The Tulsa Forum by TulsaNow

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2011/05/18/102-things-not-to-do-if-you-hate-taxes/
So, you’re a Republican that hates taxes? Well, since you do not like taxes or government, please kindly do the following.

1. Do not use Medicare.
2. Do not use Social Security
3. Do not become a member of the US military, who are paid with tax dollars.
4. Do not ask the National Guard to help you after a disaster.
5. Do not call 911 when you get hurt.
6. Do not call the police to stop intruders in your home.
7. Do not summon the fire department to save your burning home.
8. Do not drive on any paved road, highway, and interstate or drive on any bridge.
9. Do not use public restrooms.
10. Do not send your kids to public schools.
11. Do not put your trash out for city garbage collectors.
12. Do not live in areas with clean air.
13. Do not drink clean water.
14. Do not visit National Parks.
15. Do not visit public museums, zoos, and monuments.
16. Do not eat or use FDA inspected food and medicines.
17. Do not bring your kids to public playgrounds.
18. Do not walk or run on sidewalks.
19. Do not use public recreational facilities such as basketball and tennis courts.
20. Do not seek shelter facilities or food in soup kitchens when you are homeless and hungry.
21. Do not apply for educational or job training assistance when you lose your job.
22. Do not apply for food stamps when you can’t feed your children.
23. Do not use the judiciary system for any reason.
24. Do not ask for an attorney when you are arrested and do not ask for one to be assigned to you by the court.
25. Do not apply for any Pell Grants.
26. Do not use cures that were discovered by labs using federal dollars.
27. Do not fly on federally regulated airplanes.
28. Do not use any product that can trace its development back to NASA.
29. Do not watch the weather provided by the National Weather Service.
30. Do not listen to severe weather warnings from the National Weather Service.
31. Do not listen to tsunami, hurricane, or earthquake alert systems.
32. Do not apply for federal housing.
33. Do not use the internet, which was developed by the military.
34. Do not swim in clean rivers.
35. Do not allow your child to eat school lunches or breakfasts.
36. Do not ask for FEMA assistance when everything you own gets wiped out by disaster.
37. Do not ask the military to defend your life and home in the event of a foreign invasion.
38. Do not use your cell phone or home telephone.
39. Do not buy firearms that wouldn’t have been developed without the support of the US Government and military. That includes most of them.
40. Do not eat USDA inspected produce and meat.
41. Do not apply for government grants to start your own business.
42. Do not apply to win a government contract.
43. Do not buy any vehicle that has been inspected by government safety agencies.
44. Do not buy any product that is protected from poisons, toxins, etc…by the Consumer Protection Agency.
45. Do not save your money in a bank that is FDIC insured.
46. Do not use Veterans benefits or military health care.
47. Do not use the G.I. Bill to go to college.
48. Do not apply for unemployment benefits.
49. Do not use any electricity from companies regulated by the Department of Energy.
50. Do not live in homes that are built to code.
51. Do not run for public office. Politicians are paid with taxpayer dollars.
52. Do not ask for help from the FBI, S.W.A.T, the bomb squad, Homeland Security, State troopers, etc…
53. Do not apply for any government job whatsoever as all state and federal employees are paid with tax dollars.
54. Do not use public libraries.
55. Do not use the US Postal Service.
56. Do not visit the National Archives.
57. Do not visit Presidential Libraries.
58. Do not use airports that are secured by the federal government.
59. Do not apply for loans from any bank that is FDIC insured.
60. Do not ask the government to help you clean up after a tornado.
61. Do not ask the Department of Agriculture to provide a subsidy to help you run your farm.
62. Do not take walks in National Forests.
63. Do not ask for taxpayer dollars for your oil company.
64. Do not ask the federal government to bail your company out during recessions.
65. Do not seek medical care from places that use federal dollars.
66. Do not use Medicaid.
67. Do not use WIC.
68. Do not use electricity generated by Hoover Dam.
69. Do not use electricity or any service provided by the Tennessee Valley Authority.
70. Do not ask the Army Corps of Engineers to rebuild levees when they break.
71. Do not let the Coast Guard save you from drowning when your boat capsizes at sea.
72. Do not ask the government to help evacuate you when all hell breaks loose in the country you are in.
73. Do not visit historic landmarks.
74. Do not visit fisheries.
75. Do not expect to see animals that are federally protected because of the Endangered Species List.
76. Do not expect plows to clear roads of snow and ice so your kids can go to school and so you can get to work.
77. Do not hunt or camp on federal land.
78. Do not work anywhere that has a safe workplace because of government regulations.
79. Do not use public transportation.
80. Do not drink water from public water fountains.
81. Do not whine when someone copies your work and sells it as their own. Government enforces copyright laws.
82. Do not expect to own your home, car, or boat. Government organizes and keeps all titles.
83. Do not expect convicted felons to remain off the streets.
84. Do not eat in restaurants that are regulated by food quality and safety standards.
85. Do not seek help from the US Embassy if you need assistance in a foreign nation.
86. Do not apply for a passport to travel outside of the United States.
87. Do not apply for a patent when you invent something.
88. Do not adopt a child through your local, state, or federal governments.
89.Do not use elevators that have been inspected by federal or state safety regulators.
90. Do not use any resource that was discovered by the USGS.
91. Do not ask for energy assistance from the government.
92. Do not move to any other developed nation, because the taxes are much higher.
93. Do not go to a beach that is kept clean by the state.
94. Do not use money printed by the US Treasury.
95. Do not complain when millions more illegal immigrants cross the border because there are no more border patrol agents.
96. Do not attend a state university.
97. Do not see any doctor that is licensed through the state.
98. Do not use any water from municipal water systems.
99. Do not complain when diseases and viruses, that were once fought around the globe by the US government and CDC, reach your house.
100. Do not work for any company that is required to pay its workers a livable wage, provide them sick days, vacation days, and benefits.
101. Do not expect to be able to vote on election days. Government provides voting booths, election day officials, and voting machines which are paid for with taxes.
102. Do not ride trains. The railroad was built with government financial assistance.

