Megalextoria
Retro computing and gaming, sci-fi books, tv and movies and other geeky stuff.

Home » Digital Archaeology » Computer Arcana » Computer Folklore » What Makes an Architecture Bizarre?
Show: Today's Messages :: Show Polls :: Message Navigator
E-mail to friend 
Switch to threaded view of this topic Create a new topic Submit Reply
Re: What Makes a Tax System Bizarre? [message #96680 is a reply to message #96588] Tue, 16 July 2013 14:09 Go to previous messageGo to next message
jklam is currently offline  jklam
Messages: 43
Registered: June 2013
Karma: 0
Member
"Peter Flass" <Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:ks3e5a$9ou$1@dont-email.me...
> On 7/15/2013 3:51 PM, jklam wrote:

>>

>>

>> "Peter Flass" <Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com> wrote in message

>> news:ks0mhq$dk7$1@dont-email.me...

>>> On 7/14/2013 3:21 PM, John Levine wrote:

>>>> >> So for capital gains, would you tax the total sale price, with no

>>>> >> deduction for the basis?

>>>> >

>>>> > That's just silly. A capital gain (i.e. income to be taxed) is

>>>> > defined

>>>> > as the difference between the sale price and the cost basis; there

>>>> > is no

>>>> > "deduction" involved.

>>>>

>>>> Well, OK, is it the nominal cost basis or inflation adjusted cost

>>>> basis? If you buy something for $1000 and sell it decades later for

>>>> $1500, but in the meantime prices have doubled, is that a gain or a

>>>> loss? This isn't a silly question, inflation is a large part of the

>>>> rationale for lower capital gains rates.

>>>

>>> Even aside from that, your cost basis isn't just the cost of purchase

>>> of an asset, lots of things can happen later that contribute to your

>>> cost basis. The problem from a tax POV is that the more things

>>> contribute to it the more room for fiddling to reduce your taxes. It

>>> seems like whatever we do should be simple and easy to calculate with

>>> no wiggle room.

>>

>> That just isn't possible with capital gains.


> Money you spend related to your investment counts in the cost basis

> (AFAIK).


That is not correct with the calculation of what capital gain has been
achieved.

> If for some reason you choose to get actual stock certificates and then

> pay to rent a safe-deposit box to keep them, the cost of the box reduces

> your gain, etc. (again AFAIK)


No, that is not how the capital gain is calculated.

>> It isn't even possible with business expenses either.


>> Do you allow junkets to tourist traps for the best performing

>> employees as an incentive to do better for example ?


> They do now.


Yes, but you were proposing that that not be possible in future
by eliminating any wiggle room.

>> Prostitutes for the customers who can deliver big contracts ?


> Probably where they're legal.


The IRS doesn't see it that way.

And it isn't just what is legal that is an allowable deduction
either, particularly with bribes.
Re: What Makes a Tax System Bizarre? [message #96681 is a reply to message #96592] Tue, 16 July 2013 14:15 Go to previous messageGo to next message
127 is currently offline  127
Messages: 41
Registered: July 2013
Karma: 0
Member
"Peter Flass" <Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:ks3f38$ep0$1@dont-email.me...
> On 7/15/2013 5:58 PM, 127 wrote:

>>

>> And isn't accurate with household income either, because

>> the number of wage earners per household has increased

>> too with many more women working than used to.


> I'm not sure how much this helps.


It helps a lot when it doubles the household income when
there are two wages instead of one.

> I used to listen to the women at work talk about how much child-care cost.


There isnt necessarily any child care cost involved,
particularly once the kids are old enough to not need it.

> For a middle-income woman it was marginally worthwhile to work. For

> someone with lower income, they'd basically be working for nothing until

> the kids go in school, and then they'd still have to do something about

> after school.


They just look after themselves. That’s what I did.
Re: What Makes a Tax System Bizarre? [message #96682 is a reply to message #96594] Tue, 16 July 2013 14:21 Go to previous messageGo to next message
127 is currently offline  127
Messages: 41
Registered: July 2013
Karma: 0
Member
"Andrew Swallow" <am.swallow@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:2umdna5K9aEm0njMnZ2dnUVZ8n-dnZ2d@bt.com...
> On 16/07/2013 13:49, Peter Flass wrote:

>> On 7/15/2013 5:58 PM, 127 wrote:

>>>

>>> And isn't accurate with household income either, because

>>> the number of wage earners per household has increased

>>> too with many more women working than used to.

