Taxes

[Brew 3047]

All of your tax plans suck, it needs to be a simple system that people can’t play. Income above some amount (have a base that slides based on dependents) is taxed at X% with progressive increases as income goes up, all income is just income for tax purposes, get rid of the deductions because it shouldn’t matter where you live or who you donate to, incentivize retirement savings, and on down the list of shit that makes sense and keeps it easy. All trusts and assets go through estates, minimal exemption set of $X, sliding scale on tax based on asset valuations with a much lower rate than the current 40%. Business pay same sliding scale as individuals, Section 179 and bonus depreciation go away, options are taxed as earned not exercised, etc.

None of this is going to happen so this whole discussion is a waste, but we need a simple system with limited variability. There is entirely too much money spent gaming the system where if we were more reasonable we could probably bring the rate structure down substantially.

[TwiceHorn 31283]

47 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

Yes, ain’t shit to many here, I know. Don’t know you Austin people do it. 
 

Thanks. It’s what I strive for. 

Well, yeah, a lot of people in your district probably don't pay 12k in property taxes.  They also don't live in a half-million-plus dollar house either.  But a goodly chunk of their rent goes to property tax.

Should the folks that live in a $1.5MM house and pay $24k in property tax resent you for paying half as much?

I get, to a certain extent, the feeling that the poors ought to have "some skin in the game."  But the reality is they aren't going to think that way, skin in the game or not.  It's just a matter of paying the bills to them.

Also, since you seem to be unaware of the plight of the poors, it is highly unlikely that anyone in your district is paying less than $1000/month.  There were some startling stats about the cost of rent in Texas not too long ago.

Edited November 3, 2021 by TwiceHorn

[TwiceHorn 31283]

1 minute ago, Brew said:

All of your tax plans suck, it needs to be a simple system that people can’t play. Income above some amount (have a base that slides based on dependents) is taxed at X% with progressive increases as income goes up, all income is just income for tax purposes, get rid of the deductions because it shouldn’t matter where you live or who you donate to, incentivize retirement savings, and on down the list of shit that makes sense and keeps it easy. All trusts and assets go through estates, minimal exemption set of $X, sliding scale on tax based on asset valuations with a much lower rate than the current 40%. Business pay same sliding scale as individuals, Section 179 and bonus depreciation go away, options are taxed as earned not exercised, etc.

None of this is going to happen so this whole discussion is a waste, but we need a simple system with limited variability. There is entirely too much money spent gaming the system where if we were more reasonable we could probably bring the rate structure down substantially.

I agree that this is what should happen.  And also that it won't.

Raising rates within something resembling the current system seems much more likely.  Maybe changing some income-realization rules and closing a few loopholes.

[Brew 3047]

1 minute ago, TwiceHorn said:

Well, yeah, a lot of people in your district probably don't pay 12k in property taxes.  They also don't live in a half-million-plus dollar house either.  But a goodly chunk of their rent goes to property tax.

Should the folks that live in a $1.5MM house and pay $24k in property tax resent you for paying half as much?

I get, to a certain extent, the feeling that the poors ought to have "some skin in the game."  But the reality is they aren't going to think that way, skin in the game or not.  It's just a matter of paying the bills to them.

Property taxes are a perfectly fine system for local governments. If you choose to spend $1.5M, you pay more than the guy that can get by at $500k. However, as a private school parent, it does suck to pay property taxes and still pay tuition.

[TwiceHorn 31283]

1 minute ago, Brew said:

Property taxes are a perfectly fine system for local governments. If you choose to spend $1.5M, you pay more than the guy that can get by at $500k. However, as a private school parent, it does suck to pay property taxes and still pay tuition.

As a childless homeowner, relatable.

[Neonmoon 38127]

3 hours ago, fattyflattie said:

I know, and they make a fuckload of overtime.  And most never finished high school. That’s why I don’t understand it, I suppose. Some literally have no skill other can show up and sometimes not fuck things up. 