The fact is, we pay for the lifestyle we expect. Without taxes, our lifestyles would be totally different and much harder. America would be a third world country. The less we pay, the less we get in return. Americans pay less taxes today since 1958 and is ranked 32nd out of 34 of the top tax paying countries. Chile and Mexico are 33rd and 34th. The Republicans are lying when they say that we pay the highest taxes in the world and are only attacking taxes to reward corporations and the wealthy and to weaken our infrastructure and way of life. So next time you object to paying taxes or fight to abolish taxes for corporations and the wealthy, keep this quote in mind…

“I like to pay taxes. With them, I buy civilization.” ~Oliver Wendell Holmes

So there is a list of what 50% Americans who pay no federal or state income taxes receive for free (save medicare/SS). Way to frak yourself.

And your list might be a good starting point for people to start crossing off the things they don't want out of government.

I don't know of anyone who doesn't want to be taxed.  I do happen to know a lot of people who think the government shouldn't ask for more tax dollars out of their pockets until government gets its spending under control and quits greasing all these special interests with money it doesn't have in the first place.

You're one of the most thoughtful conservatives on the board but, damn, is that where we stand these days?  I want all of these things.  I expect all of these things.  And I expect to pay for them.  And to have these things, it's neither impossible nor too expensive. 

This is what kills me about the current debate:  there's no reason to make those choices.  We don't have to cross things off.  We can easily pay for what we want.  We're the richest freakin' country in the history of the world, and we can't pay enough to our government for basic services?  We've actually done it moderately well up to the turn of the millenia.  But then we hit this ten year span of government that decided to take on a few $T in unfunded liabilities, all while lowering taxes drastically, by several more T$.  And then we had an economic collapse unrelated to the unfunded liabilities.  And all of a sudden it's a systemic problem and we need to make cut after cut after cut to programs that improve the quality of everyone's life.  But none of these things interrelate.  The budget deficit is not the result of us overpaying for sidewalks, or overpaying the FAA, or overpaying WIC, or overpaying for Pell Grants.  The budget deficit is a direct result of about five items.  And when we fix those five items -- which can easily be done! -- we're in the clear.

It's like the Bush II Admin manufactured the environment that proved the basic rightie theorems about government and now we're reaping the whirlwind. 