>>

>> I'm not sure how much this helps. I used to listen to the women at work

>> talk about how much child-care cost. For a middle-income woman it was

>> marginally worthwhile to work. For someone with lower income, they'd

>> basically be working for nothing until the kids go in school, and then

>> they'd still have to do something about after school.

>>

>

> Yes. The cost of a woman is frequently equal to the cost of a woman.


Not when the working woman is a professional
and employs an illegal to look after the kids.

> For a woman with young children to work per pay has to be more than (the

> nannies wages + tax + expenses such as a bed room).


That only happens with the higher paid professionals.

> This only changes when the nanny is replaced by a teacher with 20-30

> children in her class.


No, it also happens with most childcare where you have
someone who is paid rather less than a teacher is to
operate the childcare operation too.

And once the kids are in school, they can
look after themselves after school too.

And there are only kids in school for part of the working time
for women anyway.
Re: What Makes a Tax System Bizarre? [message #96683 is a reply to message #96595] Tue, 16 July 2013 14:30 Go to previous messageGo to next message
127 is currently offline  127
Messages: 41
Registered: July 2013
Karma: 0
Member
"Walter Bushell" <proto@panix.com> wrote in message
news:proto-41CF94.09560516072013@70-1-84-166.pools.spcsdns.net...
> In article <ks2b5e$fto$1@dont-email.me>,

> Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote:

>

>> On 15-Jul-13 19:26, John Levine wrote:

>>>> Without the, the only possible source for my benefits will be

>>>> then-current contributions, and tax revenues (under current law)

>>>> are projected to cover only 30% of that amount.

>>>

>>> I found this informative flyer on the SSA's web site:

>>>

>>> http://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/chartbooks/fast_facts/2012/fa st_facts12.pdf

>>>

>>> The Long-Run Financial Outlook on page 37 says (using the mandated

>>> pessimistic numbers) that the trust fund will run out in 2033,

>>

>> ... before I'll be eligible for benefits, under current law.

>>

>>> and after that, revenue under current law will cover 75% of costs.

>>> Any chance you could tell us where that implausible 30% number

>>> came from?

>>

>> Directly from the statement they send me every year. My best guess is

>> that they won't short everyone by the same percentage but rather pay

>> everyone the same amount until they run out of money, which means I'll

>> get shorted by more than the average worker.

>>

>>> It also says ths shortfall will be 2.67% of taxable payroll, which

>>> confirms the fact that small changes like increasing the payroll cap

>>> would be adequate to fix it forever.

>>

>> Congress has raised the cap 40 times since 1971, and it's already more

>> than double what it was when I started working, yet SS is still

>> insolvent. That doesn't seem to be working.

>>

>> The real problem is on page 36 of that source: the number of workers per

>> retiree has dropped from over 8 in 1955 to 3 today, and it will continue

>> to drop over time. That's the thing with Ponzi schemes: you eventually

>> run out of suckers and the whole thing collapses.


> It's not a Ponzi scheme it's a tontine.


It's not either. Those currently receiving money from the scheme
are getting it from those currently paying money into the scheme.

Tontines didn’t work like that.

> But is really a welfare program.


Yes, with that welfare stream being at least nominally separated
from the general taxation system at least in a formal sense if not
in reality.

> The real problem is that if people did save for retirement,

> it would crash the economy


No it does not. That happens as well and does in fact provide
much more of the income in retirement than social security
does for most people.

> and lead to a concentration of wealth in the elderly,

> if the economy could survive the saving.


That doesn’t happen either, and all modern economies
do in fact survive that saving fine. Those savings end up
in the pension funds and mutual funds and that is in fact
who owns the absolute vast bulk of almost all industrial
operations now. And what else is owned by others is
mostly just savings of individuals who choose to keep
those savings invested in the stock market, mostly the
middle class, but also some of the working class too.
Re: What Makes a Tax System Bizarre? [message #96685 is a reply to message #96597] Tue, 16 July 2013 14:34 Go to previous messageGo to next message
127 is currently offline  127
Messages: 41
Registered: July 2013
Karma: 0
Member
"Walter Bushell" <proto@panix.com> wrote in message
news:proto-1D55E7.10074816072013@70-1-84-166.pools.spcsdns.net...
> In article <PM0004E19F86294DBF@aca2448a.ipt.aol.com>,

> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:

>

>>>

>>> Medicare is a financial black hole, but it's the same black hole as

>>> the whole US medical non-system, and Medicare has much lower overhead

>>> than any private insurance company.