You are correct, you don’t understand it. You understand YOUR situation and YOUR experiences and people you’ve interacted with at work but have zero understanding, tolerance, or compassion for someone that experienced different things in life or hasn’t “pulled themselves up by their bootstraps”. Many people have accused you of being naive, or ignorant for this line of thought. I will not. In my mind, you are old enough to to comprehend the cruelties and misfortunes of life, and have judged your fellow man for not accumulating wealth in the face of these realities, a lesser person, and unworthy of aid, especially from your bounty. You’re so assured in your own worldview, so blinded with narcissistic simplicity you cannot fathom a reality where another doesn’t have 1 million saved up the age of 40 years old. No, you are not naive, you are a piece of shit. Your argument is “fuck the poor”, which I roundly reject. 

[Bullneck 18987]

28 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

 I pay 12k in fucking taxes and my kids go to the same school as people that don’t pay 12k a year in rent.  Fair?  

So I guess your kids shouldn't have to be around poor kids?  Am I reading that right?

[fattyflattie 4636]

7 minutes ago, PenelopeWitherspoon said:

I agree.  The gasoline tax hasn't changed in years.  And honestly, it would be better to do a mileage tax rather than a gas tax, since the gas tax was meant to be a way to pay for the interstate highway system.  And miles is what causes road damage (partially).  

You are right, the billionaires do not give a fuck.  Which is why there should be a better system in play.  I would support a tax system that treated corporations and individuals the same.  We all get deductions for federal purposes for taxes paid (no SALT cap), including sales taxes, housing payments (for those that own, you would get depreciation and your interest and for those that rent, your rent payment), as well as other basic expenses (food, healthcare) and expenses that should be encouraged (donations to charitable organizations) as well as deductions for savings because that should be encouraged).  Transportation is interesting.  I think you could encourage certain behaviors through the tax code that you might not be able to do elsewhere.  So that would be something I would like to see.  

Then you have your net income, and you are taxed on a percentage of that.  

We still have a progressive tax structure, and the top rate should be 40%.  That 40% is for those individuals with a net income of over 1M.  I personally think corporations should be on the same schedule.  But I could see that going over like a lead balloon.  

Also, capital gains are taxed as ordinary income.  That is the key kicker there.

I don’t have a problem with any of that, even though I would get clobbered on the per mile part.  And weight (also a good indicator of road use) would also kill me. I’m ok with that. 

[Brew 3047]

1 minute ago, TwiceHorn said:

I agree that this is what should happen.  And also that it won't.

Raising rates within something resembling the current system seems much more likely.  Maybe changing some income-realization rules and closing a few loopholes.

They’ve never closed a loophole without opening 10 more. It’s why the tax code has ballooned each and every year and why at this point no one understands it. The software companies can’t even keep up with the pace of change. If we’re not going to wholesale change it, just eliminate the 20% QBI deduction, roll back the rates to where they were, roll back the estate exemption and pull in trusts and other planning vehicles back into the estate, increase the CG rates, and add a few other things to get rid of some of the lopsided benefits that have been put in place.

We just worked a deal to transfer a large corporation to family members through trusts in a tax free setup that will avoid estate/gift taxes and CG taxes because of a bullshit loophole that a local law firm is taking advantage of. It’s the most lopsided transaction I’ve ever seen from a tax standpoint and it’s 100% by the book as of today.

[elfenix 34171]

A lot to unpack there but I’m not an engineer, though my peers are.  I got a bit ahead because I chose to put things off while living in some of the shittiest places on earth (and some nice ones). I’m sure you can dream up what it’s like to be gone from your wife and kids ~50% of the time. I also came into O&G in ‘09, not by any means a great time.  But lots of people work hard, and many of my peers have done a lot better than, me so this shit isn’t some luck.  
Im not saying to hell with anyone, I just believe things should have a semblance of fairness.  You want to tax these rich fucks at 33% have at it.  You want to cap them at a billion dollars, I don’t agree, but fuck it do it.  But at some point everyone should put something in the pot.  And sales tax and gasoline tax isn’t going to cut it.  I pay 12k in fucking taxes and my kids go to the same school as people that don’t pay 12k a year in rent.  Fair?  Shit is borked and the “middle” whatever that is, is being fucked the hardest.  
 
 

Everyone should put something in the pot!
*Everyone pays sales and most pay gas taxes*
No not those!

[Bullneck 18987]

28 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

Does it?  What is the value of an 80 yo greeter?   What is the value of the person who can’t be bothered to answer where something can be located?  
 