 

Than pay for them.  I don't see a whole lot wrong with this list, it's just the layers of waste piled on top of some of these items, and the thousands of other adopted government responsibilities that would make this list a hundred pages long.  That's where the divide between Big Government thought and Private Sector thought is.

Government has a basic duty spelled out in our constitution, and yes it's natural tendency is to grow, and it has.  As it begins to grow out of control it becomes our duty to prune it back.

I have a rose bush by my front porch.  It's beautiful and everyone enjoys it.  It's natural tendency is to grow out of control into the walkway, and it has thorns.  I have to prune it several times a year.  It makes my wife angry because I cut off a ton of blooms.  If I simply let it grow it will tear my kids to shreds.

We need to prune government.  We don't want to cut everything, but we do need to remove some blooms so we can provide a better future for our children.

That's a canard.  It's nothing more than an excuse to gut the list of things that TTC posted.  The only layers of waste that are ever fingered by the GOP are those programs in the list.  I've come to the point that I can't accept that as a rationalization for cutting budgets unless I'm given up front what you expect to save and where you expect to save it from.  It's simply not self-evident because you say it is. Otherwise, it's just a good excuse to destroy the third of our government budget that actually supports the function of governing.

Our tax dollars pay for clean rivers?
58. Do not use airports that are secured by the federal government.  (read "do not get groped or nudi-scanned when traveling")

Sure most of this list is stuff the govn't should provide.
However, there's no reason each should become it's own ever-growing government bureaucracy with unchecked spending and waste.  The TSA is a prime example.  What a joke.  There's trillions of dollars right there being wasted.

Yes, they do pay for clean rivers. Rivers that used to be flammable and sterile. Rivers that used to be dammed up for industrial use and filled with PCB's.

And what do you think would have been preferable to TSA? Its a joke that showed we would make an effort to hinder terrorist threats. We executed it with our own level of incompetence but I haven't heard of any planes exploding mid air lately. If you think corporates could do any better then you believe in a fantasy. The general level of incompetence and waste in America is widespread and growing.

Government waste is an always dependable, ever popular bumper sticker subject. Corporate and private waste is more or less ignored. Big Box retailers routinely throw away furniture and electronics that need minor repair or that simply didn't sell well because they are so afraid they might have to pay for an employee to fix them or that an employee might cheat them. Their distributors enable the waste by paying them to destroy them with credit rather than returning them and incurring freight cost. The manufacturer doesn't quality check their products because they save labor costs that way. Cheaper to just give credit. We throw stuff away all over this country to keep prices low. But we actually just defer the real costs.

Is that better waste than government waste?

The TSA budget is only $8.1 Billion. That is about a week of the cost of the Iraq war.

Thank you W.

here's some more good ones

Do not use the US Postal Service
   I try not to.   All they do is loose my mail.   USPS is only used by solicitors and bill notices

Do not whine when someone copies your work and sells it as their own. Government enforces copyright laws.
    You mean the laws that are written by Disney and the other big media companies so that "fair use" doesn't exist / nothing ever enters the public domain?

Do not use money printed by the US Treasury.
    Can't think of the last time I did.

Do not ride trains.
     Sen Coburn says what trains?

Do not expect plows to clear roads of snow and ice so your kids can go to school and so you can get to work.
     Ha.    This is Tulsa.    Think of the children!  We can't send kids to school when it's cold outside!   A plowed road is a slick and dangerous road.   Close the schools until the snow melts I say.

I'm still inspired by the words of JFK's inaugural speech in 1961.  "Ask not what your country can do for you..."

I believe every American should make it incumbent upon themselves to think of something they could do without.  Certainly there are many good and worthy things government does in that list that TTC posted.  The list even thoughtfully lists items which are funded on local, state, and federal levels though they are not identified as such in that list.  I probably use less than 1/2 of the items or services on that list and underutilize many of the ones I do use, but I do realize my tax contribution is necessary to help improve the standard of living of other citizens.

