of infrastructure that has created America in the first place. All this society you see around you, it all costs money. And I don't get how anyone can take it for granted, especially if they know a helpful government employee personally, like a cop, or a teacher, or a fireman, or anyone.
You couldn't earn the same paycheck in an undeveloped country. Go to Somalia or Haiti or Rwanda or any other country with far less and far weaker government than we have here, and try to earn the same coin. It's not 100% yours.
hell, I couldn't earn a paycheck at all where it not for the internet. I literally would have no income without the internet. Which was paid for with tax dollars, military research, arpanet, etc etc. Without government tax dollars, there would be no internet. Packet switching tech wouldn't exist. So I don't kvetch about paying my taxes.
I have not questioned the need for taxes, or the great benefit I derive.
and WUB - do you know how damned condescending it is to say, "I simply do not understand how you can believe this".
You think the way you do, I think the way I do. I do not dismiss you with a "I can't believe you think that".
And I certainly do not appreciate it when you dismiss me with that sort of bullshit.
| 340 |
Nimed Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:38:23pm |
re: #286 marjoriemoon
There's a video of Ayn Rand on youtube in one of her last (or last) interviews with Phil Donahue. She's 75 or 80 already. It's in 5 parts.
Anyway, she believed the government should pay for police and military defense. I think one other thing, but I can't recall it.
Good thing she thought of the police because there would be a whole lotta rioting going on.
And courts. Ayn Rand was a minarchist. She also believed that there is no such thing as a natural monopoly, and that anti-trust laws should be abolished.
There are even crazier libertarians out there. Anarcho-capitalists believe that the army, police and courts ought to be private, rather then run by a "State monopoly".
| 341 |
Aceofwhat? Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:38:24pm |
| 342 |
Varek Raith Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:38:53pm |
| 343 |
reine.de.tout Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:38:54pm |
re: #332 Obdicut
Some of it is not yours. Some of it, as you said, legally belongs to someone else. I don't know what's unnerving about that. I understand, when I work, that I owe some of that money to the government. I like living in a civil society, so, while I'm very concerned about the ways that money is spent, the mere concept of 'government needs money and gets some of that money from me, a beneficiary of that government' isn't the least bit unnerving.
It belongs to me.
I have a legal obligation to pay whatever is my share in any given year. And I do. Gladly.
| 344 |
Velvet Elvis Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:39:01pm |
re: #289 reine.de.tout
I'm legally obligated to pay what has been decided I should pay on my income - or on the things I buy, or whatever. And I pay it gladly.
But no, Obdi - if I've earned the money, it's mine. And I gladly and voluntarily pay my taxes. And if the government decides it needs less of my money, that is not a subsidy to me.
If that tax cut give to you has to be accounted for by raising revenue elsewhere in the budget, then yet it is.
| 345 |
karmic_inquisitor Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:39:37pm |
BTW - how many people here who are against corporate subsidies are also against subsidies for private higher education?
| 346 |
reine.de.tout Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:40:16pm |
re: #337 elbruce
: a grant or gift of money: as a : a sum of money formerly granted by the British Parliament to the crown and raised by special taxation b : money granted by one state to another c : a grant by a government to a private person or company to assist an enterprise deemed advantageous to the public
Grant =/= cash transfer. As has been exhaustively and repeatedly pointed out, cancelling a portion of a legal debt consitutes a subsidy.
Well - yeah, some here have defined it that way.
Merriam has not.
And I don't accept Obdi's definition.
| 347 |
Four More Tears Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:40:24pm |
re: #333 PT Barnum
Hey, PT. I've played it for a total of an hour and a half so far. I'm going to give it some more time, but it really hasn't grabbed me so far.
| 348 |
Aceofwhat? Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:40:29pm |
re: #344 Conservative Moonbat
If that tax cut give to you has to be accounted for by raising revenue elsewhere in the budget, then yet it is.
and if it doesn't?
| 349 |
Velvet Elvis Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:40:30pm |
re: #293 reine.de.tout
I suspect if there's going to be a shortfall, the government is not going to be offering to lower my taxes.
So the fact that I pay a lower rate of tax because of my income, than someone else who makes more than I do, is NOT A SUBSIDY.
Yes it is. Obama's recent tax cuts are subsidizing the middle class.
| 350 |
Nervous Norvous Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:40:48pm |
re: #346 reine.de.tout
Well - yeah, some here have defined it that way.
Merriam has not.
And I don't accept Obdi's definition.
Then I think it's a matter of you say tomahto, I say tomayto
| 351 |
reine.de.tout Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:41:07pm |
re: #344 Conservative Moonbat
If that tax cut give to you has to be accounted for by raising revenue elsewhere in the budget, then yet it is.
And how often do you think the government is going to reduce what I owe when there is a shortfall that has to be collected somewhere else? In what universe is that going to happen?
| 353 |
Varek Raith Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:41:14pm |
re: #347 JasonA
Hey, PT. I've played it for a total of an hour and a half so far. I'm going to give it some more time, but it really hasn't grabbed me so far.
Kids.
There's something I never wanna deal with!
:P
| 354 |
Velvet Elvis Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:41:26pm |
| 355 |
Obdicut Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:41:50pm |
re: #336 karmic_inquisitor
I don't think taxing the rich and getting the rich to invest are diametrically opposed.
I know a lot of very wealthy people. I know absolutely zero of them who have ever not invested in something because, if it's successful, they'll have to pay taxes on it. I know some of them who didn't invest in something because they felt the government wasn't investing enough in it. That is currently part of the situation in the economy; a lot of investors are leery of investing since the government is shaky on investment right now.
Taxes certainly can be punitive, but we're nowhere at all near that level. Tax differentials right now mostly affects people who are not investors in 'real industries', but only in the paper ones.
| 356 |
reine.de.tout Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:41:56pm |
re: #350 PT Barnum
Then I think it's a matter of you say tomahto, I say tomayto
Prolly so.
But I happen to think the distinction is important.
| 357 |
cliffster Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:42:16pm |
re: #344 Conservative Moonbat
If that tax cut give to you has to be accounted for by raising revenue elsewhere in the budget, then yet it is.
If the federal budget actually worked that way, then SO many of our problems would be solved...
| 358 |
freetoken Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:42:25pm |
Yesterday the (R) candidates for the Alaska Senate nomination had a televised debate, pitting incumbent Murkowski against Palin fav Joe Miller. From Miller's website its pretty clear he is just another extreme wingnut, but watching the vid of the debate on Youtube leaves one no option but to realize how on how stupid of an idea it was for Palin to endorse him.
| 359 |
Nervous Norvous Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:42:29pm |
Jack Horkeimer died (PBS viewers will know who I'm talking about)
| 360 |
Aceofwhat? Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:42:31pm |
re: #354 Conservative Moonbat
That was a bad way of wording that
i think the word you're looking for is "uncle"
;)
| 361 |
Kragar Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:43:10pm |
re: #342 Varek Raith
Frikkin' WH freaks.
The Emperor protects. He just happens to protect a little better when you're wearing a full suit of carapace armor and a helgun at your side.
| 362 |
Nervous Norvous Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:43:17pm |
re: #353 Varek Raith
Kids.
There's something I never wanna deal with!
:P
Sorry to hear that..I understand LOTR is going free to play as well...
| 363 |
Varek Raith Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:43:25pm |
| 364 |
Obdicut Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:43:56pm |
re: #343 reine.de.tout
It belongs to me.
I have a legal obligation to pay whatever is my share in any given year. And I do. Gladly.
I'm sorry, Reine, but to me that is a contradictory statement. If it legally belongs to someone else, and you have to give it to them, then it's not yours. It's theirs.
Like I said, if I make a deal with a guy that I'll give him every tenth fish that I catch, that tenth one is never really mine. It's always his. It's in my net, but it's his the moment I catch it. Likewise, with taxes. You know the deal ahead of time. You know how much you will owe on your fishes. You know, when you earn it, how much of it is the government's. I'd submit that it never really is yours, that portion, in exactly the same way the fish is never mine.
If you do think the fish is mine, then we're just having a more fundamental disagreement about terms, I guess.
| 366 |
Idle Drifter Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:44:05pm |
re: #326 Obdicut
Tax breaks can also be subsidies. Things can be more than one thing at once. Its rather handy.
I would appreciate it if people stopped calling me odd and crazy for using completely normal economic terminology.
I don't think you are crazy or odd. It's the terminology that I have a problem with as each item has a set of different conditions. One is the lesser or lack of taxation. While the other is taxation with a refund or assistance based on the submitting the proper paper work and gaining the approval of the proper authority to receive that said refund.
| 367 |
Velvet Elvis Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:44:21pm |
re: #345 karmic_inquisitor
BTW - how many people here who are against corporate subsidies are also against subsidies for private higher education?
Like Pell Grants? People should be able to spend them however they want.
I prefer research grants go to public institutions, but whoever is doing the best work should ultimately get the money.
| 369 |
What, me worry? Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:44:38pm |
re: #340 Nimed
And courts. Ayn Rand was a minarchist. She also believed that there is no such thing as a natural monopoly, and that anti-trust laws should be abolished.
There are even crazier libertarians out there. Anarcho-capitalists believe that the army, police and courts ought to be private, rather then run by a "State monopoly".
You should check out the vids. Easy to find. There's one of her and a very young Mike Wallace, probably in the 50s. Mike lights up a ciggy during the interview lol
The Phil Donahue show was interesting. The first 10 minutes or so, she comes across like a cute, hip, little old lady. Then when she starts talking about how we should get rid of special needs education, which was something fairly new in the 70s, the audience started to gasp. How we support handicapped people when they'll never contribute anything to society anyway, etc. Piece a work, she was.
| 370 |
Nervous Norvous Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:44:47pm |
re: #347 JasonA
Hey, PT. I've played it for a total of an hour and a half so far. I'm going to give it some more time, but it really hasn't grabbed me so far.
Do give it a bit more time...it took me about 5 -10 hours to really get into it..it's not Wow...that's for sure. It's more focused on dungeons and quests rather than single player action.
| 371 |
elbruce Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:44:52pm |
| 372 |
cliffster Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:45:13pm |
re: #355 Obdicut
That just doesn't make sense. An investment is either worth making or not, based on risk vs reward. The more you tax the reward, the more investments are necessarily going to be mathematically not worth the risk.
| 373 |
Stanghazi Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:45:25pm |
| 374 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:45:33pm |
| 375 |
Four More Tears Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:46:14pm |
re: #370 PT Barnum
Do give it a bit more time...it took me about 5 -10 hours to really get into it..it's not Wow...that's for sure. It's more focused on dungeons and quests rather than single player action.
I haven't given up yet. And the whole Socialist "free" thing gives me an incentive to give it a little more time.
| 376 |
Obdicut Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:46:51pm |
re: #366 Idle Drifter
I don't think you are crazy or odd. It's the terminology that I have a problem with as each item has a set of different conditions. One is the lesser or lack of taxation. While the other is taxation with a refund or assistance based on the submitting the proper paper work and gaining the approval of the proper authority to receive that said refund.
Oh, okay, I get you. Lesser taxation is just removal of the paperwork, from my perspective. But I'm not sure exactly what you mean by lesser taxation.
If Company X maxes xidgets, and is taxed at 5% because it's an xidget company, and Company Y makes yidgets, and is taxed at 8% because it is a yidget company, then Company X is receiving an indirect subsidy.
| 377 |
Four More Tears Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:46:55pm |
re: #374 WindUpBird
I'm 34 as well, I know I don't always act it :D
I think you're aging process was accelerated.
| 378 |
reine.de.tout Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:46:59pm |
re: #296 WindUpBird
And I was a government employee.
And was quite aware how my paycheck was funded.
And very careful to give the best possible value for that paycheck.
| 379 |
Nervous Norvous Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:47:00pm |
re: #372 cliffster
That just doesn't make sense. An investment is either worth making or not, based on risk vs reward. The more you tax the reward, the more investments are necessarily going to be mathematically not worth the risk.
Except that most investments require there be a demand or potential demand to be worthwhile. This is why I never understood trickle down economics. If there's no demand, why would anybody spend the money?
| 380 |
freetoken Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:47:02pm |
Pick up this video starting at 7:49 :
Murkowski's response is probably about as good as one could hope for, given the limited time.
| 381 |
elbruce Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:47:28pm |
re: #372 cliffster
That just doesn't make sense. An investment is either worth making or not, based on risk vs reward. The more you tax the reward, the more investments are necessarily going to be mathematically not worth the risk.
Only relative to other investments. If your tax covers 'em evenly across the board, then that all balances out and the investor is still left with their original choice.
| 382 |
Nimed Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:47:50pm |
re: #356 reine.de.tout
Prolly so.
But I happen to think the distinction is important.
Well, the discussion is mostly semantics, but here's a way to look at it: if you pay more in taxes than the expenditure of your federal and state taxes divided by the the populations of interest, you're currently not being subsidized. There are lots of problems with this indicator, but it's not a bad first approximation.
| 383 |
windsagio Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:47:53pm |
re: #378 reine.de.tout
I just don't get the idea that things you owe to others are still yours.
It just does not compute.
| 384 |
Nervous Norvous Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:47:56pm |
re: #377 JasonA
I think you're aging process was accelerated.
I'm 48, but I feel 24, except in the morning when I first get up then I feel 80.
| 385 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:48:03pm |
re: #326 Obdicut
Tax breaks can also be subsidies. Things can be more than one thing at once. Its rather handy.
I would appreciate it if people stopped calling me odd and crazy for using completely normal economic terminology.