What happens if Waltons say fuck you, we’ve got our 50b, you deal with the 2.3m workers were laying off tomorrow?  I’d say they have a partnership with America to keep people that are almost unemployable elsewhere, employed. Especially the people in the little shit towns they prop up. 

Sheer arrogance.

[Brew 3047]

3 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

As a childless homeowner, relatable.

A solid public school district is a benefit to everyone, so paying the tax is what it is. There is a debate locally for vouchers to be able to apply part of that tax cost to private school that will probably go nowhere, but would help me feel better about it because our local system sucks.

[fattyflattie 4636]

2 minutes ago, Bullneck said:

So I guess your kids shouldn't have to be around poor kids?  Am I reading that right?

You can interpret that any way you see fit. 
 

11 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Should the folks that live in a $1.5MM house and pay $24k in property tax resent you for paying half as much?

 

I’m sure they do.  All this shit scales up/down. 

[PenelopeWitherspoon 19093]

9 minutes ago, Brew said:

All of your tax plans suck, it needs to be a simple system that people can’t play. Income above some amount (have a base that slides based on dependents) is taxed at X% with progressive increases as income goes up, all income is just income for tax purposes, get rid of the deductions because it shouldn’t matter where you live or who you donate to, incentivize retirement savings, and on down the list of shit that makes sense and keeps it easy. All trusts and assets go through estates, minimal exemption set of $X, sliding scale on tax based on asset valuations with a much lower rate than the current 40%. Business pay same sliding scale as individuals, Section 179 and bonus depreciation go away, options are taxed as earned not exercised, etc.

None of this is going to happen so this whole discussion is a waste, but we need a simple system with limited variability. There is entirely too much money spent gaming the system where if we were more reasonable we could probably bring the rate structure down substantially.

I disagree because cost of living is a real cost, and that should absolutely be taken into a consideration.  $1 of income in Austin or Houston for an individual is NOT the same as $1 in Amarillo.  

[PenelopeWitherspoon 19093]

5 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

I don’t have a problem with any of that, even though I would get clobbered on the per mile part.  And weight (also a good indicator of road use) would also kill me. I’m ok with that. 

Perhaps, there could be incentives for lighter, fuel efficient vehicles.  That would be helpful, and something that should be encouraged.  This is also why I hate the gas tax as it is because Teslas, which use the same road as gasoline or diesel vehicles, do not pay for the upkeep.  There is a free rider problem.

[Brew 3047]

Just now, PenelopeWitherspoon said:

I disagree because cost of living is a real cost, and that should absolutely be taken into a consideration.  $1 of income in Austin or Houston for an individual is NOT the same as $1 in Amarillo.  

That’s because you choose to live in a high cost district. I don’t believe that should have any bearing on the federal income tax system. Tax income, take the preferential treatments out of the system.

[jimmyjazz 45560]

36 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

I pay 12k in fucking taxes and my kids go to the same school as people that don’t pay 12k a year in rent. 

Well, you get to deduct $10K of those taxes, minus any state income tax you pay.  (I don't know where you live.)

But what I really want to know is, since you're such a financial genius who is so outraged by your property tax bill, why don't you just rent for $12K per year?  Seems like a pretty obviously fucking solution, and you'd have more disposable income.  Hmmm.  Maybe those poors are a lot smarter than you give them credit for.

[elfenix 34171]

Perhaps, there could be incentives for lighter, fuel efficient vehicles.  That would be helpful, and something that should be encouraged.  This is also why I hate the gas tax as it is because Teslas, which use the same road as gasoline or diesel vehicles, do not pay for the upkeep.  There is a free rider problem.

Cars don't actually damage the highway. We're basically subsidizing heavy trucking.

[Neonmoon 38127]

3 minutes ago, Brew said:

A solid public school district is a benefit to everyone, so paying the tax is what it is. There is a debate locally for vouchers to be able to apply part of that tax cost to private school that will probably go nowhere, but would help me feel better about it because our local system sucks.

Local school system sucks but you have your kids in Private school. I know you didn’t start the fire, but your solution is why local schools suck. 

[fattyflattie 4636]

1 minute ago, jimmyjazz said:

Well, you get to deduct $10K of those taxes, minus any state income tax you pay.  (I don't know where you live.)

