***** Official Election Game Day Thread *****

[ZRod]

7 minutes ago, B.B. Hemingway said:

 

I pretty clearly stated earlier that I was aware that they used tax loopholes, and am against it. Everyone should pay the same percentage, no matter your income (I am not against of floor, of say $40,000/year, where you didn't have to pay income tax).

Why would we want a regressive flat tax? 10% of 10, 20, 30, 50 , 60k is a lot different than 10% of 1, 10, 100M when you look at spending power.

[Enhance]

49 minutes ago, B.B. Hemingway said:

You're not wrong, for sure. 

 

I certainly don't feel sorry for the rich, but I've long disliked the idea of taxing them at a higher rate than anybody else.... The idea of punishing them for being financially successful doesn't sit well with me (I am aware that a lot of them don't pay anywhere near their fair share with tax loopholes).

 

4 minutes ago, ZRod said:

You know trickle down doesn't work, right? We have some of the lowest tax rates in the world and yet the rich still try to hide money in off shore accounts, play crooked games with tax loop holes, and invest in manual labor else where.

In my eyes there are two big problems people seem to either not know and/or misunderstand about taxes and 'taxing the rich' - first, people often want to focus on 'earned' income when they talk about taxing the wealthy. Most wealthy people's financial success does not come from their earned income but from their passive and capital gains. So messing with tax income brackets to try to get to those people ultimately ignores their true wealth generators.

 

Second, as economists, statisticians and others have routinely noted, taxation doesn't necessarily re-shift the distribution of wealth to the middle and low-income classes to help them pay for stuff. It just generates more dollars to be used in gov't assistance programs that are fine-tuned to serve unique circumstances and not the greater whole.

 

There are important adjustments we could make to tax codes, without question, but the low-hanging fruit places that people often want to focus their attention are often misguided IMO.

[commando]

what is the proper term for donald now?  lame duck or donald duck?

[B.B. Hemingway]

1 minute ago, ZRod said:

Why would we want a regressive flat tax? 10% of 10, 20, 30, 50 , 60k is a lot different than 10% of 1, 10, 100M when you look at spending power.

 

Is it regressive if you take the same amount from both?

 

We just see this in fundamentally different ways.

[knapplc]

4 minutes ago, teachercd said:

Are we looking at a big tax increase?  Under Biden, is that something you (anyone, anyone, Bueller) see happening?  

 

Yep, and they're going to take our guns, too.

 

[ColoradoHusk]

5 minutes ago, teachercd said:

Are we looking at a big tax increase?  Under Biden, is that something you (anyone, anyone, Bueller) see happening?  

Biden's campaigning said he would only raise taxes for people over $400K per year in salary.  So, if you fall in that category, it sucks for you.  But, I am sure you can afford those extra taxes.

[teachercd]

Just now, knapplc said:

 

Yep, and they're going to take our guns, too.

 

I don't have any guns...except for my biceps.  

1 minute ago, ColoradoHusk said:

Biden's campaigning said he would only raise taxes for people over $400K per year in salary.  So, if you fall in that category, it sucks for you.  But, I am sure you can afford those extra taxes.

Ugggg...why did I except that asst speech coach gig...that pushed me to 401,000 a year!

[knapplc]

1 minute ago, teachercd said:

I don't have any guns...except for my biceps.  

 

No exceptions!

 

[B.B. Hemingway]

1 minute ago, knapplc said:

 

Yep, and they're going to take our guns, too.

 

 

It amazes me that people actually worry about that happening.

[Cdog923]

6 minutes ago, commando said:

what is the proper term for donald now?  lame duck or donald duck?

 

"Dips#!t who's going to have to be thrown out like yesterday's newspaper"

[teachercd]

3 minutes ago, knapplc said:

 

No exceptions!

 

Ha!

 

 

1 minute ago, Cdog923 said:

 

"Dips#!t who's going to have to be thrown out like yesterday's newspaper"

You ummmm...you don't do a lot of team slogans for your school, do you?  Hahaha

[commando]

1 minute ago, Cdog923 said:

 

"Dips#!t who's going to have to be thrown out like yesterday's newspaper"

hopefully they throw him away and don't recycle him for 2024

[Enhance]

2 hours ago, VectorVictor said:

if CNN is bathing in the schadenfreude that 4+ years of Trump’s petulant childish behavior and baseless accusations (not to mention all of the childish, idiotic derp Trump supporters have spouted and continue to spout) created...well, I can’t blame them, they’re only human. 
 

 ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 

 

10 minutes ago, Cdog923 said:

The only problem I have with CNN and other news media going after the President like they have been is that they should have started 4 years ago. 

I don't necessarily disagree with either of these points, but I do think we should be holding our media providers to high standards. We shouldn't get to pick and choose when it is appropriate for them to act professionally and tell the facts vs. when it's OK for them to go after a president by referring to him as an overweight reptile on national television.

 

We often lament Fox News and right wing media providers for their behavior, but if we shrug our shoulders at similar behavior from the other side, it sort of negates our argument.

 

I just think we need to be better instead of stooping to low levels to get our points across (not talking about you two, by the way - talking about media).

[ZRod]

3 minutes ago, B.B. Hemingway said:

 

Is it regressive if you take the same amount from both?

 

We just see this in fundamentally different ways.

Yes, it is. Just as a thought experiment... Who is going to hurt worse if you take 10% of their income. The person barely getting by on 10k a year or the person making 100k? That $10,000 sucks but it's not going to be a problem. On the other hand that $1,000 you just took could mean they don't pay rent for a month, can't get all the groceries they need each week, don't have money to fix their car, etc.

 

10% isn't just 10%

[B.B. Hemingway]

2 minutes ago, ZRod said:

Yes, it is. Just as a thought experiment... Who is going to hurt worse if you take 10% of their income. The person barely getting by on 10k a year or the person making 100k? That $10,000 sucks but it's not going to be a problem. On the other hand that $1,000 you just took could mean they don't pay rent for a month, can't get all the groceries they need each week, don't have money to fix their car, etc.

 

10% isn't just 10%

 

I said I'd be okay with a floor salary.

 

A better example would be 70k vs. 250k.... 7k in taxes, using your rate, vs 25k.... I don't feel bad for the 70k guy in that situation