Well, the problem is you got all that booklearnin'
| 386 |
Four More Tears Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:48:53pm |
re: #384 PT Barnum
I'm 48, but I feel 24, except in the morning when I first get up then I feel 80.
Yeah, that pre-caffeine or nicotine time can be like that.
| 387 |
reine.de.tout Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:48:57pm |
re: #326 Obdicut
Tax breaks can also be subsidies. Things can be more than one thing at once. Its rather handy.
I would appreciate it if people stopped calling me odd and crazy for using completely normal economic terminology.
Oh hell, Obdi.
I haven't seen anyone call YOU odd or crazy.
They saved it for me.
Along with a flip whiny dismissal, "I can't believe you think that!".
pfft.
| 388 |
elbruce Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:49:06pm |
re: #379 PT Barnum
Except that most investments require there be a demand or potential demand to be worthwhile. This is why I never understood trickle down economics. If there's no demand, why would anybody spend the money?
All that ends up happening is that all the extra investment just overinflates the price of the assets, leading to a bubble burst when the market corrects.
| 389 |
Nervous Norvous Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:49:12pm |
re: #383 windsagio
I just don't get the idea that things you owe to others are still yours.
It just does not compute.
They're still yours if you decide to default on the debt.
| 390 |
webevintage Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:49:40pm |
re: #336 karmic_inquisitor
People alter their behavior all of the time (and even irrationally) because of taxation. i have a friend who 1) constantly tells me how WalMart is destroying my town, and 2) has bought just about everything he needs via the internet over the last 5 years to avoid sales tax. At least WalMart collects sales tax for my town.
That is irrational since sales taxes help pay for the services he probably uses in the city/town he live in.
I one the other hand hate to drive and shop and will buy off the internet (and pay shipping) just to avoid having to shop and/or drive anywhere.
| 391 |
Nimed Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:50:00pm |
re: #364 Obdicut
I'm sorry, Reine, but to me that is a contradictory statement. If it legally belongs to someone else, and you have to give it to them, then it's not yours. It's theirs.
Like I said, if I make a deal with a guy that I'll give him every tenth fish that I catch, that tenth one is never really mine. It's always his. It's in my net, but it's his the moment I catch it. Likewise, with taxes. You know the deal ahead of time. You know how much you will owe on your fishes. You know, when you earn it, how much of it is the government's. I'd submit that it never really is yours, that portion, in exactly the same way the fish is never mine.
If you do think the fish is mine, then we're just having a more fundamental disagreement about terms, I guess.
NO! THE CONTRACT WITH TEH GUMINT IS NOT VOLUNTARY!!1!
(channeling libertarian moralist)
| 393 |
Vicious Babushka Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:50:14pm |
re: #369 marjoriemoon
You should check out the vids. Easy to find. There's one of her and a very young Mike Wallace, probably in the 50s. Mike lights up a ciggy during the interview lol
The Phil Donahue show was interesting. The first 10 minutes or so, she comes across like a cute, hip, little old lady. Then when she starts talking about how we should get rid of special needs education, which was something fairly new in the 70s, the audience started to gasp. How we support handicapped people when they'll never contribute anything to society anyway, etc. Piece a work, she was.
Lebensunwertes Leben, nicht wahr?
| 394 |
webevintage Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:50:29pm |
re: #358 freetoken
Yesterday the (R) candidates for the Alaska Senate nomination had a televised debate, pitting incumbent Murkowski against Palin fav Joe Miller. From Miller's website its pretty clear he is just another extreme wingnut, but watching the vid of the debate on Youtube leaves one no option but to realize how on how stupid of an idea it was for Palin to endorse him.
President Palin has become the kiss of death to a candidate.
| 395 |
b_sharp Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:50:29pm |
re: #136 Aceofwhat?
that, and i fully cop to not being healthy or quite right in the head...i mean, look at my avatar...
I dunno, that's not too bad, except maybe for the hairy pits.
| 396 |
windsagio Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:50:36pm |
re: #387 reine.de.tout
I think this is one of those basic ways of thinking kind of things... Its almost incoprehensible that somebody would think that way about it.
(ok that language is a little strong but you know what I mean)
| 397 |
Kragar Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:50:42pm |
re: #391 Nimed
NO! THE CONTRACT WITH TEH GUMINT IS NOT VOLUNTARY!!1!
(channeling libertarian moralist)
GOLD FRINGE!!!
| 398 |
Nervous Norvous Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:50:43pm |
re: #387 reine.de.tout
Oh hell, Obdi.
I haven't seen anyone call YOU odd or crazy.
They saved it for me.
Along with a flip whiny dismissal, "I can't believe you think that!".
pfft.
Reine, I believe the quote was I have a hard time understanding why you think that, not I can't believe you can't think that.
There is a fundamental difference between the two statements.
| 399 |
Nimed Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:51:34pm |
re: #386 JasonA
Yeah, that pre-caffeine or nicotine time can be like that.
By the way, still hanging on to the robocop cig?
| 400 |
Four More Tears Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:52:05pm |
| 401 |
sagehen Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:52:05pm |
re: #174 reine.de.tout
Louisiana is on a program to attract the film industry to film movies here. They do it by granting "tax credits" to the production companies - some sort of program where these can be "traded" or whatever, I'm not certain of the exact details of how it works.
At any given time, there are 3 or 4 or more movies being filmed in Louisiana. With crews. Needing food, lodging, peripheral services. People here in Baton Rouge have built and are adding onto a movie set (a new business - that hires people with families to feed).
Tax "credits", tax "subsidies", and just plain reduced rates, WORK to move money into the hands of people.
Tax incentives to film companies make sense, because the film companies could just as easily go somewhere else. Oil and gas and coal companies don't make location decisions based on taxes, they're ruled by geology. Subsidizing them seems to me to be unnecessary to get them to work in a particular location, and it increases how much the jurisdiction has to tax somebody else.
| 402 |
cliffster Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:52:06pm |
re: #381 elbruce
Only relative to other investments. If your tax covers 'em evenly across the board, then that all balances out and the investor is still left with their original choice.
indeed. And that original choice included, "don't invest at all" or "invest in low-risk bonds" etc etc. I like the angle you took, but I don't think you really proved what you were trying to...
| 403 |
reine.de.tout Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:52:09pm |
re: #383 windsagio
I just don't get the idea that things you owe to others are still yours.
It just does not compute.
And it doesn't compute to me, that the things I earn aren't mine, but belong to someone else.
If the law says I am obligated to pay X tax, I will do it.
And be very grateful for living in this country, where middle-class me is richer beyond the wildest dreams of many many people in the rest of the world.
But I've earned it; it's mine. I pay what the government says I owe as my part of the contract for our society. It's the "price" government has set on the services and benefits I receive. If Ford says pay this if you want this car, and I want the car, I will pay it. The money doesn't belong to Ford until I have paid it.
| 404 |
swamprat Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:52:25pm |
re: #345 karmic_inquisitor
BTW - how many people here who are against corporate subsidies are also against subsidies for private higher education?
I am undecided about corporate welfare; too complex.
Education- provided the country has a very healthy economy- will repay itself every time. Unless there are not enough jobs and industry to field them. If you educate people properly, though, they will damn well MAKE their own way. "Properly" is the key here. Independent thought is imperative.
| 405 |
Nervous Norvous Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:52:34pm |
re: #398 PT Barnum
Reine, I believe the quote was I have a hard time understanding why you think that, not I can't believe you can't think that.
There is a fundamental difference between the two statements.
While I can understand why you might think that, I don't agree.
| 406 |
Nervous Norvous Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:52:52pm |
| 407 |
cliffster Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:52:55pm |
re: #392 Varek Raith
Economics+Me=Headache.
I'm saving this comment to be used against you in a future arguement
| 408 |
Four More Tears Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:53:06pm |
re: #399 Nimed
By the way, still hanging on to the robocop cig?
Clutching it like it's that battery Tony Stark had to carry around.
| 409 |
windsagio Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:53:30pm |
re: #403 reine.de.tout
It's a basic philosophical difference.
Of course, being on Obdicut's side, that means I'm right >>
(only guy on LGF I"m afraid to debate against... and yes, I'm a suckup)
| 410 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:53:31pm |
re: #390 webevintage
That is irrational since sales taxes help pay for the services he probably uses in the city/town he live in.
I one the other hand hate to drive and shop and will buy off the internet (and pay shipping) just to avoid having to shop and/or drive anywhere.
yeah, my behavior is not affected by taxation, it is totally affected by convenience. If the sales tax for the internet was 10% I'd still buy the same stuff off the internet, because it's saving me time and effort. Computer gear alone, I have to head down to Frys, which is like a 40 minute drive one way, then I have to wander haplessly around a gigantic warehouse for the one thing I need. On the internet, it takes me one minute. Click, done.
| 411 |
Four More Tears Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:53:37pm |
| 412 |
What, me worry? Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:53:41pm |
| 413 |
Varek Raith Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:53:49pm |
re: #407 cliffster
I'm saving this comment to be used against you in a future arguement
That's fine.
I tend not to argue about economics since I know jack squat about it.
I just snark at the libertarians.
:)
| 414 |
reine.de.tout Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:54:09pm |
re: #364 Obdicut
I'm sorry, Reine, but to me that is a contradictory statement. If it legally belongs to someone else, and you have to give it to them, then it's not yours. It's theirs.
Like I said, if I make a deal with a guy that I'll give him every tenth fish that I catch, that tenth one is never really mine. It's always his. It's in my net, but it's his the moment I catch it. Likewise, with taxes. You know the deal ahead of time. You know how much you will owe on your fishes. You know, when you earn it, how much of it is the government's. I'd submit that it never really is yours, that portion, in exactly the same way the fish is never mine.
If you do think the fish is mine, then we're just having a more fundamental disagreement about terms, I guess.
See - I see the fish as mine, and I make a gift of it of my own will.
Of course in the case of government and taxes, I haven't been part of making the deal. The gov't simply decides, and tells me what I owe. And - fine! I'll pay it.
And I'll also still give away 1/10 of my fish to other things, as well.
| 415 |
Dark_Falcon Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:54:11pm |
re: #253 reine.de.tout
No, you're not "giving" me money, to tell me that you're going to allow me to keep $200 of what I've earned.
You are simply not taking as much as you could.
I'm not arguing that taxes are not real obligations, of course they are.
Nor am I arguing that breaks are relief from those obligations. They are, of course.I'm arguing that if I've earned it, it's MINE. And allowing me to keep more of it than before, is NOT subsidizing ME. It's just taking less away from me.
Agreed. Sorry I dropped out for a time. Computer had a slow down.
| 416 |
Nimed Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:54:32pm |
re: #397 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)
GOLD FRINGE!!!
EXCUSE ME FOR A MINUTE I'M GONNA ASK THE FEDS IF I'M ALLOWED TO TAKE A PISS ON MY PROPARTY!
| 417 |
Fat Bastard Vegetarian Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:54:36pm |
re: #403 reine.de.tout
Taking into consideration that we are able to reduce our tax liabilities with deductions also lends to your argument.
It's yours'... you just have to find out a way to keep it.
| 418 |
Obdicut Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:54:47pm |
re: #372 cliffster
That just doesn't make sense. An investment is either worth making or not, based on risk vs reward. The more you tax the reward, the more investments are necessarily going to be mathematically not worth the risk.
Well, you're ignoring that one can offset capital losses, for one thing. But we do give huge, huge tax breaks to investment already-- capital gains tax are half what income tax are. That means if I do work with my hands and my mind that's worth a million dollars, I pay more tax on it than someone who sat on his ass and day-trades his way to a million dollars. That part really does annoy me on a basic level.
But speaking purely economically: There is an inherent risk in uninvested money, that being inflation. Money that is not invested, that is not working to provide profit, is always losing value. You can always be certain of that. This is why people invest their money, when they feel too unsure of the risk-reward from stocks, in bonds; government bonds, at that. The mathematical proportion that taxation plays certainly has a factor, but it is nowhere near as large-- and is much better defined-- than the inherent risk of investment itself.
There really are not a lot of risky investors out there, and those who are, generally make good use of the hedging provided to them by capital loss rules.
| 419 |
reine.de.tout Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:55:03pm |
re: #409 windsagio
It's a basic philosophical difference.
Of course, being on Obdicut's side, that means I'm right >>
(only guy on LGF I"m afraid to debate against... and yes, I'm a suckup)
As long as you don't pull the bullshit, "I can't believe you think that", which is dismissive and condescending and just, really, un-fucking-necessary in order to have a conversation, we'll be OK.
Except I'm the one who's right.
| 420 |
goddamnedfrank Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:55:14pm |
What is the polar opposite of a government subsidy? An excise tax increase.
| 421 |
reine.de.tout Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:55:25pm |
re: #417 Fat Bastard Vegetarian
Taking into consideration that we are able to reduce our tax liabilities with deductions also lends to your argument.
It's yours'... you just have to find out a way to keep it.
{FBV}
Love ya.
| 422 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:55:33pm |
re: #387 reine.de.tout
Oh hell, Obdi.
I haven't seen anyone call YOU odd or crazy.
They saved it for me.
Along with a flip whiny dismissal, "I can't believe you think that!".
pfft.
It's not so much a dismissal as that I literally cannot comprehend it
| 423 |
reine.de.tout Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:56:08pm |
re: #422 WindUpBird
It's not so much a dismissal as that I literally cannot comprehend it
Nor I, your view.