But what I really want to know is, since you're such a financial genius who is so outraged by your property tax bill, why don't you just rent for $12K per year?  Seems like a pretty obviously fucking solution, and you'd have more disposable income.  Hmmm.  Maybe those poors are a lot smarter than you give them credit for.

You know why. I believe it was chapelle that covered it.  I could live in a cardboard box. 

[Captainant 27464]

6 minutes ago, Brew said:

However, as a private school parent, it does suck to pay property taxes and still pay tuition.

Well it's your right to choose to spend extra money. It sucks to pay for roads in taxes and still have to use the toll roads to make it to meetings across town in time too.

 

Also lulz at fattyflatty tossing out paying $12k in taxes and scoffing at THE NERVE of people who aren't, but their kids dare get the same education his are. I've been paying at least $12k/yr in taxes since I started working as a web ops engineer back in 2014. I don't see much benefit for that compared to you, nor the premiums I put into my health insurance or auto insurance. 

Don't see me getting a sandy vag over paying taxes though, because that's just part of the fuckin deal. It's not theft or violence against me (lmao thanks for the newest hyperbole, annie). It's paying into the system that contributed to my opportunity and present benefit I realize and making it easier for people after me to have the opportunities I have. 

I went to public schools for grade school and UT for undergrad. I took out a fuckload of student debt to cover school costs after my parents lost their savings to the healthcare costs of parkinson's for my dad and spinal surgery for my sister. I'm still paying off my student debt, and between my wife and my payments, it's about as much as our monthly mortgage payment. 

Shit ain't fair sometimes. Doesn't mean we should make it even harder for those that come after us. 

[PenelopeWitherspoon 19093]

1 minute ago, Brew said:

That’s because you choose to live in a high cost district. I don’t believe that should have any bearing on the federal income tax system. Tax income, take the preferential treatments out of the system.

I don't live in Texas.  I was just using Texas as an example.  I would argue the cost of food is also more expensive (I saw the regularly, seeing the cost of a gallon of milk in Houston vs. a gallon in Belton when I would visit my parents).  It is even worse to compare a gallon of milk in Houston to a gallon of milk in NYC.  There absolutely are differences in the costs of necessities, and that should definitely be taken into account.  We are a massive country.  Those discrepancies will happen, and they should be taken into consideration.

[jimmyjazz 45560]

Just now, fattyflattie said:

You know why. I believe it was chapelle that covered it.  I could live in a cardboard box. 

So you want the safety, convenience, and aesthetic appeal of living in a higher priced neighborhood, but you don't want to pay the associated property tax.  Got it.

[Brew 3047]

6 minutes ago, Neonmoon said:

Local school system sucks but you have your kids in Private school. I know you didn’t start the fire, but your solution is why local schools suck. 

We both graduated from the public schools and always believed our kids would attend them. Federal lawsuits that ended the community schools along with federal management oversight turned our system into a disaster that it is having a hard time recovering from. I send my kids to private school because locally that is the best option and we have to make decisions based on what’s beat for our kids long-term.

[immamac 42519]

2 hours ago, sheeeit said:

Interesting.  I think I understand your point.  I buy 1M shares of Apple at $100/share.  I have bought the stock with income that has already been taxed and my basis is $100M.  Apple goes to $150/share so the value of my holding is now $150M.  So I can borrow up to $100M with no tax implication.  But if I borrow $120M I will have to pay ordinary income taxes (obviously at the top rate of 37%) on the $20M that is above my basis or $7.4M in income taxes.  Pretty sure that would stop the practice.  

This may make some sense as a tool to tax the super wealthy but for everyday people this would have serious implications. And, as I mentioned above, this tactic is really just delaying taxation not evading it.  I could make a pretty good argument that borrowing against those stocks and then that money going back into the economy is much better than an amount 37% lower going to the govt.  

So If I bought a house in Austin in 2010 for $150K with a $100K mortgage and I have made some improvements to it and there has been a lot of appreciation and now that house is worth $500K.  I decide I want to refinance and get some cash out so I do a loan for $300K.  This happens every single day.  Under your plan I have a new mortgage for $300K and I have to pay income taxes on $150K  (the amount of my new loan over my basis) which would be in the range of $45K.  So I would now have $200K more in long term debt and I get $155K in new cash.  Before the transaction I had $400K in net worth and after the transaction I would have $355K in net worth.  Who would ever do this?  Its a plan I suppose but it would absolutely kill the home mortgage industry and stall the economy.  

