Thread: Fix education, restore social mobility

Originally Posted by Roosveltrepub

Nah you know exavtly what i said and since it is irrefutable decided to challenge something I didnt say

What exactly did you say?

It's very hard to read your posts sometimes.

[quote]
yeah and taxes are 14 percent of gdp.[quote]

This has nothing to do with my tax bill.

Your taxes seem high because the highest earners having seen an avg yrly growth in income around 7-8 percent the last 30 yrs are paying a high percentage of total taxes but, as a percentage of their earnings an extremely low rate

My taxes feel high because the "high earners", I guess you mean those who make a lot of money, much more than I do, increased their earnings by an average of 7.5% per year for the last 30 years. But relative to their high income, their taxes is low.

Let's take your number. Let's say a "high earner" gets a 7.5% raise every single year over the last 30 years. Does his tax rate decease? Increase? Stay the same?

I don't know that much about math, but last time I checked our tax code is based on percentages rather than absolute numbers. A person making 7.5% more will need to pay the same or greater portion of that extra 7.5% to the IRS.

the fact they have had exponential income growth masks the historically low rates they enjoy.

Income growth does not affect tax rate. In fact, higher income incurs higher tax rate. The more one makes, the more one pays.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rate_sc...ral_income_tax)

You think your taxes are high based on the comparison between your earnings and taxes while basing the conclusion high earners are fairly or over taxed by the totals taxes paid in and of itself.

Yes I do think that. They pay more in absolute dollar terms and in percentages (income tax).

Using that rate schedule from wikipedia, I came up with these numbers:

Tax for $75,000/yr income is $4750 + 25%(75000 - 34500) = 4750 + 25%(40500) = 4750 + 10125 = $14875

Tax for $10,000,000/yr income is $110016.5 + 35%(10,000,000 - 379150) = 110016.5 + 35%(9620850) = 110016.5 + 3367297.5 = $3,477,314

Effective tax rate for $75000/yr income is 14875/75000 = 19.83%

Effective tax rate for $10,000,000/yr income is 3,477,314/10,000,000 = 34.77%

In absolute terms 14,875 < 3,477,314

In relative terms 19.83% < 34.77%

I don't understand how you came up with

as a percentage of their earnings an extremely low rate

if spending were kept to 18 percent of gnp our current system would have a defict of 23% of total spending which is unsustainable.

I agree. Maybe it's time to trim the spending.

I'm sure when you buy more stuff than you could afford you would cut out some other stuff that you no longer need. Maybe cutting back on the summer trip from 3 weeks to 2 weeks. Maybe cutting the pay channels on your cable TV. You could go to your boss and demand a raise to fund your new hobby or toys, but I doubt that would go well.


I don't have time to read the article you posted. Need to go to hockey. I'll read it tomorrow.

Gunut high earners do not pay higher rates anywhere but on paper. Historical Effective Federal Tax Rates for All Households for the bottom 3 quintiles make sure to add in the 7.5 percent social security tax which becomes negligble as a percent of pay at the top level. That's a conservative 7.5 percent because every employer figuires in the 7.5 percent they pay when offering you a compensation package. it's not like they say geez we'll pay that tax out of profit so we can pay gunut more. So basically if you ignore taxes on income other than FICA and tax deductions you are right. Again if the goal is 18 percent of gdp and revenue is 14 the goal requires an increase in revenue. Presently social security, defense, VA, debt service and infrastructure equals that 14 percent.

I understand it can be hard to understand and am grateful for the patience needed to wade through posts. it's as fruistarting to have an ld is it is to read something someone with one writes =0 I think in this case it's the dissonance you are experiencing between what the code appears to be on paper a progressive one, the fact it is actually a non normalized bell curve with the the top of the curve being gross income of 100k to 140k depending on deductions or thereabouts and maybe and i say maybe your belief it is far more progressive even on paper than it actually is because you ignore social security taxes paid by all workers and the reduced rate on cap gains before deductions which goes into such a huge percentage of high earner income. Do you figuire your federal rate from the actual taxes paid including any refund as a percentage of your gross pay or your highest marginal rate? I fall short of the most taxed income ranges a bit but pay a far higher percentage of my gross pay in taxes than a fortune 500 CEO or a fund manager

Originally Posted by Roosveltrepub

followed by prudish outrage .... you'd think she was teaching the benefits of gangbangs

Well, she certainly could.

