A Forum for Grinches and Ho-Ho-Hoes

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Oddly enough, Bush's hands are not on Negroponte's head. What does this mean?

Two questions:

Where are Bush's hands?

Where is Bush looking?

[Shape Shifter]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop

"It must be hard to describe how to cause people to love one another."
-- Washington, D.C., Dec. 20, 2001

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop

"It's a bird, see? Now I'll show you a Social Security crisis."

Originally posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
Two questions:

Where are Bush's hands?

Where is Bush looking?

To post 50 long winded Tax-wet dreams or whatever the fuck that was you caused today - that's bad enough- You're a fucking moron-that's clear- but then to follow up a "caption" with the obvious- "Heh-heh I don't see hands- maybe he's rubbing the guy's dick!!!" Give it a fucking rest already- Caption please requires Funny or just shut up- please?

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop

If you hold your hands like this, and put them up to the light, it looks like an eagle on the wall . . . eagles are cooool.

ETA - Shit, beaten by Ty

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally posted by blue_Triangle
To post 50 long winded Tax-wet dreams or whatever the fuck that was you caused today - that's bad enough- You're a fucking moron-that's clear- but then to follow up a "caption" with the obvious- "Heh-heh I don't see hands- maybe he's rubbing the guy's dick!!!" Give it a fucking rest already- Caption please requires Funny or just shut up- please?

(Pssst. Hank. It's the politics board. Every now and then talking about politics is done here.)

Originally posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
(Pssst. Hank. It's the politics board. Every now and then talking about politics is done here.)

All that shite was politics? Fuck that. And you can be on topic and hrribly boring so don't try that shit- and plus the caption please is what I'm calling you on- okay you were delusional and boring all day- as you say that is "politics" but you lame ass joke is still a waste of electrons- stop.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally posted by blue_Triangle
All that shite was politics? Fuck that. And you can be on topic and hrribly boring so don't try that shit- and plus the caption please is what I'm calling you on- okay you were delusional and boring all day- as you say that is "politics" but you lame ass joke is still a waste of electrons- stop.

Originally posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

if this is saving face for you okay- but knwo I'm back and I'm empowered to clean up the mess that this board has become.

[bilmore]

Originally posted by blue_Triangle
All that shite was politics? Fuck that. And you can be on topic and hrribly boring so don't try that shit- and plus the caption please is what I'm calling you on- okay you were delusional and boring all day- as you say that is "politics" but you lame ass joke is still a waste of electrons- stop.

ABB haz bin berry berry gud tu mi. So, just let 'em go.

Originally posted by bilmore
ABB haz bin berry berry gud tu mi. So, just let 'em go.

this ain't none of your business old man.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
(Pssst. Hank. )

I don't do socks. My primary fights his fights.

[Spanky]

I don't know how some of you guys keep your jobs. I have enough trouble keeping up with the boards let alone taking the time to post something. Maybe I am just slow. By the time I post this and do some work I am going to be five pages behind.

As for the tax issue - my two cents.

1)We tax the rich more because all taxes suck and we want to make them as little painful as possible. The utility of each dollar decreases the more money you make. So taxes are less painfull for rich people. In addition, rich people have much more invested in the security of the nation than do poor people. The more land you own the more important it is for you to have it protected by the police and the military. Donald trump needs the protection of the legal system significantly more than a welfare mom. In total anarchy Trump loses a lot, the homelss person not much.

2) Income taxes and taxes on capital suck because they do discourage productivity.

3) A straight consumption tax sucks because it is so regressive

4) The solution, as stated before, is you exempt spending on certain necessities. Then tax the hell out of luxury items.

5) You want Bill Gates to make at lot of money, you just don't want him to spend it. So every time he buys a luxury item tax the hell out of it. You encourage him to invest all his money because that creates more jobs than his consumption. Models have shown that consumption by rich people creates less stimulus to the economy than consumption by poor people. It is better to have ten people buy Toyotas than have one rich person by a Rolls Royce even though they ad up to the same amount. The production and purchase of the Toyotas is a much better economic growth generator.

6) Yes - this system would be open to abuse. All sorts of lobbies would want their products to be taxed less. But what system is not? And if implemented correctly, such a system would encourage wealth creation and not be regressive. Why not shoot for the best system. You may come up short but that is better then coming up short on the second best system.

[Adder]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Oddly enough, Bush's hands are not on Negroponte's head. What does this mean?

Um.. looks like Bush's hands are on his head to me...

[Sidd Finch]

Originally posted by ltl/fb
Withhold on withdrawals, like they do now. Presumably they will only be taking out what they plan to use for consumption anyway. If they are going to sock it right back into a savings account, it would be like a direct rollover.

So every time someone writes a check the bank has to withhold an additional amount from their account for taxes? Unless, of course, the bank deems that the check, or some portion thereof, is for a contribution to an investment account, or for non-taxable spending like food, or rent, or...... (Or are you dispensing with th theory that spending on necessities will not be taxed?) Sorting out which portion of a credit card bill is for taxable or non-taxable items will be a joy. So will sorting out whether someone is withdrawing money just to hvae some "just-in-case" cash around -- and getting taxed for doing that.

The banks, for one, will love the system, however -- just imagine how many people will bounce checks because they fail to calculate correctly the amounts that will be withheld on each one.

Perhaps I am missing the point of your plan completely -- are you really suggesting a tax system that says your taxes are x% times (income minus savings)?