Post #12,439
10/9/01 12:40:27 PM
|
Acceptable if . .
. . it is steeply progressive. Those who make a high income are getting more benefit from the system and should support it to a greater degree.
The tax would have to be three layers deep: National, State, Local. National rate would apply uniformly to all, but it doesn't make sense to apply the same state and local rates to a farm town in Kansas as in downtown New York.
The State and Local rates would be established by the same State and Local governments as now.
Of course, this is all pie-in-the-sky, because governments aren't going to give up their ability to influence social, commercial and moral standards by discriminatory taxation.
[link|http://www.aaxnet.com|AAx]
|
Post #12,441
10/9/01 12:44:55 PM
10/9/01 12:49:35 PM
|
Yeah, that's what I was suggesting.
Assume a tax rate of 60%. Sounds high, right?
Assume cost of living in a given area is $30,000 a year.
Assume family makes $30,000 or less. They pay nothing. Why should we collect taxes from somebody who isn't making enough to survive?
Assume family makes $40,000. They pay 60% of $10,000, or $6,000. That's a 15% tax.
Now, take a guy who makes $130,000 a year. He pays taxes on $100,000 a year, or $60,000. That's roughly 46%.
Now, take a guy who makes $1,030,000 a year. He pays taxes on $1,000,000 a year, or $600,000. That's a 58% tax.
That work for you? ^_^
Oh, and make profit from the sale of stocks/goods/etc = income.
"He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you." - Friedrich Nietzsche
|
Post #12,452
10/9/01 2:06:23 PM
|
Flat tax, negative income tax
Earn less than 30,000 a year, you get a check from the government for some amount.
Earn more, you pay flat percentage of whatever you earned over that. Enough of the social engineering. Puts 80% of the IRS out of work. (This is a Good Thing, IMO, unless they're monitoring this site, in which case it's a bad thing I want all those IRS workers busy as bees tracking down people etc. etc.)
Who knows how empty the sky is
In the place of a fallen tower.
Who knows how quiet it is in the home
Where a son has not returned.
-- Anna Akhmatova (1889-1966)
|
Post #12,455
10/9/01 2:16:43 PM
|
How about scrap income tax altogether
..and go with a [link|http://www.noirs.com/noirs/plan.html|National Sales Tax]
Jay O'Connor
"Going places unmapped
to do things unplanned
to people unsuspecting"
|
Post #12,461
10/9/01 2:46:01 PM
|
Re: How about scrap income tax altogether
It has the advantage of being highly visible. Every time you go to the checkout counter, you see you're paying 30% (or whatever) federal sales tax.
But the liberals won't like it, since it would hit the lower classes too hard. (as if they aren't being hit in many ways anyway.)
Still, better that than a VAT; a VAT is almost completely transparent.
Who knows how empty the sky is
In the place of a fallen tower.
Who knows how quiet it is in the home
Where a son has not returned.
-- Anna Akhmatova (1889-1966)
|
Post #12,462
10/9/01 2:50:27 PM
|
Re: How about scrap income tax altogether
But the liberals won't like it, since it would hit the lower classes too hard
How's that? The idea from the link I posted exempted food, rent, and medicine. It also menas you pay more if you buy soemthing more expensive. 10% of that Beamer is a lot more than 10% of that Yugo. So even though the tax is evenly applied, it still hits 'the rich' more than 'the poor'
Jay O'Connor
"Going places unmapped
to do things unplanned
to people unsuspecting"
|
Post #12,465
10/9/01 3:03:08 PM
|
Doesn't matter
Even if food, medicine, rent is excluded, the liberals will whine about televisions, clothes, stereos, computers, computer games (er, I mean computer educational software), etc. etc.
It doesn't matter. The rich are paying the same percentage, so therefore it must be unfair. That's why we have a graduated income tax, so the rich pay "their fair share".
Tell me that isn't so. Then look at any congressional debate about tax reform.
Who knows how empty the sky is
In the place of a fallen tower.
Who knows how quiet it is in the home
Where a son has not returned.
-- Anna Akhmatova (1889-1966)
|
Post #12,466
10/9/01 3:13:40 PM
|
Yeah...
I made the mistake of asking you something when you were just echoing an argument not necessarily your own
I don't quite understand the argument that just because you make more you should pay more other than as a linear relationship to what you make.
I make a lot more than some of my friends and associates, but due to some details in my job and some past history, I'm paying an awful lot of money in debt and some other expenses that are related to the job I do. So in the end my lifestyle is really no different then theirs. Should I be taxed more?
Ironically, I'm trying to work my way into a much lower income simply because the things I really want to do with my life don't pay nearly as well
Jay O'Connor
"Going places unmapped
to do things unplanned
to people unsuspecting"
|
Post #12,481
10/9/01 4:07:30 PM
|
Depends on how you look at the numbers...
