Taxing those who make money

[beowolfe]

This is the most crooked administration in U.S. history... expect the worse.

How many administration officials have gone to prison? None. If they can maintain this, then that in and of itself makes you a liar at worse, totally misinformed at best.

 

[The Rabbi]

What do you expect from libs? They haven't a clue how to make a buck.. they're basically a bunch of parasites who leach off the producers and then question the manner in which we provide their substenance. Fuck 'em.

A Republican and a Democrat are walking down the street. A homeless man comes up to them and asks for help. The Republican pulls $20 out of his wallet, gives it to the man, gives him his card and says to come see him on Mon about a job.
The Democrat is very impressed.
As they walk another homeless man comes along and asks for help.
The Democrat reaches into his pocket and comes up empty. He asks the Republican to lend him $20 so he can give it to the guy. Then he gives the guy directions to the welfare office so he can apply the next day.


And that's the difference between Republicans and Democrats.

 

[beowolfe]

What do you expect from libs? They haven't a clue how to make a buck.. they're basically a bunch of parasites who leach off the producers and then question the manner in which we provide their substenance. Fuck 'em.

Statments like this qualify you for the most 'clueless' poster.

 

[The Rabbi]

This is the most crooked administration in U.S. history... expect the worse.

How many administration officials have gone to prison? None. If they can maintain this, then that in and of itself makes you a liar at worse, totally misinformed at best.

None. Yet.
But it's still early and we've had how many officials have copped to cheating on taxes?

 

[MIPS]

So, you think those who are taxed don't get any benefit from it. Interesting.

The net benefit is of less value than the current cost to most, equal to some and of greater value to a few, all in all the current state of affairs is a raw deal to the majority.

As for property taxes, you can avoid those easily.....don't buy property!!!

Yeah I suppose that's one solution, not very practical and beside the point, but at least you tried.

So, you think that (let's take Bill Gates) what he pays in taxes is not worth the benefits he gets from the 'system'. You think Bill pays enough to have built all the roads he uses, all the airports he uses, all of the electricity he uses, etc, etc.... Interesting.

LOL, Bill Gates? he does not even get close to the utility out of any one of those things nor all of them combined to justify the amount of taxes he's paid in to the system. Not to mention the variable costs that one must pay to use those things in the first place (i.e. license fees for roads, airport tax on each plane ticket and since when did electricity get included in ones tax bill or are you referring to utility taxes which are added ON TOP of the costs of transmission that gets passed along to the consumer? ).

It's only common sense that one that "pays into" a system that then turns around and "pays out" to others that pay in nothing (or pay in far less) cannot receive a good value for his/her money ? As in you give me $10 and I'll give you $4 back and give $6 away to other people and you tell me if you got a good deal.... K?

 

[rightwinger]

This is the most crooked administration in U.S. history... expect the worse.

How many administration officials have gone to prison? None. If they can maintain this, then that in and of itself makes you a liar at worse, totally misinformed at best.

None. Yet.
But it's still early and we've had how many officials have copped to cheating on taxes?

Charge them of a crime, convict them and then send them to prison..

Until that time your "most corrupt administration" crap is just BS

 

[The Rabbi]

How many administration officials have gone to prison? None. If they can maintain this, then that in and of itself makes you a liar at worse, totally misinformed at best.

None. Yet.
But it's still early and we've had how many officials have copped to cheating on taxes?

Charge them of a crime, convict them and then send them to prison..

Until that time your "most corrupt administration" crap is just BS

Unfortunaely I dont have the power to charge them. If I did half the administration would be doing the perp walk.

 

[Political Junky]

Since Reagan reduced the tax rates for the richest Americans, the US economy has been in trouble.

 

[beowolfe]

This is the most crooked administration in U.S. history... expect the worse.

How many administration officials have gone to prison? None. If they can maintain this, then that in and of itself makes you a liar at worse, totally misinformed at best.

None. Yet.
But it's still early and we've had how many officials have copped to cheating on taxes?