We need to quit providing services to non-citizens which would not be reciprocated in their home country (i.e. any sort of financial aid, education, or free medical care- try that in China, Mexico, Ireland, or Brazil) to a non-citizen.  There are also layers of administration in many of the federal programs on the list which are entirely unnecessary and which do nothing at all to improve the efficiency of those programs.  Given we are now in an entirely digital age, government administration should be a fraction of what it is.  That's money which could be better spent on public safety (not to be confused with national defense) and infrastructure.  We have the means to stop fraud in medicare, medicaid, welfare, and tax cheats yet the claim is always there's not enough people to enforce it...B.S. it's a matter of priorities.  Take people out of admin and put them in enforcement and investigations.

Probably more important is ending the thinking that small amounts of waste are insignificant.  Every bit of waste is significant as are even the smallest of tax loopholes.

It's really no different than when I've had a drop in income.  I took a $30K hit a year ago, same job but bonuses of previous years dried up due to some large clients scaling back due to the economy.  I've had two goals which have been unwavering:  I've got a specific retirement goal I'm saving toward, and I refuse to borrow a penny to send my daughters to college.  

I still managed to hit those goals, but it required prioritizing my spending and deciding what things I could do without.  I had to keep paying my mortgage, I needed water, electricity, heat, transportation, and food.  Here's what I didn't do: No big vacation, I cancelled my cable and went with a discounted DirecTV package, got rid of internet at home (since I could use 3G access), limited how much I ate out, deferred finishing non-essential renovation items on the home I bought in 2009, put off buying a new vehicle until my personal financial picture improved, and didn't spend much on things I "wanted" and even managed to pare down my "needed" items. When I finally bought a car this year, it was a program car and the savings in gas alone make a fair amount of the payment.  I make decisions within my means.  Government could do the same if it weren't so concerned with trying to solve every single problem and provide every single service where there's a perceived gap.

I get slammed all the time by others on the board for comparing my micro thinking to macro-economic issues, but there's absolutely no reason not to compare the two.  I have ratios of my personal GDP that I spend, that I save, and that I use to pay down long term debt.  I think the biggest problem facing us is a general ignorance of what all these government services cost and how many of these services we all use without completely realizing they are government-provided.

People keep going back to the prosperity of the "Clinton Surplus" without fully appreciating the investment bubble in the late 1990's which helped create a crap ton of new tax revenue that higher tax rates alone did not create.  That wasn't even necessarily an increase in productivity, a lot of people were getting wealthy doing nothing more than passive investing or creating a .com and shilling it off to the public in everyone's rush to be on the ground floor of the next big winner.  Sure those companies were able to put people on payroll, but it was on borrowed funds and sooner or later those dry up if the concept is not sustainable.  Consider it a private sector "stimulus".

I submit that without having the luck to preside over one of the largest technology expansions ever (.com, telecom, biotech) the waning years of the Clinton administration would not have been near as rosy and we might have even crept off into recession sooner than 2001.  I'm actually a Clinton fan, but these are immutable facts which get conveniently butchered in the haste to paint the Bush administration (I'm less a fan of Bush II than Clinton, if you must know) as completely incompetent.  The Bush admin did enjoy very low unemployment and economic prosperity, he simply had the poor timing to initiate tax cuts just prior to expensive wars (which went much longer than anticipated) and unforeseen record natural disasters and the poor judgement to not rein cuts in when needed.

/ramble

Actually corporate waste is quite limited due to accountability to shareholders.  Your example doesn't compare to layers of useless administration in government and what you are referring to as waste is built into the cost of products we buy.  As well, there's more than simple corporate laziness behind throwing away items.

Government has spent money it doesn't have because it's not accountable to the people who are it's stakeholders.  They way you cure that is with a BBA.

OK, lets assume that those 102 things are essential..
Here's the budget:

Giant graphic:  http://information2share.files.wordpress.com/2011/06/death-and-taxes.jpg
Zoomable graphic:   http://www.wallstats.com/deathandtaxes/

What percentage of the budget are these items receiving?
Can you find most of them in the budget?

Our priorities are not the priorities given in the budget

I have to correct this one:

33. Do not use the internet, which was developed by the military Algore.

33. Do not use the internet, which was developed by the military Algore counter culture hippies.

You don't need to be an apologist for corporate waste. Stockholders only care about return on their stock and deferring waste costs to others or to the future accomplishes that. It is actually much larger than the potential for government waste, even including the military. GDP is larger than our budget.

