6/16/2014 2:46 PM
Posted by bad_luck on 6/16/2014 1:27:00 PM (view original):
Posted by toddcommish on 6/16/2014 12:39:00 PM (view original):
BL, You're missing the point.  Even if my next $5,000 means "less" to me than it does to a homeless man.... IT'S IRRELEVANT.

IT'S MINE.

I EARNED IT BY WORKING.

The government should not decide that "Well, Todd is wealthier than BL, so he should have to give up his money until he is just as destitute and miserable as BL, and their marginal utility of their next dollar is equal."

If you think that's the function of government, then you're on the wrong continent.

Am I on the wrong continent? Because we have tax brackets that tax upper income brackets at a higher rate.

Is it your argument that you shouldn't have to pay any taxes because "IT'S MINE/I EARNED IT?"
I'm not saying I shouldn't have to pay any taxes.  I'm saying that I shouldn't have to pay tons more simply because I'm more successful than others, especially when I don't believe in the social programs that have been perpetuating this culture of handouts and freebies.

Some taxes are necessary for the infrastructure of the government and the protection of the country.  I don't want to give up my money for the stuff I don't believe in.
6/16/2014 2:47 PM
There's are no brackets and only one tax rate in my proposal.

Stop pretending there isn't.

6/16/2014 2:48 PM
Posted by tecwrg on 6/16/2014 2:47:00 PM (view original):
There's are no brackets and only one tax rate in my proposal.

Stop pretending there isn't.

What is the annual income tax bill for someone that makes $50,000 a year in your proposal?
6/16/2014 2:59 PM
Posted by MikeT23 on 6/16/2014 2:33:00 PM (view original):
Posted by burnsy483 on 6/16/2014 1:01:00 PM (view original):
Maybe it's as simple as "I don't have as good of a grasp on human nature as I thought I did."  But it seems to me, that someone with $100 dollars in their bank account, rent due tomorrow and their next paycheck of $500 coming next week would make the next dollar he made more valuable and make him more likely to pick up the dollar on the sidewalk than the guy with $1 million in the bank and a paycheck of $10,000 coming this week would.  And I'm not only talking about perceived value by both people, I'm talking about actual value.  One guy needs every penny, the other doesn't.  But maybe it's legit me not understanding people as well as I thought I did. 

As for the argument of "I'm not a saver" maybe I don't have the exact mentality as moy does, but I do save money.  I save more money now than I did 5-10 years ago because I make more money.  My mindset really hasn't changed too much, except that I have the ability to save money, so I do.  I don't buy many material items, I don't smoke, and with more money I earn, my lifestyle likely won't change much.  But there was a period of time where if I saw a quarter on the ground, I grabbed it, because it was 1/4 of the way to me getting a burger at McDonalds for lunch.  I'm not necessarily going out of my way to pick up a quarter anymore, because I don't NEED to.  Money still have value to me, I do want to retire one day, but the value of each dollar isn't as strong as it was.  If you want to blame me for taking my experiences and applying them to society, making for a bad argument, that's fair, I suppose.

If your argument is "I don't care what's necessarily better or worse for the economy, it's my ******* money, and I'm going to do what I want with it, don't tax me more just because I can afford it"  I can actually appreciate that argument more.  Especially when it's true that there are many people who ARE poor partially because they spend money poorly.  
"If you want to blame me for taking my experiences and applying them to society, making for a bad argument, that's fair, I suppose."

Correct.

I've been all over the income spectrum over the last 16 years.  I've always picked up the quarter(or nickel).   I assume I always will.   But I don't apply that to everyone else.  



It seems so obvious to me.  People are talking about LeBron and Wade taking pay cuts to get Melo to play in Miami because they have all the money in the world, already, what's the difference? Yankee fans ******** at Cano taking more money (ironic, but anyway...) because "what's the difference?" Many athletes taking less money to go somewhere else/stay where they are because the money doesn't matter as much.  Gil Meche(?) retiring and walking away from $12M because he was tired of playing baseball.  So it seems obvious enough that the extra million that many others make may not matter as much as the extra thousand that the less wealthy make.  If you don't see it, then we're arguing over something that I can't prove to you.  What makes all the sense in the world to me may not to you, or most others in this thread.
6/16/2014 3:03 PM
Posted by bad_luck on 6/16/2014 2:48:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 6/16/2014 2:47:00 PM (view original):
There's are no brackets and only one tax rate in my proposal.

Stop pretending there isn't.

