(07-07-2012 10:16 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(07-07-2012 12:34 AM)Razor Ramon Monarch Wrote:  By the way, if socialism in it's purest form ruled the land, we would no longer have competitive sports because every single game would end in a tie, lest someone be better than someone else, then the other team should simply just be rewarded enough points to tie things up so everyone is equal.

Even at it's very core socialism is a stupid, stupid idea that doesn't work in the real world. The execution by its corrupt tenants is usually even worse than the "theory".

No, that's what you believe socialism is at it's core, because it makes it easier for you to summarily dismiss anything that can be viewed as 'socialist' without having to come up with any legitimate arguments based on actual facts.

I don't know of a single person who doesn't want those who are successful to earn more money and have more things than those who don't. They might differ on how great that divide should ideally be, but there is not a single person I know who has ever once even implied that those who are successful should have the exact same as those who aren't. Never. Are there those people out there? I'm sure there are, somewhere, but to ascribe that belief to the overarching socialist movement, especially how it has historically been represented in the US, is laughable and intellectually lazy on your part. If you want to attack specific policies, then attack those policies and provide data to support your complaints. But sitting here, convincing each other that you know what socialists think and their ultimate desires while spewing nonsense isn't productive nor is it anything but a way in which you can further convince yourselves that you know better without actually searching for the truth. It summarizes the major problem with our absurdly partisan system and the cheerleaders behind it; you all would rather be 'right' than truly correct.

Not that I suspect this will stop any of this though.

"now I do believe at some point you have made enough money" -----Barrack Obama

I know that I personally would feel that way too, but I don't think we should stop people from making money if they're successful. That being said, I have absolutely no qualms about a progressive tax system, and those two things are not at all mutually exclusive.

so saying, if you make more money we will simply take more, encourages people to make more money or discourages it?

Youre speaking out of both sides of your mouth.

(07-07-2012 11:04 AM)maximus Wrote:  so saying, if you make more money we will simply take more, encourages people to make more money or discourages it?

Youre speaking out of both sides of your mouth.

Well a set percentage across the board would result in that same outcome, but looking past that obvious mistake, I'm in no way talking out of both sides of my mouth. Those who are successful are still earning more based overall, even if a larger percentage is paid in taxes. When someone proposes an income limit, in which every dollar beyond a certain point becomes the government, then your argument will be valid.

But, I don't know of anyone who would support such a measure, and it's certainly never been popularly supported in any meaningful way.

(07-07-2012 11:44 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(07-07-2012 11:04 AM)maximus Wrote:  so saying, if you make more money we will simply take more, encourages people to make more money or discourages it?

Youre speaking out of both sides of your mouth.

Well a set percentage across the board would result in that same outcome, but looking past that obvious mistake, I'm in no way talking out of both sides of my mouth. Those who are successful are still earning more based overall, even if a larger percentage is paid in taxes. When someone proposes an income limit, in which every dollar beyond a certain point becomes the government, then your argument will be valid.

But, I don't know of anyone who would support such a measure, and it's certainly never been popularly supported in any meaningful way.

mindnumbing.

Mindnumbing that you don't know how percentages work? Or are you actually going to argue that using the same percentage across the board for taxing incomes means that someone earning $20,000 pays the same numerical amount as someone earning $250k? Because, honestly, at this point in the discussion, I wouldn't be surprised if you actually tried to argue that point.

But by all means, ignore the actual meat of the discussion and instead focus on my simple, somewhat snide, correction in your earlier statement.

(07-07-2012 11:44 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(07-07-2012 11:04 AM)maximus Wrote:  so saying, if you make more money we will simply take more, encourages people to make more money or discourages it?

Youre speaking out of both sides of your mouth.

Well a set percentage across the board would result in that same outcome, but looking past that obvious mistake, I'm in no way talking out of both sides of my mouth. Those who are successful are still earning more based overall, even if a larger percentage is paid in taxes. When someone proposes an income limit, in which every dollar beyond a certain point becomes the government, then your argument will be valid.

But, I don't know of anyone who would support such a measure, and it's certainly never been popularly supported in any meaningful way.

But of course there are multiple tax brackets. the difference in taxes if one is bumped to the next bracket can be thousands if one only made a few hundred dollars more to cross that threshold.

It's like Obamas idiotic argument about taxing someone more if they make more than 250k. I can damn well assure you those who are close would much rather make just under and not make over. That is but of course discouraging those to make less.

And I haven't got into overtime and how it becomes stupid economically to actually work more.

(07-07-2012 11:53 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  Mindnumbing that you don't know how percentages work? Or are you actually going to argue that using the same percentage across the board for taxing incomes means that someone earning $20,000 pays the same numerical amount as someone earning $250k? Because, honestly, at this point in the discussion, I wouldn't be surprised if you actually tried to argue that point.

