Originally posted by MaskedAvatar
BoutTime

Renewed respect (although there was no need for the full detail for me to appreciate you being able to straddle the business development and social policy chairs with the great aplomb that you do).

A lesson for protagonists in knowing thy "enemy".

Well done, and wishes for your continued business success and continued positive contribution to people's thinking at ATS.

Thanks MA!

The tech sector is still largly contingent on capital expenditures, so it's no where near the love fest it used to be.
And, I remeber seeing some where that Springer ran his own company as well, same with Kukla.
My hats off to everyone doing the daily grind, but especially to my compadres out here on the tight rope without a net.
No Unemployment insurance for you!!!

Originally posted by vader
The top 1%, who earn 20.81% of all income covered under the income tax, are paying 37.42% of the federal tax bite. The half of Americans with the highest incomes pays 96.09% of all income tax.

Can you cite the source for these figures?

I would genuinely like to validate them.

On the second part, especially, it points to a much higher income disparity than what even I would have believed. That figure would seem to indicate one thing about tax inequitability, but the reality is instead the highlighting of a preponderance of such low incomes as to render taxation of the individuals infeasible. This is the really concerning part... the extent of poverty and lack of full employment in the shadows.

First off though, a link to the source of the figures would be very interesting indeed! Thanks.

I want the people that run this website to look carefully at this thread for it typifies a lot of what is wrong with ATS these days. Not that there is much wrong but what is wrong is this herein.

A buncha people ganging up on a few others and rather than think for themselves they just repost crap from somewhere else on the web. Furthermore we have so called 'experts' perennially asking for proof and evidence as though they can offer it themselves. Just because something is posted on the web does not mean it is true!

Lastly, we have all the people that never worked a day in their lives telling adults how the 'world really works.' YEAH RIGHT!

Anyways I am not asking for you to do anything about this because I do not believe in censorship of any kind. But on the other hand I bring to attention the dangers of those that want to BELIEVE IN ANY AND EVERY CONSPIRACT THEY COME ACROSS!

Because the web is full of conspiracy these days and every agenda is represented by its own spin on things that is why we find that we are evaluating theories more than presenting them as happened in the past.

The glory days of conspiracy are over as now we have communist insurgents, anarchists, muslims, CIA, patriots, christians and various other maligned groups producing conspiracy like it is some 18th century serial writing factory.

It is fun to sit back and watch.

"A buncha people ganging up on a few others and rather than think for themselves they just repost crap from somewhere else on the web."

THE NEO

I hope you did not take my links as crap. I just got here. I made a factual statement and provided backup. You don't possibly mean that the IRS has a conspiracy about our taxes?

Facts not known by most:

- the monies collected now go straight to the Treasury

- the IRS has staffed several thousand Auditors to target those making under $100K per year

Your right!!! The democrats keep on losing!

I guess that gives the 1/2 of the 30% who actually vote a CLEAR idealogical and moral compass with which to steer this country.

Sounds like a philosophical run-away to me.

Originally posted by vader
Springer,

Closest to the old Soviet Union machine is today's liberals in this country including the liberal media with all of it's truth bending lying tricks.

NEWSFLASH FOR YOU VADER

First of all, I agree with your comments on Communism, and secondly, Reagan is my favorite living president.

HOWEVER,

It's time for people to wake up and smell the coffee. I hate to break it to you, but it is not, repeat, NOT the LIBERAL media. It is the corporate-controlled media. CORPORATE. Corporate ain't Democrat and it ain't Republican.

The media has taken its marching orders directly from the White and House and Pentagon since Bush took office; or, at least since 9-11. It's fear-driven. You speak up and cause any noise in the mainstream and your arse'll be so out of a career, it's nauseating.

ECK,
I couldn't agree anymore with what you commented.
Very nice and refreshing to see.


regards
seekerof

Originally posted by Seekerof
ECK,
I couldn't agree anymore with what you commented.
Very nice and refreshing to see.


regards
seekerof

Thanks, Seekerof! It's important for folks to understand that.
btw, whose your fave president Seekerof?

