Jump to content

Joe Biden 2022: Enter Dark Brandon

Longboard Horn

By Longboard Horn
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

Bookman

Bookman 4639

Posted
Posted
7 hours ago, Incredulity said:

Also, no one ever payed a 90% effective income tax rate.  Pure leftist drivel.

That was a marginal tax rate not an effective tax rate.

And that was back pre-Reagan when this country believed in paying its debts.

  • Hook 'Em 6
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 8.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Foosters
Foosters
TexEx15
TexEx15

SLOW. CLAP.

HenryJames
HenryJames

Posted Images

royiv

royiv 9333

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

Why do you worry about it?  It's not like you me or anyone other than ChiDoc and a handful of others would ever be subject to it.

Because uneducated whites overwhelmingly vote against their own interests.

  • Hook 'Em 6
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
hornmpa96

hornmpa96 2619

Posted
Posted
18 minutes ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

No one pays their full rate now, so what's the difference?

The difference - when the top marginal rate was 90%, everything was deductible including personal interest expense. Additionally tax shelters were allowed and every high income professional had passive losses offsetting their salary for tax purposes.

Since the 80s, the basic idea has been to broaden the base and reduce rates.

There are good arguments to be had related to raising marginal tax rates on the wealthy; however, any discussion around the former 90% rate is kooky talk.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fudge Nuggets

Fudge Nuggets 19210

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, Incredulity said:

The, "let's return to 90% tax rate" schtick is literally disinformation.  Nina Jankowicz is on the case, I'm sure.

Start the rate at 90% and when the uber-rich cheat they knock it down to 30% or so.

Start the rate at 40% and when the uber-rich cheat they knock it down to fuck all % or so.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fudge Nuggets

Fudge Nuggets 19210

Posted
Posted
Just now, hornmpa96 said:

The difference - when the top marginal rate was 90%, everything was deductible including personal interest expense. Additionally tax shelters were allowed and every high income professional had passive losses offsetting their salary for tax purposes.

Since the 80s, the basic idea has been to broaden the base and reduce rates.

There are good arguments to be had related to raising marginal tax rates on the wealthy; however, any discussion around the former 90% rate is kooky talk.

I guess it's a great thing that high income professionals have no way to avoid paying their full rate today.  Glad we took care of that.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
wildcat09

wildcat09 29361

Posted
Posted

His post wasn't that long, so I don't know why you guys can't read it:

Quote

Capping out at 90% for income over $500M. 80% for income over 250M. 70% for income over $100M. 60% for income over $50M. 50% for income over $25M. 40% for income over $10M. I use the post WWII tax rates as a benchmark, reasoning that we are in a similarly debt laden situation.

There is nothing in that post that could reasonably be interpreted as saying there used to be a 90% effective tax rate or as promoting one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jimmyjazz

jimmyjazz 46006

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, wildcat09 said:

His post wasn't that long, so I don't know why you guys can't read it:

There is nothing in that post that could reasonably be interpreted as saying there used to be a 90% effective tax rate or as promoting one.

Of course not.  But, gaslighting.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Vegas64

Vegas64 677

Posted
Posted
On 4/30/2022 at 11:24 AM, Vegas64 said:

1) Doing away with the very liberal arts or making those not loan-friendly (because they are expensive and not as valuable individually relative to their general ROI) as Sack said is actually going to create an even bigger moat in inequality insomuch as only the privileged will be able to afford to study them. Philosophy and Visual Arts in Multimedia, Gender studies, etc., and essentially the entire institution of NYU and Columbia would be rendered even more a privileged finishing school (just kidding, decent B-schools). I say this as someone with a modicum of cash and a liberal arts background.

2) Speaking of finishing school, that’s what undergrad basically is if you aren’t learning a trade profession with clear cut rules and governance (coding, accounting, etc.). It’s essentially a finishing school where you learn how to better write, read, apply judgment, manage your time, learn how to balance social skills with work, understand hierarchy and power maps/org charges, learn the lines you can cross and which you cannot, what you can get away with and what you can’t, etc. It’s a very expensive soft-skill finishing school for polish, which itself is privileged.

