What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

So who are these "1%" that make life so miserable for the envious (and for those who do not understand statistics and the concept of three standard deviations from the median)?

According to The Economist:


The average household income of the 1% was $1.2m in 2008, according to federal tax data.
...
16% of the top 1% were in medical professions and 8% were lawyers....financial occupations...13.9%....[non-financial executives, ~ 34%, and "others" ~ 30%].
Click to expand...


I saw a similar breakdown somewhere else, in which financial occupations were 14%, non-financial executives were 41%, athletes and entertainers were something like 25% - 30%, and the rest were doctors and lawyers. There is some overlap between "lawyers" and "financial occupations" because law firms work on mergers and acquisitions.

So, those "selfish, evil greedy bankers" are only about 1/7 of the 1%...6/7 of the 1% are not.

Amazing how evidence and stereotype are at odds here......
 
Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

FreshFish said:
So who are these "1%" that make life so miserable for the envious (and for those who do not understand statistics and the concept of three standard deviations from the median)?

According to The Economist:





I saw a similar breakdown somewhere else, in which financial occupations were 14%, non-financial executives were 41%, athletes and entertainers were something like 25% - 30%, and the rest were doctors and lawyers. There is some overlap between "lawyers" and "financial occupations" because law firms work on mergers and acquisitions.

So, those "selfish, evil greedy bankers" are only about 1/7 of the 1%...6/7 of the 1% are not.

Amazing how evidence and stereotype are at odds here......
Click to expand...

While we're on the subject of "selfish, evil greedy bankers"... I've been noticing that the Infowars crowd is now being gathered. Every other complaint of theirs uses the word "corporation".
 
Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

ScoobyDoo said:
Why would a plutocracy shrink it's military?
Click to expand...

I believe the theory is that we'll be plowing it into the black helicopter brigades.

BTW - does anybody know who manufactures those black helicopters? I'd like to invest in them before the other shoe drops on these defense spending cuts (as in an equal increase in the Big Brother State :eek: :eek: :eek:)
 
Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

Rover said:
I believe the theory is that we'll be plowing it into the black helicopter brigades.

BTW - does anybody know who manufactures those black helicopters? I'd like to invest in them before the other shoe drops on these defense spending cuts (as in an equal increase in the Big Brother State :eek: :eek: :eek:)
Click to expand...

The defense contractors. Take your pick as to which one.
 
Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

FlagDUDE08 said:
It won't shrink, it will just be re-branded as a homeland force.
Click to expand...

Possibly. But that will continue to put pressure on the budget or at least the usage. Then resources get reprioritized into 21st century threats like cyber and terror security rather than tanks.

Force reduction, force change...probably not as good is serious cuts, but its still an improvement.
 
Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

5mn_Major said:
Possibly. But that will continue to put pressure on the budget or at least the usage. Then resources get reprioritized into 21st century threats like cyber and terror security rather than tanks.

Force reduction, force change...probably not as good is serious cuts, but its still an improvement.
Click to expand...

Do you think anyone in DC, regardless of the letter next to their name, knows the definition of "cut"? ;)
 
Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

Rover said:
I believe the theory is that we'll be plowing it into the black helicopter brigades.

BTW - does anybody know who manufactures those black helicopters? I'd like to invest in them before the other shoe drops on these defense spending cuts (as in an equal increase in the Big Brother State :eek: :eek: :eek:)
Click to expand...
Sikorsky (United Technologies), Bell, Boeing, Augusta Westland, Eurocopter... Oh, wait - was that rhetorical?

Oh, and the article is wrong about one thing: the Global Hawk is fully autonomous, not remotely piloted. Hard to believe the U-2 will really be retired after all this time. Going to be a lot of interesting food fights in the coming years!
 
Last edited:
Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

This what I like about knuckledraggers. No matter how stupid, unpopular or discredited their policies are, they still push them likes its 1982 all over again!

Case in point. Paul Ryan, last seen getting his @ ss fed to him in a debate with drunken Uncle Joe Biden, is out with a tax plan that....you guessed it, slashes taxes on the rich. Didn't we try this during the Bush era already? :rolleyes:

http://www.cnbc.com/id/101447481
 
Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

Rover said:
This what I like about knuckledraggers. No matter how stupid, unpopular or discredited their policies are, they still push them likes its 1982 all over again!

Case in point. Paul Ryan, last seen getting his @ ss fed to him in a debate with drunken Uncle Joe Biden, is out with a tax plan that....you guessed it, slashes taxes on the rich. Didn't we try this during the Bush era already? :rolleyes:

http://www.cnbc.com/id/101447481
Click to expand...

You know as well as I do. The road to prosperity is paved with Tax Cuts to the Job Creators. Ryan is right. Always has been, always will be.
 
Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

Candide said:
Paul Ryan... is out with a tax plan that ... slashes taxes on the rich.
Click to expand...