Hi Jay,
I don't quite understand the argument that just because you make more you should pay more other than as a linear relationship to what you make.
It depends on how you look at the numbers and what you feel the purpose of the taxes are. If, to take the two extremes, you view taxes as a being like a user fee - everyone pays the same amount to supply the same services - then uniform tax rates make sense. If you view taxes as being a way to make society more equitable, by redistributing some income, then "progressive" tax rates make more sense.
The [link|http://www.census.gov/prod/www/statistical-abstract-us.html|Statistical Abstract of the US (PDFs)] is a good source of information about all sorts of numbers about the US.
Table 740 lists "Mean Taxes Paid..." in 1997.
1997 ............ 95,850,000 Households
$13,077 mean taxes paid (Federal Income, State Income, FICA, Property)
24.9% of mean before-tax income.
If everyone was treated equally (ala Thatcher's Poll Tax (IIRC)), then those families that made slightly more than $13,000 a year would obviously be hurt by an equal tax.
Percentage-based taxes have problems with defining what "income" is. What should be excluded? Insurance proceeds? Investment income? Should all income be taxed the same way? What about capital gains?
What deductions and exclusions should be allowed? Children? That means a higher burden on young single people and the elderly. Food? If so, what about resturants? Medicine? What about vitamins and "herbal supplements"? Medical equipment? What about exercise machines and Rec Club memberships? If you say "No exclusions" to keep the system simple and transparent and minimize abuse, there are also problems. The tax rate has to be rather high to supply the multi-trillion dollars the governments need to do their job. People who are currently paying very low effective rates would be hurt unless there were exceptions and exclusions. But someone has to decide what they are and what fits - leaving the system open for potential abuse by the tax law writers.
Table 745 lists "Share of Aggregate Income Received by Each Fifth and Top 5 Percent of Families: 1970 to 1998"
1998 ....... 71,551,000 Families
Bottom Fifth $21,600 cutoff, 4.2% of aggregate income
Next Fifth $37,692 cutoff, 9.9% of aggregate income
Next Fifth $56,020 cutoff, 23.0% of aggregate income
Next Fifth $83,693 cutoff, 47.3% of aggregate income
Top 5% $145,199 cutoff, 20.7% of aggregate income
Many argue the top 5% people having 20.7% of the US family income means that they can afford to pay more (as a percentage) in taxes than those at the bottom of the income scale. They can't be paying their fair share right now, right?
But if you look at Table 549, "Individual Income Tax Returns ..." you might reach a different conclusion.
Individual Income Tax as percent of Adjusted Gross Income
Income 1995 1997
Less than $1,000 . -0.2 -0.3
$1,000-$2,999 .... 1.2 1.5
$3,000-$4,999 .... 1.0 1.1
$5,000-$6,999 .... 1.3 1.5
$7,000-$8,999 .... 2.2 2.0
$9,000-$10,999 . . 3.0 3.1
$11,000-$12,999. . 3.9 3.6
$13,000-$14,999 . . 4.3 4.0
$15,000-$16,999 . . 4.9 4.6
$17,000-$18,999 . . 5.5 4.9
$19,000-$21,999 . . 6.5 5.9
$22,000-$24,999 . . 7.6 7.1
$25,000-$29,999 . . 8.6 8.4
$30,000-$39,999 . . 9.9 9.6
$40,000-$49,999 . 10.7 10.7
$50,000-$74,999 . 12.1 11.9
$75,000-$99,999 . 14.8 14.5
$100,000-$199,999 18.3 17.8
$200,000-$499,999 25.6 24.6
$500,000-$999,999 30.2 29.0
$1,000,000 or more 31.4 28.8
144,000 individual federal tax returns were filed in 1997 with AGI of $1 M or more.
So, it depends on how you look at it. Our federal income tax is already highly "progressive", at least up to the $500 K or so level.
This isn't a simple problem. Nearly every change to the tax law had good and bad effects.
Cheers,
Scott.
|
Post #12,484
10/9/01 4:14:45 PM
|
Re: Depends on how you look at the numbers...
It depends on how you look at the numbers and what you feel the purpose of the taxes are. If, to take the two extremes, you view taxes as a being like a user fee - everyone pays the same amount to supply the same services - then uniform tax rates make sense. If you view taxes as being a way to make society more equitable, by redistributing some income, then "progressive" tax rates make more sense.
I obviously see it as the first.
When you got to a restaurant, they don't ask you how much you make and then charge you $3 or $30 for a cheeseburger depending on your answer.
In this case, as in most cases, the government should be blind and the rules should be applied equally to all citizens
Jay O'Connor
"Going places unmapped
to do things unplanned
to people unsuspecting"
|
Post #12,510
10/9/01 5:59:25 PM
|
Re: Yeah...
Echoing an argument?
