Post an interesting link (ongoing)...
- Thread starter Useless
- Start date
-
Hey - turns out IRC is out and something a little more modern has taken it's place... A little thing called Discord!
Join our community @ https://discord.gg/JuaSzXBZrk for a pick-up game, or just to rekindle with fellow community members.
omg. I got down to the Koala picture before I just had to stop. Some of those pictures are so heartbreaking and so, so very sad. Nice find jules, thanks for sharing
The guys argument has many flaws:
1. Like a true American Hanauer doesn't consider the international movement of high earners (not the top 1%, but the top 25%) and companies. Imagine you are a young middle income engineer at a Company A in Country A paying 50% tax; Company B in Country B then offers you the same salary at 30%, which country will you live in and where will you spend your money?
2. Rich people don't just sit with piles of cash in the bank buying expensive suits, they invest the majority of their wealth in all kinds of things from companies to infrastructure. Without that investment there are no smaller companies, there is no job for joe bloggs and therefore joe bloggs can't pay tax or have any extra money to spend.
3. Companies don't just sell jeans to joe bloggs. Many companies provide services or products to governments and other companies. Ok so then you need to figure out how to give companies more cash to spend (see point 1 and 2) and if a government can raise more taxes by taxing a) everybody b) the rich c) companies ..... I don't know the answer to this.
There is actually a practical example of this argument. UK has cut the highest rate of tax by 5% to 45% and corporation tax is down from 30% to 22% or whatever since the beginning of the financial crisis ... our economy is just starting to recover. France hasn't touched corporation tax and has its highest rate of tax at 53% ... their economy is still struggling.
I don't have the answers at all, I'm not even claiming that what I'm saying above is correct, I guess what I'm saying is that the whole situation is very complex and this guy is over simplifying things a LOT.
The only fair way to do it is to tax everybody the same amount, otherwise someone will always be moaning.
Below is an interesting link about how the tax system works.
The tax system explained, using beer.
Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to £100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:
The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay £1.
The sixth would pay £3.
The seventh would pay £7.
The eighth would pay £12.
The ninth would pay £18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay £59.
So, that's what they decided to do.
The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve. 'Since you are all such good customers,' he said, 'I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by £20.' Drinks for the ten now cost just £80.
The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes so the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men – the paying customers? How could they divide the £20 windfall so that everyone would get his 'fair share?'
They realized that £20 divided by six is £3.33. But if they subtracted that from everyone's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer. So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay.
And so:
The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings).
The sixth now paid £2 instead of £3 (33%savings).
The seventh now paid £5 instead of £7 (28%savings).
The eighth now paid £9 instead of £12 (25% savings).
The ninth now paid £14 instead of £18 (22% savings).
The tenth now paid £49 instead of £59 (16% savings).
Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings.
'I only got a pound out of the £20,' declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man, 'but he got £10!'
'Yes, that's right,' exclaimed the fifth man. 'I only saved a pound, too. It's unfair that he got ten times more than I did'
'That's true!' shouted the seventh man. 'Why should he get ten back when I got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks'
'Wait a minute,' yelled the first four men in unison. 'We didn't get anything at all. The system exploits the poor'
The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.
The next night the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn't have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill.
And that, ladies and gentlemen, journalists and college professors, is how our tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.
Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to £100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:
The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay £1.
The sixth would pay £3.
The seventh would pay £7.
The eighth would pay £12.
The ninth would pay £18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay £59.
So, that's what they decided to do.
The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve. 'Since you are all such good customers,' he said, 'I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by £20.' Drinks for the ten now cost just £80.
The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes so the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men – the paying customers? How could they divide the £20 windfall so that everyone would get his 'fair share?'
They realized that £20 divided by six is £3.33. But if they subtracted that from everyone's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer. So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay.
And so:
The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings).
The sixth now paid £2 instead of £3 (33%savings).
The seventh now paid £5 instead of £7 (28%savings).
The eighth now paid £9 instead of £12 (25% savings).
The ninth now paid £14 instead of £18 (22% savings).
The tenth now paid £49 instead of £59 (16% savings).
Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings.
'I only got a pound out of the £20,' declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man, 'but he got £10!'
'Yes, that's right,' exclaimed the fifth man. 'I only saved a pound, too. It's unfair that he got ten times more than I did'
'That's true!' shouted the seventh man. 'Why should he get ten back when I got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks'
'Wait a minute,' yelled the first four men in unison. 'We didn't get anything at all. The system exploits the poor'
The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.
The next night the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn't have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill.
And that, ladies and gentlemen, journalists and college professors, is how our tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.
