G oog le BadWeB | Login/out | Topics | Search | Custodians | Register | Edit Profile


Buell Forum » Quick Board » Archives » Archive through May 11, 2011 » Getting the Economy Moving « Previous Next »

  Thread Last Poster Posts Pages Last Post
Archive through May 03, 2011Blake30 05-03-11  10:01 am
         

Author Message
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Cityxslicker
Posted on Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - 12:34 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

Its the converse of disruptive distributive marketing; instead of charging everyone a nominal fee for a product they want... you charge everyone a parsed segment of tax based on their actual consumption.

how much money has Apple made from selling i songs, at $1 a pop (which was supposed to be the end of the music industry and creativity....)

yes, live in a hut, off grid.... that also contributes, because if you were forced to be self sufficent enough to actually live in a hut off grid, you would also not be a drain and leach on the social largesse of alphabet soup of 'entitlement, assistance' programs.

I like a 12% flat tax for every breathing body in the nation. and an additional FAT tax based on BMI, body wt, and Fat %.

No taxes if you relocate and expat overseas, if you come back, for anything longer than 3 weeks total (cumalative or consecutive) in the entire year, you are taxed as if you had been here the whole year.
Corporations are taxed the 12% as well, and then a factor based on the number of employees and their Fat Tax aggregate.
Taxes are levied, no exemptions, no exeptions, no exclusions, and on entitlement programs BEFORE money is paid.

theres 38-53 MILLION illegals that aint paying taxes, its time they pony up.
(that number is way more accurate than the fed will admit, but knowing people in the biz of CBP, ICE, DEA it is way more on target than the 18 they keep claiming)
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Eboos
Posted on Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - 12:43 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

"And really, what percentage of the adult workforce earns minimum wage?"

About 2%, and a much higher percentage makes just a bit more then minimum wage. How many adult workers make less then $10.00 per hour?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Zane
Posted on Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - 12:58 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

I haven't seen anything that makes more sense than the Forbes Flat tax plan.

For a family of 4, the first $48,000 is tax free. Above that, and it a flat rate of 17.5%. No deductions, no exemptions. Nothing. You make over 48k and you pay taxes.

Oh and one thing not in the Forbes model. Takes a 63% vote in Congress to raise the rate but only a 51% vote to lower it.

The best thing about a flat tax with NO exemptions is it stops congress from any more social engineering. Do this and get a tax break, do that and you get to pay full bore. Does away with all of that stuff.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Blake
Posted on Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - 03:25 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

EVERYONE should pay federal income tax. You live here, you should darn well pay tax. Who the heck wants to be a moocher? I sure don't.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Blake
Posted on Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - 03:29 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

Eboos,

Two percent, that's about what I figured, and those who do make minimum usually don't stay at that low wage long. How many make less than $10 per hour? I dunno. Must be some data out there somewhere.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Eboos
Posted on Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - 06:33 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

Correction: According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, 6% of all hourly workers are at or below federal minimum wage. This does not account for people earning state minimum wages that are higher then the federal minimum. 70% of them have a high school diploma or higher.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Eboos
Posted on Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - 06:40 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

The number for 2010 has tripled what it was in 2006.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Sifo
Posted on Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - 06:51 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

"And really, what percentage of the adult workforce earns minimum wage?"

Correction: According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, 6% of all hourly workers are at or below federal minimum wage.

I doubt there was intent, but I don't think your statistic answers the question. "6% of all hourly workers" includes a lot of workers who are dependents. For most minimum wage jobs, if you stay a few months you will see a pay increase.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Eboos
Posted on Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - 07:00 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

They are not my statistics, they are the Bureau of Labor Statistics' stats. This was the percentage for all of 2010.

http://www.bls.gov/cps/minwage2010.htm
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Sifo
Posted on Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - 07:11 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

I know they aren't yours. I'm simply pointing out the discrepancy between the question and the answer. As I said, I don't think there was any intent to be deceitful. It's just hard to come up with exact statistics sometimes.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Aesquire
Posted on Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - 07:15 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

So.... only a sales tax? ( and City's Fat tax. Damn it, I'm Big Boned! ) No income, property, or vat taxes? Certainly some fees will remain. ( big thing in NY, Fee's )

Fee's for licenses make sense. You want to fish, you help pay for the game wardens. Want to drive, pay a bit for road repair. It can be overdone. ( really, ask a New Yorker )

Perhaps. I keep three-seeing this system getting gamed like the current one, and I'm pretty sure I'm the one paying for it.

The President pays less (income) taxes than I do by percentage. He's rich. A millionaire. Makes enough in legal salary to qualify for his own class envy definition as well. yet. He doesn't pay more in taxes even though he wants all those other people to. Hypercritical.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Eboos
Posted on Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - 07:21 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

"As I said, I don't think there was any intent to be deceitful. It's just hard to come up with exact statistics sometimes."

I know what you are saying, and I am not defending the BLS statistics, but bare with me here: Lets say you have 100 workers. 6 of them are earning minimum wage. In six months, they get a pay raise. During that same six month period, 6 workers retire, and six more are hired at minimum wage. Does the statistics for the year ever change from 6% earning minimum wage?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Sifo
Posted on Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - 07:27 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

I know what you are saying, and I am not defending the BLS statistics, but bare with me here: Lets say you have 100 workers. 6 of them are earning minimum wage. In six months, they get a pay raise. During that same six month period, 6 workers retire, and six more are hired at minimum wage. Does the statistics for the year ever change from 6% earning minimum wage?