Here's my position. Flat tax. Those below some boundary get negative income tax. Fair for everyone, IMO, though there are many who will howl at the unfairness (?) of it.
National sales tax: OK, I'll take it. I think it's less fair than a flat tax, but I'll take it. Again, every liberal bedwetter is going to howl at the unfairness of it.
There's damned near no fair tax that is going to get through Congress (or for that matter through any state); it's a thought problem more than anything else, IMO.
I'm a "Senior software engineer" so I make a bit, but not bazillions. I suppose I'm upper middle class. Perhaps that biases me against the current tax system. So be it.
Who knows how empty the sky is
In the place of a fallen tower.
Who knows how quiet it is in the home
Where a son has not returned.
-- Anna Akhmatova (1889-1966)
|
Post #12,467
10/9/01 3:28:11 PM
|
No.
The system is working much better for the rich than the poor. They should support the system in a proportional manner. The pain level for paying taxes should be uniform from top to bottom.
10% on top of the Yugo is a heck of a lot more painful for the family with a $30,000 income than 10% on top of the Beamer for an exec pulling in $6,000,000 per year who's paying for it with pocket change.
No a national sales tax is a highly regressive tax and is not an acceptable alternative.
[link|http://www.aaxnet.com|AAx]
|
Post #12,473
10/9/01 3:51:09 PM
|
Impossible...
The pain level for paying taxes should be uniform from top to bottom.
...because everyone has different pain thresholds
$45K a year for a single mom with four kids and no health care is a *lot* different than $45K a year for a family with one working spouse, one childcare spouse and a job with health care. Same income, but the impact of a %10 income tax is quite a bit different
I make *about* the same as I did several years ago. but back then I had one vehicle and I telecommuted. Now I live in a differentcity than I work; so I need to maintian two vehicles (including insurance) and I spend close to $200 a month on gas. My income has not changed, my pain threshold has changed. My income is also artificially lowererd because I spent 4 months unemployed a few years back and ran up very high credit debts paying mortgage and utilities on credit. I'm still paying those off. So my 'income' in terms of what I can actually use is lower than my 'income' in terms of a paycheck
That's where such plans are doomed to failure. As soon as you start playing games with 'everyone should have the same pain' then it becomes a nightmare of trying to equalize everyone's situation fairly, and the bereaucracy to do that becomes unbearbly heavy
Jay O'Connor
"Going places unmapped
to do things unplanned
to people unsuspecting"
|
Post #12,471
10/9/01 3:43:22 PM
|
The only way I'd go for this...
...is if you included ALL personal transactions (including stock purchases, business purchases, etc) under the national sales tax.
A lot of that gets away right now under "capital gains" - which effectively creates two different kinds of income, that which the poor and middle class mostly survive on, and that which the wealthy gorge on. To add insult to injury, the capital gains tax is much lower than the income tax... Which aids the transfer of wealth, along with the means of producing wealth, from those who don't have very much to those who already have a lot.
There was another comment about high debt loads. Rule #1 - don't get yourself into debt. ^_^ Okay, I know there are some circumstances where it's unavoidable, such as medical issues and education, but those two are representative of some fundamental structural problems in our society - namely that essential services are being sold as value-added products.
"He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you." - Friedrich Nietzsche
|
Post #12,472
10/9/01 3:48:48 PM
|
Umm...
...is if you included ALL personal transactions (including stock purchases, business purchases, etc) under the national sales tax.
The page I linked included that
Jay O'Connor
"Going places unmapped
to do things unplanned
to people unsuspecting"
|
Post #12,479
10/9/01 4:03:41 PM
|
Well then...
...it's a defininte improvement over most "VATs" or "National Sales Tax" programs I've seen.
Sorry, didn't have time to follow the link. /me grins sheepishly.
"He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you." - Friedrich Nietzsche
|
Post #12,476
10/9/01 3:57:33 PM
|
Don't get yourself in debt...
Easy to say, hard to do if you are unemployed.
Like Jay, I ran up some credit card bills while I was unemployed, and it had nothing to do with 1) me being a slacker, 2) me living out of my means, 3) education, or 4) medical bills.
Regards,
-scott anderson
|
Post #12,478
10/9/01 4:01:45 PM
|
Yeah, I know there's more to it than that...
...having run up a few bills in my time.
Ultimately, that kind of situation falls under the same structural problems I was referring to - that our society has an awfuly leaky safety net, that has an annoying habit of helping the wrong people as well. I just forgot to include it. :P
"He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you." - Friedrich Nietzsche
|
Post #12,483
10/9/01 4:09:55 PM
|
Which net?
that our society has an awfuly leaky safety net,
My 'society' and my 'safety net' is my friends, my relatives, my church. I am there for them, they are there for me; that net has never leaked.