And that's my point!! It's so early no one can know or predict what the final outcome will be.

From the information I've seen, no one has copped to 'cheating' on taxes.

 

[beowolfe]

None. Yet.
But it's still early and we've had how many officials have copped to cheating on taxes?

Charge them of a crime, convict them and then send them to prison..

Until that time your "most corrupt administration" crap is just BS

Unfortunaely I dont have the power to charge them. If I did half the administration would be doing the perp walk.

The reason you don't have that power is because you'd abuse it. One of the cool things about a democratic republic is people who would be obvious power abusers are weeded out rather quickly.

 

[The Rabbi]

How many administration officials have gone to prison? None. If they can maintain this, then that in and of itself makes you a liar at worse, totally misinformed at best.

None. Yet.
But it's still early and we've had how many officials have copped to cheating on taxes?

And that's my point!! It's so early no one can know or predict what the final outcome will be.

From the information I've seen, no one has copped to 'cheating' on taxes.

Geezus are you either uninformed or downright stupid.
Citing Tax Troubles, an Obama Appointee Withdraws - The Caucus Blog - NYTimes.com
Hot Air Blog Archive Good news: Another Obama appointee owes back taxes
Unprecedented Level of Tax Evasion Among Obama Appointees

 

[SpidermanTuba]

Depends on where you live, U.S./NY City (i.e. if you live in NYC) ranks #21, U.S./Illinois #35, #44 U.S/Texas (if you live in Texas) and #48 Overall out of 65 countries for tax burden (i.e. "Misery Index") based on rankings derived from Forbes Data for 2009...

Tax Burden by Country - Country Ranks 2009

48 out of 65. We are not a high tax nation.

That of course is a matter of opinion..... and requires one ignore all the cumulative operating deficits and unfunded liabilities (totaling out at around $113 TRILLION last time I looked) which must inevitably paid in the form of taxation (and that it includes taking the form of inflation).

What's the difference between an unfunded and a funded liability?

 

[MIPS]

48 out of 65. We are not a high tax nation.

That of course is a matter of opinion..... and requires one ignore all the cumulative operating deficits and unfunded liabilities (totaling out at around $113 TRILLION last time I looked) which must inevitably paid in the form of taxation (and that it includes taking the form of inflation).

What's the difference between an unfunded and a funded liability?

A funded liability is a promise that is either backed completely by existing assets or can reasonably be expected to be backed completely by assets when the promise comes due, or if the promise is paid out over time (for example a monthly pension) have assets set aside to generate sufficient income to cover the periodic payments over the expected lifetime of the promise (set by an actuarial calculation).

An unfunded liability is a promise that isn't backed by sufficient assets to cover the anticipated costs of the promise or cannot reasonably be expected to cover it when the promise comes due, or cannot be expected to generate sufficient income to cover the periodic payments required to fulfill the promise over the lifetime of the promise.

simple example You promise your 10 year old kid a Harvard education, which you anticipate will cost $200K, over the next 8 years you save nothing when the kid turns 18 you now have a $200K unfunded liability which means you either borrow the money to fund it or renege on your promise.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

That of course is a matter of opinion..... and requires one ignore all the cumulative operating deficits and unfunded liabilities (totaling out at around $113 TRILLION last time I looked) which must inevitably paid in the form of taxation (and that it includes taking the form of inflation).

What's the difference between an unfunded and a funded liability?

A funded liability is a promise that is either backed completely by existing assets or can reasonably be expected to be backed completely by assets when the promise comes due, or if the promise is paid out over time (for example a monthly pension) have assets set aside to generate sufficient income to cover the periodic payments over the expected lifetime of the promise (set by an actuarial calculation).

An unfunded liability is a promise that isn't backed by sufficient assets to cover the anticipated costs of the promise or cannot reasonably be expected to cover it when the promise comes due, or cannot be expected to generate sufficient income to cover the periodic payments required to fulfill the promise over the lifetime of the promise.

simple example You promise your 10 year old kid a Harvard education, which you anticipate will cost $200K, over the next 8 years you save nothing when the kid turns 18 you now have a $200K unfunded liability which means you either borrow the money to fund it or renege on your promise.