Saw this today and immediately thought about the conversation last week of how if liberal arts and low ROI-degrees was "means tested" for only those who could afford them, what intangibles would be lost and how fortified in privilege the benefits would further become:

 

  • Hook 'Em 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Incredulity

Incredulity 11681

Posted
Posted
21 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

His post wasn't that long, so I don't know why you guys can't read it:

There is nothing in that post that could reasonably be interpreted as saying there used to be a 90% effective tax rate or as promoting one.

Nina, that you?

  • Haha 1
  • Fuck You 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
jimmyjazz

jimmyjazz 46006

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Incredulity said:

That seems expensive.  Still no inflation in leftist fantasy land?

I encourage you to find the last time I disputed significant inflation, and then eat your hat.  When the numbers change, my outlook changes, but you're too fucking thick to understand that some people are actually capable of following data.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Incredulity

Incredulity 11681

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, jimmyjazz said:

I encourage you to find the last time I disputed significant inflation, and then eat your hat.  When the numbers change, my outlook changes, but you're too fucking thick to understand that some people are actually capable of following data.

 

My god, you're impressive.

would you say that you represent science?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
wildcat09

wildcat09 29361

Posted
Posted
Just now, Ag with kids said:

Als die Nazis die Kommunisten holten, habe ich geschwiegen; ich war ja kein Kommunist.

Als sie die Gewerkschaftler holten, habe ich geschwiegen, ich war ja kein Gewerkschaftler.

Als sie die Juden holten, habe ich geschwiegen, ich war ja kein Jude.

Als sie mich holten, gab es keinen mehr, der protestieren konnte.

Comparing paying taxes to being exterminated in Nazi death camps is fucking disgusting and you should be deeply ashamed of yourself.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ag with kids

Ag with kids 581

Posted
Posted
Just now, wildcat09 said:

Comparing paying taxes to being exterminated in Nazi death camps is fucking disgusting and you should be deeply ashamed of yourself.

STFU...

The quote means so much more than that.

I'm not surprised you don't know that, though...

  • Fuck You 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ag with kids

Ag with kids 581

Posted
Posted (edited)
13 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

What exactly did you think you were accomplishing by posting that?

So, you don't get Niemoller's point, either?  And how it applies to the post I replied to?

JFC...

His point was that you should always stand up for the things that you believe in, even if the situation doesn't affect you.  Because at some point in time, it may affect YOU...and no one will be there for YOU.  But, more than that, do it because it's the right thing to do.

Heck...just looking at taxes, when the income tax was originally passed, it was only 1% on incomes over $3K/year (very few people at that time) and 6% on people making over $500k (just a few rich people).  Looks like it's creeped to include a whole lot more people over time...

But, more than that, if you disagree with the idea in general, then you should care even IF it doesn't affect you.

Edited by Ag with kids
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Fuck You 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
wildcat09

wildcat09 29361

Posted
Posted
19 minutes ago, Ag with kids said:

STFU...

The quote means so much more than that.

I'm not surprised you don't know that, though...

No. I mean this sincerely, you are an utter disgrace of a human being for dragging Neimoller into this. I can goddamned 100% assure you that he wasn't talking about taxes, you scum. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ag with kids

Ag with kids 581

Posted
Posted
Just now, jimmyjazz said:

It's not difficult to understand his point.  Your post was fairly tone deaf, though.

Brisketexan used the exact same quote on a reply to me on the Supremes thread and you didn't seem to mind it there...and you posted very shortly after he posted it so I'm pretty sure you saw it...

Odd that you took umbrage only with me...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ag with kids

Ag with kids 581

Posted
Posted
Just now, wildcat09 said:

No. I mean this sincerely, you are an utter disgrace of a human being for dragging Neimoller into this. I can goddamned 100% assure you that he wasn't talking about taxes, you scum. 

