Texsox

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Oct 23, 2013 -> 01:35 PM) I'm pretty sure there is convincing data out there showing that as the cigarette taxes have gone up, more and more people have stopped using them. Aren't there a lot of factors at work here, not just taxes or have you seen research that isolates cost from anti-smoking campaigns, restricting access to smoking areas, etc.? QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Oct 23, 2013 -> 01:36 PM) If you are telling someone that because they made X amount of money you are going to take more than half of it, for the same services that everyone else is paying less for, you are punishing them for being successful. While I might want all of Mark Cuban's money, he made something, had an idea or sold something to get the money, it is his money. Not yours. Should he pay double every time he orders a cheeseburger because he is rich? Should you pay more because you make over the poverty line? It is punishment and theft if you want to take more than half. We wouldn't even have those services if we only taxed what a middle class person could afford. What you are suggesting is we tax everyone the exact same amount. The shipping clerk at Amazon and the CEO would pay the exact same total amount. Not even a percentage, because why should the CEO making $10,000,000 pay $1,000,000 and the shipping clerk only pay $1,000 for the exact same services? That's just will not work.

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Oct 23, 2013 -> 10:01 AM) Rich people aren't going to stop buying cars, boats, jewelry, and vacations because they cost a few bucks more. The luxury tax on boats in 1990 crushed the industry. http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/1993-08-1...ilding-industry

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Oct 23, 2013 -> 06:26 AM) http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-24...eath-lists.html NOw on one level I have no problem with this. End of life care is the most expensive out there. But the NHS already had one scandal where doctors were putting people on the 'Death Pathway' without even telling them or their families. I can see where people are sceptical of motives. Just remember, when you get 80+ and want that new treatment that will extend your life a few more months, there will be someone, somewhere, besides you, deciding if you can get it or not. Also, two for one! Seems that 'free' healthcare may not be sustainable, at least in England. http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/he...rn-8876505.html We are very close in agreement here. The cold calous person in me says if you have the money to extend your life from 80 years 3 months to 80 years 7 months, go for it. If you don't

There are always unintended consequences. A couple requirements for a successful tax plan. Above all else, it must raise money to run the government. The problem with sin taxes, (expensive cars, boats, cigarettes, liquor) is if people stop buying those items, it eliminates jobs and doesn't raise money to run the government. I agree that we have too many hidden taxes. Gasoline taxes are incredible, every tourist area tacks on surcharges for hotel rooms and rental cars (hey, who doesn't like out of towners paying extra taxes in your town?) The graduated income tax is about as fair of a system as can be divised. A lesson that SS2k5 taught me years ago. the amounts and where it jumps up is the debate in my eyes.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Oct 22, 2013 -> 01:57 PM) Everything creates jobs. Sometimes I hate myself because I cant remember this one economist, but basically the idea was that everything adds to the pie. That a criminal is a job creator because criminals = police, security systems, jails, judges, lawyers, etc. Which is why the private for profit prison industry has been lobbying for tougher drug laws, and tougher immigration laws. Also why drug testing companies have invested tens of millions of dollars promoting drug testing individuals receiving government assistance.

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Oct 22, 2013 -> 03:59 PM) Why do you want to punish the wealthy? They earned the money, why do you want to take it from them? Do they use the police more than everyone else? Use the roads? Forest preserves or County hospitals? Why do you want to use the tax code to punish people, because that is what you are saying there. First of all I reject it is a punishment to live in this country and pay taxes. There are very few places on the planet that do not collect taxes, so I reject your implication that we should not tax at all. So if you agree with me that it is necessary to tax people, then the debate becomes how much to tax and in what manner. If you think we shouldn't "punish" the wealthy by collecting any taxes, then you can stop reading here, but I really doubt that is the case. A few reasons why I believe we should revert back to the tax rates of twenty and thirty years ago. A graduated income tax is the fairest. Money that is used for food, clothing, and shelter should not be taxed as heavy as money used for a third or fourth home, European vacations, and manicures. So higher income gets taxed more than lower income. If we looked at the country that could be built and maintained based on a tax rate that just the poor and middle class could afford, we would not have the infrastructure, the military, and all those roads, forest preserves, etc. If we want a first world country, we need to collect more income than a third world country. The wealth, in most cases, came from the purchases that the middle class and poor made.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Oct 21, 2013 -> 08:49 PM) Adding in the endorsement deals does make it a BIT more intriguing...but I still would never consider it a wise investment. There is some room in a portfolio for high risk, high reward, investments. But it would be a small amount for me and I would need some connection to the player, not some random guy.

