You don't have a concept of what individual rights are all about.

Neither do I... It's been such a long time since I've had them... ;)

(On the bright side, I've become well versed in understanding the collective who took them away.)

---

It may not be 1984 but George Orwell sure did see the future . . .

I did not imply that there should be, as you put it, a "thug tax", I said that
there is a premium, or progressive tax, for whatever reason. To me the reason is
quite clear, to stimulate a consumerist market. You may have differing views.
I personally don't care what you do in the US of A, though I'm quite free to
interpret what does happen there as I see fit.

As for your predilection for demonizing everything you happen to disagree with,
well I'd work on that if I were you.
In truth your voice carries little weight other than that
which this forum lends "You".

Cheers

;o)

There's no such thing as a 'consumerist market'. That's stupid. Again, wealth doesn't grow on trees. It's produced by people. There's no such thing as a consumerist economy. People have to produce 'stuff' before it's consumed. Your notion of consumerism is simply flawed. Hell, it even violates the laws of physics if you reduce it to the fundamentals.

---

Founder of BOINC team Objectivists. Oh the humanity! Rational people crunching data!
I did NOT authorize this belly writing!

Are you so ignorant as to believe that wealth is static? You think it grows on trees like acorns? People produce that wealth by their efforts.

Oh so very wrong.
The vast majority of people with wealth came by it by birth.

There are always exceptions to this but statistically, they are insignificant.

Flat tax, fair tax and even no tax are all called for by those with mountains of capital.
These are also the same people who will live in houses and drive cars purchased by their corporations so as to avoid personal taxation.

Those jerks who live in multi-million dollar homes with six hummers in the garage while claiming a personal income of $50,000 a year under the present system are not going to become tax angels under this new sceme.

The only real answer is a return to the progressive taxation system.
Anyone making over four million per year pays 90% income tax on all income over that four million.

Capital gains is another free ride for these guys.
Someone with millions, or even billions invested in the markets pays 15% on this income while working people pick up the slack?

Death tax? Damn right. Families passing on great wealth only serves to cement their claims to entitlment. Family dynasties should be prolonged by working to sustain the dynasty, not simply by passing the wealth down through the generations.
Let's get the wealthy earning their keep as Scary Capitalist claims they already do.

As I've said before, People who've profitted and grown ultra-wealthy from the system have a responsibility, no, they have a duty to pay the system back by way of increased taxes.
This doesn't mean they'll be stripped of their wealth, they just won't be quite as wealthy.
Who gives a crap? They'll still be stinking rich.

But you're wrong. Over %50 of the Americans that are millionaires made those millions on their own and not through inheritance.

The facts fly in your face.

The more socialized a country gets.........like GB...or Germany, or France, or (insert random s.american banana republic here) gets the worse the discrepancy gets.

You keep using phony arguments. I'm beginning to question your honesty, Waite.

---

Founder of BOINC team Objectivists. Oh the humanity! Rational people crunching data!
I did NOT authorize this belly writing!

Over %50 of the Americans that are millionaires made those millions on their own and not through inheritance.

I'm guessing that over 99% of the Americans that are millionaires didn't start out in the ghetto... ;)

---

It may not be 1984 but George Orwell sure did see the future . . .

Are you so ignorant as to believe that wealth is static? You think it grows on trees like acorns? People produce that wealth by their efforts.

Oh so very wrong.
The vast majority of people with wealth came by it by birth.

There are always exceptions to this but statistically, they are insignificant.

Flat tax, fair tax and even no tax are all called for by those with mountains of capital.
These are also the same people who will live in houses and drive cars purchased by their corporations so as to avoid personal taxation.

Those jerks who live in multi-million dollar homes with six hummers in the garage while claiming a personal income of $50,000 a year under the present system are not going to become tax angels under this new sceme.

The only real answer is a return to the progressive taxation system.
Anyone making over four million per year pays 90% income tax on all income over that four million.

Capital gains is another free ride for these guys.
Someone with millions, or even billions invested in the markets pays 15% on this income while working people pick up the slack?

Death tax? Damn right. Families passing on great wealth only serves to cement their claims to entitlment. Family dynasties should be prolonged by working to sustain the dynasty, not simply by passing the wealth down through the generations.
Let's get the wealthy earning their keep as Scary Capitalist claims they already do.

As I've said before, People who've profitted and grown ultra-wealthy from the system have a responsibility, no, they have a duty to pay the system back by way of increased taxes.
This doesn't mean they'll be stripped of their wealth, they just won't be quite as wealthy.
Who gives a crap? They'll still be stinking rich.