The *real* infrastructure problem is the fact that we have replaced friends and relatives and our community as the 'net' with handouts from the government. When you talk about 'leaks' in the saftey net and you are referring to government programs, you've already lost
I don't ask the government to share in my burdens, I don't ask them to take from my successes
Jay O'Connor
"Going places unmapped
to do things unplanned
to people unsuspecting"
|
Post #12,637
10/10/01 12:25:05 PM
|
Doesn't work for everybody.
I'm not a member of a church. I haven't found one yet that doesn't spoon-feed you religion like Gerber baby food. (Not implying that there aren't any out there, that has just been my experience with the ones I have visited. And I've been looking for a bit.)
My family is in pretty dire financial straits. So is my wife's. We probably make more than anybody else in either of our families, except for my grandparents, and we're barely getting by. If something does go wrong, we have to use government fallback.
Which leaves friends. Pretty much the only people I could hope to count on financially if things Went Bad would be you guys - and I'd hate to impose on you unless absolute survival was on the line.
Now, the other side of this is that the old way did work great in small communities - because you knew your neighbors, and everybody did rely on everybody else for their survival. With the advent of large cities, along with large population mobility, it becomes increasingly difficult to know your neighbors or build a rapport with them.
And that's one of the reasons that big city people tend to support government programs, while small towns tend to be more for "small government" - as long as "small government" doesn't mean "cut my farm subsidy checks..." ^_^ (Okay, that was a joke, not serious or related to the argument at hand. Couldn't resist, though.)
"He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you." - Friedrich Nietzsche
|
Post #12,660
10/10/01 1:08:05 PM
|
Re: Doesn't work for everybody.
Now, the other side of this is that the old way did work great in small communities - because you knew your neighbors, and everybody did rely on everybody else for their survival. With the advent of large cities, along with large population mobility, it becomes increasingly difficult to know your neighbors or build a rapport with them.
And *that's* where the breakdown that caused the leaks in the net occured, and the government is trying, pretty unsuccessfully, to patch holes in a net that is fundamentally no longer there for many people
Jay O'Connor
"Going places unmapped
to do things unplanned
to people unsuspecting"
|
Post #12,661
10/10/01 1:11:36 PM
|
So how would you fix it?
"He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you." - Friedrich Nietzsche
|
Post #12,666
10/10/01 1:29:05 PM
|
I wouldn't
We're reaping the consequences of going down paths we wanted to go down and worked hard to do so. There is no 'fix' and we're doomed if we try. You can't take ten thousand years of human social interactions and totally destroy them in a hundred years and then try to figure out how to 'fix' the results
Might as well intentionally drive your car off a cliff and trhen as me to 'fix' the course that you are on toward the ground
Jay O'Connor
"Going places unmapped
to do things unplanned
to people unsuspecting"
|
Post #12,683
10/10/01 2:32:58 PM
|
You're only looking at the bad.
We're reaping the consequences of going down paths we wanted to go down and worked hard to do so. There is no 'fix' and we're doomed if we try. You can't take ten thousand years of human social interactions and totally destroy them in a hundred years and then try to figure out how to 'fix' the results
From a religious aspect, I'm not surprised at that comment.
But its a horribly one-sided issue.
In the last hundred years, we've completely changed everything ABOUT the human social interactions. The "old ways" wouldn't have worked. We've also multiplied by incredible factors both the amount of damage that someone can do, the depths of debt someone can get into, and the reasons for it. (Car wreck, health care for any reason, etc). 100 years ago, there wasn't the need for the huge medical payments, for instance. Either you lived, or you died. Long term care needed a bed, and a bedpan changing.
The Taliban have "fixed" things by shoving them back hundreds of years - and the result there hasn't been good.
I put a lot of stock in the power that we've created by equating people in this country, whether by sex or race.
And yes, there have been some drawbacks.
But OTOH, a religious "solution" has plenty of failures. Even aside from the cons, and the scams run under the name of religion, and things like the Catholic church, and pedophilia and covering it up - aside from those things, other serious problems occur with "aid" from someone with a moral imperitive. (ObNit: the Government has the same issue, but on a smaller scale, and its far more politically changeable, which again, has good and bad aspects)
Your religious solution.. would it help out 2 homosexual partners? A prostitute? Single mother who refused to marry? Someone of different religious belief? People from a much lower social caste? And even if *yours* would, would they *all*?
That's a problem. So all the Jay's Church have a safety net, but Addison's Church (cause we're all poor) don't?
A few years back, a church my mother was attending (and dragging us to, obviously it was a waste of time. :)) had a black family move into town and start attending services. It was a Lutheran Church, and they were Lutherans.
The pastor was approached, and was requested that he request them to find another church. He refused, and was removed by the congregation. The black familiar apparently left, and the new pastor's son didn't even know of that until I told him (Went to college with him). (He was as shocked as I).
Religious institutions might work for you - but they won't for the vast majority of people... thus the problem.