>>>

>>

>> Wait until after next year. The black hole will implode.

>>

>> /BAH

>

> The problem is we can't provide the best medical care for everyone


That is in fact perfectly possible.

The real problem is with the heroic costs of providing
a minimal few months extra at the very end of your life.

> and as more expensive and esoteric treatments

> are discovered the situation is getting worse.


No it is not with the major killers like heart attacks and strokes.

It isn't even true of cancer and diabetes.
Re: What Makes a Tax System Bizarre? [message #96686 is a reply to message #96678] Tue, 16 July 2013 14:42 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Anne &amp; Lynn Wheel is currently offline  Anne &amp; Lynn Wheel
Messages: 3156
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
Is This The Chart Reflecting The True State Of The US Economy?
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-07-16/chart-reflecting-tr ue-state-us-economy

from above:

By now even five year-olds understand two simple things: i) the market
is no longer a discounting mechanism thanks to the Fed's 4+ year
experiment in manipulating equities in order to generate a "wealth
effect" and ii) virtually all economic indicators are distorted, as such
critical measures of economic "health" as GDP confuse credit creation by
the Fed with traditional private-sector credit creation (commercial bank
loan growth).

.... snip ...

recent posts:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013i.html#79 What Makes an Architecture Bizarre?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013i.html#80 What Makes an Architecture Bizarre?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013i.html#81 What Makes a Tax System Bizarre?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013i.html#82 What Makes an Architecture Bizarre?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013i.html#84 What Makes an Architecture Bizarre?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013i.html#85 What Makes an Architecture Bizarre?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013i.html#86 What Makes an Architecture Bizarre?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013i.html#87 What Makes an Architecture Bizarre?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013i.html#88 What Makes an Architecture Bizarre?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013i.html#89 What Makes an Architecture Bizarre?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013i.html#90 What Makes an Architecture Bizarre?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013i.html#91 What Makes a Tax System Bizarre?

--
virtualization experience starting Jan1968, online at home since Mar1970
Re: What Makes a Tax System Bizarre? [message #96687 is a reply to message #96599] Tue, 16 July 2013 14:39 Go to previous messageGo to next message
127 is currently offline  127
Messages: 41
Registered: July 2013
Karma: 0
Member
"Stephen Sprunk" <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote in message
news:ks3k9m$at6$1@dont-email.me...
> On 16-Jul-13 08:50, Andrew Swallow wrote:

>> On 16/07/2013 13:49, Peter Flass wrote:

>>> I used to listen to the women at work talk about how much

>>> child-care cost. For a middle-income woman it was marginally

>>> worthwhile to work. For someone with lower income, they'd

>>> basically be working for nothing until the kids go in school, and

>>> then they'd still have to do something about after school.

>>

>> Yes. The cost of a woman is frequently equal to the cost of a

>> woman. For a woman with young children to work per pay has to be more

>> than (the nannies wages + tax + expenses such as a bed room).

>

> Don't forget that working means she also loses thousands of dollars per

> month in welfare benefits, greatly increasing the income she needs just

> to break even. Most young women don't have the education or experience

> to get jobs that pay enough to get over that threshold, so they stay

> home with their kids instead.


Most young women do in fact work, even when they have kids.

> A friend of mine recently had a kid, and the day care prices she was

> finding were ~$1k/mo for an infant. How is a single mother working a

> minimum-wage job (making less than $1k/mo after taxes) supposed to

> pay for that--on top of the housing, food, health care, diapers, etc.?


Most of them aren't single mothers.

> If neo-cons really want to stop abortions, they need to change the

> depressing economics of being a single mother--or agree to provide

> young, low-income women with free birth control, which is far cheaper

> for the govt than the alternative anyway.


The problem is that many of the single mothers choose to have
the kids and are essentially volunteering for welfare, so free birth
control would make no difference with them.

>> This only changes when the nanny is replaced by a teacher with 20-30

>> children in her class.

>

> Exactly, which partly explains why we have so many problems with our

> educational system: parents see it as a "free" babysitter so they can

> afford to work rather than as an investment in their kids' future.