1. Even if 'family dynasties' got their money through inheritance what gives you the magical right to seize it?


2. Under the proposed Fair Tax plan those eeeeeeeevil rich guys that you scorn so much won't have a choice to pay or not pay. It's built into the system. You again claim things that are simply not true. Do you not have any respect for the virtue of adhering to reality, sir? Have you no decency?

---

Founder of BOINC team Objectivists. Oh the humanity! Rational people crunching data!
I did NOT authorize this belly writing!

But you're wrong. Over %50 of the Americans that are millionaires made those millions on their own and not through inheritance.

The facts fly in your face.

The more socialized a country gets.........like GB...or Germany, or France, or (insert random s.american banana republic here) gets the worse the discrepancy gets.

You keep using phony arguments. I'm beginning to question your honesty, Waite.

What is a millionaire these days?
I'm talking about people with money, not someone who bought 3 or 4 houses in the 60's or 70's.

What is this discrepency you speak of in socialized nations?

By the way, I question your motives and ability to know what's good for you all the time.

1. Even if 'family dynasties' got their money through inheritance what gives you the magical right to seize it?


2. Under the proposed Fair Tax plan those eeeeeeeevil rich guys that you scorn so much won't have a choice to pay or not pay. It's built into the system. You again claim things that are simply not true. Do you not have any respect for the virtue of adhering to reality, sir? Have you no decency?

1. It's not "siezing" when a society places taxes on those who've made great gains from a system that has provided security in both political and economic venues.
This system has provided an educated workforce, secure sources of food and energy along with the infrastructure needed to run industry.
Combine all these things together with others I haven't mentioned and the people who have ended up lucky enough to become very wealthy certainly do owe a debt to this society.

2. As for this fair tax and it's "built in" aspect of paying taxes by the wealthy, I say bunk.
This system has no provisions for taxing corporate gains and assets.
What is there in this plan to stop someone from forming a corporation to buy his goodies tax free? NOTHING!

Stop promoting the wants of your masters over the needs of your peers.

Metaphorically, you are no different than a guy who throws others from a lifeboat to save his own skin.

1. Even if 'family dynasties' got their money through inheritance what gives you the magical right to seize it?


2. Under the proposed Fair Tax plan those eeeeeeeevil rich guys that you scorn so much won't have a choice to pay or not pay. It's built into the system. You again claim things that are simply not true. Do you not have any respect for the virtue of adhering to reality, sir? Have you no decency?

1. It's not "siezing" when a society places taxes on those who've made great gains from a system that has provided security in both political and economic venues.
This system has provided an educated workforce, secure sources of food and energy along with the infrastructure needed to run industry.
Combine all these things together with others I haven't mentioned and the people who have ended up lucky enough to become very wealthy certainly do owe a debt to this society.

2. As for this fair tax and it's "built in" aspect of paying taxes by the wealthy, I say bunk.
This system has no provisions for taxing corporate gains and assets.
What is there in this plan to stop someone from forming a corporation to buy his goodies tax free? NOTHING!

Stop promoting the wants of your masters over the needs of your peers.

Metaphorically, you are no different than a guy who throws others from a lifeboat to save his own skin.

Always keep in mind that unless you're self-employed, the signatures on the face of your paycheck generally make more money than you. When you limit their ability to make money and keep the money that they make, the greater the odds that you will someday not be getting a check from them...

Also, keep in mind 401(k) "millionaires" either are out there, or will be out there in the next 10 years. If I busted my butt for 30-40 years and saved a lot and had a good return, then I fail to understand why I should have punitive amounts of that confiscated once I start taking distributions...

Always keep in mind that unless you're self-employed, the signatures on the face of your paycheck generally make more money than you. When you limit their ability to make money and keep the money that they make, the greater the odds that you will someday not be getting a check from them...

Also, keep in mind 401(k) "millionaires" either are out there, or will be out there in the next 10 years. If I busted my butt for 30-40 years and saved a lot and had a good return, then I fail to understand why I should have punitive amounts of that confiscated once I start taking distributions...

Well, as to the employer making more money than the employee, I have no argument.
But the trickle down theory has been proven to be a load of garbage.
Reagan did away with the progressive tax system under the trickle down theory which was based on the innaccurate assumption that when the wealthy became even more wealthy, they would share some of it with the working class.
This has proven to be one of the greatest wrongs ever thrust upon working people ever.
Since the dark days of Reaganism, we have witnessed increases of over 400% in earnings for the wealthy while earnings for working people has not even kept pace with inflation.
This is why you have less in your pocket now than you did 35 years ago.