Addison
|
Post #12,690
10/10/01 2:57:12 PM
|
Re: You're only looking at the bad.
In the last hundred years, we've completely changed everything ABOUT the human social interactions. The "old ways" wouldn't have worked.
No kidding. That was my point. Inthane was talking about the safety net having leaks and I was just point out that the leaks in the net are more fundamental than government programs missing a few people
So all the Jay's Church have a safety net, but Addison's Church (cause we're all poor) don't?
The poor churches I've attended tended to be far closer nit and better at helping each other out than the rich churches.
A few years back, a church my mother was attending ...
Which is totally irrelevant to the situation but...everyone has an antecdote
Mine is that I spent the first 6 months of my Chirstian life attending a mostly rich white Megachurch on Sunday mornings and an almost all black,poor, pentecostal church on Saturday nights and between the two of them I learned what community was all about.
You're looking at the church; I'm looking at the church as an example of a community that supports each other. Religion doesn't matter, but in our country that religion used to embody that community at some level and we've losed that community and whether you replace it with religion or some other purpose for people to come together, we are far weaker without something that does hold us together
Jay O'Connor
"Going places unmapped
to do things unplanned
to people unsuspecting"
|
Post #12,711
10/10/01 4:03:26 PM
|
Re: You're only looking at the bad.
That was my point. Inthane was talking about the safety net having leaks and I was just point out that the leaks in the net are more fundamental than government programs missing a few people
I don't want to say "That's not your point" but I don't think I read you as saying that.
Neither do I want to completely disagree. But your tone is one that religion and community were "kicked out" of modern life, and that I don't think is the case at all. I think its much more of a case that people have gotten lazy, and self-protective, and as a result have stopped having the community.
Look at the huge subdivisions, where nobody has room for even throwing a baseball, much less the kids getting a game up. That's not forced on people, they're choosing it.
And so I agree about the loss of community. I even agree some on that the community is also sometimes centered around religion. I just don't think that's a good focal point - when you have a problem with the focal point, the minister runs off with the till, or anything, its doubly worse... But that's a minor point.
My take on religion was more in reply to your other post, that that would be your answer.
The poor churches I've attended tended to be far closer nit and better at helping each other out than the rich churches.
Funny how that is, isn't it?
You're right, of course, but I was talking more in generalities - the problem with "churches" is that they're of course inclusive, and of something that (obviously) is of great debate.
I'm looking at the church as an example of a community that supports each other.
That's true (for the purposes of this discussion), but what do you do for members who don't want to belong in your church, or you don't want in them?
Religion doesn't matter, but in our country that religion used to embody that community at some level
But I disagree here - religion does matter - does to you, see your prior post. The people who want a religious solution, or partial solution are presuming (from what I see) that everybody will agree with them... Its what do you do with the people who *don't* that's a big issue there.
And the community is more a issue of size.. Small towns are still pretty closely knit.. We've spread out - notice your commute :) - and as a result, spread ourselves thinly - not allowing the time it takes for community.
Addison
|
Post #12,743
10/10/01 6:38:20 PM
|
And life was better a hundred years ago?
A hundred years ago people depended on family.
Which is how my grandfather, at 6, managed to find himself at work in a factory supporting a ton of siblings.
A hundred years ago people depended on their children in their old age.
Which is why people pre Roosevelt looked forward to old age with dread. For many it was a time of extreme poverty as everyone you had known and depended on went away. And furthermore since you depended on children, you made sure you had a lot of them. My grandparents all came from families of a dozen or more. That wasn't unusual.
A hundred years ago people depended on their church.
Which meant that people who disagreed with the churches were SoL.
A hundred years ago people depended on local networks.
So when those local networks frayed, people could and did slip between the cracks and starved. It doesn't happen any more.
Now if you want to talk about 10,000 years of human action, well 200 years ago people believed that slavery was the inevitable way of the world. In fact selling yourself or your family into slavery was a time-honored way to handle personal debt. And of course any time prior to 300 years ago, in Europe at any given time, a substantial fraction of the population didn't have homes and had real reasons to fear death.
You may idealize a world where people would add water to the soup and boil again and again and again until they could find something to put into it. I don't. Frankly, all told, this isn't such a bad world to be born into. Slavery isn't even a memory in this country. The bankruptcy laws are unbelievably generous (by the standards of past eras). Great fears of the past like "consumption" and "pressgang" are trivia questions, words which some adults don't know. Has there been a keelhauling in living memory? Not that I have heard of! (And darned few even know what it is. BTW the [link|http://www.dictionary.com/cgi-bin/dict.pl?term=keelhaul|dictionary version] doesn't mention that people generally didn't survive the experience...)
Cheers,
Ben
|
Post #13,000
10/11/01 5:09:48 PM
|
Wow, how *impressively* wrong you can be!