What is the annual income tax bill for someone that makes $50,000 a year in your proposal?
60% of their income above the standard exempted income (which applies to everybody).

Do the math.  Use your advanced baseball statistics calculator if you need to.

6/16/2014 3:12 PM
Posted by tecwrg on 6/16/2014 3:03:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 6/16/2014 2:48:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 6/16/2014 2:47:00 PM (view original):
There's are no brackets and only one tax rate in my proposal.

Stop pretending there isn't.

What is the annual income tax bill for someone that makes $50,000 a year in your proposal?
60% of their income above the standard exempted income (which applies to everybody).

Do the math.  Use your advanced baseball statistics calculator if you need to.

So why are you giving an exemption?
6/16/2014 3:22 PM
Would you prefer that I take it away?

I'll do that if you wish.

Let me know.

6/16/2014 3:28 PM
Posted by tecwrg on 6/16/2014 3:22:00 PM (view original):
Would you prefer that I take it away?

I'll do that if you wish.

Let me know.

No, honestly. Why give it?

If all money is equal in utility, why allow the first $60,000 to not be taxed?
6/16/2014 3:48 PM
Posted by tecwrg on 6/16/2014 3:22:00 PM (view original):
Would you prefer that I take it away?

I'll do that if you wish.

Let me know.

A quick check, and I found 2012 numbers.

Total gross income for the U.S. was around $15.7 trillion dollars.  Total individual income tax revenues was around $1.132 trillion.  That comes out to around 7.2%.

So that works for me.

No exemption, and EVERYBODY pays a 7.2% tax rate.

DONE!

6/16/2014 3:57 PM
Are there really that few people paying taxes? Or am I missing something.

6/16/2014 4:24 PM
Posted by burnsy483 on 6/16/2014 2:59:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 6/16/2014 2:33:00 PM (view original):
Posted by burnsy483 on 6/16/2014 1:01:00 PM (view original):
Maybe it's as simple as "I don't have as good of a grasp on human nature as I thought I did."  But it seems to me, that someone with $100 dollars in their bank account, rent due tomorrow and their next paycheck of $500 coming next week would make the next dollar he made more valuable and make him more likely to pick up the dollar on the sidewalk than the guy with $1 million in the bank and a paycheck of $10,000 coming this week would.  And I'm not only talking about perceived value by both people, I'm talking about actual value.  One guy needs every penny, the other doesn't.  But maybe it's legit me not understanding people as well as I thought I did. 

As for the argument of "I'm not a saver" maybe I don't have the exact mentality as moy does, but I do save money.  I save more money now than I did 5-10 years ago because I make more money.  My mindset really hasn't changed too much, except that I have the ability to save money, so I do.  I don't buy many material items, I don't smoke, and with more money I earn, my lifestyle likely won't change much.  But there was a period of time where if I saw a quarter on the ground, I grabbed it, because it was 1/4 of the way to me getting a burger at McDonalds for lunch.  I'm not necessarily going out of my way to pick up a quarter anymore, because I don't NEED to.  Money still have value to me, I do want to retire one day, but the value of each dollar isn't as strong as it was.  If you want to blame me for taking my experiences and applying them to society, making for a bad argument, that's fair, I suppose.

If your argument is "I don't care what's necessarily better or worse for the economy, it's my ******* money, and I'm going to do what I want with it, don't tax me more just because I can afford it"  I can actually appreciate that argument more.  Especially when it's true that there are many people who ARE poor partially because they spend money poorly.  
"If you want to blame me for taking my experiences and applying them to society, making for a bad argument, that's fair, I suppose."

Correct.

I've been all over the income spectrum over the last 16 years.  I've always picked up the quarter(or nickel).   I assume I always will.   But I don't apply that to everyone else.  



It seems so obvious to me.  People are talking about LeBron and Wade taking pay cuts to get Melo to play in Miami because they have all the money in the world, already, what's the difference? Yankee fans ******** at Cano taking more money (ironic, but anyway...) because "what's the difference?" Many athletes taking less money to go somewhere else/stay where they are because the money doesn't matter as much.  Gil Meche(?) retiring and walking away from $12M because he was tired of playing baseball.  So it seems obvious enough that the extra million that many others make may not matter as much as the extra thousand that the less wealthy make.  If you don't see it, then we're arguing over something that I can't prove to you.  What makes all the sense in the world to me may not to you, or most others in this thread.
You ignore the people making millions and putting in 80 hour work weeks.    The next dollar has a lot of value to them or they'd work a normal work week. 