If you truly believe this you are either an inconsiderate fool or an idiot who has no idea about poverty
people who live below the poverty standard or whatever you wanna call it often have to make choices wether to pay the rent, buy food or buy their prescription meds.... do you seriously think it's fair to tax people in these situations ''15%'' so that maybe that month they wont be able to afford milk for their fucking cereals?
a gallon of milk costs the same for someone earning 400 quid a month and someone earning 10000 quid a month. gas costs the same. so many things for human survival cost the same for everyone but for the poor it can take up to 100% of their budget while for the rich, food gas etc will reach maybe what 5% of what they earn? how is it fair to cut in the bare necessities of the poor when the rich moan that they '' lose'' money that they don't even fucking need to survive
also you make a point that companies need more money to spend so they can invest and create jobs.... pretty much every big companies seek profits to redistribute them to shareholders, not to grow their own companies, you should know this.... they seek profit for the rich who can afford to buy their shares so they can become even richer... thats how capitalism works and it needs to stop because the system is strangling itself as the guy illustrated briefly but quite well.
right wing people, like you seem to be, who blindly and selfishly practice the cult of the god Money make me sick and ashamed to call myself a human being.
Last edited:
the picture with the POW facing Himmler is a member of the Russian army and that picture was taken in Minsk so it is NOT "mr. america" Horace Greasley
he is clearly wearing a "Pilotka" sidecap
http://www.13thguardspoltavaskaya.com/uniform.html
rest of the pictures are really nice and I have no shame saying i shed a tear with all the powerfull emotions conveyed in them
Wealth can be redistributed through a welfare system like in most European countries. Healthcare can be free. Social housing also exists for your other point (you might wanna look outside North America at some point in your life). There are plenty of countries that currently have a flat tax rate and it seems to work (Russia, Bulgaria, Hungary), although I'm sure you can find examples where it doesn't (Slovakia recently got rid of it).
You are of course entitled to your opinion, it's easy to criticize, less easy to offer a viable alternative.
From an idealistic point of view, your idea is great, but practically it's impossible to implement, kills motivation and usually requires a dictatorship to maintain. Like any good scientist you should also take your hypothesis to it's limits and see if it still holds. So, let's take a guy who earns $5m / year and let's tax him so he ends up with $40k (or whatever the average wage is). To make $5m this guy probably works like crazy, has sacrificed time with his friends and family, takes shit from his boss or shareholders all day and is under huge amounts of pressure pretty much 18 hours a day in order to keep his company running and safeguard the jobs of hundreds of his employees. So one day this guy wakes up and thinks ... why the fuck do I bother, he quits his job, his company collapses and all his employees lose their job. So what it all really boils down to is how can you incentivize people without using money? That's really a difficult question to answer.
This story obviously only covers entrepreneurs, like the guy in your video was talking about. The people who should make you sick are traders, quants, professional sports players, actors and musicians. These guys really do nothing useful and can make millions. But society is consumerist and if you have something that everyone wants then you're gonna make money. It is actually society that is sick, thinking they NEED to pay £20 to see the latest movie (how many times did you see the LOTR movies?) and that they NEED to have a smartphone, tablet and computer etc etc. You are part of that society.
You seem a bit emotional to have a reasonable discussion with so I'll let you have the last word and not hi-jack the thread more than I already have.
Connected with ^
This has been all over the news today http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-22551401
Tax laws need changing when they can hire a legal team to get through all the loopholes
This has been all over the news today http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-22551401
Tax laws need changing when they can hire a legal team to get through all the loopholes
nice article even though im morally against their tax evasion i'm not as mad against google as against the rest of the companies who do that. (fuck microsoft starbucks and amazon) but google actually gives a shitload back to the public for free with quality products: gmail google maps/translate/earth and invests in R&D a shitload (google fiber and google glass) jsut to name a few + their CEO doesnt give himself a ridiculous salary on top of his shares fortune. So ya go google but fuck the rest and make better laws against tax evasion especially in fiscal paradises like cyprus.
and more on topic of this thread; and sort of akin to bn's strong emotional images http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f1FGbEPYH5s
Last edited:
good speech, strangely enough though David Foster Wallace (the guy giving the speech) commited suicide 3 years after giving it
Maybe because "This is bullshit, this is bullshit."
http://www.pcgamer.com/2013/05/04/why-the-flak-cannon-is-the-greatest-gun-in-pc-gaming/
Why the Flak Cannon is the Greatest Gun in PC Gaming
Why the Flak Cannon is the Greatest Gun in PC Gaming
http://www.pcgamer.com/2013/03/01/why-facing-worlds-unreal-tournament
Why UT's Facing Worlds is One of the Best Multiplayer Maps Ever
Why UT's Facing Worlds is One of the Best Multiplayer Maps Ever