Jay the Freep: We're reaping the consequences of going down paths we wanted to go down and worked hard to do so. There is no 'fix' and we're doomed if we try. Uhm... The "fix" would obviously be that we all, collectively, (all of us city dwellers at least) shoulder the burden for all of those among us, collectively, who can't right at the moment make it on their own. Which is exactly what we (you Merkins to a somewhat lesser extent than we YourPeons; but still, all of us in the "Western" world) *are* doing -- "Christian" charity at its blindest and finest -- in the form of... exactly those "government handouts" you are whining about! Sheesh. You can't take ten thousand years of human social interactions and totally destroy them in a hundred years and then try to figure out how to 'fix' the results Cities have been around for at least four thousand years (and it's debatable whether the six thousand years of "human social interactions" immediately before that were all that much to write home about -- notice, nobody did). What do you think the pyramids were, if not a Keynesian wealth-dispersal-through-government-projects program? Looks like it's *you* who are proposing to tear down thousands of years of human social interaction... What time frame did you have in mind; something a lot LESS than a hundred years, I guess? Double sheesh. Christian R. Conrad
The Man Who Knows Fucking Everything
|
Post #13,062
10/11/01 10:29:07 PM
|
Jerico.
[link|http://emuseum.mnsu.edu/archaeology/sites/middle_east/jericho.html|Jerico may be 10000 years old.] While trenching downward through the site she uncovered the first walled city along with a number of houses and courtyards that had been constructed over 10,000 years ago, during the Neolithic. I had heard somewhere (perhaps the The Ascent of Man program) it is the oldest city. Alex
Whom the gods wish to destroy, they first make mad. -- Euripides
|
Post #13,181
10/12/01 6:34:42 PM
|
Cackle.. glorp
Brevity Award \ufffd with beladonna-leaf cluster!
Yup, I've noticed that charity as defined by lots of folk to mean er 'Faith'-based-Monopoly: derives from and panders often to a mindset with a certain complex baggage:
A) You're guilty from birth! you scum [it's in the book] - haven't figured out how to milk capital-gains and proxy bidding yet? = you're dumb too, then.
B) Even though you don't 'deserve' it - we're so fucking magnanimous, we'll offer you this ___ IF.. you demonstrate your abject willingness to learn how to Believe Right. Too.. (er we'll find a way to gently introduce you to our Truth.)
C) Government umm 'charity' OTOH - is bound to be abused by such as You are, and was invented by atheist scum intent upon keeping the word of [Our God] from being heeded. A computer on every desk running Our Soft-ware! is our goal. We demand a [Our]God-fearing Nation Now..
D) Add-in the other facets as are found to varying degrees. (Note that there are some exceptions to be found, natch - even to the point of actually eliding all the proselytizing, at least 'officially'. This last more honored by the breach than the observance.)
Methinks that any efforts towards (say) "honest, simply less-skewed? apportionment of enough basic wealth as is needed to survive" -- will be constantly hampered ('least in Murica) by variations on the above themes. These are rarely uttered, of course, but my lifetime experience is such that I have seen this sub-rosa message in countless forms.
We'd rather fund legions of insurance middle-men suits, over any idea of a national health plan, just as we have turned over prisons - and soon perhaps all the formerly 'public' schools to: the bizness mind.
(Scandinavia made a trade of ~ "limiting the possibilities of any? much? truly obscene levels of personal wealth" (like Billy's) in exchange for a genuine safety net for all, as well as a decent level of health care. This naturally pisses off the Fundamentalist Capitalists no end: ya gotta *earn* as Rugged Induhvidualist, or die sucker.. And these folk don't even believe! in er, evolutionary 'survival of the fittest' -- officially!)
I call that, an attempt towards civilization. I know what them Holy folk would call me. :-\ufffd
Anyway .. You Said It (but briefer).
Ashton
|
Post #13,232
10/14/01 11:58:03 AM
|
Belladonna? Uhm... Thanks - I think! :-)
|
Post #13,251
10/14/01 7:57:15 PM
|
belladona dilates the pupils (eye-opener)
|
Post #13,278
10/15/01 2:50:16 AM
|
3 ears and a tail..
Alas I cannot claim credit for such subtlety (this time ;-) just thought the leaves purty..
But as with Oscar Wilde,
Oscar: I wish I'd said that!
Guest: Don't worry, Oscar - you will.. you will..
:-\ufffd
|
Post #13,779
10/17/01 1:30:42 PM
|
There's such a thing as being too open-eyed.
Dilate the pupil too much and parts of the lens that aren't meant to be used come on line. They don't focus properly. Useable resolution drops drastically.
Plus, on a sunny day, it's extremely unpleasant. It's fun at night though. Kind of like that hokey special effect they used to use for dream sequences. Everything's blurry and sparkly at the same time.