Can you give an example as it relates to the federal government? Because I don't see the functional difference. Treasury obligations are considered the safest u.s. dollar denominated asset around.

So for example I might choose to fund that liability of a harvard education by buying U.S. Treasuries - which are backed by the full faith and credit of the U.S. Government.


So say the U.S. Government wanted to fund a liability, how would it do it? What would it do differently? Buy treasuries? But then its buying things from itself, what would be the point of that?

 

[MIPS]

What's the difference between an unfunded and a funded liability?

A funded liability is a promise that is either backed completely by existing assets or can reasonably be expected to be backed completely by assets when the promise comes due, or if the promise is paid out over time (for example a monthly pension) have assets set aside to generate sufficient income to cover the periodic payments over the expected lifetime of the promise (set by an actuarial calculation).

An unfunded liability is a promise that isn't backed by sufficient assets to cover the anticipated costs of the promise or cannot reasonably be expected to cover it when the promise comes due, or cannot be expected to generate sufficient income to cover the periodic payments required to fulfill the promise over the lifetime of the promise.

simple example You promise your 10 year old kid a Harvard education, which you anticipate will cost $200K, over the next 8 years you save nothing when the kid turns 18 you now have a $200K unfunded liability which means you either borrow the money to fund it or renege on your promise.

Can you give an example as it relates to the federal government? Because I don't see the functional difference. Treasury obligations are considered the safest u.s. dollar denominated asset around.

So for example I might choose to fund that liability of a harvard education by buying U.S. Treasuries - which are backed by the full faith and credit of the U.S. Government.


So say the U.S. Government wanted to fund a liability, how would it do it? What would it do differently? Buy treasuries? But then its buying things from itself, what would be the point of that?

This is beyond the scope of what I was talking about with respect to Federal Unfunded Liabilities, the numbers I was talking about entail unfunded Social Security, Medicare and other Federal Pension liabilities. The current (quick & dirty) unfunded liability numbers for these programs can be found here :

U.S. National Debt Clock : Real Time

More details on the actuarial imbalances for Social Security & Medicare can be found at (good places to start)
Social Security Online - The Official Website of the U.S. Social Security Administration
The Peter G. Peterson Foundation

 

[SpidermanTuba]

What is the difference between a funded and unfunded social security liability? What would the difference be? What 'asset' would the government hold that makes it funded?

 

[MIPS]

What is the difference between a funded and unfunded social security liability?

Go back to what I already wrote and take note that Social Security represents a promise by the federal government, as in will there be enough money to pay you the social security payments that you've been promised after you retire? if not, then it's an unfunded promise.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

What is the difference between a funded and unfunded social security liability?

Go back to what I already wrote and take note that Social Security represents a promise by the federal government, as in will there be enough money to pay you the social security payments that you've been promised after you retire? if not, then it's an unfunded promise.

If there was enough money for it, where would we put it? The safest place to put any money is a U.S. Treasury. There's no difference between the government buying treasuries from itself and not buying them at all.

 

[MIPS]

What is the difference between a funded and unfunded social security liability?

Go back to what I already wrote and take note that Social Security represents a promise by the federal government, as in will there be enough money to pay you the social security payments that you've been promised after you retire? if not, then it's an unfunded promise.

If there was enough money for it, where would we put it? The safest place to put any money is a U.S. Treasury. There's no difference between the government buying treasuries from itself and not buying them at all.

That's where we have been putting it, SORT OF, the Congress has been spending the SS surpluses and replacing the money with Treasury Bills in the mythical SS "trust fund", so essentially we're taking money out of one pocket, putting it in another, putting IOUS in the first pocket and announcing "Look we've doubled our money!", eventually those T-Bills come due and the money has to come out of the general fund (which is operating at a deficit even with the money raided from the SS income stream).

 

[SpidermanTuba]

Specifically what do we do differently to have a "funded" social security liability?