And the real cost of that corporate waste isn't reflected in the real price, merely the laid in cost. Do you think GE added in the cost of removing PCB's from a dammed up lake (I think it was Georgia) they polluted to their customers real time? No they didn't. They were so lazy and shortsighted that they never even considered cleaning up their mess. Eventually the taxpayer foots most of that type of laziness.

Huh?  Did anyone else's head just ratchet a full 360 reading that?  Cost is a function of price paid.

I've worked in retail and your account of mountains of items being thrown away is complete fiction and a truly poor example of trying to compare corporate waste to that of government unless your previous employer does things vastly different than most other big box operations.  Many defective and over-run items which are returned wind up being reconditioned and/or re-sold via discount outlets like Big Lots or internet retailers.  But if you care to make that comparison based on broken and defective retail goods, then do the same on a material basis and the government still manages to mismanage and waste assets far worse than the corporate world because, again, they are accountable to no one for their waste.

Corporations are necessarily run far more efficiently than government, again because they are accountable to shareholders to minimize waste and duplication of services by needing to maintain profitability objectives (I'm sorry, I mean greed objectives for those who are free-market challenged).  They can also fire people who don't perform their job duties as expected a whole lot easier than government can (or will).

Provide a single example of an industry that government engages in where the equivalent private industry counterpart is less efficient.

Big box stores, can't you read?

LOL.

This is my favorite "Fetch Boo boo" challenge.  They usually come back with "The Post Office" or some obscure infrastructural or regulatory reference.

You have this conversation over and over so you know what your "they" will do?

Did you really LOL?

No it was more of an SMP.

Oh gross

That's just silly. Lets take just one industry which I am familiar with. Office Supplies. If you want I could choose the Oil industry, the medical industry, newspapers or groceries. They all are hopeless wasters.

Big box locations in Tulsa numbers about a dozen. They are open 360 days a year. Everyday we threw away stock that was returned, damaged in shipment, slow moving stock that was not part of a return w/credit agreement, etc. Enough that we had to contract with a company for a huge trash compactor to be regularly hauled off. One chair per day that needed a part ordered. That may have needed a wheel replaced. That could have been marked down and sold as is. Times 360, times 12. That's 4320 chairs per day just in Tulsa. That's just one item from one department. At an average margin of 40% if the chair cost $100 that is $172,000. No return agreement on most of them. That doesn't count the opportunity loss of having that money used in more productive pursuits. The real loss for them is $172,000 plus at least the cost of borrowing $262,000 at market rates. And believe me I am being conservative with those figures. They could contract with an independent to buy them, repair them and resell them, like companies did back in the 1980's but they are scared of being underpriced in their own market. More importantly, there is no mechanism, no loss prevention protocol within the company to do so. If corporate doesn't see it, it doesn't exist. Is any of this sounding familiar? Sort of like governmental bs? Well, then you think they may outfit each store with a small repair facility and/or an employee so they could repair and resell themselves. Wrong. That would mean additional lost $per foot and labor expended. No patience for that. You really think the stockholders know they are throwing away nearly a quarter million $ of their money just in one department? No. If everyone does it then its not noticeable to them.

Then add in the partial theft (remainder thrown away), the timely materials like calendars and planners, the broken plastics, store merchandising fixtures, displays and other generally lazy, short sighted business decisions like belief in "just in time" restocking systems or overdependence on digital solutions and you see some really incompetent, lazy businessmen who succeed on the backs of employees. McDonalds in college taught me one thing, its the front counter guy who IS the company.

ONE more example cause I doubt I'll ever change  you guys perception. Because mainly I think you only view government waste as a result of social costs and labor. I ask this of Recyclemike: How is the recycling of these new mercury laden lightbulbs being handled? Did the industry accompany their release with recycling centers located within the point of sale locations? Or did they niftily shuffle off that responsibility with printed instructions to "please recycle safely at your local recycling center" so that you and other taxpayers would pay for that? Did they include the cost of that potentially dangerous product in the pricing of the product? How much would that be? OR did they do what bottlers did when they stopped using glass containers that you could recycle for $.05 cents apiece in favor of plastic that ended up in rivers, lakes, oceans and landfills at no cost whatsoever? Just curious.