JFC you're fucking slow.

I never said he was talking about taxes.  God damn.  You need to work on your reading comprehension (and maybe even read my later post to jimmyjazz).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
wildcat09

wildcat09 29361

Posted
Posted
Just now, Ag with kids said:

JFC you're fucking slow.

I never said he was talking about taxes.  God damn.  You need to work on your reading comprehension (and maybe even read my later post to jimmyjazz).

That's a gutless decontextualization of what you did.

Good, you clearly are ashamed. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
jimmyjazz

jimmyjazz 46006

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Ag with kids said:

Brisketexan used the exact same quote on a reply to me on the Supremes thread and you didn't seem to mind it there...and you posted very shortly after he posted it so I'm pretty sure you saw it...

Odd that you took umbrage only with me...

I don't recall that.  I usually skim Brisket's posts at best.  He can be . . . wordy . . . and repetitive.  Smart, passionate dude, though.

The sentiment in the "poem" (or whatever one would call it) is terrific.  It just gets clumsy when extended to other, perhaps less onerous topics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
wildcat09

wildcat09 29361

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

I don't recall that.  I usually skim Brisket's posts at best.  He can be . . . wordy . . . and repetitive.  Smart, passionate dude, though.

The sentiment in the "poem" (or whatever one would call it) is terrific.  It just gets clumsy when extended to other, perhaps less onerous topics.

It's a hell of a lot more appropriate to reference it for support of an argument that we shouldn't be literally criminalizing women's healthcare than it is in support of an argument that we shouldn't raise taxes.

  • Hook 'Em 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
BehoId, The Underminer!

BehoId, The Underminer! 11669

Posted
Posted

They came for the bell bottoms, but I didn't speak out, for I didn't wear bell bottoms.

Then they came for hypercolors, but I didn't speak out for my handprints didn't show up very well.

They they came for the grunge, but I didn't speak out because what even is teen spirit

They came for the frosted tips, but I didn't speak out because I still had my puka shells.

Finally, when they came for low top sneakers, there was no one left to speak for me.

- Ag with Kids on fashion trends through the ages.

 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fudge Nuggets

Fudge Nuggets 19210

Posted
Posted
58 minutes ago, Ag with kids said:

JFC you're fucking slow.

I never said he was talking about taxes.  God damn.  You need to work on your reading comprehension (and maybe even read my later post to jimmyjazz).

So why respond to a post about taxes with that quote?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Foosters

Foosters 17860

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Ag with kids said:

JFC you're fucking slow.

I never said he was talking about taxes.  God damn.  You need to work on your reading comprehension (and maybe even read my later post to jimmyjazz).

Uh oh, should you call the mods to have you removed again?

Don't want you to be uncomfortable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ag with kids

Ag with kids 581

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, jimmyjazz said:

I don't recall that.  I usually skim Brisket's posts at best.  He can be . . . wordy . . . and repetitive.  Smart, passionate dude, though.

The sentiment in the "poem" (or whatever one would call it) is terrific.  It just gets clumsy when extended to other, perhaps less onerous topics.

Fair enough...I will agree with you on his posts.  And he IS smart...that's obvious.  FWIW, it was a HUGE graphic...

As to "First they came..." I think it's a powerful way to show how you should alway do what's right, even if you don't really gain anything personal from it, because not doing what's right can potentially have really bad results.  That's how I've taken the message of it...to me it extends far further than just the immediate issue it was referring to...

BTW...thanks for keeping the discussion civil.  I appreciate that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ag with kids

Ag with kids 581

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

So why respond to a post about taxes with that quote?

Because the message in the poem wasn't just about what Niemoller didn't do in the lead up to WWII.   It's about not abdicating personal responsibility solely because the effects of an act won't have immediate personal repercussions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...