No.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Eboos
Posted on Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - 08:11 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

For some reason, that seems like a very cryptic 'no'.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Sifo
Posted on Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - 08:14 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

I'm not taking any stance in this dialog, beyond the one point I made.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Cityxslicker
Posted on Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - 08:23 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

trust me, I am thick too. 245 @ 5-6 (down from 285) but if there is a fat tax, that number is directly in my ability to affect the contribution and required payment.
And with the number of additional health problems that a fat flabby outta shape body has against the health care system; it makes since to charge based on weight (especially since you can no longer discriminate pricing based on age, health, or history of illness)

And why do you think the IRS is administrating the data for the new Obamacare largessse?.... fat tax- it is the only growth sector left in the american economy.

(well death tax, but the IRS has that one on lock too with the new bill - hello asset forfeiture, surrender, declaraton document !)
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Gregtonn
Posted on Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - 09:23 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

"I find your argument sorely lacking and you hypothesis implausible. One economist lacky..."

Obviously you lack the imagination it takes to grasp the concept of analogy.

That must mean you believe there really is a Senator Foghorn...wow..that..well its...its just....

G
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Blake
Posted on Wednesday, May 04, 2011 - 02:10 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

Eboos,

The key word being "adults", meaning not juveniles.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Boltrider
Posted on Wednesday, May 04, 2011 - 02:50 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

Fat tax, I like it. Let's tax the fatties.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Eboos
Posted on Wednesday, May 04, 2011 - 06:44 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

"The key word being "adults", meaning not juveniles."

Minimum wage earners between 16 and 19 make up only 22% of all minimum wage earners.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Sifo
Posted on Wednesday, May 04, 2011 - 11:15 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

I think the statistic that is needed for this discussion is the percentage of minimum wage earners who are not dependents. Keep in mind that even "adults" are still often dependents. No doubt that many college kids over 19 work part time & summer jobs that would be min. wage.

I'm not sure where that statistic might exist, but I think it's the one that is really in question here.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Sifo
Posted on Wednesday, May 04, 2011 - 11:26 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

A bit more on the subject...

http://epionline.org/study_detail.cfm?sid=132

quote:

The evidence presented in this paper largely refutes the conventional wisdom about adult minimum wage workers: Schiller finds that in 94 percent of families with adults who work a job that pays at or below the minimum wage, the spouse works as well. In about 8 out of 10 of those families where children are present, the minimum wage job accounts for less than twenty percent of their household income. In other words, the majority of adult minimum wage earners are providing a small supplement to the income of a higher-earning spouse.

Other data in this study make this point explicitly. For instance, Schiller looked at adults with children who earned less than $10,000 each year from their job. He found that:

•Nearly half of these low wage, low income workers had a spouse that earned more than $40,000 a year;

•Another 16 percent had spouses earning between $30,000 and $40,000 a year;

•And 12 percent had spouses earning between $20,000 and $30,000 each year.

Though these figures change somewhat when looking at adults that aren’t supporting children, they still depart from the conventional wisdom: Approximately 3 out of every 4 of these adults earn 30 percent or less of their total household income from a job that pays at or below the minimum wage.

Schiller’s study shows that only a small minority of adults age 33 to 50 who earn at or below the minimum wage are the primary (or sole) breadwinner in their household. Previous research has shown that long-term minimum wage earners (while an enormously small portion of the population) often lack basic job skills needed to move up in the workforce. Paradoxically, raising the minimum wage in an attempt to help this small subset of minimum wage workers can actually harm them; decades of economic research show that artificially raising the cost to hire and train these employees makes it likely that management will hire a more-skilled employee to do their job (or replace that job with an automated, self-service alternative).

Fortunately, there are better policy options to help this small subset. Schiller finds that very few adults are “stuck” at minimum wage jobs; while approximately a quarter of the adults in the survey at one point earned at or below the minimum wage during the eight year period, roughly 95 percent of the adults survey also earned considerably more than the minimum at some point in that same period. This is consistent with earlier research that shows that a majority of minimum wage employees earn a raise within 1 to 12 months on the job. Public policies that promote employment and increase income (like the Earned Income Tax Credit) ensure that less-skilled employees are able to get the experience needed to earn that raise.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Blake
Posted on Wednesday, May 04, 2011 - 11:28 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

Excellent point Tom.


Eboos, "Only 22%"? That's pretty significant isn't it? It drops the aforementioned 6% down to 4.7% (0.78 * 6% = 4.7%). Factor in the dependents like Tom points out and we may be back down towards that original 2%. Regardless, I'm not seeing the issue wrt the consumption tax. Everyone should pay a share towards our nation's budget. Allowing almost half the electorate to vote themselves free money is insane.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Paint_shaker
Posted on Wednesday, May 04, 2011 - 11:33 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

Forget a FAT tax, how about just a fair tax?? Everyone pays an equal percentage. Make less, pay less. Make more, pay more. Evade taxes up to a certain percent, light penatly. Evade over the certain point and or second (more) offense pay up sukka!
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Cityxslicker
Posted on Wednesday, May 04, 2011 - 02:30 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

you will enjoy the new IRS asset forfeiture, release and declaration that will be required upon inpatient stay.
Because if they can bilk it out of you while you are on life support at 100%; why bother with a death tax. Why else do you think the IRS is in charge of 'administering' healthcare ?
« Previous Next »

Add Your Message Here
Post:
Bold text Italics Underline Create a hyperlink Insert a clipart image

Username: Posting Information:
This is a public posting area. Enter your username and password if you have an account. Otherwise, enter your full name as your username and leave the password blank. Your e-mail address is optional.
Password:
E-mail:
Options: Post as "Anonymous" (Valid reason required. Abusers will be exposed. If unsure, ask.)
Enable HTML code in message
Automatically activate URLs in message
Action:

Topics | Last Day | Tree View | Search | User List | Help/Instructions | Rules | Program Credits Administration