>

> S

>

> --

> Stephen Sprunk "God does not play dice." --Albert Einstein

> CCIE #3723 "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the

> K5SSS dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking
Re: What Makes a Tax System Bizarre? [message #96688 is a reply to message #96601] Tue, 16 July 2013 14:42 Go to previous messageGo to next message
127 is currently offline  127
Messages: 41
Registered: July 2013
Karma: 0
Member
"Stephen Sprunk" <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote in message
news:ks3ktl$efo$1@dont-email.me...
> On 15-Jul-13 23:31, 127 wrote:

>> "Stephen Sprunk" <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote in message

>> news:ks2cqm$n52$1@dont-email.me...

>>> On 15-Jul-13 16:58, 127 wrote:

>>>> "Stephen Sprunk" <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote in message

>>>> news:ks1q0j$sbt$1@dont-email.me...

>>>> > On 15-Jul-13 15:04, John Levine wrote:

>>>> >> and we are richer now than we were in the past.

>>>> >

>>>> > No, actually we're not. Income for the working classes has

>>>> > been stagnant for the last 30 years, after adjusting for

>>>> > inflation.

>>>>

>>>> That is not accurate with real living standards, number and

>>>> quality of cars and houses and things like that.

>>

>>> People more readily go into debt to buy such things now, mainly due

>>> to lower interest rates, but they're not making more money

>>> (adjusted for inflation) to pay for them,

>>

>> They are actually when you calculate it by household,


> I was referring to household income.


Yes, but I was pointing out that household income has in fact increased
significantly over that 30 years you mentioned, largely because of the
significant increase in the number of married women working.

>> That is not correct. Household income has increased significantly

>> over that time.

>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Household_income_in_the_United_ States#Household_income_over_time


> Are you actually reading what you're citing?


Yes.

> The 50th percentile, i.e. the median, rose from $45,325 in 1979 to a

> mere $49,777 in 2009; that's an increase of just 9.8% over 30 years.

> The 20th percentile rose from $19,274 in 1979 to $20,453 in 2009, a mere

> 6.1% increase.

>

> OTOH, the 95th percentile's income rose 39.5% over the same period, so

> of course _they_ think everything is going just fine.


It isn't the only percentile that has increased significantly.

> S

>

> --

> Stephen Sprunk "God does not play dice." --Albert Einstein

> CCIE #3723 "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the

> K5SSS dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking
Re: What Makes a Tax System Bizarre? [message #96689 is a reply to message #96603] Tue, 16 July 2013 14:44 Go to previous messageGo to next message
127 is currently offline  127
Messages: 41
Registered: July 2013
Karma: 0
Member
"Stephen Sprunk" <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote in message
news:ks3lud$k6b$1@dont-email.me...
> On 16-Jul-13 09:27, Dan Espen wrote:

>> Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> writes:

>>> The problem is we can't provide the best medical care for everyone

>>> and as more expensive and esoteric treatments are discovered the

>>> situation is getting worse.

>>

>> We have people out of work and no shortage of medical supplies. Why

>> can't we provide medical care?

>

> For the same reason the rest of the 6 million vacant jobs are going

> unfilled: lack of skilled workers.

>

> Why? Because our educational system is designed solely to prepare

> students for college, even though only ~30% of students actually

> graduate from college--and most of those with useless liberal-arts

> degrees. There is little interest, from educators or politicians, in

> vocational training that will actually prepare students for the

> workforce by providing them with marketable skills.


A substantial part of the education system does
provide marketable skills for the medical industry.

> S

>

> --

> Stephen Sprunk "God does not play dice." --Albert Einstein

> CCIE #3723 "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the

> K5SSS dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking
Re: What Makes a Tax System Bizarre? [message #96691 is a reply to message #96662] Tue, 16 July 2013 14:47 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Rod Speed is currently offline  Rod Speed
Messages: 3507
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
"Walter Banks" <walter@bytecraft.com> wrote in message
news:51E56CBA.D6A4617E@bytecraft.com...
>

>

> Walter Bushell wrote:

>

>> It's not a Ponzi scheme it's a tontine. But is really a welfare

>> program. The real problem is that if people did save for retirement,

>> it would crash the economy and lead to a concentration of wealth in

>> the elderly, if the economy could survive the saving.

>

> Is there some reason that SS was not fully funded from contributions?