Sorry.
| 425 |
Four More Tears Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:56:18pm |
re: #419 reine.de.tout
As long as you don't pull the bullshit, "I can't believe you think that", which is dismissive and condescending and just, really, un-fucking-necessary in order to have a conversation, we'll be OK.
Except I'm the one who's right.
I love that feeling of shock I get when someone who usually maintains a clean mouth lets an F-bomb fly.
| 426 |
Nervous Norvous Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:57:19pm |
re: #425 JasonA
I love that feeling of shock I get when someone who usually maintains a clean mouth lets an F-bomb fly.
Makes it all the more effective, which is why it's better to save the expletives for times when they are truly required.
| 427 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:57:20pm |
re: #415 Dark_Falcon
Agreed. Sorry I dropped out for a time. Computer had a slow down.
Do you think you'd have the ability to earn what you earn now in a 3rd world country with small government?
| 428 |
Obdicut Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:57:24pm |
re: #414 reine.de.tout
See - I see the fish as mine, and I make a gift of it of my own will.
How is it a gift of your own free will when you made a deal with the guy to give him every tenth fish?
Of course in the case of government and taxes, I haven't been part of making the deal. The gov't simply decides, and tells me what I owe. And - fine! I'll pay it.
You have been part of making the deal. No taxation without representation! And you have representation.
The government does not arbitrarily decide. It is voted on. By people you vote for.
| 429 |
reine.de.tout Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:57:31pm |
re: #415 Dark_Falcon
Agreed. Sorry I dropped out for a time. Computer had a slow down.
DF - suggest you keep your head low on this 'un.
It's winding down anyhow.
And I'm pissed, not at the disagreement, but being treated so damned dismissively (WUB - that's you).
| 430 |
elbruce Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:57:36pm |
re: #402 cliffster
indeed. And that original choice included, "don't invest at all" or "invest in low-risk bonds" etc etc. I like the angle you took, but I don't think you really proved what you were trying to...
I'm not sure if it's possible to not invest at all, when you really think about it. Even if I take my money in small bills and stuff it under my mattress, I'm technically invested in the currency market, and am techinically gaining or losing wealth based on the strength of the dollar relative to other currencies at any moment.
| 431 |
reine.de.tout Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:58:20pm |
re: #428 Obdicut
How is it a gift of your own free will when you made a deal with the guy to give him every tenth fish?
You have been part of making the deal. No taxation without representation! And you have representation.
The government does not arbitrarily decide. It is voted on. By people you vote for.
Because I made the agreement!
And by living here, I agree to abide by the laws of this country.
And pay what is due.
| 432 |
cliffster Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:58:27pm |
re: #418 Obdicut
There really are not a lot of risky investors out there, and those who are, generally make good use of the hedging provided to them by capital loss rules.
Yes, there are. And yes, they do, but that doesn't change the math behind the risk/reward of an individual investment.
| 433 |
Obdicut Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:58:55pm |
re: #429 reine.de.tout
Reine, you did say that my use of the word subsidy to describe, well, indirect subsidies was 'odd'. That was also rather dismissive, especially since it's in perfectly common economic usage.
| 434 |
reine.de.tout Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:59:14pm |
re: #425 JasonA
I love that feeling of shock I get when someone who usually maintains a clean mouth lets an F-bomb fly.
Take it as sort of a clue as to how pissed off I am about that.
That's one of those things that just ruin my damned day.
| 435 |
Four More Tears Sat, Aug 21, 2010 8:59:46pm |
Wow. This is like the worst conversation ever to just jump in the middle of. I'm really confused.
A little buzzed, too.
| 436 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:00:03pm |
re: #423 reine.de.tout
Nor I, your view.
Sorry.
It always just boils down to this for me:
Would you have the opportunity to earn what you earn anywhere on earth? Or is your earning potential dependent upon America's government infrastructure, dependent upon conditions and safeguards and infrastruture and laws that were put in place by government? (and yes, that includes our military)
Do banks govern themselves? Or are there laws and infrastructure in place to ensure that they play by rules and make some semblance of sense?
| 437 |
Obdicut Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:00:06pm |
re: #432 cliffster
Yes, there are. And yes, they do, but that doesn't change the math behind the risk/reward of an individual investment.
Well, yes it does, actually. Because people don't make investments involving all of their money, all at once. (Or they shouldn't-- those who do are normally going into a small business, and it's not the same thing.) They balance the risk-reward of a suite of investments.
You can't really dismiss part of the tax policy-- capital losses being deductible-- in order to make a point about taxation on capital gains. It doesn't make any sense.
| 438 |
reine.de.tout Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:00:14pm |
re: #433 Obdicut
Reine, you did say that my use of the word subsidy to describe, well, indirect subsidies was 'odd'. That was also rather dismissive, especially since it's in perfectly common economic usage.
Well, let me change it then, I think it's odd.
Not you - you're not odd.
I think that idea is odd.
And - you think mine is odd, and that's fine.
You weren't dismissive to me, anyhooo.
| 439 |
cliffster Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:00:37pm |
re: #430 elbruce
I'm not sure if it's possible to not invest at all, when you really think about it. Even if I take my money in small bills and stuff it under my mattress, I'm technically invested in the currency market, and am techinically gaining or losing wealth based on the strength of the dollar relative to other currencies at any moment.
That's true, but it doesn't really add anything to the discussion...
| 440 |
Dark_Falcon Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:00:44pm |
re: #427 WindUpBird
Do you think you'd have the ability to earn what you earn now in a 3rd world country with small government?
What does that have to do with the point I was making originally.
| 441 |
Nimed Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:00:58pm |
re: #422 WindUpBird
It's not so much a dismissal as that I literally cannot comprehend it
It's too late for you, you've been brainwashed by Seattle Marxists since your infancy -- I'm amazed you still seem to grasp the concept of ownership.
| 442 |
Nervous Norvous Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:00:59pm |
re: #431 reine.de.tout
Because I made the agreement!
And by living here, I agree to abide by the laws of this country.
And pay what is due.
To confuse the issue further, it could be argued that the total resources of the society always belong to the entire society and not individuals. The societies function is to move resources between members in ways that provide for the continuation of that society. Those resources never really belong to anyone, they're merely used until they are put back into general circulation again.
| 443 |
Idle Drifter Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:01:00pm |
re: #376 Obdicut
Oh, okay, I get you. Lesser taxation is just removal of the paperwork, from my perspective. But I'm not sure exactly what you mean by lesser taxation.
If Company X maxes xidgets, and is taxed at 5% because it's an xidget company, and Company Y makes yidgets, and is taxed at 8% because it is a yidget company, then Company X is receiving an indirect subsidy.
I just see it as an unfair tax cut rather than an indirect subsidy. Finding parity in the current tax system is difficult as favored companies and technologies will win out with the more clout they hold on the government hill. No system is infallible and it will always be a work in progress. In this case we both will simply just call it as we see it and debate the justice of it all in the big picture. Though I did enjoy debating the nuances with you.
| 444 |
reine.de.tout Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:01:54pm |
re: #436 WindUpBird
It always just boils down to this for me:
Would you have the opportunity to earn what you earn anywhere on earth? Or is your earning potential dependent upon America's government infrastructure, dependent upon conditions and safeguards and infrastruture and laws that were put in place by government? (and yes, that includes our military)
Do banks govern themselves? Or are there laws and infrastructure in place to ensure that they play by rules and make some semblance of sense?
No, I would not have had the opportunities I've had here, anywhere else.
I am so blessed to live in this country.
And I have no issue with being taxed.
What I have an issue with is the characterization that I pay my taxes because it's the government's money to begin with. I pay my taxes freely and gladly, with my money.
| 445 |
Obdicut Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:01:55pm |
re: #431 reine.de.tout
Because I made the agreement!
And by living here, I agree to abide by the laws of this country.
And pay what is due.
Okay. This is just a terminology thing, then. If I make a deal with a guy whereby I give him every tenth fish in return for fishing on his land, I'd consider it rather insulting to him to tell him that that tenth fish was a gift of my own free will to him. Instead, I'd consider it a debt and an obligation to him. Gifts, to me, are things that you give when there is no obligation, when you haven't agreed to one.
| 446 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:01:56pm |
re: #429 reine.de.tout
DF - suggest you keep your head low on this 'un.
It's winding down anyhow.
And I'm pissed, not at the disagreement, but being treated so damned dismissively (WUB - that's you).
I'm not treating you dismissively at all, I'm telling you the truth, the absolute truth about what I believe, and you're playing the victim.
| 448 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:02:32pm |
Now I WAS being dismissive to cliffster, that's perfectly true
| 449 |
cliffster Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:02:45pm |
re: #437 Obdicut
the deductibility of capital losses has no impact on whether an individual investment is worth making or not. If an investment is a loss, then the deduction would have the same mathematical impact on all the alternatives to the investment, as well as the investment. I think we must be talking about two different things.
| 450 |
reine.de.tout Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:03:03pm |
re: #446 WindUpBird
I'm not treating you dismissively at all, I'm telling you the truth, the absolute truth about what I believe, and you're playing the victim.
*snort*
right.
Now it's your turn?
| 451 |
Nimed Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:03:15pm |
re: #431 reine.de.tout
Because I made the agreement!
And by living here, I agree to abide by the laws of this country.
And pay what is due.
Well, you didn't make the agreement -- you were born into it. Social contract, baby.
| 452 |
Obdicut Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:03:46pm |
re: #443 Idle Drifter
I just see it as an unfair tax cut rather than an indirect subsidy.
Okay. In common economic language, it would be called an indirect subsidy.
For example, the fact that we don't pay sales tax on food is an indirect subsidy.
| 453 |
cliffster Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:03:51pm |
re: #446 WindUpBird
I'm not treating you dismissively at all, I'm telling you the truth, the absolute truth about what I believe, and you're playing the victim.
No, you're being as asshole. I honestly think that when you go on your condescending, sarcastic rampages, you don't realize what a dick you're being.
| 454 |
sagehen Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:04:13pm |
re: #236 windsagio
Let me try putting it this way:
It seems to me that this whole discussion is based on a distinction between whether taxes are what you owe the government for various things vs. them being what the government takes from you for various things.
If you owe it, its really clearly a subsidy. If its just the government taking what's rightfully yours, its not.
"Taxes are the price we pay for a civilized society."
Oliver Wendell Holmes
| 455 |
Nervous Norvous Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:04:25pm |
re: #451 Nimed
Well, you didn't make the agreement -- you were born into it. Social contract, baby.
She made the agreement by not opting out of it (emigrating)
Yes, I'm playing both sides, but I can see both points of view, I just think that claiming that everything you earn is yours isn't necessarily accurate.
| 456 |
Fat Bastard Vegetarian Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:05:39pm |
re: #444 reine.de.tout
Y'all are kind of "stump chasing" at this point.
Careful, y'all might just turn in to a delicious puddle of melted butter.
| 457 |
Obdicut Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:06:09pm |
re: #449 cliffster
the deductibility of capital losses has no impact on whether an individual investment is worth making or not.
Yes, it does, if you have deductible losses you can apply. Why on earth are you trying to analyze every investment as though it's happening in a vacuum?
If an investment is a loss, then the deduction would have the same mathematical impact on all the alternatives to the investment, as well as the investment. I think we must be talking about two different things.
I have no idea what you're talking about there, definitely. My point is that not only does the government tax profits, it gives credit for losses-- it taxes not on each individual investment, but on your entire investment income, which is why it's silly of you to talk about individual investments.
| 458 |
Nervous Norvous Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:06:28pm |
re: #456 Fat Bastard Vegetarian
Y'all are kind of "stump chasing" at this point.
Careful, y'all might just turn in to a delicious puddle of melted butter.
And we're right back to the popcorn posts at the start of the thread.
| 459 |
reine.de.tout Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:06:49pm |
re: #445 Obdicut
Okay. This is just a terminology thing, then. If I make a deal with a guy whereby I give him every tenth fish in return for fishing on his land, I'd consider it rather insulting to him to tell him that that tenth fish was a gift of my own free will to him. Instead, I'd consider it a debt and an obligation to him. Gifts, to me, are things that you give when there is no obligation, when you haven't agreed to one.
See - I don't know how you can reduce the good-heartedness and generosity of citizens by looking at something like that as an obligation, a debt. Really.
The law says I'm obligated to pay taxes. And I do it. And I'm glad to do it, for all the reasons the government has decided it needs to use that money. I don't pay my taxes with anger toward the government, or for any of the needs government has determined are important.
I do get angry when I'm told it's not my money to begin with, and that if my taxes are reduced, I am somehow being "subsidized". That's the whole thing in a nutshell, right there, and a
| 460 |
Nimed Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:07:34pm |
re: #455 PT Barnum
She made the agreement by not opting out of it (emigrating)
Yes, I'm playing both sides, but I can see both points of view, I just think that claiming that everything you earn is yours isn't necessarily accurate.
reine could, by emigrating and rescinding citizenship, completely cease the agreement. But the possibility of changing clubs later doesn't change the fact that she was born belonging to this club.
| 461 |
reine.de.tout Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:07:57pm |
re: #456 Fat Bastard Vegetarian
Y'all are kind of "stump chasing" at this point.
Careful, y'all might just turn in to a delicious puddle of melted butter.
Thing is FBV, I truly think it's an important distinction, one that's been lost somehow.
| 462 |
elbruce Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:08:32pm |
re: #439 cliffster
That's true, but it doesn't really add anything to the discussion...
