$250,000 annually or, put another way, a quarter of a million per year. Considering that such a person could spend $75,000 per year ($25k more than my wife and I make, combined - both in jobs that require college degrees - meaning that a third of their income is half again as much as our total) and still put enough in the bank to be a millionaire in just over 5.5 years, I would consider that pretty darn well off, at least. Then, again, there are professional baseball players, etc. who get paid several times that amount for playing a damn game. Either way, I still don't trust - or support - Obama (or McCain, either.)
Add in a house payment, a car payment, insurance, high taxes, etc and that $250K isn't exactly as high as it seems. No doubt, it's a good living but wealthy, no....thats based on people I know who are wealthy. One made $300K off the interest from once account alone (he has since passed on). Thats wealthy. Granted, don't have to buy a big house or nice cars and just invest and save. Yet unders someone's plan, you're considered rich (or wealthy, however you want to say it) and will have an increase in taxable income because of it. Until the system is completely overhauled and the IRS is done away with, I don't see any drastic change anyway. There's an old saying in that the poor have been voting for the Democrats for 50 years and they are still poor. Rich folk are rich regardless of who is in the front office.
__________________
There are only three things the copilot should ever say:
1. Nice landing, Sir.
2. I'll buy the first round.
3. I'll take the ugly one.
Where the money goes varies. In Georgia, we pay a fuel sales tax that goes directly to the DOT (an unusual arrangement). Usually it goes into a General Fund, and comes out as spending allocations. Sometimes more comes out as an allocation for one thing, sometimes more for another.
The 3 to 1 ratio is just an estimate - as I said, I haven't seen the rough draft of the bill (mainly because it exists mostly as a headline right now rather than as actual prepared legislation), but this is pretty typical. Government's overhead percentage on many such things is pretty steep (routing money through the government is NOT cost free), and then there's the likelihood that other priorities will be included, other expenses added on, etc. A "clean" bill is quite rare, as you know, and particularly one that has "pork" written all over it like this one. Obama's buddies in Congress have a LONG history of taking such programs and padding them (in fact, that's where a lot of my ratio comes from).
Maybe it will only be 2:1, making it a pretty "clean" bill, or even worse than 3:1, making it a "christmas tree" laden with pork.
Also to be considered is the fact that such programs impose assorted costs upon the middleman collecting the taxes, and those costs (like all corporate costs) get added on to the prices charged for their goods and services somewhere along the line. This is particularly true when an entire national industry is targeted, so there is NO market force pressure to prevent the prices from being passed along to consumers. For every dollar collected by corporations as taxes, a large amount of overhead is generated - adding to the ratio, of course.
KS, this is all really basic economics. Reality.
If Obama is seeking to emulate Jimmy Carter here, the next step would be price and wage controls, something he has not yet mentioned. This is of course the other side of the zero sum game, where once the effect of prices of this sort of thing is realized by the Boss (aka, the voters), attempts to force the tax extraction to follow the preferred path (ie, coming out of the stockholder's hide, ably discussed by Neal in my post above), an entire new dumptruck load of worms is revealed.
As for the Nokia and Motorola example, it completely goes over my head. What in the dickens do they have to do with punitive oil profit taxes and a plan to share some of them with taxpayers? Budweiser being purchased by a European company?
KS, I think you are losing the thread.
These things have no common ground with my post, none at all...
Uh, Trip, you may recall the Bridge to Nowhere?
Sorry, but my NEW Party put together the last balanced budget.
____________________________________
Trip, if trickle-down worked, we'd have the jobs Bush promised us, the dollar would be worth something, and the folks in charge of Corporate America would have planned ahead for the oil shortage that everyone saw coming.
Like most ideologies, it smacks reality and falters.
IF that were true, Oil Companies would have REDUCED the percentage as profit to remain competitive, and passed on the savings to consumers, as they received NOT ONLY TAX CUTS but SUBSIDIES, TOO!!
The savings did NOT get passed on to consumers, as they relied on the same formulas they had PRIOR to the tax cuts, paid off their lobbyists, put together an ad campaign, and then pocketed the rest.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 95MGTS
Add in a house payment, a car payment, insurance, high taxes, etc and that $250K isn't exactly as high as it seems. No doubt, it's a good living but wealthy, no....thats based on people I know who are wealthy. One made $300K off the interest from once account alone (he has since passed on). Thats wealthy. Granted, don't have to buy a big house or nice cars and just invest and save. Yet unders someone's plan, you're considered rich (or wealthy, however you want to say it) and will have an increase in taxable income because of it. Until the system is completely overhauled and the IRS is done away with, I don't see any drastic change anyway. There's an old saying in that the poor have been voting for the Democrats for 50 years and they are still poor. Rich folk are rich regardless of who is in the front office.
And why should my Federal tax dollars go to protecting your coastline & beaches?