P.S.

Nice avatar! I do miss Einstein winking at me, tho!

"The top 1%, who earn 20.81% of all income covered under the income tax, are paying 37.42% of the federal tax bite. The half of Americans with the highest incomes pays 96.09% of all income tax. "

This is true, and Rush is mathematically correct. But the concept of "fair" taxation needs perspective here.

Would a flat tax (no matter what the rate) not effectively punish someone WORKING for 100% of their income more than someone that could never work another day in their life, and their great great grandkids could still draw more than 98% of WORKING Americans by drawing interest alone?

All our taxes go to pay for roads, educating a new generation of WORKERS, capitalist infrastructure and protection of 'what we have'... does it not makes sense then that those that HAVE THE MOST (ie):

a) Earned their wealth on the backs of WORKING CLASS Americans (and 1% inspiration)
b) Transported their products to market on our roads and advertise on our airwaves and mark up OUR sweat and tears
-and-
c) are almost exclusively protected all over the world by a WORKING CLASS MILITARY PAID BY TAXES, TAXES, TAXES

Should pay more? And I mean MUCH, MUCH MORE than those with the least to lose?

Doesn't Paris Hilton DESERVE to pay a higher tax rate than MOST AMERICANS?

This is not Marxist, labourism. It's common sense. And the truly "obscenely" wealthy should be GLAD to pay higher taxes...

That is, if they know whats good for them!

Originally posted by vader
Russian,

Mne vsjo horosho. Although I am not a Russian. Just a guy who escaped the occupation before the wall came down. It's funny how history goes in a circle. I escaped the Afghanistan war (the Russian one) just to come here and find the new one a decade later. But that's for another topic.

the russians got their asses handed to them. this one were "winning" if you could call it that. you cant bomb the # outta afgahnistan cause they'll go "up grade!"

Originally posted by RANT
"The top 1%, who earn 20.81% of all income covered under the income tax, are paying 37.42% of the federal tax bite. The half of Americans with the highest incomes pays 96.09% of all income tax. "

This is true, and Rush is mathematically correct. But the concept of "fair" taxation needs perspective here.

Would a flat tax (no matter what the rate) not effectively punish someone WORKING for 100% of their income more than someone that could never work another day in their life, and their great great grandkids could still draw more than 98% of WORKING Americans by drawing interest alone?

All our taxes go to pay for roads, educating a new generation of WORKERS, capitalist infrastructure and protection of 'what we have'... does it not makes sense then that those that HAVE THE MOST (ie):

a) Earned their wealth on the backs of WORKING CLASS Americans (and 1% inspiration)
b) Transported their products to market on our roads and advertise on our airwaves and mark up OUR sweat and tears
-and-
c) are almost exclusively protected all over the world by a WORKING CLASS MILITARY PAID BY TAXES, TAXES, TAXES

Should pay more? And I mean MUCH, MUCH MORE than those with the least to lose?

Doesn't Paris Hilton DESERVE to pay a higher tax rate than MOST AMERICANS?

This is not Marxist, labourism. It's common sense. And the truly "obscenely" wealthy should be GLAD to pay higher taxes...

That is, if they know whats good for them!

There's only two words for this:


"Well said."

That is very well said. It is a nicely constructed argument. I'm still torn on whether a flat tax would be benificial or not. There is also the posibility of taxing very high incomes.(another tax on people who make more than a million per year, like we have now) It would be, in my eyes, fair.

Though I have one last thing to say...

I SUPPORT TAX CUTS FOR THE MIDDLE CLASS!
...and there are very few dems who support tax cuts for them. I know that Leiberman supports not repealing the cuts for the middle class. I wouldn't be totally opposed to seeing him get in.

just be thankful you dont live in england. while i whole hartly support of english speaking cousins, they have to pay taxes on windows in their home, and on garden hoses too, amongst other house hold brick-a-brack thats what social ism gets ya

[Edited on 12-11-2003 by KrazyIvan]