Talk about waste and you have no one who outpaces industry. If you're talking incompetence, note that most politicians came from the business world. They take those competencies with them.

Why? You feeling lazier than usual?

Government and industry are not the same thing. They may have functions that mirror each other but totally different goals to reach. But even then there is a balance to such things. When private industry is vastly superior to government in a particular role they seem to get privatized. When an industry is particularly abusive or incompetent they tend to get regulated or those functions are subject to increased monitoring.

The postal service is not governmental Boo Boo. Beware belittling another's experience. You run the risk of sounding like Rush. Well informed but drawing the wrong conclusions.

Yep!  ;)

You posted this under a Conan post by accident. But thanks anyway.  ;D

And also a "thank you" to John Kerry, The Swimmer, Al Gore, Chris Dodd.....

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FCVZlLBchVE[/youtube]

*sigh*

Yeah, well that's just manufactured by Faux from multiple sound bites  ::)

Again, their ultimate denial and desertion of President Bush on this shows liberals inventing their own reality when it's convenient.

Speaking of taxes, why is it again that people claim that personal taxation is massive? Most people pay more income tax than anything else, yet income tax, personal property tax, and licenses are a little over 9% of GDP, well below the post-1950 average.

(http://www.nwacg.net/gallery3/var/albums/random-stuff/personal-taxes-gdp.png?m=1312404828)

Before the payroll tax holiday, payroll tax collections were down only a few tenths of a percent relative to GDP, but thanks to the cuts, collections dropped by 1% of GDP to a bit over 6%.

By the way, whoever said that companies are beholden to their shareholders may have said the funniest thing I've heard all week. Corporate governance in this country is very poor on the whole, at least in publicly traded companies. Shareholders can't or won't push for accountability, the board is usually controlled by the CEO.

You live in La-La Land Nate. And I don't mean Los Angeles either.

How Orwellian of you. Basing one's opinion on facts now puts one in la-la land, while serious people base their opinion on..something else. Such skillful jujitsu.

Edited to add: If you prefer to look at it as a percentage of personal income, here you go:

(http://www.nwacg.net/gallery3/var/resizes/random-stuff/taxes-income.png?m=1312408919)

Doesn't really make the case that taxes are high relative to historic norms.

This is your quote I take issue with:


That's a really broad brush for such a tiny reality of business in America.

Think about it, what motivates a company to turn a profit?  It's not a desire to pay more in taxes, it's not an altruistic duty to create jobs or provide a means of consumption.  The principal purpose of a for-profit corporation is to turn a profit for it's shareholders.  The only reason to own stock in a company as a passive investor (unless you are shorting it) is the expectation of profit in the form of dividends and/or increasing the value of the initial investment through the profitable operations of the company.

Boards serve at the pleasure of the share-holders and frequently are made up of major share-holders.  CEO's usually serve at the pleasure of the board and are frequently turned out for poor performance and rewarded for great performance. Certainly, the structure differs from one corporation to another and the amount of relative power a CEO has over the board depends on how much of a stake of the company they own and whether or not the corporation is largely held by the same family and if the CEO is a member of that family.

As per my original statement, business must necessarily operate much more efficiently than government.  Business can't afford extraneous layers of administration for make work projects, they can't afford to foot massive cost-overruns when projects are mis-managed, and they typically will be much more alert for fraud, theft, and mitigating loss because there is no bottomless pit for them.

Sometimes I question where you come up with some of your positions because they are at complete odds with the realities of economics and commerce.

probably all those receiving assistance that are bringing the average down.

Its more than him you're questioning. I pretty much agree with him and find your statements lacking in reality. That's the way its supposed to work but it just doesn't. I watched in horror as Cities Service was mismanaged to death with the board as willing accomplices. Perceived wasteful layers of administration were eliminated by routinely bingeing and purging entire departments because it looked good to the stockholders. Stock down? Better centralize! Then grow it back over time.  It gutted their operations. Best employees went out with deadwood. Other oil companies snapped them up. Copper mines, shale oil, oh yeah baby!! Don't worry about it. Stuff like that set them up for takeover. Went from 9th largest oil company in America to takeover bait because of a few bad presidents supported with self serving boards. Occidental? Armand Hammer? They were not aberrations.