[link|http://www.angelfire.com/ca3/marlowe/index.html|http://www.angelfir...e/index.html]
Sometimes "tolerance" is just a word for not dealing with things.
|
Post #13,936
10/18/01 7:36:21 AM
|
Actually, I was thinking (and "thank?"ing Ashton for)...
...the other part of the definition, "poisonous".
(Not to poop on y'all's eyeball party, just saying I wasn't in on it.)
Christian R. Conrad
The Man Who Knows Fucking Everything About Venom In Writing
|
Post #12,668
10/10/01 1:31:29 PM
|
Clarification
My solution would be a religious solution but very few would want that so my only recourse is to shrug and say "oh well"
Jay O'Connor
"Going places unmapped
to do things unplanned
to people unsuspecting"
|
Post #12,480
10/9/01 4:05:41 PM
|
Yup
The first couple $K came when I was doing traveling consulting and was paying expenses on my credit card and getting remibursed from travel expenses....
Me and some of my coworkers ended up several hundred to several thousand dollars in debt when the consulting company stopped reimbursing us.
Four months unemployement and trying to make mortgage and car payments and buy groceries sunk us into deeper debt.
Ironically, I would be able to work at a lot m,ore places and enjoy it and be happy with the salary based on my expenses, but the payment on my outstanding debt is so high that I have to stick with jobs above a certain threshold and they are harder to find, especially in a poor state like NM.
Jay O'Connor
"Going places unmapped
to do things unplanned
to people unsuspecting"
|
Post #12,513
10/9/01 6:22:24 PM
8/21/07 5:43:29 AM
|
Been there
Formerly a 100% traveling Senior Architect for Platinum Technologies with a $10k rolling balance on *my* AmEx. I got royally screwed when Platinum was purchased by Comp Assoc.
I no longer loan money to employers and I'm not shy about telling them that up front. If you want me to go, you buy the tickets, you book the hotels and cars and you pay the bills - plus you give me my per diem before I leave. Or if you just want to give me a corporate card where you pay the bill, thats OK too.
|
Post #12,634
10/10/01 12:15:45 PM
|
Escrow companies for contractors.
An obvious need - you incurred expenses that your contracting company should have compensated you for, and did not.
Once again, not your fault, but you get stuck holding the live grenade because of somebody else's unethical behavior.
"He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you." - Friedrich Nietzsche
|
Post #12,693
10/10/01 3:14:56 PM
|
Re: Don't get yourself in debt...
My income has not changed, my pain threshold has changed. My income is also artificially lowererd because I spent 4 months unemployed a few years back and ran up very high credit debts paying mortgage and utilities on credit. I'm still paying those off.
And I'm working off SEVEN months of unemployment where bills, mortgage, etc. were paid with cc. Became unemployed one month after getting remarried, adding a wife with three teenage daughters to the family...
My wife fell back in May, and is now unemployed/unemployable until we can figure out what has caused her to loose strenght/feeling in legs and arms, and what's causing muscle spasms.
I'm also "senior ... (title depends on day of week or time of day :)), so I'm making "good money". However, latest budget shows $300/month left to cover: food (Wife and I, her 3 teen daughters and my 2 teen daughters); gas; entertainment; church donations; emergencies....
[link|mailto:jbrabeck@mn.mediaone.net|Joe]
|
Post #12,893
10/11/01 11:44:49 AM
|
Sorry To Hear That
Did she get checked for MS? It's important to diagnose it early.
|
Post #13,059
10/11/01 10:07:24 PM
|
Very Important.
One of my best friends, Frank, was diagnosed with MS last month.
His vision was failing, and for the last year or so, he was getting 'stumble-y', losing feeling in his legs, etc. He had tests done last year that SAID he had MS - the doctor ignored the results, and now the disease has progressed signifigantly.
His current doctor is supporting him in a malpractice suit; there are therapies that slow the progress of the disease signifigantly (he takes multiple shots a day), apparently - his old doctor's decision to ignore results that explicitly stated "MS" has really impacted the quality of his life badly.
GET IT CHECKED.... Please!
Imric's Tips for Living- Paranoia Is a Survival Trait
- Pessimists are never disappointed - but sometimes, if they are very lucky, they can be pleasantly surprised...
- Even though everyone is out to get you, it doesn't matter unless you let them win.
|
Post #13,103
10/12/01 9:54:42 AM
|
Thanks - we finally have a diagnosis
Short version...
Fell in early May. Went to Dr. following week due to pain, said "Pulled muscles".
Pain got worse. Urgent care Dr. "Sprained wrist".
Few weeks later, Pain got so bad on weekend went to ER. Dr. suggested Mayo Clinic, neurology/spine check.
Went to Mayo. CT, MRI, EEG, EMG. "Can't find anything physically/neurologically wrong, "try a shrink" (my wife's interpetation). Mayo did rule out MS, Parkinsons, stroke, spinal injury and nerve malfunction. But didn't give a diagnosis.