I start a new business venture with little or no start up money.  5 years in I have a decent little company but need cash to really grow.  I go to the bank for a business loan.  This happens every single day.  Under this approach, I have to pay income taxes on the amount of my loan as my basis in the business is zero.  So a 30% up front cost to borrow money (income taxes on the loan) plus the interest to grow my business.  No one would ever do this.

"Stock options when executed immediately become unrealized gain (usually, thats why people execute them for their "lower" strike price). If you turn around and get a loan against your millions in stock now you should absolutely pay taxes against that instead of just interest. "

I don't follow.  If Musk has an option to buy 1000 shares in Tesla at $50/ share that is his strike price.  So if the stock is currently trading at $100/share when he exercises his options he pays ordinary income tax on $50,000, the spread between $50 and $100, even though he received no cash and his basis remains at $50/share for capital gains purposes.  So when he does eventually sell the shares he will get hit with another 20% tax on those same shares at whatever the value of the stock is over $50/share.  Why does it matter if he sells stock or borrows against it?  The govt is still getting the income tax from the exercised option.  The govt misses out on capital gains taxes from selling his shares if he went that option but they are going to get it eventually and, in the meantime, some banker made some money which goes back into the economy.

 

 

 

 

bruh, you don't know shit about shit - it's actually comical. You started off alright, then you tried to break your brain to make sure that this tax would destroy the common man (spoiler: it doesn't) and you now look like a fucking idiot.

Your home example is stupid, you get 500k in tax free gains after living in the house for at least 2 years. Your improvements would also add to your cost basis. A revised example that would be accurate is you bought a 150k house, put 200k into it and now it's worth 1.5M. Your basis would be 350k and you want 500k to buy another rental property. You borrow 650k(or something, I'm lazy up to 850k no taxes 350k basis + 500k if you have a spouse in free appreciation), pay the tax man and buy your 500k rental property and still have 1M mortgage. Your new rental property has a tax basis of 500k and you own that free and clear now thanks to all this equity you have built in your primary residence. You rent that for your entire mortgage and cover most of the cost. You can now 1031 exchange that property every now and then when it appreciates and use all those proceeds to snowball into another gigantic home, but you can only use it max 2 weeks a year without it turning into a vacation property and violating the 1031 exchange laws. 

This law doesn't stop shit, it just makes sure when you leverage unrealized gains the tax man gets their cut, you can still do whatever the hell you want with your gains, just like before, but instead of getting a free ride you have to pay for the equity you are using.

Your business example is fucking insanely stupid. Business tax law is so much different and a working capital/small business loan is not leveraged against anything from an equity perspective. There is no "cost basis" in this situation it's debt on a balance sheet - HOLY FUCK THIS IS STUPID I'm not even going to further entertain this complete nonsense of an example.

Stock options would never be exercised for no reason, unless they were expiring. Your first part is true, but what if he gets a loan on the stock after exercised above the cost basis? Oh right, nothing. you know how he pays 0 now? he borrows against stock he already own and never exercises his options. thats why even though he borrows 100M+ a year he pays 0 in taxes. 

 

[fattyflattie 4636]

3 minutes ago, Captainant said:

Also lulz at fattyflatty tossing out paying $12k in taxes and scoffing at THE NERVE of people who aren't, but their kids dare get the same education his are. I've been paying at least $12k/yr in taxes since I started working as a web ops engineer back in 2014.

Didn’t think I’d have to clarify, but that’s my annual property tax. Not income, capital gains, or any of the other bullshit that comes when I’m not W2’d

5 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

So you want the safety, convenience, and aesthetic appeal of living in a higher priced neighborhood, but you don't want to pay the associated property tax.  Got it.

I grit me teeth and pay it every year. Just saying, wife and kids change the math on where I’d be without them. I’m certain you understand that. But yeah it would be nice to have the same exact access at 1k/month all in.

[DonkeyCigars 144]

23 minutes ago, Brew said:

Property taxes are a perfectly fine system for local governments. If you choose to spend $1.5M, you pay more than the guy that can get by at $500k. However, as a private school parent, it does suck to pay property taxes and still pay tuition.