That'd be the discussion about the meaning of the word "subsidy," right? Yeah, let's keep having that...
| 463 |
reine.de.tout Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:08:46pm |
re: #460 Nimed
reine could, by emigrating and rescinding citizenship, completely cease the agreement. But the possibility of changing clubs later doesn't change the fact that she was born belonging to this club.
LOL.
Y'all.
Really.
Don't be talking 'bout me behind my back!
(and I'm laughing here).
| 464 |
spikester Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:09:27pm |
re: #456 Fat Bastard Vegetarian
Had to ding you for the racial reference
| 465 |
reine.de.tout Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:09:47pm |
re: #451 Nimed
Well, you didn't make the agreement -- you were born into it. Social contract, baby.
I could choose to leave.
| 466 |
Fat Bastard Vegetarian Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:10:11pm |
re: #456 Fat Bastard Vegetarian
Speaking of which... folks were speaking of how old they are earlier... I am so old that the story of "Little Black Sambo" was told in my first grade class.
| 467 |
Fat Bastard Vegetarian Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:10:59pm |
re: #464 spikester
Wow. How delicate you are.
| 468 |
cliffster Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:11:06pm |
re: #457 Obdicut
Yes, it does, if you have deductible losses you can apply. Why on earth are you trying to analyze every investment as though it's happening in a vacuum?
I have no idea what you're talking about there, definitely. My point is that not only does the government tax profits, it gives credit for losses-- it taxes not on each individual investment, but on your entire investment income, which is why it's silly of you to talk about individual investments.
opportunity cost. Whatever I made or lost on investment X, what could I have made on other investments. ok, the deduction for losses does have an impact, but one would hope it's not much of an impact or one won't be investing for long!
| 469 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:11:36pm |
re: #444 reine.de.tout
No, I would not have had the opportunities I've had here, anywhere else.
I am so blessed to live in this country.
And I have no issue with being taxed.What I have an issue with is the characterization that I pay my taxes because it's the government's money to begin with. I pay my taxes freely and gladly, with my money.
We're just not ever going to see eye to eye on this subject, it's never going to happen
If we were talking about s single service government provides, I could see the point, maybe DMV fees, or a fishing license, or some arbitraty nickle-and-dime thing
But we're actually talking about your, and my, very existence in society, quality of life, access to care, safety, safe harbor for your movey itself, all these things. The FDIC alone, you want to talk about your money, you're conecptually giving a bank power over your money, it's the government that's putting safeguards in place to make sure that the bank can't collapse and take your money with it.
I'm not sure there's a single person here who would argue that the FDIC is "big government". Necessary stuff. Critical stuff. Al paid for with taxes. Not grants, not gifts, not freely given just for the hell of it money. Taxes. Taxes that you gotta pay or else they'll take it from you. It's the way of the world. if you're here for the calendar year, a chunk of your money is then no longer yours.
Now, if you leave America? Then it's your money, out there on some mysterious island or wherever you live that isn't governed by any country. But as long as you're American, you're utilizing all these protections, all this infrastucture, all these opportunities. And you're using them before your taxes are due.
I guess this is why I'm not a conservative! Fundamental philosophical platform at the core of my being
| 470 |
karmic_inquisitor Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:11:55pm |
re: #355 Obdicut
I don't think taxing the rich and getting the rich to invest are diametrically opposed.
I know a lot of very wealthy people. I know absolutely zero of them who have ever not invested in something because, if it's successful, they'll have to pay taxes on it. I know some of them who didn't invest in something because they felt the government wasn't investing enough in it. That is currently part of the situation in the economy; a lot of investors are leery of investing since the government is shaky on investment right now.
Taxes certainly can be punitive, but we're nowhere at all near that level. Tax differentials right now mostly affects people who are not investors in 'real industries', but only in the paper ones.
Lots of stuff in there.
First, I don't think i made the proposition that people won't invest because there someday may be some tax to pay. To the contrary, the only way to make tax policy effective is to have all the players on the hook and then incentivize activity that will let them off the hook a little.
Second, I would say people are shaky on investment based on certainty. Tax policy needs to be stable to be effective. Does that mean you never change it? No. But when you say you will be changing it, offer few specifics because it will be up to congress anyway, and when the populist rhetoric from the party in power is punitive, unfocused, but assures us that we are no where near the appropriate pain threshold, you have a very unstable situation that does not invite taking big risks with piles of capital. No one knows what the policy will be. And the assurance that it won't be draconian but that some "free ride" is over is no comfort. A clear policy, even with some punitive measures, would be better than nothing being clear (though the outcome of the election may simply result in a stalmete which will add its own certainty).
We still have a tax system (thankfully) where the top few pay most of the bill. In 2008 the top 10% of the top 1% (that is the top on thousandth) reported 12 percent of the GDP on their returns and paid 20% of the federal tax bill. Think about it - that ain't bad. Sure - there are idealists who think that such wealth should not exist, but to get 20% of the revenue out of 12% of the activity is pretty cool. And that was with all the Bush "give aways" to the rich in the tax code.
Does it seem that this group is getting away with something? Or should we be upset that they exist? We could construct a punitive system that would make us feel good, but they'd simply move their activity off shore in a better jurisdiction and then we'd be stuck paying all of the bill.
I think we should be trying to figure out how to create more economic activity in this country so that the government will see more revenues and there are more jobs so that the government is paying out less aid. It isn't like this recession came about due to a natural disaster or famine - the world is configured largely as it was 5 years ago. What has us stuck right now is that the traditional engine of global growth (the US economy) is mired in uncertainty and it is chic to blame those activities that create wealth for not creating wealth evenly.
| 471 |
cliffster Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:11:56pm |
re: #462 elbruce
That'd be the discussion about the meaning of the word "subsidy," right? Yeah, let's keep having that...
eh, that's semantics really, right?
| 472 |
Obdicut Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:12:15pm |
re: #459 reine.de.tout
See - I don't know how you can reduce the good-heartedness and generosity of citizens by looking at something like that as an obligation, a debt. Really.
Mainly because it is a debt. And it is an obligation.
I don't feel generous for paying taxes. I feel damn glad I live in a country with a low amount of corruption (in general, I know LA has its whatsits) and where I can clearly calculate my taxes ahead of time and won't be hit up for a 'special' tax by some local asshole. I see taxes as an obligation, because they are an obligation. They're not a free gift I make.
The law says I'm obligated to pay taxes. And I do it. And I'm glad to do it, for all the reasons the government has decided it needs to use that money. I don't pay my taxes with anger toward the government, or for any of the needs government has determined are important.
That's cool. But notice that you're saying here you're obligated, and in the first part said you didn't understand how I could see it as an obligation. How is that not contradictory?
I do get angry when I'm told it's not my money to begin with, and that if my taxes are reduced, I am somehow being "subsidized". That's the whole thing in a nutshell, right there, and a
I didn't ever say if your taxes are reduced you're being subsidized. If you, personally, had your taxes reduced and I didn't, because you were Reine and I was Obdicut, then yes, you'd be subsidized. But that's not happening. And I always clearly said that a part of the money isn't yours because you know, ahead of time, that it belongs to the government, because you have to pay it to them. Because it's an obligation.
| 473 |
Vicious Babushka Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:12:41pm |
| 474 |
spikester Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:12:58pm |
re: #467 Fat Bastard Vegetarian
I found a book in a second hand store
yes I bought it.
no the kids dont know where it is
Yes when they are old enough (after the sex talk)
| 475 |
sagehen Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:13:03pm |
re: #265 reine.de.tout
Yes, of course that's true!
But deciding to take LESS away from me isn't subsidizing me. It's simply taking less.
If I'm taking less from you for that 1 bedroom apartment than I take from all the other people in the building who have 1 bedroom apartments, then I'm subsidizing your rent. Because *what everybody else has to pay* is the standard going rate. And I'm picking up the tab for some of yours.
| 476 |
Nimed Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:13:11pm |
re: #465 reine.de.tout
I could choose to leave.
That's what PT said, my 460 was an answer to that. You were born with the obligation of giving 1/10th of your fish to the other dude (and getting some stuff in return). You can opt out of the contract later, but you don't have the choice of not making the contract in the first place.
| 477 |
reine.de.tout Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:13:30pm |
re: #469 WindUpBird
We're just not ever going to see eye to eye on this subject, it's never going to happen
If we were talking about s single service government provides, I could see the point, maybe DMV fees, or a fishing license, or some arbitraty nickle-and-dime thing
But we're actually talking about your, and my, very existence in society, quality of life, access to care, safety, safe harbor for your movey itself, all these things. The FDIC alone, you want to talk about your money, you're conecptually giving a bank power over your money, it's the government that's putting safeguards in place to make sure that the bank can't collapse and take your money with it.
I'm not sure there's a single person here who would argue that the FDIC is "big government". Necessary stuff. Critical stuff. Al paid for with taxes. Not grants, not gifts, not freely given just for the hell of it money. Taxes. Taxes that you gotta pay or else they'll take it from you. It's the way of the world. if you're here for the calendar year, a chunk of your money is then no longer yours.
Now, if you leave America? Then it's your money, out there on some mysterious island or wherever you live that isn't governed by any country. But as long as you're American, you're utilizing all these protections, all this infrastucture, all these opportunities. And you're using them before your taxes are due.
I guess this is why I'm not a conservative! Fundamental philosophical platform at the core of my being
WUB - I've not argued that any of the things you are talking about are unnecessary, or unworthy of support. Not once. I've said the opposite, actually, if you read.
The only thing that aggravates me is the characterization that what I work for and earn is NOT MINE. It is mine. And a lower rate of tax is NOT SUBSIDIZING ME.
| 478 |
Nervous Norvous Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:13:31pm |
re: #466 Fat Bastard Vegetarian
Speaking of which... folks were speaking of how old they are earlier... I am so old that the story of "Little Black Sambo" was told in my first grade class.
I'm old enough I can remember eating at Sambo's
| 479 |
reine.de.tout Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:14:40pm |
re: #472 Obdicut
Mainly because it is a debt. And it is an obligation.
I don't feel generous for paying taxes. I feel damn glad I live in a country with a low amount of corruption (in general, I know LA has its whatsits) and where I can clearly calculate my taxes ahead of time and won't be hit up for a 'special' tax by some local asshole. I see taxes as an obligation, because they are an obligation. They're not a free gift I make.
That's cool. But notice that you're saying here you're obligated, and in the first part said you didn't understand how I could see it as an obligation. How is that not contradictory?
I didn't ever say if your taxes are reduced you're being subsidized. If you, personally, had your taxes reduced and I didn't, because you were Reine and I was Obdicut, then yes, you'd be subsidized. But that's not happening. And I always clearly said that a part of the money isn't yours because you know, ahead of time, that it belongs to the government, because you have to pay it to them. Because it's an obligation.
We're not gonna see eye to eye on this, ever.
| 480 |
Obdicut Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:14:59pm |
re: #468 cliffster
opportunity cost. Whatever I made or lost on investment X, what could I have made on other investments. ok, the deduction for losses does have an impact, but one would hope it's not much of an impact or one won't be investing for long!
Sure. But it does show that you can't talk about individual investments and get anywhere. It's about your total tax picture.
The reason we're seeing an uptick in bond buying right now is not because taxes have gone up, it's because people are afraid of the risk in the market, because the economy is shaky. Ironically, higher government spending right now would ease investors fears and lead to greater investment.
And that is straight from the arch-Republican CEO of my former company, and the manager of a hedge fund that I know, also a staunch R. (though they're probably sitting this election out, since they're fiscal Rs.)
| 482 |
reine.de.tout Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:15:40pm |
re: #476 Nimed
That's what PT said, my 460 was an answer to that. You were born with the obligation of giving 1/10th of your fish to the other dude (and getting some stuff in return). You can opt out of the contract later, but you don't have the choice of not making the contract in the first place.
Sure I do.
I can decide I do not wish to earn any income.
Or I can decide to remain in a job where my income is not taxed.
I have all sorts of options.
| 483 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:15:53pm |
re: #453 cliffster
No, you're being as asshole. I honestly think that when you go on your condescending, sarcastic rampages, you don't realize what a dick you're being.
See, it's like this. When you get all in my face with bullshit straw men, yeah you get condescended to. Perhaps you should stop insulting my intelligenc with your stale Rush Limbaugh lines, if you don't wish to be condescended to.
And by the way, I think I've spent more time explaining myself patiently to Reine on this thread than I have to anyone here in the past couple of months at least. Possibly the past year. And then she gets all pissed off because...who knows? I don't understand it.
| 484 |
Nimed Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:16:07pm |
re: #455 PT Barnum
She made the agreement by not opting out of it (emigrating)
Yes, I'm playing both sides, but I can see both points of view, I just think that claiming that everything you earn is yours isn't necessarily accurate.
Didn't answer the part in bold. Thinking of it as yours or not is not an important question because it depends solely on how you choose to define "yours".
| 485 |
swamprat Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:16:17pm |
re: #429 reine.de.tout
Mathematically, letting you keep x amount of your money is the same as giving you x amount of "their" (the governments, "our" money;
amount owed, minus me paying x, equals something
amount owed, they give me x, so I don't have to pay it, equals the same number.
The numbers might be the same, but from a personal rights and freedom viewpoint, these numbers are the result of 2 totally different transactions.
Also;
Does the government own your money, and you allow them to repossess it?
or
Does the government deserve your money and you owe them for what services they perform?
It is a matter of viewpoint.
One side is a bit more tyrannical and arrogant, than the other.
But you're still out some cash at the end of the day.