From my untrained eye, it seems that 100 years ago it took more capital, today it takes a good idea. In other words, we've moved from capital driving success to ideas driving success, and by extension, jobs.

SS, this is more your area, but in your opinion, has the economy changed fundementaly between Carnegie and US Steel and Tumblr?

BTW, how will Republican* birthers react to Ted Cruz for President?

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Oct 22, 2013 -> 11:17 AM) they will make that back when they get control of healthcare by denying benefits to old people and end of life care. Which party? The one that likes to give people things (not denying anything), or the one that likes to leave people's income in their pockets instead of taxing them? It's kind of the same argument I have about social security. Which party will let the system collapse? And my answer is always, neither one.

Which is a roundabout way back to my point. For job creation, I believe we ought to be reducing taxes on the middle class and begin increasing on the wealthiest. The best bang for the buck is having a middle class spending more money.

So no answer? Can we collect more in taxes? Can we spend less? Or is the size of the deficit the most important thing? Should the deficit be higher? Should it be higher by spending more or collecting less?

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Oct 22, 2013 -> 12:58 PM) Yes, but to be fair, I'm dubious of everything. Which is appreciated. Now how many middle class folks start and maintain businesses of less than say 50 employees versus those that go on to be mega employers? Without any research, my guess is the real job creators in this economy are middle class folks that start and keep running small businesses. If we put more money in the middle class pockets it will create more jobs than concentrating it with the rich.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Oct 22, 2013 -> 10:28 AM) I have friends like this, too, but they have like 1 employee...so I wouldn't call them prolific job creators. You were the one dubious of my claim that the companies I worked for were started by middle class owners.

So which number is critical, the amount we can collect in taxes, the amount we spend, or the amount of the deficit? In other words, Do we have to collect only the amount we collect, or could be collect more? Do we have to spend everything that we spend? Do we have to run a deficit or if we could increase A while decreasing B and eliminating C?

Good point, I was forgetting that.

OK, how about Microsoft, Facebook, Google, Apple, etc. Where there founders rich or middle class?

Since I was in management and in a couple cases friends with them before they started the companies, I am positive they were middle class. The two companies I worked for the longest were both started by middle class guys. Chuck and Art worked as sales reps in the same industry before striking out on their own. Their initial investment was being able to work a year without drawing a paycheck and a $125,000 line of credit against their homes. Jim worked his way up in the company to President before buying the company. He was living in the same house outside Milwaukee he and his wife bought as newlyweds. Three bedroom with a detached garage. He drove a 10 year old pick up most days, his kids attended UW-M. I was barely middle class when I started my companies. The Boy Scouts of America were started by an insurance agent from Chicago who happened to meet a Scout in London while on a trip. I'm also thinking of friends that have their own companies, two in lawn maintenance who started with less than $10,000 in capital.

The other area we could look at is what drugs are available over the counter. Down here many people self medicate by visiting pharmacies in Mexico for what we could consider basic drugs.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 22, 2013 -> 08:04 AM) How many poor people have you worked for? How many middle class people have you worked for? All have been middle class at best.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 21, 2013 -> 03:38 PM) Nice spin. Spin it back for me. Who are the middle class job creators? We are claiming that the wealthy create jjobs for people. Someone here point out the wealthy person that created their job and when was it done.

With golf, poker, tennis, there is individual prize money to be earned. That makes those investments more straightforward and viable. Without guaranteed money, those people without a stake can't get a steak.

Just so I am clear, Jenks, Alpha, and SS2k5 all believe McJobs and working at Walmart are the examples of job creation we should slash taxes to get. Would Walmart or McDonalds try to get by with less staff if the owner's taxes were higher? What if it meant that the middle class would be paying less taxes and spending that money at McD and WalMart?

Jerry is picking up the dinner tab next time he sees someone from Liberty Media* *This would be a better comment if Ted Turner still owned the team, damn corporations