But by all means, ignore the actual meat of the discussion and instead focus on my simple, somewhat snide, correction in your earlier statement.

Actually, the person making $20,000 should paay more because the person making $250,000 is a "job creator".

Quote:But of course there are multiple tax brackets. the difference in taxes if one is bumped to the next bracket can be thousands if one only made a few hundred dollars more to cross that threshold.

It's like Obamas idiotic argument about taxing someone more if they make more than 250k. I can damn well assure you those who are close would much rather make just under and not make over. That is but of course discouraging those to make less.

Holy sh*t, have you ever even paid taxes before? Because that is absolutely in no way shape or form how bracketed taxes function, and the fact you don't know that scares me.

You are only taxed on the amounts over each threshold that you earn, so it's patently impossible for your scenario in which one barely reaches a threshold forces them to pay a significant amount more than the amount they went over said threshold. In reality, which is something you need to look into joining sometime, only the 'few hundred dollars' would be taxed at the higher rate, and it goes on down the line. Every multimillionaire in the US doesn't pay federal income taxes on the first ~$8.5k they earn, for instance, because it's under the amount that the IRS sets to tax.

Holy mother of god you need to actually learn to read some stuff before you spout out your ignorance.

(07-07-2012 11:53 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  Mindnumbing that you don't know how percentages work? Or are you actually going to argue that using the same percentage across the board for taxing incomes means that someone earning $20,000 pays the same numerical amount as someone earning $250k? Because, honestly, at this point in the discussion, I wouldn't be surprised if you actually tried to argue that point.

But by all means, ignore the actual meat of the discussion and instead focus on my simple, somewhat snide, correction in your earlier statement.

Mindnumbing in that the obvious escapes you continually and when it is thrown back in your face, continually, you are willing to just look past the obvious and point toward obscurity as being the obvious answer. Are you getting the mindnumbing part yet?

Still waiting for a response with an actual legitimate argument that simply isn't 'lol ur dumb'. If I'm really that dumb, it shouldn't be that hard to prove it.

(07-07-2012 12:05 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  

(07-07-2012 11:53 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  Mindnumbing that you don't know how percentages work? Or are you actually going to argue that using the same percentage across the board for taxing incomes means that someone earning $20,000 pays the same numerical amount as someone earning $250k? Because, honestly, at this point in the discussion, I wouldn't be surprised if you actually tried to argue that point.

But by all means, ignore the actual meat of the discussion and instead focus on my simple, somewhat snide, correction in your earlier statement.

Mindnumbing in that the obvious escapes you continually and when it is thrown back in your face, continually, you are willing to just look past the obvious and point toward obscurity as being the obvious answer. Are you getting the mindnumbing part yet?

In other words, you don't understand the tax brackets either. Not at all surprising.

(07-07-2012 12:03 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  

Quote:But of course there are multiple tax brackets. the difference in taxes if one is bumped to the next bracket can be thousands if one only made a few hundred dollars more to cross that threshold.

It's like Obamas idiotic argument about taxing someone more if they make more than 250k. I can damn well assure you those who are close would much rather make just under and not make over. That is but of course discouraging those to make less.

Holy sh*t, have you ever even paid taxes before? Because that is absolutely in no way shape or form how bracketed taxes function, and the fact you don't know that scares me.

You are only taxed on the amounts over each threshold that you earn, so it's patently impossible for your scenario in which one barely reaches a threshold forces them to pay a significant amount more than the amount they went over said threshold. In reality, which is something you need to look into joining sometime, only the 'few hundred dollars' would be taxed at the higher rate, and it goes on down the line. Every multimillionaire in the US doesn't pay federal income taxes on the first ~$8.5k they earn, for instance, because it's under the amount that the IRS sets to tax.I

Holy mother of god you need to actually learn to read some stuff before you spout out your ignorance.

I should have written that on the check I sent to the IRS

Also I just want to reiterate that Maximus didn't know at all how income tax brackets work, and that despite that fact you're still stuck on trying to call my posts mindnumbing.

It's as simple as explaining yourself, or even attempting to do so, yet you won't because you know you can't, and you know you'll end up looking like maximus. I'm throwing down the pepsi challenge here; explain yourself or admit you can't.

(07-07-2012 12:12 PM)maximus Wrote:  

(07-07-2012 12:03 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  

Quote:But of course there are multiple tax brackets. the difference in taxes if one is bumped to the next bracket can be thousands if one only made a few hundred dollars more to cross that threshold.

It's like Obamas idiotic argument about taxing someone more if they make more than 250k. I can damn well assure you those who are close would much rather make just under and not make over. That is but of course discouraging those to make less.

Holy sh*t, have you ever even paid taxes before? Because that is absolutely in no way shape or form how bracketed taxes function, and the fact you don't know that scares me.