I assume George Clooney has made millions.  He still does movies.   Why?
Bill Clinton has made millions.   He still books speaking engagements.   Why?
Trump has made(and apparently lost) millions.   He's still building buildings.  Why?
6/16/2014 4:29 PM (edited)
Posted by burnsy483 on 6/16/2014 3:57:00 PM (view original):
Are there really that few people paying taxes? Or am I missing something.

85 million tax returns*

*not individuals since about 40-45% of those filed jointly.


Bottom line is half the nation pays for the other half the nation. The top 50% of tax payers account for 97.8% of the taxes collected.
6/16/2014 4:34 PM
If you offered the guy who just needs to make money to pay his rent a lead movie role, where he makes $100K spread out over the next year, do you think he would take it? How about Clooney? Would Clooney keep making movies if that was the rate?

If you offered that guy $500 to speak to a group of people for an hour, would he do it?  Would Clinton? Would Clinton keep doing speaking engagements?
6/16/2014 4:35 PM
So you're saying Clinton and Clooney have plenty of money but keep doing what they do because it pays so well?
6/16/2014 4:46 PM
Posted by burnsy483 on 6/16/2014 2:59:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 6/16/2014 2:33:00 PM (view original):
Posted by burnsy483 on 6/16/2014 1:01:00 PM (view original):
Maybe it's as simple as "I don't have as good of a grasp on human nature as I thought I did."  But it seems to me, that someone with $100 dollars in their bank account, rent due tomorrow and their next paycheck of $500 coming next week would make the next dollar he made more valuable and make him more likely to pick up the dollar on the sidewalk than the guy with $1 million in the bank and a paycheck of $10,000 coming this week would.  And I'm not only talking about perceived value by both people, I'm talking about actual value.  One guy needs every penny, the other doesn't.  But maybe it's legit me not understanding people as well as I thought I did. 

As for the argument of "I'm not a saver" maybe I don't have the exact mentality as moy does, but I do save money.  I save more money now than I did 5-10 years ago because I make more money.  My mindset really hasn't changed too much, except that I have the ability to save money, so I do.  I don't buy many material items, I don't smoke, and with more money I earn, my lifestyle likely won't change much.  But there was a period of time where if I saw a quarter on the ground, I grabbed it, because it was 1/4 of the way to me getting a burger at McDonalds for lunch.  I'm not necessarily going out of my way to pick up a quarter anymore, because I don't NEED to.  Money still have value to me, I do want to retire one day, but the value of each dollar isn't as strong as it was.  If you want to blame me for taking my experiences and applying them to society, making for a bad argument, that's fair, I suppose.

If your argument is "I don't care what's necessarily better or worse for the economy, it's my ******* money, and I'm going to do what I want with it, don't tax me more just because I can afford it"  I can actually appreciate that argument more.  Especially when it's true that there are many people who ARE poor partially because they spend money poorly.  
"If you want to blame me for taking my experiences and applying them to society, making for a bad argument, that's fair, I suppose."

Correct.

I've been all over the income spectrum over the last 16 years.  I've always picked up the quarter(or nickel).   I assume I always will.   But I don't apply that to everyone else.  



It seems so obvious to me.  People are talking about LeBron and Wade taking pay cuts to get Melo to play in Miami because they have all the money in the world, already, what's the difference? Yankee fans ******** at Cano taking more money (ironic, but anyway...) because "what's the difference?" Many athletes taking less money to go somewhere else/stay where they are because the money doesn't matter as much.  Gil Meche(?) retiring and walking away from $12M because he was tired of playing baseball.  So it seems obvious enough that the extra million that many others make may not matter as much as the extra thousand that the less wealthy make.  If you don't see it, then we're arguing over something that I can't prove to you.  What makes all the sense in the world to me may not to you, or most others in this thread.
Sounds more like opportunity cost than the law of marginal utility.

I.e. lebron making more money might mean his buddy won't be winning championships with him because of a salary cap structure of some sort. That does not necessarily mean every future dollar is worth less, rather that other things like winning a championship with melo are worth more.

We see this every day with people turning promotion opportunities because it'd require too much travel, or not wanting to work for a tyrannical boss despite the financial upside. There are more important things than money - no one is disputing that.
of 123

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

Popular on WhatIfSports site: Baseball Simulation | College Basketball Game | College Football Game | Online Baseball Game | Hockey Simulation | NFL Picks | College Football Picks | Sports Games

© 1999-2014 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.