Why can't you protect your own coastline -since you bought your house close to it? I mean, I lived there once, but I don't live there now. Why should my tax dollars subsidize your lifestyle?
Particularly since you're making more than 6x the median and average income of most San Diegans
If you're only living well, what's everyone else doing?
__________________
Woe to him who builds his palace by unrighteousness,his upper rooms by injustice,making his countrymen work for nothing...Does it make you a king to have more and more cedar?Did not your father have food and drink?He did what was right and just,so all went well with him. He defended the cause of the poor and needy,and so all went well...But your eyes and your heart are set only on dishonest gain,on shedding innocent blood and on oppression and extortion. Jer 22:13, 15-17
Last edited by EagleAutosports; 08-05-2008 at 10:44 PM.
Reason: Merged 2 posts
And why should my Federal tax dollars go to protecting your coastline & beaches?
Why can't you protect your own coastline -since you bought your house close to it? I mean, I lived there once, but I don't live there now. Why should my tax dollars subsidize your lifestyle?
Particularly since you're making more than 6x the median and average income of most San Diegans
If you're only living well, what's everyone else doing?
Number one, WTF are you talking about? What coastline and beaches? If a state wants nice coastlines and beaches, then use their budget to do so. When I lived in San Diego the area we lived in was nice. The city was well kept, great parks, streets were clean, public schools had state of the art equipment, etc. Why? The state and city charged a Mellaruse tax (not sure of the spelling). We paid $275 a month. I'm okay with that, I chose to live there and liked the results.
Being I'm living okay, not sure what others are doing and don't care. Not my problem. My problem is my family and our life.
__________________
There are only three things the copilot should ever say:
1. Nice landing, Sir.
2. I'll buy the first round.
3. I'll take the ugly one.
Number one, WTF are you talking about? What coastline and beaches? If a state wants nice coastlines and beaches, then use their budget to do so. When I lived in San Diego the area we lived in was nice. The city was well kept, great parks, streets were clean, public schools had state of the art equipment, etc. Why? The state and city charged a Mellaruse tax (not sure of the spelling). We paid $275 a month. I'm okay with that, I chose to live there and liked the results.
Being I'm living okay, not sure what others are doing and don't care. Not my problem. My problem is my family and our life.
You must have lived in Poway, S.D. is falling apart at the seems. Oh and it's Mello Roos such a wierd name.
You must have lived in Poway, S.D. is falling apart at the seems. Oh and it's Mello Roos such a wierd name.
Nope, lived in Eastlake area of Chula Vista. I live in Florida now. Still own the house for right now. I've taken a huge, huge loss on it in terms of value. My fault, bad, bad decision by me to buy it in the first place. Yes, thats it, Mello Roos....certainly odd.
__________________
There are only three things the copilot should ever say:
1. Nice landing, Sir.
2. I'll buy the first round.
3. I'll take the ugly one.
Number one, WTF are you talking about? What coastline and beaches? If a state wants nice coastlines and beaches, then use their budget to do so. When I lived in San Diego the area we lived in was nice. The city was well kept, great parks, streets were clean, public schools had state of the art equipment, etc. Why? The state and city charged a Mellaruse tax (not sure of the spelling). We paid $275 a month. I'm okay with that, I chose to live there and liked the results.
Being I'm living okay, not sure what others are doing and don't care. Not my problem. My problem is my family and our life.
$429,000,000 Federal tax dollars go to preserve Florida's coastline, much of which is privately owned.
Why am I having to pay to preserve your lifestyle?
Quote:
Originally Posted by 95MGTS
Being I'm living okay, not sure what others are doing and don't care. Not my problem. My problem is my family and our life.
That's the Republican Way, in a nutshell.
Thanks for being explicit in your opinions!
__________________
Woe to him who builds his palace by unrighteousness,his upper rooms by injustice,making his countrymen work for nothing...Does it make you a king to have more and more cedar?Did not your father have food and drink?He did what was right and just,so all went well with him. He defended the cause of the poor and needy,and so all went well...But your eyes and your heart are set only on dishonest gain,on shedding innocent blood and on oppression and extortion. Jer 22:13, 15-17
$429,000,000 Federal tax dollars go to preserve Florida's coastline, much of which is privately owned.
Why am I having to pay to preserve your lifestyle?
Not my lifestyle, I could care less. Like I said, much of our taxed revenue is used ineffeciently or ineffectively. If you don't like it, do something about it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kscoyote
That's the Republican Way, in a nutshell.
Thanks for being explicit in your opinions!
Not sure if it's the Republican way but it's certainly my way. I'm not a politician, not a civilian leader. My priority is my family and my money. To many personal issues and problems to worry about other people. Of all folks explicit in their opinions.....and whining....you would know
__________________
There are only three things the copilot should ever say:
1. Nice landing, Sir.
2. I'll buy the first round.
3. I'll take the ugly one.