Same.

[DonkeyCigars 144]

3 minutes ago, Brew said:

We both graduated from the public schools and always believed our kids would attend them. Federal lawsuits that ended the community schools along with federal management oversight turned our system into a disaster that it is having a hard time recovering from. I send my kids to private school because locally that is the best option and we have to make decisions based on what’s beat for our kids long-term.

Same.

[jimmyjazz 45560]

25 minutes ago, Brew said:

However, as a private school parent, it does suck to pay property taxes and still pay tuition.

So . . . don't.

[Brew 3047]

Just now, jimmyjazz said:

So . . . don't.

Not planning on it in about 5 more years.

[Bullneck 18987]

17 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

You can interpret that any way you see fit. 
 

I’m sure they do.  All this shit scales up/down. 

Attention whore.  I assume the people you know IRL don't pay much attention to your idea.

[DonkeyCigars 144]

2 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

So . . . don't.

I think you missed this part of his post "I send my kids to private school because locally that is the best option and we have to make decisions based on what’s beat for our kids long-term."

I know your kids are older, from what I remember of your posts, and not sure if you even had to wrestle with the pros/cons, benefits/risks, but it's a real problem these days.

[fattyflattie 4636]

Just now, Bullneck said:

Attention whore.  I assume the people you know IRL don't pay much attention to your idea.

What is my idea? Of a flat tax? Of EVERYONE contributing to society?  Please be more specific.  Also, likely the first time I’ve ever been called that. Im pretty fucking anti-attention. 

[sheeeit 129]

31 minutes ago, Blotto said:

Or you could just simply admit you were wrong, and you don't know how to interpret the chart you used to "prove" that prices for laundry equipment had fallen since trump's tariffs. I don't have to fall back on a lame excuse of "I don't know why the charts change.  Their methodology is weird.  I tried to understand it.  I think it is mixing different things." The reason I don't have to do that is because I simply interpret the chart by what it claims to show " 3 month % change" and then all the charts  make sense. In that context, this chart also makes sense

Laundry equipment costs more, not less as you claimed . That was also the finding of this article which you completely ignore as cherry picked data . The basis of that article was a paper published in the  American Economic Review, which also provides their data set (https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/aer.20190611). But you would rather use a poorly interperted chart with discrepencies you can't explain "I don't know why the charts change.... but heres some random pricing I found on google"   

You're full of shit. We know it. You know it. But like all loyal trumptards, you believe if you simply never admit that you're wrong, you won't ever actually be wrong. 

I was really hoping you were different.  But you appear to be just as stupid as the rest.

Did you even read the paper you linked to?  I am strongly guessing that you did not.  I did.  The methodology that they used to determine the cost of the tariffs was based on sales analysis between 2013 and 2018.  Exclusively.  They did not use any data from 2019 or 2020.   They say that right in the paper.  That paper is completely worthless in this discussion.  

All of this is in the paper you so proudly linked to.  The paper relied on data from a group called GAP Intelligence and they send in people to retail stores in 22 different markets to get weekly pricing on washing machines.  They found a spike in pricing in mid July 2018 and they stopped reporting in late 2018.  Interestingly, they talk about the tariff on steel that went into effect in March of 2018 as contributing to the price increase.  This corresponds exactly with the data I provided (that you and everyone else ignored) on steel prices that went up initially for about 6 months in 2018 and then went way down in 2019.  So they have exactly zero data on washing machine prices from late 2018 going forward.  Zero.

As I said from the beginning, there was a small spike in prices immediately after the tariffs went into effect.  This is noted in the paper you linked.  I never argued any differently.  What I agued is that prices went down after the initial spike to levels that were below the prices at the time of the tariffs.  And they did.  

Here is a BLS/CPI graph from 2017 to 2018 and then from 2018 to 2019 for laundry equipment.  This is a different graph from before and is not a 3 month/6 month/12 month graph but appears to be straight pricing.

It tracks exactly as the paper you provided said it would.  Prices started to go up in March of 2018 in exact accordance with the tariffs on washing machines and steel.

Now here is that exact same graph from 2018 to 2019.  As you can see, the prices started dropping at almost the exact same time as steel prices started dropping and by the end of 2019 the cost was below the cost at the beginning of 2018.  Just exactly as I said.