Yes, it isnt possible to start a scheme like that that way.
Re: What Makes a Tax System Bizarre? [message #96692 is a reply to message #96664] Tue, 16 July 2013 14:55 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Rod Speed is currently offline  Rod Speed
Messages: 3507
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
"Walter Banks" <walter@bytecraft.com> wrote in message
news:51E56DE5.C12DF836@bytecraft.com...
>

>

> Walter Bushell wrote:

>

>> In article <PM0004E19F86294DBF@aca2448a.ipt.aol.com>,

>> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:

>>

>>>>

>>>> Medicare is a financial black hole, but it's the same black hole as

>>>> the whole US medical non-system, and Medicare has much lower overhead

>>>> than any private insurance company.

>>>>

>>>

>>> Wait until after next year. The black hole will implode.

>>

>>

>> The problem is we can't provide the best medical care for everyone and

>> as more expensive and esoteric treatments are discovered the situation

>> is getting worse.


> Why not?


Indeed. And its very arguable whether providing a month or
two extra at the very end of your life is anything like the best
medical care as well. In many ways it's the worst medical care.

> When health care is universal fewer esoteric treatments are needed?


I don't buy that with stuff like stents, heart bypasses,
transplants, or anything else I can think of either.

> People seek care earlier.


That is very arguable indeed with the esoteric treatments
he is talking about. No evidence to substantiate that claim.

Even with stuff like cancer, there is no evidence that
universal health care sees cancers detected earlier
even when the universal health care does provide
free screening, it is very hard to get many to use it.

> There is enough data from other countries that have implemented

> health care to show what can be done and what it actually costs.


Yes. And that it costs much less than the US currently spends too.
Re: What Makes a Tax System Bizarre? [message #96744 is a reply to message #96679] Tue, 16 July 2013 15:01 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Dan Espen is currently offline  Dan Espen
Messages: 3867
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> writes:

> Ditto for many other industries. The tech industry in particular has

> been having problems for decades, hence the H-1B visa program. Even

> that can only provide a few hundred thousand skilled workers per year,

> though, and that is but a drop in the bucket compared to the demand that

> our pitiful educational system is leaving completely unmet.


Every off shore worker I've seen hired was as a result of a native worker being
fired, and not fired for cause.

--
Dan Espen
Re: What Makes a Tax System Bizarre? [message #96746 is a reply to message #96686] Tue, 16 July 2013 15:06 Go to previous messageGo to next message
127 is currently offline  127
Messages: 41
Registered: July 2013
Karma: 0
Member
"Anne & Lynn Wheeler" <lynn@garlic.com> wrote in message
news:m3wqoqe489.fsf@garlic.com...
>

> Is This The Chart Reflecting The True State Of The US Economy?

> http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-07-16/chart-reflecting-tr ue-state-us-economy


No, it is only a tiny part of the state of the US economy.

> from above:

>

> By now even five year-olds understand two simple things: i) the market

> is no longer a discounting mechanism thanks to the Fed's 4+ year

> experiment in manipulating equities in order to generate a "wealth

> effect" and ii) virtually all economic indicators are distorted, as such

> critical measures of economic "health" as GDP confuse credit creation by

> the Fed with traditional private-sector credit creation (commercial bank

> loan growth).

>

> ... snip ...

>

> recent posts:

> http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013i.html#79 What Makes an Architecture

> Bizarre?

> http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013i.html#80 What Makes an Architecture

> Bizarre?

> http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013i.html#81 What Makes a Tax System Bizarre?

> http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013i.html#82 What Makes an Architecture

> Bizarre?

> http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013i.html#84 What Makes an Architecture

> Bizarre?

> http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013i.html#85 What Makes an Architecture

> Bizarre?

> http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013i.html#86 What Makes an Architecture

> Bizarre?

> http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013i.html#87 What Makes an Architecture

> Bizarre?

> http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013i.html#88 What Makes an Architecture

> Bizarre?

> http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013i.html#89 What Makes an Architecture

> Bizarre?

> http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013i.html#90 What Makes an Architecture

> Bizarre?

> http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013i.html#91 What Makes a Tax System Bizarre?

>

> --

> virtualization experience starting Jan1968, online at home since Mar1970
Re: What Makes Social Insurance Not Bizarre At All? [message #96748 is a reply to message #96662] Tue, 16 July 2013 15:08 Go to previous messageGo to next message
John Levine is currently offline  John Levine
Messages: 1405
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
Senior Member
> Is there some reason that SS was not fully funded from contributions?