Actually at Cities you were at a disadvantage if you were tall, not from back east or Chicago, or spoke like a Cajun. I understand that one of the large oil companies here moved their entire operation because the president's wife didn't like the social atmosphere in Tulsa. Just lacked that Houston feel, y'all. That sound like a board with its head on straight?

The system still works, its just not as simple as you portray.

Conan, you're hampered by your idealistic view of corporate governance. It should work that way, but it doesn't. Shareholders have almost no say because they don't get to elect whomever they like, they get to choose between management's candidates, at least in most public companies. The real profit motive? Executive bonuses. That's why there's no focus on a year from now, only this quarter.

It's true that the little guy doesn't get to play by the same rules, but that's not really what we were talking about.

BKDotCom, unemployment benefits have been taxable since the early Reagan years.

If anything your version is skewed.  Especially the last paragraph, but I digress.

Purging wasteful departments is precisely my point when it comes to corporate structure.  Why do they make cuts?  To stay profitable or return to profitability sooner.  They don't get rid of waste and employees which no longer fit the business model or the changing business climate out of spite or pure stupidity.  When companies sell out, know the motive?  Profit and increased value for shareholders.  There's one reason all that happens: PROFIT!!  Who benefits from profit (aside from taxing authorities)? Shareholders!!!  And the truth will set you free!!!

Another local case in point: in 2001 within six weeks of 9/11, Dollar Thrifty purged a lot of jobs and shed itself of any fleet they could to react quickly to the growing financial crisis stemming from the recession of '00/01 and the upheaval in the travel industry.  They did it again a few years ago, coming back from the brink of bankruptcy.

I can see an Aqua Man/Conan summit is needed soon.  Pick the place and I'll buy the Marshall's as soon as I return from my race out in Colorado week after next.  I miss your good natured cheer.

How long ago was your divorce from reality final?

Finally you're making some sense! Good luck with the race.

Conan, my issue with Nate is he has no real world experience with how companies operate. It's nothing but sophistry and irrelevant information masquerading as supporting facts that drives his economic view. As to the latter, making the "rich" look like they are not paying enough in taxes by looking at tax policy in connection with GDP. Who gives a frak about that? Only the Nate's in the world, not the greedy/selfish shlub making 400K year and pays >100K in taxes, suggest that people already paying more in taxes than the Nate's earn in a year should pay more because of what the rich paid SIXTY DAMNED YEARS AGO!!! And on the subject of the 1950s tax structure, a meme I read frequently in this forum that the rich paid a 90% tax rate. Actually, that number was a marginal tax rate. Here's an article from the leftist hacks at Politifact which takes up the issue.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2009/oct/02/michael-moore/michael-moores-film-capitalism-claims-richest-paid/

We won't talk about how many tax breaks were available back then, which if I recall was the impetus for the AMT.

That may be what you read, but I've never written that, and I haven't seen anyone here refer to that number as anything but the top [marginal] rate.

I have yet to be divorced from reality. That seems to be what most frustrates you about my posts. :P (hard data is reality, my friend)

But Guido is right, I have never been the CEO of a public company. I doubt he has either, but whatever. At least I understand the concept of supply and demand. Without demand, there will be no increase in supply, so we'll continue to have a jobs problem.

http://gizmodo.com/5827468/the-pentagon-spends-more-money-fixing-rusty-old-smile-than-canada-spends-on-its-entire-military

Here's a thread:

http://www.tulsanow.org/forum/index.php?topic=15448.0

So you're saying that when he bothered to put top in there it was meant to convey a 90% effective tax rate and not a top marginal rate, even though he was specifically referring to previous tax policy in which the top marginal rate was in fact 90%? If you say so. If anyone implied a 90% effective rate, it was Conan (http://www.tulsanow.org/forum/index.php?topic=15448.msg162602#msg162602) (having only read page one)

Either way, if that's all you can point to, it's pretty thin evidence of an actual meme propagating across the forum. Are there examples of other people having made the same mistake? If so, great, let's start a new topic in big bold letters to make sure everyone knows that the tax brackets are and have always been marginal.