But attitude DOES matter.
| 486 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:16:44pm |
re: #469 WindUpBird
We're just not ever going to see eye to eye on this subject, it's never going to happen
If we were talking about s single service government provides, I could see the point, maybe DMV fees, or a fishing license, or some arbitraty nickle-and-dime thing
But we're actually talking about your, and my, very existence in society, quality of life, access to care, safety, safe harbor for your movey itself, all these things. The FDIC alone, you want to talk about your money, you're conecptually giving a bank power over your money, it's the government that's putting safeguards in place to make sure that the bank can't collapse and take your money with it.
I'm not sure there's a single person here who would argue that the FDIC is "big government". Necessary stuff. Critical stuff. Al paid for with taxes. Not grants, not gifts, not freely given just for the hell of it money. Taxes. Taxes that you gotta pay or else they'll take it from you. It's the way of the world. if you're here for the calendar year, a chunk of your money is then no longer yours.
Now, if you leave America? Then it's your money, out there on some mysterious island or wherever you live that isn't governed by any country. But as long as you're American, you're utilizing all these protections, all this infrastucture, all these opportunities. And you're using them before your taxes are due.
I guess this is why I'm not a conservative! Fundamental philosophical platform at the core of my being
yeah cliff
I'm just such an evil cock for like, writing all this stuff
I'm just a big meany meany meany poo poo
| 487 |
Nervous Norvous Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:17:50pm |
re: #485 swamprat
Mathematically, letting you keep x amount of your money is the same as giving you x amount of "their" (the governments, "our" money;
amount owed, minus me paying x, equals something
amount owed, they give me x, so I don't have to pay it, equals the same number.
The numbers might be the same, but from a personal rights and freedom viewpoint, these numbers are the result of 2 totally different transactions.
Also;
Does the government own your money, and you allow them to repossess it?
or
Does the government deserve your money and you owe them for what services they perform?It is a matter of viewpoint.
One side is a bit more tyrannical and arrogant, than the other.
But you're still out some cash at the end of the day.But attitude DOES matter.
I think it's a matter of how you define ownership. I don't see ownership as an absolute concept, merely a way of saying who has the current possession of a resource.
As Ben Franklin said "The use of money is the only good in having it."
| 488 |
Obdicut Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:18:07pm |
re: #470 karmic_inquisitor
I'm sorry, but the 'then they'll just offshore all their money' argument doesn't go anywhere with me, since the government could also pass laws ensuring that no, they couldn't. In addition, investment in American companies is still, economically, more worthwhile than investment in most other places. There is not an infinite universe out there for investors to choose from. It is true a lot of companies are playing the trick of incorporating elsewhere while doing most of their business here, but that doesn't mean we should simply lower taxes until they're at the level of the Cayman Islands.
| 489 |
goddamnedfrank Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:18:41pm |
re: #479 reine.de.tout
We're not gonna see eye to eye on this, ever.
What is the antithesis of a subsidy?
| 491 |
reine.de.tout Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:19:20pm |
re: #483 WindUpBird
See, it's like this. When you get all in my face with bullshit straw men, yeah you get condescended to. Perhaps you should stop insulting my intelligenc with your stale Rush Limbaugh lines, if you don't wish to be condescended to.
And by the way, I think I've spent more time explaining myself patiently to Reine on this thread than I have to anyone here in the past couple of months at least. Possibly the past year. And then she gets all pissed off because...who knows? I don't understand it.
You have indeed been patient, let me be clear, and it's been appreciated.
I really really really do not like it when someone says "I can't believe you think THAT". It's - dismissive, and unnecessary.
My liberal brother does this to me all the time - "There ya go, spouting those FOXnews talking points", when
1) I do not watch Fxo news
and
2) I am perfectly capable of thinking for myself thankyewverymuch.
Which is the part he refuses to credit me for.
| 492 |
Fozzie Bear Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:19:26pm |
I have an idea. Lets just cut taxes to super low levels and finance our infrastructure by printing money, and thus devaluing our currency over time. That way, instead of taking more of the money everybody makes in taxes, we'll just make the money that everybody makes worth less at a faster rate.
Oh wait. That's what we are doing. Never mind. Reagan sure was a genius. /
| 493 |
Obdicut Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:19:33pm |
re: #479 reine.de.tout
We're not gonna see eye to eye on this, ever.
Can you explain how you can simultaneously say that you don't know how I can reduce the generosity of citizens paying taxes to an obligation, an say that the law obliges us to pay taxes so you pay them?
Isn't that a contradiction?
| 494 |
b_sharp Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:19:52pm |
re: #486 WindUpBird
yeah cliff
I'm just such an evil cock for like, writing all this stuff
I'm just a big meany meany meany poo poo
If you say so.
| 495 |
Dark_Falcon Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:20:36pm |
re: #469 WindUpBird
WUB, that's not even what we were arguing. Neither Reine nor I were saying there should not be taxes. All I was originally trying to say was that tax cuts are generally better than government taking money in then handing it out as subsidies.
| 496 |
karmic_inquisitor Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:20:39pm |
re: #404 swamprat
I am undecided about corporate welfare; too complex.
Education- provided the country has a very healthy economy- will repay itself every time. Unless there are not enough jobs and industry to field them. If you educate people properly, though, they will damn well MAKE their own way. "Properly" is the key here. Independent thought is imperative.
I agree that education is imperative. Thing is, our subsidies of higher education has helped make it continually more and more unaffordable. At the same time, we are (for reasons unclear to me) producing fewer and fewer graduates in science and engineering as a percentage of the all degrees conferred. There is a bubble there and student loans that can never be extinguished in a bankruptcy court are also contributing to the problem. Should 18 year olds be signed up to (in some cases) a life long debt load in exchange for a degree which may or may not make him/her more marketable as a graduate? Are they in a fair bargaining position when they make that deal? Questions for the thread to ponder.
| 497 |
Nervous Norvous Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:20:51pm |
re: #486 WindUpBird
yeah cliff
I'm just such an evil cock for like, writing all this stuff
I'm just a big meany meany meany poo poo
There ya go again, raising the level of discourse. Next thing you'll be calling Cliffster a stupid head.
| 498 |
cliffster Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:21:30pm |
re: #480 Obdicut
Sure. But it does show that you can't talk about individual investments and get anywhere. It's about your total tax picture.
Yes, but your total tax picture is made of individual investments. Let me ask you this - are you contesting the fact that taxation will make some investments not worth making? Are you saying that there is no level of taxation that will cause investment to go down because the rewards are reduced by said taxation?
The reason we're seeing an uptick in bond buying right now is not because taxes have gone up, it's because people are afraid of the risk in the market
That's true - economics 101. That actually sort of makes my point...
| 499 |
b_sharp Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:21:47pm |
re: #491 reine.de.tout
You have indeed been patient, let me be clear, and it's been appreciated.
I really really really do not like it when someone says "I can't believe you think THAT". It's - dismissive, and unnecessary.
[snip]
Is - I don't understand why you believe that - less condescending?
| 500 |
Obdicut Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:21:55pm |
re: #495 Dark_Falcon
WUB, that's not even what we were arguing. Neither Reine nor I were saying there should not be taxes. All I was originally trying to say was that tax cuts are generally better than government taking money in then handing it out as subsidies.
Direct subsidies are very rare, Dark. And, as Ace pointed out, the form of it really doesn't matter; it's what we get back from it.
Directly subsidizing science research gains us a giant return on our money. It is money far, far, far better spent then a lot of tax breaks.
| 501 |
reine.de.tout Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:22:14pm |
re: #493 Obdicut
Can you explain how you can simultaneously say that you don't know how I can reduce the generosity of citizens paying taxes to an obligation, an say that the law obliges us to pay taxes so you pay them?
Isn't that a contradiction?
I can explain it and have tried.
What I can't do is understand it for you.
(Nor can you understand FOR ME whatever it is you're trying to say).
We just are not going to "get" each other on this.
| 502 |
Nervous Norvous Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:22:29pm |
re: #496 karmic_inquisitor
I agree that education is imperative. Thing is, our subsidies of higher education has helped make it continually more and more unaffordable. At the same time, we are (for reasons unclear to me) producing fewer and fewer graduates in science and engineering as a percentage of the all degrees conferred. There is a bubble there and student loans that can never be extinguished in a bankruptcy court are also contributing to the problem. Should 18 year olds be signed up to (in some cases) a life long debt load in exchange for a degree which may or may not make him/her more marketable as a graduate? Are they in a fair bargaining position when they make that deal? Questions for the thread to ponder.
Even more problematic, many people are forced to take on a student debt load that they can never repay because the career they choose doesn't pay that well in the first place, despite it being crucial to a functioning society (teachers come to mind)
| 503 |
Four More Tears Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:22:35pm |
re: #499 b_sharp
Is - I don't understand why you believe that - less condescending?
It's not what you say, it's how you say it.
| 504 |
reine.de.tout Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:23:16pm |
| 505 |
swamprat Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:23:30pm |
re: #487 PT Barnum
I think it's a matter of how you define ownership. I don't see ownership as an absolute concept, merely a way of saying who has the current possession of a resource.
As Ben Franklin said "The use of money is the only good in having it."
As swamprat says
It's my fuckin' money. I allow them to have some because I make that choice. It is not their money because they are our servants, and not the other way around.
| 506 |
Obdicut Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:23:53pm |
re: #498 cliffster
Yes, but your total tax picture is made of individual investments.
That's pretty meaningless, man. It's made up of a number of individual investments-- so they're not individual anymore.
Let me ask you this - are you contesting the fact that taxation will make some investments not worth making?
Nope.
Are you saying that there is no level of taxation that will cause investment to go down because the rewards are reduced by said taxation?
Yes. The key being the 'some investments' part. Money will continue to be invested. Where it is invested will change, because the risk/reward picture is changing.
That's true - economics 101. That actually sort of makes my point...
Not really, no.
| 507 |
reine.de.tout Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:24:08pm |
re: #505 swamprat
As swamprat says
It's my fuckin' money. I allow them to have some because I make that choice. It is not their money because they are our servants, and not the other way around.
thank you.
| 508 |
b_sharp Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:24:11pm |
re: #497 PT Barnum
There ya go again, raising the level of discourse. Next thing you'll be calling Cliffster a stupid head.
As long as WUB doesn't go as far as icky yucky stupid head.
| 509 |
Nervous Norvous Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:24:19pm |
re: #503 JasonA
It's not what you say, it's how you say it.
But I don't think WUB ever said he couldn't believe that reine believed that, he said that he couldn't understand how reine believed that. There is a difference in that one is condescending, the other is an invitation to explain her position.
Whether WUB meant it that way is another thing altogether.
| 510 |
cliffster Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:24:20pm |
re: #486 WindUpBird
yeah cliff
I'm just such an evil cock for like, writing all this stuff
I'm just a big meany meany meany poo poo
That was a pretty gracious post. You should use that post as a model.
| 511 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:24:32pm |
I think fundamental to the othering of the government as the enemy is the notion that the government is TAKING your money, like a thief, or an extortionist. Isn't that always the joke, isn't that the way people complain about their taxes?
It's easier to get mad at a guy taking your stuff, than to get mad at a guy who you owe money to.
Taxes to me, are like rent. I wouldn't bitch about my taxes any more than I'd bitch about my rent. I'm using this building to shelter me and my partner and my cats, I'm using their trash facilities, their parking spot, their garage, their squirty water nozzle thing I use to wash my car, I owe them that money. It's like Ob said, it's an obligation.
So it's a pattern of thought. if it's ALL YOUR MONEY, then by its very nature the government is taking it unfairly, right?
| 512 |
Obdicut Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:25:15pm |
re: #501 reine.de.tout
I can explain it and have tried.
What I can't do is understand it for you.
(Nor can you understand FOR ME whatever it is you're trying to say).
We just are not going to "get" each other on this.
Okay. That makes me a little sad, since i don't see how you can be weirded out by me considering taxes an obligation and then go right ahead and say that you're obliged to pay taxes.
| 513 |
sagehen Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:25:35pm |
re: #281 elbruce
Except for how it never has.
Not never, just rarely.
When the JFK administration lowered the maximum marginal rate from 92% to 70%, high-income sporadic workers (prize fighters, movie stars, touring musicians) found it worthwhile to work a lot more, and high-income-always people (Fords and Rockefellers and Carnegies and other owners of large companies) stopped putting their money into tax-free foundations (which also means they weren't building as many museums and hospital wings and endowing chairs at universities, but that's a whole 'nother story).
The high-income people now had 3x as much take-home pay, and they spent it on American-made goods that meant American jobs (Europe and Asia were still barely recovering from WWII, so they weren't making a lot of exports).
GDP and tax revenue both went up; that's why LBJ thought we could afford escalating Vietnam and doing the Great Society both.
(Reagan's tax cuts did goose the economy so GDP went up, but not enough to generate sufficient revenue at the lower rate -- that's where his deficits came from. Most economists think that kind of goose should be temporary, then raise the rates again once the economy's humming to get the deficit under control. But by then people were used to not paying what they'd until recently been paying, and they were very resistant to putting it even halfway back. Bush I tried and lost his job over it; Clinton did it and balanced the budget, but at the cost of eternal hatred from half the country.)
| 515 |
reine.de.tout Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:26:03pm |
re: #511 WindUpBird
I think fundamental to the othering of the government as the enemy is the notion that the government is TAKING your money, like a thief, or an extortionist. Isn't that always the joke, isn't that the way people complain about their taxes?