SS has always been fully funded from contributions, give or take
relatively minor surpluses and deficits in recent years.

What it has never done other than a short-lived death benefit in the
1930s is to fund individual accounts from that individual's
contributions. SS is basically an insurance program to provide a
minimum retirement income to anyone who's worked. The argument that
it was intended to persuade people to retire may have some merit, but
the overwhelming reason it was created was to raise the elderly out of
their historic frequent poverty.

When programs are run by the government, which can assure itself a
permanent revenue stream from taxes, this is an entirely normal way to
run a program. You can expect howls of protest from people who are
either insufficiently familiar with arithmetic to understand that, or
who have a vested interest in replacing it with, e.g., privately
managed accounts that they or their friends would get a windfall from
managing.

--
Regards,
John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies",
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. http://jl.ly
Re: What Makes an Employment System Bizarre? [message #96749 is a reply to message #96679] Tue, 16 July 2013 15:11 Go to previous messageGo to next message
John Levine is currently offline  John Levine
Messages: 1405
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
Senior Member
> Ditto for many other industries. The tech industry in particular has

> been having problems for decades, hence the H-1B visa program.


The problem they have is to find people willing to work for the crappy
wages they want to pay, so they find replacements who are used to
south Asian wage levels and standards of living.

We all know plenty of US tech workers who cannot find jobs that pay a
living wage.

--
Regards,
John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies",
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. http://jl.ly
Re: What Makes a Medical System Bizarre? [message #96750 is a reply to message #96597] Tue, 16 July 2013 15:13 Go to previous messageGo to next message
John Levine is currently offline  John Levine
Messages: 1405
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
Senior Member
> The problem is we can't provide the best medical care for everyone


Nobody can.

On the other hand, if you look at the medical systems in France,
Germany, and Canada, they provide overall better care than we do at
half the price.

That's better care as measured by the usual metrics like life
expectancy.

--
Regards,
John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies",
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. http://jl.ly
Re: What Makes a Tax System Bizarre? [message #96751 is a reply to message #96692] Tue, 16 July 2013 15:23 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Walter Banks is currently offline  Walter Banks
Messages: 1000
Registered: July 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
Rod Speed wrote:

> "Walter Banks" <walter@bytecraft.com> wrote in message

> news:51E56DE5.C12DF836@bytecraft.com...

>

>>> The problem is we can't provide the best medical care for everyone and

>>> as more expensive and esoteric treatments are discovered the situation

>>> is getting worse.

>

>> Why not?

>

> Indeed. And its very arguable whether providing a month or

> two extra at the very end of your life is anything like the best

> medical care as well. In many ways it's the worst medical care.

>

>> When health care is universal fewer esoteric treatments are needed?

>

> I don't buy that with stuff like stents, heart bypasses,

> transplants, or anything else I can think of either.


Heart bypasses and stents are hardly esoteric care anymore nor
are they particularly expensive. They are routine enough that they
are being done in a local community hospital.

>> People seek care earlier.

>

> That is very arguable indeed with the esoteric treatments

> he is talking about. No evidence to substantiate that claim.

>

> Even with stuff like cancer, there is no evidence that

> universal health care sees cancers detected earlier

> even when the universal health care does provide

> free screening, it is very hard to get many to use it.


Compare Canada with the US and Canadians seek
treatment earlier. There is good cancer treatment here
and good survival rates mostly because the treatment
starts earlier.

>> There is enough data from other countries that have implemented

>> health care to show what can be done and what it actually costs.

>

> Yes. And that it costs much less than the US currently spends too.


It sure does. Just implementing Cuban style community walk-in clinics
in the US inner cities would save both lives and a substantial amount
of money.

There is a lot that could have be done.

I have lived in both the US and Canada, the care in middle class
American towns (NH) is very similar to what is in Canada. Almost
care is by a single insurance provider and it works quite well.

w..
Re: What Makes a Medical System Bizarre? [message #96752 is a reply to message #96750] Tue, 16 July 2013 16:20 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Rod Speed is currently offline  Rod Speed
Messages: 3507
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> wrote

>> The problem is we can't provide the best medical care for everyone


> Nobody can.


Everyone can, and all but the US does too with the modern first world.

> On the other hand, if you look at the medical systems in France,

> Germany, and Canada, they provide overall better care than we do


That’s not really true for those in the US that get the best medical care.

> at half the price.


> That's better care as measured by the usual metrics like life expectancy.