-dale

Originally Posted by gunnut

You're saying the more money I make, the lower taxes I pay? That is not my experience.

Your not in the top 1% are you?

Originally Posted by Doktor

You think she should have been there in the first place?

some lady promoting reading? I'm not sure those students have seen any of her films or know who she is...........although i wish I could of hired her as a babysitter

Originally Posted by Roosveltrepub

some lady promoting reading? I'm not sure those students have seen any of her films or know who she is...........although i wish I could of hired her as a babysitter

I think their parents, especially fathers, couldn't believe their eyes

Wish I had enough $$$ to hire her for anything, she is multitalented I guess.

An economics professor made a statement that he had never failed a single student before, but had recently failed an entire class. That class had insisted that Obama's socialism worked and that no one would be poor and no one would be rich, a great equalizer.

The professor then said, "OK, we will have an experiment in this class on Obama's plan".. All grades will be averaged and everyone will receive the same grade so no one will fail and no one will receive an A.... (substituting grades for dollars - something closer to home and more readily understood by all).

After the first test, the grades were averaged and everyone got a B. The students who studied hard were upset and the students who studied little were happy. As the second test rolled around, the students who studied little had studied even less and the ones who studied hard decided they wanted a free ride too so they studied little.

The second test average was a D! No one was happy.



When the 3rd test rolled around, the average was an F.

As the tests proceeded, the scores never increased as bickering, name-calling and blame all resulted in hard feelings, and no one would study for the benefit of anyone else.

To their great surprise, ALL FAILED and the professor told them that socialism would also ultimately fail because when the reward is great, the effort to succeed is great, but when government takes all the reward away, no one will try or want to succeed.




These 5 sentences are all applicable to this experiment:

1. You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity.

2. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving.

3. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else.

4. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it.

5. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and, when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that is the beginning of the end of any nation.

Originally Posted by Roosveltrepub

Gunut high earners do not pay higher rates anywhere but on paper.

How would you propose to fix that? You can pass all sorts of laws but they are all "on paper."

Originally Posted by Roosveltrepub

Historical Effective Federal Tax Rates for All Households for the bottom 3 quintiles make sure to add in the 7.5 percent social security tax which becomes negligble as a percent of pay at the top level. That's a conservative 7.5 percent because every employer figuires in the 7.5 percent they pay when offering you a compensation package. it's not like they say geez we'll pay that tax out of profit so we can pay gunut more. So basically if you ignore taxes on income other than FICA and tax deductions you are right. Again if the goal is 18 percent of gdp and revenue is 14 the goal requires an increase in revenue. Presently social security, defense, VA, debt service and infrastructure equals that 14 percent.

Do you know the reason why the payroll tax is restricted to the first $106k (?) of income? Because the social security payout is also capped. It is un fair to tax someone with $10 million income at 15% for the payroll tax but cap his social security benefit/entitlement.

Originally Posted by Roosveltrepub

I understand it can be hard to understand and am grateful for the patience needed to wade through posts. it's as fruistarting to have an ld is it is to read something someone with one writes =0 I think in this case it's the dissonance you are experiencing between what the code appears to be on paper a progressive one, the fact it is actually a non normalized bell curve with the the top of the curve being gross income of 100k to 140k depending on deductions or thereabouts and maybe and i say maybe your belief it is far more progressive even on paper than it actually is because you ignore social security taxes paid by all workers and the reduced rate on cap gains before deductions which goes into such a huge percentage of high earner income. Do you figuire your federal rate from the actual taxes paid including any refund as a percentage of your gross pay or your highest marginal rate? I fall short of the most taxed income ranges a bit but pay a far higher percentage of my gross pay in taxes than a fortune 500 CEO or a fund manager

Again, if the rich can escape taxes as of now, what makes you think increasing their tax rate would yield any more tax revenue?