It's easier to get mad at a guy taking your stuff, than to get mad at a guy who you owe money to.
Taxes to me, are like rent. I wouldn't bitch about my taxes any more than I'd bitch about my rent. I'm using this building to shelter me and my partner and my cats, I'm using their trash facilities, their parking spot, their garage, their squirty water nozzle thing I use to wash my car, I owe them that money. It's like Ob said, it's an obligation.
So it's a pattern of thought. if it's ALL YOUR MONEY, then by its very nature the government is taking it unfairly, right?
It is a pattern of thought.
I do not believe, nor have I anywhere indicated, that the government is taking my money unfairly.
But I am not the servant of the government. I will pay what the law says I owe. And I'm happy to do it (as I've said several times already).
| 516 |
Nervous Norvous Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:26:32pm |
re: #505 swamprat
As swamprat says
It's my fuckin' money. I allow them to have some because I make that choice. It is not their money because they are our servants, and not the other way around.
It's only your money if you can keep it against other people taking it. If you can't prevent that from happening either by force or by legal maneuver, you only have stewardship of it, not absolute ownership.
| 517 |
reine.de.tout Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:27:10pm |
re: #512 Obdicut
Okay. That makes me a little sad, since i don't see how you can be weirded out by me considering taxes an obligation and then go right ahead and say that you're obliged to pay taxes.
I'm not weirded out by you, let me make that clear.
We do not agree on this, that is all it is. It is NOT a big deal.
It was a discussion, lively, and honestly, I quite enjoyed it, I just wish I could write about these sorts of matters more eloquently than I'm able to.
| 518 |
Four More Tears Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:27:19pm |
How JasonA Sees Taxes:
re: #515 reine.de.tout
It is a pattern of thought.
I do not believe, nor have I anywhere indicated, that the government is taking my money unfairly.But I am not the servant of the government. I will pay what the law says I owe. And I'm happy to do it (as I've said several times already).
Do you sometimes feel like you're a servant of the government?
| 519 |
swamprat Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:27:44pm |
re: #511 WindUpBird
The government is not the enemy. They are the hired help.
| 520 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:27:49pm |
re: #507 reine.de.tout
thank you.
yeah, servants that are owed money are paid that money in the form of taxes.
if I hire a guy, and then I just skate town and don't pay him, I suppose it's still my money because the cops haven't caught me yet. But it's actually that guy's money, that I'm stealing.
| 521 |
Dark_Falcon Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:28:00pm |
re: #500 Obdicut
Direct subsidies are very rare, Dark. And, as Ace pointed out, the form of it really doesn't matter; it's what we get back from it.
Directly subsidizing science research gains us a giant return on our money. It is money far, far, far better spent then a lot of tax breaks.
Which is why I said "generally". I know there are exceptions and I said as much right at the start. However, the discussion somehow veered into a "to tax or not to tax" meme.
| 522 |
reine.de.tout Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:28:02pm |
re: #518 JasonA
How JasonA Sees Taxes:
Do you sometimes feel like you're a servant of the government?
Only when I reported to work each day (government employee, here).
No, I don't. Which is why I believe what I earn is MINE, until I pay what I owe.
| 523 |
Nervous Norvous Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:28:34pm |
Well this is all been fun, but I am going to bed. Picked up a book that has all the cartoons ever published by the new yorker. (Some are printed on the page, the rest are on a CD). $20 on the close out rack at Borders.
| 524 |
reine.de.tout Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:28:47pm |
re: #520 WindUpBird
yeah, servants that are owed money are paid that money in the form of taxes.
if I hire a guy, and then I just skate town and don't pay him, I suppose it's still my money because the cops haven't caught me yet. But it's actually that guy's money, that I'm stealing.
Is it theft?
Or would that be fraud?
| 525 |
Racer X Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:28:54pm |
re: #505 swamprat
As swamprat says
It's my fuckin' money. I allow them to have some because I make that choice. It is not their money because they are our servants, and not the other way around.
Effin brilliant.
| 526 |
reine.de.tout Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:29:13pm |
re: #521 Dark_Falcon
Which is why I said "generally". I know there are exceptions and I said as much right at the start. However, the discussion somehow veered into a "to tax or not to tax" meme.
Not by me.
| 527 |
Obdicut Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:29:25pm |
re: #513 sagehen
Sorry, Sage, but the Carnegie types had a lot of stuff assessed against capital gains tax, not pure income tax. Otherwise, a very good overview.
| 528 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:29:27pm |
re: #515 reine.de.tout
It is a pattern of thought.
I do not believe, nor have I anywhere indicated, that the government is taking my money unfairly.But I am not the servant of the government. I will pay what the law says I owe. And I'm happy to do it (as I've said several times already).
You're not the servant of the government, you're someone who owes money to the government each year.
If I hire you, and you do a bunch of contract work for me, and I owe you fifty grand, and then I just disappear without paying it, thats your money I disappeared with.
Where did the "servant of the government" thing come from? How does an obligation make you a subject?
| 529 |
Four More Tears Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:29:57pm |
re: #522 reine.de.tout
Only when I reported to work each day (government employee, here).
No, I don't. Which is why I believe what I earn is MINE, until I pay what I owe.
Heh. So much passion on this thread. Yes, I know most of what you earn is yours. Some of it belongs to us. Collectively.
| 530 |
Obdicut Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:30:05pm |
re: #517 reine.de.tout
I'm not weirded out by you, let me make that clear.
We do not agree on this, that is all it is. It is NOT a big deal.
It was a discussion, lively, and honestly, I quite enjoyed it, I just wish I could write about these sorts of matters more eloquently than I'm able to.
Okay. when you said you didn't understand how I could 'reduce' the generosity etc. that felt like you were weirded out by it. The word 'reduce' especially.
| 531 |
Fozzie Bear Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:30:07pm |
re: #505 swamprat
As swamprat says
It's my fuckin' money. I allow them to have some because I make that choice. It is not their money because they are our servants, and not the other way around.
They are you. They are us.
| 532 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:30:21pm |
re: #524 reine.de.tout
Is it theft?
Or would that be fraud?
For purposes of my argument, it makes no difference.
| 533 |
karmic_inquisitor Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:30:42pm |
re: #488 Obdicut
I'm sorry, but the 'then they'll just offshore all their money' argument doesn't go anywhere with me, since the government could also pass laws ensuring that no, they couldn't. In addition, investment in American companies is still, economically, more worthwhile than investment in most other places. There is not an infinite universe out there for investors to choose from. It is true a lot of companies are playing the trick of incorporating elsewhere while doing most of their business here, but that doesn't mean we should simply lower taxes until they're at the level of the Cayman Islands.
Well let me assure you they can.
The top one thousandth knows how to set up corporations overseas, do chargebacks and cross licensing to move costs around and have transactions land in the jurisdiction most favorable. They already do it and have been for twenty years. Computers just make it all faster.
Thing is, we are one of the most favorable jurisdictions. So is the Netherlands which is why they get some of that windfall.
The Cayman island schemes are for the plastic surgeons and divorce lawyers who just think that they are rich.
| 534 |
swamprat Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:31:53pm |
re: #496 karmic_inquisitor
We need socialized education.
(off to side; "what did you say jon steward?"...ok
We need education "REFORM".
| 535 |
Nimed Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:31:55pm |
re: #482 reine.de.tout
Sure I do.
I can decide I do not wish to earn any income.
Or I can decide to remain in a job where my income is not taxed.
I have all sorts of options.
Well, it's not that simple. If you live in a state with a sales tax, you can only avoid it by not buying anything except exempted goods. A similar argument can be made for payroll tax, property taxes, etc. Not to mention that there are all sorts of other obligations in the social contract besides taxation.
| 536 |
Obdicut Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:32:11pm |
re: #533 karmic_inquisitor
Well let me assure you they can.
The top one thousandth knows how to set up corporations overseas, do chargebacks and cross licensing to move costs around and have transactions land in the jurisdiction most favorable. They already do it and have been for twenty years. Computers just make it all faster.
Thing is, we are one of the most favorable jurisdictions. So is the Netherlands which is why they get some of that windfall.
The Cayman island schemes are for the plastic surgeons and divorce lawyers who just think that they are rich.
I know all of that. I just mean when talking in the pure abstract, the government could put up a lot more draconian laws about moving currency offshore. We won't, and we don't want to, but the fact that we have a stable government and a stable currency is worth a hell of a lot in taxation. Those poor bastards who used Panama for their banks learned that.
| 537 |
Fozzie Bear Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:32:14pm |
re: #533 karmic_inquisitor
That's only because we (the government) don't deem tariffs to be a fair use of our power. There's not good reason for this, other than ideology.
| 538 |
cliffster Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:32:20pm |
re: #506 Obdicut
That's pretty meaningless, man. It's made up of a number of individual investments-- so they're not individual anymore.
it's not meaningless. Every investment is evaluated individually. I either kick my money in or I don't. If taxes are higher, it makes me less likely to kick my money in, because my potential reward goes down. Yes, you are necessarily investing somewhere else in that case; see below.
Yes. The key being the 'some investments' part. Money will continue to be invested. Where it is invested will change, because the risk/reward picture is changing.
Money will indeed continue to be invested. As has been pointed out, burying your money in the mattress is an investment; it's saying that you think that losing value to inflation is safer than other investments which would lose you even more. However, taxation causes investments that actually build the economy to become less attractive, and "investments", that are actually hedges, to become more attractive.
| 539 |
Dark_Falcon Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:32:46pm |
re: #519 swamprat
The government is not the enemy. They are the hired help.
Yes, but sometimes it is necessary to remind them of their place. When they start getting involved in social issues that are not their business (that faults both the left and the right, BTW).
| 540 |
Nimed Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:32:48pm |
re: #529 JasonA
Heh. So much passion on this thread. Yes, I know most of what you earn is yours. Some of it belongs to us. Collectively.
Commie.
| 541 |
reine.de.tout Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:32:56pm |
re: #529 JasonA
Heh. So much passion on this thread. Yes, I know most of what you earn is yours. Some of it belongs to us. Collectively.
Oh, ARGH>
| 542 |
justaminute Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:33:07pm |
re: #496 karmic_inquisitor
This was on Huff Po yesterday:
New data show that fewer than 25% of 2010 graduates who took the ACT college-entrance exam possessed the academic skills necessary to pass entry-level courses, despite modest gains in college-readiness among U.S high-school students in the last few years.
| 543 |
Obdicut Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:33:16pm |
re: #513 sagehen
I want to stress what a good post this was, since I nitpicked at it. Especially since you paid attention to the export/import stuff.
Really good post.
| 544 |
Four More Tears Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:34:44pm |
re: #541 reine.de.tout
Oh, ARGH>
Sorry, Reine. I'm not going to press the issue. You seem to have had enough of that.
| 545 |
b_sharp Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:34:53pm |
re: #504 reine.de.tout
Yes.
The reason I asked is because that is what I understood WUB to be saying. Unfortunately what was said can be taken as being - 'how stupid can you be to believe that' - but my understanding was it was an expression of WUB's inability to understand the reasoning.
Of course, I could be wrong, so we'll have to see what he says about it.
Just for a point of understanding reine, some of us really do have difficulty in knowing when we are being insensitive or condescending. Our social skills are poorly defined or in some almost non-existent. Some of our brain wiring hasn't passed inspection.
| 546 |
Obdicut Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:36:37pm |
re: #538 cliffster
it's not meaningless. Every investment is evaluated individually. I either kick my money in or I don't. If taxes are higher, it makes me less likely to kick my money in, because my potential reward goes down. Yes, you are necessarily investing somewhere else in that case; see below.
It can make you more likely to kick your money in, though, if it's a safer investment. That is part of the risk/reward moving around.
Money will indeed continue to be invested. As has been pointed out, burying your money in the mattress is an investment; it's saying that you think that losing value to inflation is safer than other investments which would lose you even more.
Which nobody does. They buy bonds at the very least.
However, taxation causes investments that actually build the economy to become less attractive, and "investments", that are actually hedges, to become more attractive.
Well, a lot of industries do nothing whatsoever to build the economy, and a lot to detract from it. You can't blanket-claim that all investment is good for the economy, especially in the wake of the economic meltdown.
Right now, we have a huge emphasis on short-term profit over long-term. I would prefer a scaled capital gains tax that lowered every year you were invested, rather than poofing after a year.
| 547 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:37:06pm |
re: #529 JasonA
Heh. So much passion on this thread. Yes, I know most of what you earn is yours. Some of it belongs to us. Collectively.
Think about land, you buy land, it's yours right?
Only it's really not, because there are all kinds of conditions placed on land and what can be done with land. Zoning, building codes, pollution regs, etc.
| 548 |
Idle Drifter Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:37:20pm |
Well it's been fun and insightful. Yes, I'm serious. And in the spirit of this thread and the earlier Warhammer 40K references. I leave you this:
| 549 |
Fat Bastard Vegetarian Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:37:30pm |
re: #545 b_sharp
Heh. Sometimes on the internets we are talking to real live people.
| 550 |
swamprat Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:37:42pm |
We really get to the crux of socialism vs conservatism here.
Put me down on the side of personal freedom vs group need.
Govs do stuff for us; they do not own us or our stuff.
| 551 |
prairiefire Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:38:27pm |
re: #547 WindUpBird
WUB, ask me a Disney trivia question?
| 552 |
reine.de.tout Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:38:33pm |
re: #545 b_sharp
The reason I asked is because that is what I understood WUB to be saying. Unfortunately what was said can be taken as being - 'how stupid can you be to believe that' - but my understanding was it was an expression of WUB's inability to understand the reasoning.