But that isnt a very good measure at all when so much of
life expectancy is now determined by obesity and smoking.
Re: What Makes a Tax System Bizarre? [message #96753 is a reply to message #96751] Tue, 16 July 2013 16:32 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Rod Speed is currently offline  Rod Speed
Messages: 3507
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> wrote
> Rod Speed wrote

>> Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> wrote


>>>> The problem is we can't provide the best medical care for

>>>> everyone and as more expensive and esoteric treatments

>>>> are discovered the situation is getting worse.


>>> Why not?


>> Indeed. And its very arguable whether providing a month or

>> two extra at the very end of your life is anything like the best

>> medical care as well. In many ways it's the worst medical care.


>>> When health care is universal fewer esoteric treatments are needed?


>> I don't buy that with stuff like stents, heart bypasses,

>> transplants, or anything else I can think of either.


> Heart bypasses and stents are hardly esoteric care anymore


So what do you claim is esoteric care that is seen much now ?

About all I can think of is some very expensive stuff
done with those who are absolutely certain to die
of the secondary cancer they how have.

> nor are they particularly expensive.


They are a lot more expensive than anything
else most ever get treatment wise.

> They are routine enough that they are

> being done in a local community hospital.


That's bullshit with bypasses and stents.

>>> People seek care earlier.


>> That is very arguable indeed with the esoteric treatments

>> he is talking about. No evidence to substantiate that claim.


>> Even with stuff like cancer, there is no evidence that

>> universal health care sees cancers detected earlier

>> even when the universal health care does provide

>> free screening, it is very hard to get many to use it.


> Compare Canada with the US and Canadians seek treatment earlier.


Have fun actually providing any evidence of that
with stuff that will cost a lot more if treated later.

> There is good cancer treatment here and good survival rates


Both are just as good in the US.

> mostly because the treatment starts earlier.


Bullshit.

>>> There is enough data from other countries that have implemented

>>> health care to show what can be done and what it actually costs.


>> Yes. And that it costs much less than the US currently spends too.


> It sure does. Just implementing Cuban style community

> walk-in clinics in the US inner cities would save both lives


That's very arguable indeed. We don't in fact see anything like
that here, where that is done here, with no copayment at all.

> and a substantial amount of money.


> There is a lot that could have be done.


> I have lived in both the US and Canada, the care in middle class

> American towns (NH) is very similar to what is in Canada. Almost

> care is by a single insurance provider and it works quite well.


But costs about twice as much in the US, essentially
because all that insurance overhead has to be paid for.

That's obvious from the much lower costs with Medicare in the US.
Re: What Makes a Tax System Bizarre? [message #96754 is a reply to message #96753] Tue, 16 July 2013 17:02 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Walter Banks is currently offline  Walter Banks
Messages: 1000
Registered: July 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
Rod Speed wrote:

> Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> wrote

>

>> They are routine enough that they are

>> being done in a local community hospital.

>

> That's bullshit with bypasses and stents.

>


I stand corrected they are routinely done in *our* local
community hospital.



w..
Re: What Makes a Tax System Bizarre? [message #96755 is a reply to message #96754] Tue, 16 July 2013 17:35 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Rod Speed is currently offline  Rod Speed
Messages: 3507
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> wrote
> Rod Speed wrote

>> Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> wrote


>>> They are routine enough that they are

>>> being done in a local community hospital.


>> That's bullshit with bypasses and stents.


> I stand corrected they are routinely done

> in *our* local community hospital.


They are done here in the specialist hospital
in the state capital and that approach produces
a much better result statistically.
Re: What Makes an Architecture Bizarre? [message #96807 is a reply to message #96432] Tue, 16 July 2013 19:17 Go to previous messageGo to next message
D.J. is currently offline  D.J.
Messages: 821
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
On 15 Jul 13 16:14:04 -0800, "Charlie Gibbs" <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid>
wrote:
> In article <b4jbgdFphb4U1@mid.individual.net>,

> blmblm.myrealbox@gmail.com (blmblm@myrealbox.com) writes:

>

>> (Okay, *really* late to the party .... )

>

> No problem, here's some slightly stale cake and warm punch.