As to your investments or pensions, if you reread my post, it states the progressive taxation would kick in on any money over $4 million per year.

The first $4 million is taxed at the normal rate but anything above that gets taxed at the appropriate rate.

Not many of us are involved in a pension plan or investment scheme that is going to provide over $4 million a year so it's save to assume that only the super rich, who have enjoyed all the perks of this stable society, will be involved in paying the progressive tax.

What do you think about it? It's bound to be a well debated topic this year in the presidential campaigns.

Do you even watch your own country's debates?

The only things being well debated are Christ and fences, and everyone seems to be on the same page when it comes to both of these.

Therefore, I must conclude that there is no debate in your political proccess, but plenty of small sound bites for mass consumption by people like you.

But you're wrong. Over %50 of the Americans that are millionaires made those millions on their own and not through inheritance.

The facts fly in your face.

The more socialized a country gets.........like GB...or Germany, or France, or (insert random s.american banana republic here) gets the worse the discrepancy gets.

You keep using phony arguments. I'm beginning to question your honesty, Waite.

you know Gini coefficient,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gini_coefficient



in list of countries by income equality
USA = China = Iran = Mongolia = Cambodgia = Thailand : 0.40–0.44 (funny, isn't it ?)

Sweden and denmark known for their high taxes and large public sector have the best Gini coefficient.

s.american banana republic in the 70's, 80's and 90's wasn't socialist but support by US government,US company, Friedman and chicago university. Same policy, low tax and idle rich. i.e free market dictatorships. Bests Patterns are Chile, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Panama and Colombia. Giny coefficient ≥ 0.60

---

But the trickle down theory has been proven to be a load of garbage.
Reagan did away with the progressive tax system under the trickle down theory

The tax system is still progressive, just not as progressive.

which was based on the innaccurate assumption that when the wealthy became even more wealthy, they would share some of it with the working class.
This has proven to be one of the greatest wrongs ever thrust upon working people ever.
Since the dark days of Reaganism, we have witnessed increases of over 400% in earnings for the wealthy while earnings for working people has not even kept pace with inflation.

The missing component is incentive. The proposal that I gave my Economics instructor all the way back in 1990 was that you do something like this:

Set corporate income tax to 50%. For every 1% of corporate profit that the company turns around and gives back to the rank-and-file employees, the company gets a 2% rate reduction and the ability to deduct the amount being redirected to the employees, up to 15% redirection (30% rate reduction). This would mean that the corporate income tax would then be 20% of 85%, or 17%. Add the 15% given to the employees, and the effective drain on income goes down from 38% to 32%.

You can play around with other numbers if you'd like, but I'm sure you get the idea...

This is why you have less in your pocket now than you did 35 years ago.

I have more in my pocket now than 35 years ago, because I was in diapers back then... LOL. Looking at recent events, I have less in my pocket than I did 1 year ago because I got Bangalored, even with the pleasure of training a couple of nice Indian guys before being shown the door. It wasn't their fault, which was something that was difficult to keep from showing to them how upset I was and how I knew that when I was given the assignment that I would be out the door...

The first $4 million is taxed at the normal rate but anything above that gets taxed at the appropriate rate.

One of the problems I have with the whole Liberal-based "rich should pay their 'fair share' of taxes" argument is that not one single person will ever define what "fair share" really means. You don't define it either. All you do is state a punitive limit.

The reality is, at least here in the United States, that "the rich" already pay the larger portion of the tax revenue because they have larger portion of the money.

You need to look at reward-based systems to inticing "the rich" to share, rather than looking at how you might confiscate funds...

You need to look at reward-based systems

There used to be a day when I paid more rent than the other guy because he had lived there since there was dirt... Now the new guy pays less rent than I because my rent has been raised as many times as there is dirt... So much for rewarding long term renters... ;)

(My point being: Don't expect a 'reward-based system' anytime soon.)

---

It may not be 1984 but George Orwell sure did see the future . . .

You need to look at reward-based systems

There used to be a day when I paid more rent than the other guy because he had lived there since there was dirt... Now the new guy pays less rent than I because my rent has been raised as many times as there is dirt... So much for rewarding long term renters... ;)

(My point being: Don't expect a 'reward-based system' anytime soon.)

You've really got to work on your negotiation skills. It seems you have had similar historical 'bad luck' with your employers.

---

Founder of BOINC team Objectivists. Oh the humanity! Rational people crunching data!
I did NOT authorize this belly writing!