You are only taxed on the amounts over each threshold that you earn, so it's patently impossible for your scenario in which one barely reaches a threshold forces them to pay a significant amount more than the amount they went over said threshold. In reality, which is something you need to look into joining sometime, only the 'few hundred dollars' would be taxed at the higher rate, and it goes on down the line. Every multimillionaire in the US doesn't pay federal income taxes on the first ~$8.5k they earn, for instance, because it's under the amount that the IRS sets to tax.I

Holy mother of god you need to actually learn to read some stuff before you spout out your ignorance.

I should have written that on the check I sent to the IRS

Written what? That you have no clues as to how it works?

(07-07-2012 12:12 PM)maximus Wrote:  

(07-07-2012 12:03 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  

Quote:But of course there are multiple tax brackets. the difference in taxes if one is bumped to the next bracket can be thousands if one only made a few hundred dollars more to cross that threshold.

It's like Obamas idiotic argument about taxing someone more if they make more than 250k. I can damn well assure you those who are close would much rather make just under and not make over. That is but of course discouraging those to make less.

Holy sh*t, have you ever even paid taxes before? Because that is absolutely in no way shape or form how bracketed taxes function, and the fact you don't know that scares me.

You are only taxed on the amounts over each threshold that you earn, so it's patently impossible for your scenario in which one barely reaches a threshold forces them to pay a significant amount more than the amount they went over said threshold. In reality, which is something you need to look into joining sometime, only the 'few hundred dollars' would be taxed at the higher rate, and it goes on down the line. Every multimillionaire in the US doesn't pay federal income taxes on the first ~$8.5k they earn, for instance, because it's under the amount that the IRS sets to tax.I

Holy mother of god you need to actually learn to read some stuff before you spout out your ignorance.

I should have written that on the check I sent to the IRS

No, you should learn how to do proper math so you'd actually realize the amounts of taxes you're paying when you complain about them, so unfortunate situations like this one, where you quite frankly look like a moron, are less likely to happen.

Again, I beg you to actually read and investigate things before you simply claim to understand them. It works out better in the long run, I promise you.

(07-07-2012 12:14 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(07-07-2012 12:12 PM)maximus Wrote:  

(07-07-2012 12:03 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  

Quote:But of course there are multiple tax brackets. the difference in taxes if one is bumped to the next bracket can be thousands if one only made a few hundred dollars more to cross that threshold.

It's like Obamas idiotic argument about taxing someone more if they make more than 250k. I can damn well assure you those who are close would much rather make just under and not make over. That is but of course discouraging those to make less.

Holy sh*t, have you ever even paid taxes before? Because that is absolutely in no way shape or form how bracketed taxes function, and the fact you don't know that scares me.

You are only taxed on the amounts over each threshold that you earn, so it's patently impossible for your scenario in which one barely reaches a threshold forces them to pay a significant amount more than the amount they went over said threshold. In reality, which is something you need to look into joining sometime, only the 'few hundred dollars' would be taxed at the higher rate, and it goes on down the line. Every multimillionaire in the US doesn't pay federal income taxes on the first ~$8.5k they earn, for instance, because it's under the amount that the IRS sets to tax.I

Holy mother of god you need to actually learn to read some stuff before you spout out your ignorance.

I should have written that on the check I sent to the IRS

No, you should learn how to do proper math so you'd actually realize the amounts of taxes you're paying when you complain about them, so unfortunate situations like this one, where you quite frankly look like a moron, are less likely to happen.

Again, I beg you to actually read and investigate things before you simply claim to understand them. It works out better in the long run, I promise you.

My CPA does my taxes and explains things just fine. My wife and made about 25 grand more than the previous year and our tax burden jumped a very considerable amount.

(07-07-2012 12:12 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  Also I just want to reiterate that Maximus didn't know at all how income tax brackets work, and that despite that fact you're still stuck on trying to call my posts mindnumbing.

It's as simple as explaining yourself, or even attempting to do so, yet you won't because you know you can't, and you know you'll end up looking like maximus. I'm throwing down the pepsi challenge here; explain yourself or admit you can't.

I like Coke better than Pepesi.

(07-05-2012 07:38 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  It's so cute how you guys just rally the wagons like you know something I don't

You've been consistent in that area since you arrived.

Quote:My CPA does my taxes and explains things just fine. My wife and made about 25 grand more than the previous year and our tax burden jumped a very considerable amount.

Clearly he doesn't, because as you have shown, you didn't have the slightest clue how tax brackets work, and that is one of the most simple and logical of all aspects of federal taxation. As for your other statement, well, I don't know the specifics but unless your CPA is that terrible (doubtful, because damn I've never taken a single course on taxes and yet I knew this), it's because of items other than bracketed federal income taxes.

Stop trying, just apologize for being wrong and admit you should have looked into the subject more. There's nothing wrong with ignorance, I'm ignorant on an absurd number of subjects as is everyone, but there is a problem with defending your ignorance.