Originally Posted by Roosveltrepub

So, if it is several schools does your claim become false?

Yes it would.

Just like if a few muslim extremists blow up the WTC, doesn't make islam a terror religion. But if a significant portion of them conduct terrorism on our soil, then we have to re-evaluate.

Originally Posted by Roosveltrepub

Also, since you yourself through out the 20 percent of gdp as goverment spending number and revenue is 14 percent doesnt that mean we have a revenue shortfall?

Is our tax receipt at 14% GDP? What is the historical average?

Originally Posted by Roosveltrepub

followed by prudish outrage .... you'd think she was teaching the benefits of gangbangs

I have reviewed her on-screen performance and I approve her credentials to teach.

Originally Posted by USSWisconsin

An economics professor made a statement that he had never failed a single student before, but had recently failed an entire class. That class had insisted that Obama's socialism worked and that no one would be poor and no one would be rich, a great equalizer.

The professor then said, "OK, we will have an experiment in this class on Obama's plan".. All grades will be averaged and everyone will receive the same grade so no one will fail and no one will receive an A.... (substituting grades for dollars - something closer to home and more readily understood by all).

After the first test, the grades were averaged and everyone got a B. The students who studied hard were upset and the students who studied little were happy. As the second test rolled around, the students who studied little had studied even less and the ones who studied hard decided they wanted a free ride too so they studied little.

The second test average was a D! No one was happy.



When the 3rd test rolled around, the average was an F.

As the tests proceeded, the scores never increased as bickering, name-calling and blame all resulted in hard feelings, and no one would study for the benefit of anyone else.

To their great surprise, ALL FAILED and the professor told them that socialism would also ultimately fail because when the reward is great, the effort to succeed is great, but when government takes all the reward away, no one will try or want to succeed.




These 5 sentences are all applicable to this experiment:

1. You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity.

2. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving.

3. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else.

4. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it.

5. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and, when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that is the beginning of the end of any nation.

There is one deep problem with this story: it makes the assumption that (1) no one was in the class to actually learn something; that (2) no one works except for money; and that (3) everyone will work harder for more money / higher grades.

Simply not true.

Originally Posted by gunnut

Yes it would.

Just like if a few muslim extremists blow up the WTC, doesn't make islam a terror religion. But if a significant portion of them conduct terrorism on our soil, then we have to re-evaluate.



Is our tax receipt at 14% GDP? What is the historical average?

Chart of the day: U.S. taxes | Felix Salmon it is 14.5 percent i sourced it.

Originally Posted by gunnut

How would you propose to fix that? You can pass all sorts of laws but they are all "on paper."



Do you know the reason why the payroll tax is restricted to the first $106k (?) of income? Because the social security payout is also capped. It is un fair to tax someone with $10 million income at 15% for the payroll tax but cap his social security benefit/entitlement.



Again, if the rich can escape taxes as of now, what makes you think increasing their tax rate would yield any more tax revenue?

Well, then you must be in favor of paying social security back the 2 trillion we have borowed from it making social security solvency a minot blip on the radar as it extends 30 yrs. I do not believe an ability to buy tax loopholes is a reason to not tax. The fact is the tax burden rises to then falls it isnt progressive or flat it is a bubbkle hammering the shrinking middle class.

Originally Posted by DOR

There is one deep problem with this story: it makes the assumption that (1) no one was in the class to actually learn something; that (2) no one works except for money; and that (3) everyone will work harder for more money / higher grades.

Simply not true.

As a college grad I also have to call B.S. Virtually no one I knew would eat a bad grade which goes on a permanent record simply because the teacher was an A-hole. Secondly, many classes build from earlier ones so what you don't or refuse to learn in one class will rise up and bite you on the arse when you take the next class.