Now I was WRONG in one respect.  The prices started going back up again when Covid came along in mid 2020.  I am not sure how I can google prices for these machines in 2021 and get the same price as they were selling for in 2018 but I am done with it.  But there is absolutely no debate that prices for washing machines declined for 2 straight years after the initial spike in July of 2018 until July of 2020 and that the price in July of 2020 was lower than the prices just before the tariffs.

 

[TwiceHorn 31283]

25 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

You can interpret that any way you see fit. 
 

I’m sure they do.  All this shit scales up/down. 

Well, although I don't live in your district, I'm that person, and I never give people that pay lower property taxes a thought, other than "we need to downsize" and join them.

 

[wildcat09 29257]

7 hours ago, fattyflattie said:

A lot to unpack there but I’m not an engineer, though my peers are.  I got a bit ahead because I chose to put things off while living in some of the shittiest places on earth (and some nice ones). I’m sure you can dream up what it’s like to be gone from your wife and kids ~50% of the time. I also came into O&G in ‘09, not by any means a great time.  But lots of people work hard, and many of my peers have done a lot better than, me so this shit isn’t some luck.  

Im not saying to hell with anyone, I just believe things should have a semblance of fairness.  You want to tax these rich fucks at 33% have at it.  You want to cap them at a billion dollars, I don’t agree, but fuck it do it.  But at some point everyone should put something in the pot.  And sales tax and gasoline tax isn’t going to cut it.  I pay 12k in fucking taxes and my kids go to the same school as people that don’t pay 12k a year in rent.  Fair?  Shit is borked and the “middle” whatever that is, is being fucked the hardest.  
 

 

You’re literally complaining that you have to share this earth with poor people. What the fuck is wrong with you?

[SydneyCarton 47884]

7 hours ago, Neonmoon said:

Local school system sucks but you have your kids in Private school. I know you didn’t start the fire, but your solution is why local schools suck. 

Listen, I’m no proponent of vouchers. I pay my local taxes, and we got lucky that my wife got a job at a private school, so our son can attend at a discount. Also, my mother was a public and private school educator for 30 years in between being a stay home mom, and both my step parents were career teachers as well. And let me tell you funding is hardly the only or even main reason public schools suck.   First, much of the funding  that exists never even makes it to schools. Second, the environment for teachers is so bad that most quality educators go private, switch careers, or have retired early. The pay sucks, hours are long, and now teachers and admins are basically at the mercy or shitty parents and shitty lawsuits if their poor little snowflake they raised like shit doesn’t get an A he or she deserves. It’s madness. Teachers now are shitty grads who couldn’t find a job they liked, took a test, and now teach. I know this is an oversimplification, and there are many great teachers out there, but overall it isn’t like it used to be. And that’s not because of the voucher program, at least not solely. 
 

We moved to our area because we were pregnant and it had a good stem elementary school for HISD. We were happy to send him there, and figure out junior high in a few years. Then my wife got this job. The difference…in everything…is stark and eye opening and sad. 

[RexWilson 1341]

This thread makes me think of the bar scene in Good Will Hunting. Sheeit was the pony tail trying then rest of Surly steps in.

https://youtu.be/hIdsjNGCGz4

[workswithseed 2037]

7 hours ago, Brew said:

Not planning on it in about 5 more years.

They got Scarface, I'd be careful. 

[jimmyjazz 45560]

A simple "flat tax" proposal:  eliminate income tax, but tax wealth (investments + real estate).

Total market cap of the United States is ~ $50T.  Total non-equity investment (bonds, CDs, cash, bank deposits) is ~ $60T.  Total real estate (residential + commercial) is ~ $50T.  Call the total $160T.

2020 income tax revenue, including individual and corporate, was $1.8T.  It doesn't take a math whiz to see that an across-the-board 1.1% tax on wealth would cover that nut.  No more income tax.

I eagerly await the water-carriers showing up to fight the concept, most likely because the poor wouldn't be kicking in their "fair share" and the wealthy (a class of people none of the water-carriers belong to) would bear "too much" of the load.

It will never happen, but it is an illustrative exercise.

 

Edited November 4, 2021 by jimmyjazz