You're doing that backpedaling thing again Nate.

Your reference did not support your assertion, and I'm the one backpedaling?

Nathan, posting graphs and cobbling that into misinterpreted data isn't reality.

You should come to the summit as well.  Beer is a great equalizer.  I become shockingly liberal after a few Atlas IPA's.

It takes the Pub Ale for me to turn to the right a little.  It's my least favorite of Eric's offerings.  But I'll still drink it.

I lot of people agree with me when they have been drinking.

Some reason we can't have a "like" button on tnf?

I definitely become more attractive after they've been drinking.

For a second I thought the topic had changed to 102 things not to do if you hate TEXAS.

That's what I thought it said when I first saw the thread.

We're getting a glimpse at TNF'ers who are not only dyslexic but a tad bit irrational as well.....

Are you for real? Ladies and Gentlemen. I give you perhaps the greats example of a pot calling kettle black in the history of this forum.

Resorting to that cliche? A clear example of thinking small?
 ;D

Anyone see a denial in that post?

Interesting little side note;


http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/mysterious-company-dissolves-giving-1-million-pro-romney-142445497.html


Gotta love 'em!

Mmm..hmm...
backs away slowly

At least we agree that beer is good. ;)

One of the best explanations of "economic justice" so far:

"Economic justice is when you take money from people who won't vote for you and give it to people who will."

Classic! ;D

Back to the gold standard! Weak money is a tax on the rich!

Weak money is a tax on everyone.  Shoring up support by redistribution is foolish, and temporary. . .two words that sum up all of President Obama's policies.

Please explain how weak money is bad for manufacturers, other exporters, and debtors. Or even explain how strong money is good for those groups. Either way is fine, since they're essentially the same assertion.

It's kind of funny when you try to fight the battles of the 1960s. It's scary when you try to fight battles from a century ago.

Cavuto making my point on the 51% of Americans that pay no federal income tax.

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/foxs-neil-cavuto-takes-on-democratic-rep-what-about-the-51-who-pay-no-taxes/

That is what a donkey-kicking looks like.

I'm glad you got correct what mediaite failed to get correct, guido. I'm not sure that the statistic is actually true, but at least you didn't claim 51% of American tax filers pay no tax at all.

I'm just wondering how, in the aggregate, the low income groups do actually have an effective income tax rate above zero if they're all paying zero.

Income	Effective Rate
All returns	11.35%
No adjusted gross income	-0.04%
$1 under $5,000	0.15%
$5,000 under $10,000	0.41%
$10,000 under $15,000	0.55%
$15,000 under $20,000	1.26%
$20,000 under $25,000	2.07%
$25,000 under $30,000	2.87%
$30,000 under $40,000	4.03%
$40,000 under $50,000	5.26%
$50,000 under $75,000	6.78%
$75,000 under $100,000	8.13%
$100,000 under $200,000	11.78%
$200,000 under $500,000	19.48%
$500,000 under $1,000,000	24.23%
$1,000,000 under $1,500,000	25.17%
$1,500,000 under $2,000,000	25.47%
$2,000,000 under $5,000,000	25.65%
$5,000,000 under $10,000,000	25.25%
$10,000,000 or more	22.40%

Well, actually I'm not sure about the truth of the 51% claim. In FY2009, it was actually 41.73% of returns that were not taxable, not 51%. Newer IRS tables are not yet available on their website.

Please define effective rate.  My 5 figure (left of the decimal point) salary rate is a lot higher than any rate shown in your table.  Maybe it's because I'm single with no dependents.

Edit:
I just checked my 2010 Federal Income Tax return.  Turbo Tax lists my "Effective Tax Rate" as 16.19%

It's the average for that particular income cohort (divide the group's combined tax liability by the group's combined AGI). Those without children, a mortgage interest deduction, and/or have self-employment tax will, of course, be on the high side of that, while those with 12 kids and a million dollars worth of outstanding mortgage debt will be on the low side.

That's what I thought it was.  Even with nearly maxing out my 401K contributions, I'm paying w-a-y too much compared to others with my income range.  Try to live responsibly and you get ....