Recommended to Pain Rehab Clinic. Tried the one at Sister Kinny Institute. Was too streneous for her, had to drop after one week. Now she is at the Pain Rehab at St. Mary's (Part of Mayo Clinic).
The doctor there ran some tests and said she has the most severe form of Fibromyalgia. This is what she had already determined based upon research on the internet. She (and I also) was very happy to finally have a medical person give her a diagnosis. Of course, Fibro is a life long condition. She may regain some of her mobility and ability to work, she may not...
Keep her in your prayers, if you're so inclined. And thanks.
[link|mailto:jbrabeck@mn.mediaone.net|Joe]
|
Post #13,106
10/12/01 10:08:23 AM
|
I'm with you, buddy
My wife is in the same boat.
My prayers are with you both....
jb4
(Resistance is not futile...)
|
Post #13,144
10/12/01 1:24:27 PM
|
Please email me direct.
My wife has found a Fibro chat line. That has helped her a lot. If your wife and my wife have the same thing, it may be beneficial for them to email each other.
[link|mailto:jbrabeck@mn.mediaone.net|Joe]
|
Post #13,145
10/12/01 1:29:00 PM
|
10-4...write you this weekend
But be advised that my wife is a confirmed "preservationist"; things like e-mail will have to be done by me because...well, she just doesn't want to get near the thing if she doesn't have to. (And, as far as she is cincerned, she doesn't have to!)
jb4
(Resistance is not futile...)
|
Post #13,108
10/12/01 10:11:25 AM
|
I will.
Imric's Tips for Living- Paranoia Is a Survival Trait
- Pessimists are never disappointed - but sometimes, if they are very lucky, they can be pleasantly surprised...
- Even though everyone is out to get you, it doesn't matter unless you let them win.
|
Post #13,126
10/12/01 12:05:11 PM
|
One more...
Will keep you and yours in my heart and my thoughts.
"He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you." - Friedrich Nietzsche
|
Post #13,128
10/12/01 12:09:03 PM
|
You have my support
Not a praying man, but I do make exceptions for good cause.
For every human problem, there is a neat, simple solution;
and it is always wrong
H. L. Mencken, Mencken's Metalaw
|
Post #12,488
10/9/01 4:40:00 PM
|
Re: The only way I'd go for this...
...is if you included ALL personal transactions (including stock purchases, business purchases, etc) under the national sales tax.
Part of the point being, you don't *need* to at that point.
The sales tax, being uniform, gets you when you *spend* money. The more you spend, the more you're taxed.
Remember, stock purchases and such are ways to make money, just like you sitting at work today (I presume you are).
*How* you make it under a sales tax is irrelevant. Its when you spend it that its picked up.
And one of the best benefits of it - is instead of having to deal with every single person filing income taxes, now you're dealing only with the sales taxes of the businesses - which are (relatively) easier to audit - and a *lot* less of them.
I got more enamored of a sales tax after I opened a business, and believe me, S.C. is *damnned* serious about collecting. :)
Addison
|
Post #12,594
10/10/01 9:10:27 AM
|
So if you SELL a stock...
...must you then collect (and, eventually distribute to the gov't) National Sales Tax (NST) from the entity that buys your shares?
How 'bout that used car?
Or Software consulting services?
Or barter?
To quote John Lennon in Yellow Submarine: "It sounds like it needs rehearsal."
jb4
(Resistance is not futile...)
|
Post #12,609
10/10/01 10:47:23 AM
|
I don't think so.
must you then collect (and, eventually distribute to the gov't) National Sales Tax (NST) from the entity that buys your shares?
I wouldn't think so.
How 'bout that used car?
Again, I wouldn't think so - tax was already paid on it. You'll be paying sales tax on the fuel, oil, and parts for said car.
Or Software consulting services?
Harder question, but it its true services, no different than what's now.
Or barter?
Nope. Just like now. But you'll have paid the tax on whatever you bought to barter with, or the raw materials (in most cases).
The other cases are going to be limited enough that I don't think right now its a concern.
Addison
|
Post #12,612
10/10/01 10:53:00 AM
|
Sales tax on used cars
Don't know about other states, but Illinois requires the seller to collect sales tax on a used car.
For every human problem, there is a neat, simple solution;
and it is always wrong
H. L. Mencken, Mencken's Metalaw
|
Post #12,620
10/10/01 11:16:03 AM
|
Re: Sales tax on used cars
Yes, I know sometimes that's required.
In my system, I wouldn't (double taxation). Tax on the people buying from dealers (and used cars from dealers would be subject to taxation, I suppose).
Doesn't change things all that significantly. Alternative: buyer pays ST when the car's registration changes. No need for adding new levels of bureaucracy that way.
Addison
|