1. It's not "siezing" when a society places taxes on those who've made great gains from a system that has provided security in both political and economic venues.
This system has provided an educated workforce, secure sources of food and energy along with the infrastructure needed to run industry.
Combine all these things together with others I haven't mentioned and the people who have ended up lucky enough to become very wealthy certainly do owe a debt to this society.

So you're back to the "PAY UP BECAUSE WE DIDN'T BASH YOUR BRAINS IN" extortion argument in order to soak the producers. You again have ignored the fact that they have a right to exist for their own sake without your interference and thuggery in the first place. You can stretch your logic to anything given your premises, R.Waite. Maybe women should owe you love and carresses because you've supported a community police force that deters sexual assault. Do you ever introspectively analyze the things you profess belief in?

2. As for this fair tax and it's "built in" aspect of paying taxes by the wealthy, I say bunk.
This system has no provisions for taxing corporate gains and assets.

Why is it 'bunk' ? Everyone pays except the poor. Everyone also does not pay for their necessities. You're just stuck on the soak the rich crap again.

No provisions for taxing corporations? Yeah, that's right. You whine and whine about corporations shipping jobs overseas all the time. This will bring that capital home. You seem to think that a corporation is some sort of magical entity disembodied from the citizenry but only individuals people own corporations. Period!

We're going to stop taxing the productive machine of the economy. You only pay tax on the consumables.

What is there in this plan to stop someone from forming a corporation to buy his goodies tax free? NOTHING!

This is just a false statement. It's in the legislation.

Stop promoting the wants of your masters over the needs of your peers.

Metaphorically, you are no different than a guy who throws others from a lifeboat to save his own skin.

Who are my masters? Lucifer? Beelzebub? Satan? *does best 'Church Lady accent).*

And the lifeboat comment is just trashy. I don't throw people out of lifeboats or off of Harley Davidsons for that matter.

---

Founder of BOINC team Objectivists. Oh the humanity! Rational people crunching data!
I did NOT authorize this belly writing!

Well, as to the employer making more money than the employee, I have no argument.

Well praise baby Jesus! We agree on something once in a while.

But the trickle down theory has been proven to be a load of garbage.

Proven to be garbage by whom? Oh, by the way....I don't care if it's a total lie really. Why? It's not your little trickle. It belongs to someone else and the eeeeeevil rich folks have a right to exist for their own sake just like you. They're not your slaves.

Reagan did away with the progressive tax system under the trickle down theory which was based on the innaccurate assumption that when the wealthy became even more wealthy, they would share some of it with the working class.
This has proven to be one of the greatest wrongs ever thrust upon working people ever.

Wrong wrong wrong. He didn't eliminate the progressive tax system.

Since the dark days of Reaganism, we have witnessed increases of over 400% in earnings for the wealthy while earnings for working people has not even kept pace with inflation.
This is why you have less in your pocket now than you did 35 years ago.

What was 'dark' about the Reagan years? The poor got richer and real wages have outgrown inflation since....well golly gee...forever. Go kiss a capitalist this Christmas in thanks.

---

Founder of BOINC team Objectivists. Oh the humanity! Rational people crunching data!
I did NOT authorize this belly writing!

[quote]

What do you think about it? It's bound to be a well debated topic this year in the presidential campaigns.

Do you even watch your own country's debates?

I have watched almost every single one. Note that you've mischaracterized my statement again. I said it will be a well debated topic this year in the presidential campaigns. I never once mentioned the silly official debates of the candidates. Although it has been discussed there since about day 1. It's being debated in newspapers, television and radio broadcasts, magazines, and in political journals.

---

Founder of BOINC team Objectivists. Oh the humanity! Rational people crunching data!
I did NOT authorize this belly writing!

It seems you have had similar historical 'bad luck'

'Bad luck' is when bad things happen for no apparent reason... 'Bad people' make bad things happen for personal reasons...

My problem isn't 'bad luck', my problem is 'bad people'... ;)

(I have more luck in my little toe than most have in their entire family tree. And that's a fact!)

---

It may not be 1984 but George Orwell sure did see the future . . .

It seems you have had similar historical 'bad luck'

'Bad luck' is when bad things happen for no apparent reason... 'Bad people' make bad things happen for personal reasons...

My problem isn't 'bad luck', my problem is 'bad people'... ;)

(I have more luck in my little toe than most have in their entire family tree. And that's a fact!)

Perhaps you are a bad person.

---

Founder of BOINC team Objectivists. Oh the humanity! Rational people crunching data!
I did NOT authorize this belly writing!