Of course, I could be wrong, so we'll have to see what he says about it.
Just for a point of understanding reine, some of us really do have difficulty in knowing when we are being insensitive or condescending. Our social skills are poorly defined or in some almost non-existent. Some of our brain wiring hasn't passed inspection.
Well, I think you are correct, and WUB has already clarified it, and thus I did take it wrong.
But that particular phrasing - I've heard it and heard it and heard it from so many who intend it to mean "how can you be so stupid as to think . . . ", that my reaction to it is sort of programmed.
| 553 |
Obdicut Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:38:38pm |
re: #550 swamprat
We really get to the crux of socialism vs conservatism here.
Put me down on the side of personal freedom vs group need.
Govs do stuff for us; they do not own us or our stuff.
This really has nothing at all to do with socialism, in the least, at all, in any shape, way, or form.
| 554 |
Obdicut Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:39:04pm |
| 555 |
reine.de.tout Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:39:05pm |
re: #550 swamprat
We really get to the crux of socialism vs conservatism here.
Put me down on the side of personal freedom vs group need.
Govs do stuff for us; they do not own us or our stuff.
There ya go.
Nice and simple.
Any my point.
| 556 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:39:06pm |
re: #545 b_sharp
The reason I asked is because that is what I understood WUB to be saying. Unfortunately what was said can be taken as being - 'how stupid can you be to believe that' - but my understanding was it was an expression of WUB's inability to understand the reasoning.
yeah, I wasn't implying she was stupid, I was simply saying I don't get it, I can't put myself in a position to understand it.
I also can't put myself in the position to understand how someone could be a boxer! That doesn't mean that I believe boxers are stupid
| 557 |
prairiefire Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:39:45pm |
| 558 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:40:11pm |
re: #551 prairiefire
WUB, ask me a Disney trivia question?
who was the artist who came up with the character designs of It's a Small World
| 559 |
karmic_inquisitor Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:40:49pm |
re: #480 Obdicut
Ironically, higher government spending right now would ease investors fears and lead to greater investment. And that is straight from the arch-Republican CEO of my former company, and the manager of a hedge fund that I know, also a staunch R. (though they're probably sitting this election out, since they're fiscal Rs.)
Well that is his opinion.
but if you are making the uncertainty argument regarding the economy, then more federal spending without a clear revenue plan will not result in more certainty. What it will result in is more competition for a tight capital supply, resulting in less capital for risk intensive activities while simultaneously signaling that the US Administration is in a full Keynesian bear hug a la Japan's lost decade. And, as with Japan, when the latest salvo of intervention fails the government dreams up a new and improved one which adds yet more uncertainty - after all, you can't predict what the winning political whim will be and can't model the risk in a Black-Scholes formula, so you can't price anything.
The Japanese "bottomed" when they finally got their housing market functioning again. In ten short years japan went from a nation that lectured the US on not having a culture of saving to becoming the world's biggest debtor economy. All due to bad policy decisions in hopes of avoiding pain.
| 560 |
prairiefire Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:40:52pm |
re: #558 WindUpBird
She also did Sleeping Beauty, Russian, I think.
| 561 |
Four More Tears Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:41:00pm |
re: #550 swamprat
We really get to the crux of socialism vs conservatism here.
Put me down on the side of personal freedom vs group need.
Govs do stuff for us; they do not own us or our stuff.
Govs maintain our roads, pump money into our hospitals, inspect the food we buy and establishments we buy from... You need the government to earn that money you so strongly believe is entirely yours. So, yes, you do owe the government a debt.
| 562 |
Obdicut Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:41:32pm |
re: #555 reine.de.tout
Government provides the framework where I can actually own stuff without people taking it away from me. Thats the bare minimum.
Our government does far more than that, but the government ensures property rights.
| 563 |
cliffster Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:41:40pm |
re: #546 Obdicut
It can make you more likely to kick your money in, though, if it's a safer investment. That is part of the risk/reward moving around.
hmm, that's true - a safer investment is mathematically a more enticing investment to make. The topic was whether taxation makes it LESS enticing, and taxation actually has no impact on its safety (unless you want to say it actually reduces the safety, due to the bottom line risk/reward...)
Right now, we have a huge emphasis on short-term profit over long-term. I would prefer a scaled capital gains tax that lowered every year you were invested, rather than poofing after a year.
THAT I will agree with completely.
| 564 |
b_sharp Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:41:47pm |
re: #552 reine.de.tout
Well, I think you are correct, and WUB has already clarified it, and thus I did take it wrong.
But that particular phrasing - I've heard it and heard it and heard it from so many who intend it to mean "how can you be so stupid as to think . . . ", that my reaction to it is sort of programmed.
I thought that was the case.
I've said things like that more times than I can count and had some interesting reactions so I'm well aware how the intended meaning can be overshadowed by other, less personable, meanings.
Even my wife has just about killed me over things like that.
| 565 |
reine.de.tout Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:41:51pm |
Night, all.
WUB, if I misunderstood you and got pissy for no reason, I apologize.
Obdi - I've said it over and over, you're a good guy, glad you're here!
And I actually quite enjoyed the evening!
re: #556 WindUpBird
yeah, I wasn't implying she was stupid, I was simply saying I don't get it, I can't put myself in a position to understand it.
I also can't put myself in the position to understand how someone could be a boxer! That doesn't mean that I believe boxers are stupid
See above.
Also, WUB - again, I've heard it and heard it from folks meaning exactly "How can you be that stupid?", that I just wanna scream when someone says it to me.
| 566 |
Nimed Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:42:03pm |
re: #550 swamprat
We really get to the crux of socialism vs conservatism here.
Put me down on the side of personal freedom vs group need.
Govs do stuff for us; they do not own us or our stuff.
It's silly to think of it as sides. It's even sillier to think you're the side of personal freedom when you're discussing semantics. You are legally required to pay taxes. Period. It's not generosity, it's not voluntary. Whether you think of it as the government owning your stuff or not doesn't really change anything.
| 567 |
reine.de.tout Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:42:55pm |
re: #564 b_sharp
I thought that was the case.
I've said things like that more times than I can count and had some interesting reactions so I'm well aware how the intended meaning can be overshadowed by other, less personable, meanings.
Even my wife has just about killed me over things like that.
Oh, well, yeah!
If it's your wife you say it to - sheesh - I don't even wanna think about it!
/
| 568 |
cliffster Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:43:09pm |
re: #562 Obdicut
Government provides the framework where I can actually own stuff without people taking it away from me. Thats the bare minimum.
Our government does far more than that, but the government ensures property rights.
That's a great starting point. I'm not saying it has to end there, but it's a good reference point.
| 569 |
Fozzie Bear Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:43:32pm |
re: #550 swamprat
We really get to the crux of socialism vs conservatism here.
Put me down on the side of personal freedom vs group need.
Govs do stuff for us; they do not own us or our stuff.
Except that the they there isn't a they.
| 570 |
b_sharp Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:43:39pm |
re: #556 WindUpBird
yeah, I wasn't implying she was stupid, I was simply saying I don't get it, I can't put myself in a position to understand it.
I also can't put myself in the position to understand how someone could be a boxer! That doesn't mean that I believe boxers are stupid
Same here. But those boxes have to come from somewhere, or we'll be stuck with using just bubble wrap.
| 572 |
Obdicut Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:44:08pm |
re: #559 karmic_inquisitor
Have you read Koo on the Lost Decade?
| 573 |
cliffster Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:44:13pm |
re: #545 b_sharp
Just for a point of understanding reine, some of us really do have difficulty in knowing when we are being insensitive or condescending. Our social skills are poorly defined or in some almost non-existent. Some of our brain wiring hasn't passed inspection.
well shit, when you put it like that...
| 574 |
karmic_inquisitor Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:44:22pm |
re: #536 Obdicut
I know all of that. I just mean when talking in the pure abstract, the government could put up a lot more draconian laws about moving currency offshore. We won't, and we don't want to, but the fact that we have a stable government and a stable currency is worth a hell of a lot in taxation. Those poor bastards who used Panama for their banks learned that.
One thing going for us is all of the currency that we have off shore. The trade deficit each year represents the amount of dollars that have been placed off shore. If you think of them as shares in our economy, everyone holding dollars off shore has an incentive to keep America alive and healthy. But that could harm us if we go into a deflationary cycle - holding those dollars out of circulation will reward the holder. We need them circulated so that the capital markets will flow again.
| 575 |
prairiefire Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:44:22pm |
re: #558 WindUpBird
Not Russian, Joyce Carlson:[Link: www2.tbo.com...]
Where is the one place that serves booze in DisneyLand?
What is the name of the actress Walt was rumored to have an affair with later in life?
| 576 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:44:52pm |
re: #550 swamprat
We really get to the crux of socialism vs conservatism here.
Put me down on the side of personal freedom vs group need.
Govs do stuff for us; they do not own us or our stuff.
Only, I'm actually pretty much devoted to personal freedom. I just have different standards of "free".
Philosophically, I believe what I believe about taxes, yet I've worked my whole life to put myself in a position where I have no boss, no constraints on my behavior (cough*drugtests*cough*bosses snooping on gfaebook for my personal junk*cough*) no regular work hours, and no obligations to anyone besides art.
You might say personal freedom is incredibly important to me!
I don't put taxes in the realm of personal freedom at all. Any more than I say that it's an affront to personal freedom that I have to pay my credit card interest.
It's also like this: cars give me lots of freedom. So I make my car payment. Because I owe them that money so I can continue to be free.
| 577 |
elbruce Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:45:39pm |
re: #513 sagehen
Not never, just rarely...
Great post there. Yeah, that's what I get for saying "never," but I must say it's a lot closer to the mark than "always" when talking about this.
| 578 |
b_sharp Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:45:49pm |
re: #567 reine.de.tout
Oh, well, yeah!
If it's your wife you say it to - sheesh - I don't even wanna think about it!
/
LOL
'night reine.
| 579 |
Obdicut Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:46:38pm |
re: #563 cliffster
I'm just pointing out that higher taxes just moves around where people invest their money, it doesn't make them less likely to invest. And, as Sage pointed out, it may affect the actual amount of money they have to spend-- but in the modern day, with a global economy, that benefit is not, by and large, going to reside in the US.
And I'm glad you like the idea of a time-dependent capital gains tax. It definitely wouldn't be perfect, but it'd make corporations look to the long term significantly more than they do now. Make it long enough, and they'll stop investing so much in politicians, too.
| 580 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:47:44pm |
re: #560 prairiefire
She also did Sleeping Beauty, Russian, I think.
Actually, no
Mary Blair: [Link: www.jeffpidgeon.com...]
she also did concept art for Alice in Wonderland, which is why I'm a big fan
Not actually sure who did production design for sleeping beauty...
| 581 |
cliffster Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:47:48pm |
re: #579 Obdicut
I very much enjoyed our discussion, Obdi, thank you
| 582 |
swamprat Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:47:49pm |
re: #561 JasonA
Govs maintain our roads, pump money into our hospitals, inspect the food we buy and establishments we buy from... You need the government to earn that money you so strongly believe is entirely yours. So, yes, you do owe the government a debt.
I pay with my money. I do not return them theirs. "I" pay. They perform services which justify their existence. The servant is certainly worthy of his pay.
| 583 |
b_sharp Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:48:00pm |
re: #573 cliffster
well shit, when you put it like that...
Well there Billy, ever seen a grown man stick his, umm, ... finger in a 220 volt socket?
| 584 |
Obdicut Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:48:01pm |
re: #557 prairiefire
I'm going to say yes.
Yep! They made some saucy-ass pictures for the fighting boys in WWII. Good clean American smut for the fighting man.
| 585 |
elbruce Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:48:04pm |
re: #550 swamprat
We really get to the crux of socialism vs conservatism here.
Put me down on the side of personal freedom vs group need.
Govs do stuff for us; they do not own us or our stuff.
That stuff they do ain't free. And if they don't do it, we end up as Somalia.
But I would also disagree with the (semantic) argument that if you owe something to someone else you don't own it. If you didn't own it, you couldn't owe it. Both are true.
| 586 |
Obdicut Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:48:43pm |
re: #581 cliffster
I very much enjoyed our discussion, Obdi, thank you
No problem. This is all much on my mind, since I just started my own small business and am considering whether or not I want to take it big, take on risk, or keep it small and controlled.
I'm starting 'er out easy.
| 587 |
goddamnedfrank Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:49:05pm |
re: #562 Obdicut
Government provides the framework where I can actually own stuff without people taking it away from me. Thats the bare minimum.
Our government does far more than that, but the government ensures property rights.
With great compensation comes commensurate obligation. The farther any one person has to fall in a societal collapse the greater their individual interest in insuring that it does not.
| 588 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:49:11pm |
re: #565 reine.de.tout
Night, all.
WUB, if I misunderstood you and got pissy for no reason, I apologize.
Obdi - I've said it over and over, you're a good guy, glad you're here!
And I actually quite enjoyed the evening!
See above.
Also, WUB - again, I've heard it and heard it from folks meaning exactly "How can you be that stupid?", that I just wanna scream when someone says it to me.
It's really honestly not what I meant, cheers, no apology from you needed, I didn't mean to give that impression
believe me, your notions about taxes are easier for me to understand than a lot of my friends' ideas about health. o_o
| 589 |
elbruce Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:49:24pm |
re: #579 Obdicut
And I'm glad you like the idea of a time-dependent capital gains tax. It definitely wouldn't be perfect, but it'd make corporations look to the long term significantly more than they do now. Make it long enough, and they'll stop investing so much in politicians, too.