You're not really that illiterate, are you? :rolleyes:

The plan is supposed to increase tax revenues from the rich by reducing tax rates AND ALSO eliminating a variety of special-interest tax breaks as well, in such a way to promote economic growth. 25% of a lot is worth way more than 40% of a little, or is that really so hard for you to understand?? :rolleyes:


now, it may or may not work out that way in practice, however in both 1986 and in 2003 (and also in the early 1960s after Kennedy did the same trade-off) income tax revenues did increase when rates were lowered. It became cheaper to pay the tax than to pay the CPA.


As it stands now, none of the "rich" actually pay anything near what the tax tables say, and it is a slimy disgusting part of our democracy how both parties play despicable games, pretending to increase "taxes" by combining obvious rate increases with covert special-interest carve-outs for various constituencies, with the result that no one in practice actually pays much more than before. The only thing high tax rates promote is more corruption in the legislature.

I didn't know you were such a big fan of CPAs and tax attorneys, that you want to enrich them so much at the expense of the rest of us. Can you imagine how much better off every one of us would be if no one needed an accountant to file personal income tax returns?
 
Last edited:
Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

ScoobyDoo said:
You know as well as I do. The road to prosperity is paved with Tax Cuts to the Job Creators. Ryan is right. Always has been, always will be.
Click to expand...


I do! I just think back to the peace and prosperity of the George W Bush era! ;)

FreshFish said:
You're not really that illiterate, are you? :rolleyes:

The plan is supposed to increase tax revenues from the rich by reducing tax rates AND ALSO eliminating a variety of special-interest tax breaks as well, in such a way to promote economic growth. 25% of a lot is worth way more than 40% of a little, or is that really so hard for you to understand?? :rolleyes:


now, it may or may not work out that way in practice, however in both 1986 and in 2003 (and also in the early 1960s after Kennedy did the same trade-off) income tax revenues did increase when rates were lowered.


As it stands now, none of the "rich" actually pay anything near what the tax tables say, and it is a slimy disgusting part of our democracy how both parties play despicable games, pretending to increase "taxes" by combining obvious rate increases with covert special-interest carve-outs for various constituencies, with the result that no one in practice actually pays much more than before. The only thing high tax rates promote is more corruption in the legislature.
Click to expand...

1st of all lets dispense with your idiotic talking point straight out. Tax revenues always go up as the economy is always growing so that's a nothing argument. As I told Opie, 1980 called and it wants it economic arguments back!

2nd, if you truly believe Ryan plans on getting more taxes from the rich by closing loopholes you are far stupider than I gave you credit for, and that's saying something. Only a total, complete, and utter idiot believes in trickle down economics anymore. Want proof? Reagan economy = defense spending buildup. As soon as that ended, recession despite tax cuts still in place. Clinton economy = tax hikes, balanced budget, massive prosperity far better than in the 80's. Bush II economy = massive tax cuts for GOP campaign contributors, massive deficit, worst recession in 80 years.

Read 'em and weep Fishy. Unless you have access to a time machine and can change history, those are the facts. Sorry if you subscribe to a dying ideology, but don't take that out on me.
 
Last edited:
Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

FreshFish said:
As it stands now, none of the "rich" actually pay anything near what the tax tables say
Click to expand...

Err......what? As far as I know they pay ALL THE TAXES in the nation and I'm a leech. So, I have no idea what you're talking about.
 
Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

Rover said:
2nd, if you truly believe Ryan plans on getting more taxes from the rich by closing loopholes you are far stupider than I gave you credit for, and that's saying something. Only a total, complete, and utter idiot believes in trickle down economics anymore. Want proof? Reagan economy = defense spending buildup. As soon as that ended, recession despite tax cuts still in place. Clinton economy = tax hikes, balanced budget, massive prosperity far better than in the 80's. Bush II economy = massive tax cuts for GOP campaign contributors, massive deficit, worst recession in 80 years.
Click to expand...

Forgot about the dot com boom already? You could have put tax rates at 99%, and you still would have had prosperity because of the watermelon/grape effect. And you know what's funny about Bush II? The deficit in 2007 was effectively the same as that of 2001, and that was before, shocker, left wingers took over the budget.
 
Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

FlagDUDE08 said:
Forgot about the dot com boom already? You could have put tax rates at 99%, and you still would have had prosperity because of the watermelon/grape effect. And you know what's funny about Bush II? The deficit in 2007 was effectively the same as that of 2001, and that was before, shocker, left wingers took over the budget.
Click to expand...

Another easily disproven knuckledragger talking point. Tell me Fishy, if 22M jobs were created because of a tech "bubble"....why didn't we lose 22M jobs once it burst? Answer = because that's not what was driving the economy!

Next, I know your attraction to Bush policies is well documented, but what exactly did the "lefties" propose upon taking over in 2007 that drove up the deficit? Since you brought it up, you get to supply proof! This ought to be good, especially when he tries to pawn off the unfunded prescription drug benefit and unfunded NCLB onto the Dems....:D Not to mention the Iraq war. :eek:
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top