Are you kidding? The return on investment for a politician is through the roof!
| 590 |
Four More Tears Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:50:06pm |
re: #582 swamprat
I pay with my money. I do not return them theirs. "I" pay. They perform services which justify their existence. The servant is certainly worthy of his pay.
Unless you were born pre-1787 the government certainly has invested money in you and kept you safe long before you were paying into it.
| 591 |
prairiefire Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:51:02pm |
re: #580 WindUpBird
Actually, no
Mary Blair: [Link: www.jeffpidgeon.com...]
she also did concept art for Alice in Wonderland, which is why I'm a big fan
Not actually sure who did production design for sleeping beauty...
Mary Blair. The other gal I linked i guess made the dolls.
Anyway, yes, Mary Blair did the art work for the mural like stills that are in Sleeping Beauty of the banquet.
| 592 |
Obdicut Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:51:22pm |
re: #589 elbruce
Are you kidding? The return on investment for a politician is through the roof!
Ah, but if your capital gains only fully vests itself in ten years, then there's not a lot of point in investing in a politician. He might get beat, and the policies reversed.
It'd still go on, but it'd reduce it some.
| 593 |
swamprat Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:51:57pm |
| 594 |
Obdicut Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:52:30pm |
Ah for christ's sake it's one in the morning!
Goodnight.
| 595 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:52:58pm |
re: #590 JasonA
Unless you were born pre-1787 the government certainly has invested money in you and kept you safe long before you were paying into it.
vaccinations, the FDA, public schools
Not sure where I'd be without my experiences in public schools, it was my first exposure to professional attitudes about creating things for a living, best practices for coding and asset generation, design, illustration, client relationships
All that came from my voc graphic design classes and computer science classes in high school
I'm pretty sure I wasn't paying much in taxes then!
| 596 |
cliffster Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:53:20pm |
re: #594 Obdicut
Ah for christ's sake it's one in the morning!
Goodnight.
goodnight, pain-in-the-ass I mean Obdicut
| 597 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:53:30pm |
re: #591 prairiefire
Mary Blair. The other gal I linked i guess made the dolls.
Anyway, yes, Mary Blair did the art work for the mural like stills that are in Sleeping Beauty of the banquet.
oh oh! I gotcha! Awesome, good call
| 599 |
Four More Tears Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:54:49pm |
re: #585 elbruce
That stuff they do ain't free. And if they don't do it, we end up as Somalia.
But I would also disagree with the (semantic) argument that if you owe something to someone else you don't own it. If you didn't own it, you couldn't owe it. Both are true.
I don;t how the rest of you pay taxes, but most of the money I've paid went straight to them without me getting my hands on it. I never really did "own" it even in the literal sense.
| 600 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:55:52pm |
re: #599 JasonA
I don;t how the rest of you pay taxes, but most of the money I've paid went straight to them without me getting my hands on it. I never really did "own" it even in the literal sense.
I actually have to literally write out checks quarterly to the IRS!
Once upon a time it was withheld, not anymore, now I have to be all careful
| 601 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:57:23pm |
re: #585 elbruce
That stuff they do ain't free. And if they don't do it, we end up as Somalia.
But I would also disagree with the (semantic) argument that if you owe something to someone else you don't own it. If you didn't own it, you couldn't owe it. Both are true.
haha well you got me there,
I like the term "obligation". Seems to be the best word for the job.
| 602 |
Four More Tears Sat, Aug 21, 2010 9:57:28pm |
re: #600 WindUpBird
I actually have to literally write out checks quarterly to the IRS!
Once upon a time it was withheld, not anymore, now I have to be all careful
Thanks for quoting so that I might see just how much alcohol can effect my posting ability.
| 603 |
goddamnedfrank Sat, Aug 21, 2010 10:01:27pm |
re: #598 prairiefire
I'm related to Prince Charming.
Do me a favor, tell that asshole that he still owes me $20.
| 604 |
prairiefire Sat, Aug 21, 2010 10:02:08pm |
Laugh o Gram Studio in Kansas City:[Link: www.yelp.com...]
| 605 |
sagehen Sat, Aug 21, 2010 10:16:33pm |
re: #519 swamprat
The government is not the enemy. They are the hired help.
And the hired help is entitled to be paid. *Entitled*. You're not doing them a favor, you're not making a generous gift, they're not "taking" something, they've earned it and it's rightfully theirs. And you don't get to decide you want to pay them less from now on, for work they did last year and agreed to let you stretch out the payments.
| 607 |
sagehen Sat, Aug 21, 2010 10:23:26pm |
re: #543 Obdicut
I want to stress what a good post this was, since I nitpicked at it. Especially since you paid attention to the export/import stuff.
Really good post.
thank you kindly. :)
| 608 |
sagehen Sat, Aug 21, 2010 10:30:30pm |
| 609 |
sagehen Sat, Aug 21, 2010 10:37:52pm |
re: #587 goddamnedfrank
With great compensation comes commensurate obligation. The farther any one person has to fall in a societal collapse the greater their individual interest in insuring that it does not.
"The man of great wealth owes a peculiar obligation to the State,
because he derives special advantages from the mere existence of
government" - Teddy Roosevelt
| 610 |
swamprat Sat, Aug 21, 2010 10:49:47pm |
re: #609 sagehen
"The man of great wealth owes a peculiar obligation to the State,
because he derives special advantages from the mere existence of
government" - Teddy Roosevelt
I think I'll side with the Constitution, and give Teddy a pass on this one.
| 611 |
swamprat Sat, Aug 21, 2010 11:41:31pm |
Here is a letter from John Adams to his wife, Abigail. ( she finally got the pins she had wanted, but he also mentions some other stuff about freedom and the role of government
The account you give me of the numbers slain on the side of our enemies, is afflicting to humanity, although it is a glorious proof of the bravery of our worthy countrymen. Considering all the disadvantages under which they fought, they really exhibited prodigies of valor. Your description of the distresses of the worthy inhabitants of Boston and the other seaport towns, is enough to melt a heart of stone. Our consolation must be this, my dear, that cities may be rebuilt, and a people, reduced to poverty, may acquire fresh property. But a constitution of government, once changed from freedom, can never be re stored. Liberty once lost, is lost forever. When the people once surrender their share in the Legislature, and their right of defending the limitations upon the Government, and of resisting every encroachment upon them, they can never regain it.
| 612 |
elbruce Sun, Aug 22, 2010 12:42:22am |
re: #610 swamprat
I think I'll side with the Constitution, and give Teddy a pass on this one.
Are you arguing against progressive taxation with all this "surrending liberty" stuff? I don't see the connection.
By the way, since we're quoting founding fathers, here's Thomas Paine promoting a progressive tax scheme:
[Link: books.google.com...]
But the chief object of this progressive tax (besides the justice of rendering taxes more equal than they are) is, as already stated, to extirpate the overgrown influence arising from the unnatural law of primogeniture, and which is one of the principle sources of corruption at elections.
The more things change, the more they stay the same...
| 613 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Sun, Aug 22, 2010 2:36:30am |
re: #612 elbruce
But but but I heard that forbes said the flat tax would be awesome
and he has a magazine so that means he must know exactly what he's talking about
| 614 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Sun, Aug 22, 2010 2:38:05am |
re: #602 JasonA
Thanks for quoting so that I might see just how much alcohol can effect my posting ability.
Booze makes the internet more fun, don't let anyone tell you otherwise
| 615 |
aagcobb Sun, Aug 22, 2010 4:30:54am |
I saw this morning that one GOP politician has decided to pander to the homophobes. Meg Whitman has pledged to defend Prop 8 if she is elected Governor of California.
| 616 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Sun, Aug 22, 2010 4:44:57am |
re: #615 aagcobb
I saw this morning that one GOP politician has decided to pander to the homophobes. Meg Whitman has pledged to defend Prop 8 if she is elected Governor of California.
it's sort of hollow, since it'll probably hit the supreme court before the election, there will be no "Prop 8"
| 617 |
aagcobb Sun, Aug 22, 2010 5:26:36am |
re: #616 WindUpBird
it's sort of hollow, since it'll probably hit the supreme court before the election, there will be no "Prop 8"
Whitman is trying to throw the Conservatives a bone-they have been criticizing her for being soft on immigration and climate change.
| 618 |
Romantic Heretic Sun, Aug 22, 2010 6:57:09am |
re: #18 Jetpilot1101
I'm a fiscal conservative who has no problem with gay people at all. I'm still trying to find which camp I belong in and haven't found one yet.
Sensible people?
| 619 |
kirkspencer Sun, Aug 22, 2010 7:10:57am |
re: #91 3eff Jeff
That should work great, actually. Fuel cells can run with up to 60-70% efficiency, and while hydrogen storage is a bit of an annoyance, a properly specified compressed H2 tank should work well. Also, the electric motors used for the drive system have exactly the right power and torque curves for a combat tank (full torque from zero RPM and laser level torque through most of the RPM range).
The other major problems with fuel cells aren't a big deal, because it's the military. I'm thinking primarily of the fuel distribution network issues (generating H2 and making it available at refueling station the below-average person can reasonably use).
Finally, there's some cool opportunities here. A next gen pebble bed reactor could be made small enough that you could package it up with a high-temperature high-efficiency electrolysis plant and drop ship it to a forward base with a ready water supply. No supply lines for your fuel. Normally, I'm an advocate for internal combustion and biofuels, but off the top of my head, hydrogen seems like it could be an excellent technology for the military.
Waaay late, my apologies, but I think the clarification is necessary. The M1A1 fuel cell test is for the Auxiliary Power Unit (APU), not the primary drive. It's not going to generate the 1500 HP the turbine provides. (Maybe. Yet.)
| 620 |
Romantic Heretic Sun, Aug 22, 2010 7:20:06am |
re: #168 windsagio
I think the problem, honestly, is that 'subsidies' is a bad word to people.
So is 'taxes'.
They are useful tools though, if used properly.
| 621 |
Tats66 Sun, Aug 22, 2010 7:21:26am |
Can we just agree that FAR-anything sucks!??? :)
| 622 |
swamprat Sun, Aug 22, 2010 9:26:03am |
re: #612 elbruce
No, I was not arguing about progressive tax, linear (flat) tax, or import duties.
I was discussing the governments' role in the lives of its citizens.
I took the position that the government is a servant, or hired workman deserving of its wages.
The counterpoint was that the government owns all and we are granted temporary custody from the all-owning overseer(s).
It is very telling that some took the counter position.
Telling, yet not surprising.
| 623 |
elbruce Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:11:30am |
re: #622 swamprat
I took the position that the government is a servant, or hired workman deserving of its wages.
The counterpoint was that the government owns all and we are granted temporary custody from the all-owning overseer(s).
Well in that's where the line is drawn, then I'd have to take your side.
Trump Allies Test a New Strategy for Blocking Election Results They Don’t Like When a member of Georgia’s Fulton County Board of Registration and Elections refused to join her colleagues as they certified two primaries this year, she claimed she had been denied her right to examine a long list of election ...
Cheechako
US Military M17 & M18 Pistols Causing Unintentional Discharges Documents detail U.S. soldiers shot by their own Sig Sauer guns; military says no reason for concern Around lunchtime on Feb. 8, 2023, inside an administrative office at Fort Eustis in Virginia, a sergeant with the Army’s 221st Military ...
William Lewis
The Cause of the Rain Here? dryad, in Greek mythology, a nymph or nature spirit who lives in trees and takes the form of a beautiful young woman. Dryads were originally the spirits of oak trees (drys: “oak”), but the name was later applied to ... William Lewis
Uncommon US Flags #3: Storm Warning Flags Indianola, Texas after the Civil War became the principal port for the state, due to its location on Matagorda Bay. The town steadily grew as commerce, tourism, and agriculture expanded. In 1875, a powerful Category 3 hurricane struck Indianola, ...
Anymouse 🌹🏡😷
A Friday at the Tail End of SpringJust out and about for a bit. First a walk downtown where the two rivers meet, then a short drive just outside of town. William Lewis
This Civil War Submarine Vanished for 136 Years [VIDEO] A Civil War submarine powered by hand cranks and lit by candlelight. What could possibly go wrong? Meet the HL Hunley. Support the production of these videos through our Patreon: patreon.com Thank you to Nick DeLong from Clemson University ...
teleskiguy
Billions in US Taxpayer Dollars Now Go to Religious Schools via Vouchers Billions in taxpayer dollars are being used to pay tuition at religious schools throughout the country, as state voucher programs expand dramatically and the line separating public education and religion fades. School vouchers can be used at almost any ... Cheechako
Adobe Caught Selling AI Generated Images Imitating Ansel Adams’ Work Adobe scolded for selling ‘Ansel Adams-style’ images generated by AI Adobe found itself in hot water this weekend after the Ansel Adams estate publicly scolded the company for selling generative AI imitations of the late photographer’s work. On Friday, ... William Lewis
The Good Liars at Miami Trump Rally [VIDEO] Jason and Davram talk with Trump supporters about art, Mike Lindell, who is really president and more! SUPPORT US: herohero.co SEE THE GOOD LIARS LIVE!LOS ANGELES, CA squadup.com SUBSCRIBE TO OUR AUDIO PODCAST:Apple Podcasts: podcasts.apple.comSpotify: open.spotify.comJoin this channel to ... teleskiguy