>

>> In article <1698.952T421T5023882@kltpzyxm.invalid>,

>> Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:

>>

>>> In article <6tk0s819q6al1bd0062ie9319gt0f77g3l@4ax.com>, Ibmekon

>>> (Ibmekon) writes:

>>>

>>>> I am on the clock with Windows XP - support ending on April 8, 2014

>>>

>>> Whoop-de-do. I'll give up XP when they pry it from my cold dead

>>> fingers. That is, on the occasions when I have to use Windows -

>>> which, unfortunately, includes my job. Heck, my main development

>>> box is still running 2000 (I finally decided that 98 was just

>>> too primitive). At least I can configure XP to lose its tradmark

>>> Fisher-Price look, although that disgustingly cute dog is still

>>> there during searches.

>>

>> For what it's worth: I'm pretty sure you can make the puppy

>> go away -- I don't remember how, but I do remember figuring it

>> out at some point and doing it (and that the system's response

>> involved a little animated sequence of the puppy walking away in

>> what seemed like a dejected way .... ).

>

> That rings a bell. I know I've done a similar thing to that

> damned paper clip.


There is a place to tell the sioftware you don't want the Helper
Assistant anymore. Then you get the graphic you mention.

JimP.
--
Brushing aside the thorns so I can see the stars.
http://www.linuxgazette.net/ Linux Gazette
http://dice.drivein-jim.net/ my dice collection
http://poetry.drivein-jim.net/ Aug 26, 2009
Re: What Makes a Tax System Bizarre? [message #96812 is a reply to message #96594] Tue, 16 July 2013 20:25 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Peter Flass is currently offline  Peter Flass
Messages: 8375
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
Senior Member
On 7/16/2013 9:50 AM, Andrew Swallow wrote:
> On 16/07/2013 13:49, Peter Flass wrote:

>> On 7/15/2013 5:58 PM, 127 wrote:

>>>

>>> And isn't accurate with household income either, because

>>> the number of wage earners per household has increased

>>> too with many more women working than used to.

>>

>> I'm not sure how much this helps. I used to listen to the women at work

>> talk about how much child-care cost. For a middle-income woman it was

>> marginally worthwhile to work. For someone with lower income, they'd

>> basically be working for nothing until the kids go in school, and then

>> they'd still have to do something about after school.

>>

>

> Yes. The cost of a woman is frequently equal to the cost of a woman.

> For a woman with young children to work per pay has to be more than (the

> nannies wages + tax + expenses such as a bed room).

>

> This only changes when the nanny is replaced by a teacher with 20-30

> children in her class.

>


In many cases the women with small children work either:
A. Because the want to (get out of the house, socialization, get to use
their talents, etc) or
B. If they don't stay in the labor force and stay up-to-date with
current technology they won't be able to get a job later when the kids
are older.

Add the hassle of who stays home with the kids when they're sick to the
cost of child-care and it's a wash. Often professional women who enjoy
their work keep working while women with non-professional jobs want to
stay home.



--
Pete
Re: What Makes a Tax System Bizarre? [message #96813 is a reply to message #96597] Tue, 16 July 2013 20:30 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Peter Flass is currently offline  Peter Flass
Messages: 8375
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
Senior Member
On 7/16/2013 10:07 AM, Walter Bushell wrote:
> In article <PM0004E19F86294DBF@aca2448a.ipt.aol.com>,

> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:

>

>>>

>>> Medicare is a financial black hole, but it's the same black hole as

>>> the whole US medical non-system, and Medicare has much lower overhead

>>> than any private insurance company.

>>>

>>

>> Wait until after next year. The black hole will implode.

>>

>> /BAH

>

> The problem is we can't provide the best medical care for everyone and

> as more expensive and esoteric treatments are discovered the situation

> is getting worse.

>


Just like very expensive restaurants. The food isn't 100 times better
than less expensive places, but the high prices serve to keep out the
riff-raff. I'm surprised Obama doesn't want to give people a restaurant
subsidy so we can all eat at the places that charge hundreds for a meal.

--
Pete
Re: What Makes a Tax System Bizarre? [message #96814 is a reply to message #96600] Tue, 16 July 2013 20:33 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Peter Flass is currently offline  Peter Flass
Messages: 8375
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
Senior Member
On 7/16/2013 10:27 AM, Dan Espen wrote:
> Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> writes:

>

>> In article <PM0004E19F86294DBF@aca2448a.ipt.aol.com>,

>> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:

>>

>>>>

>>>> Medicare is a financial black hole, but it's the same black hole as

>>>> the whole US medical non-system, and Medicare has much lower overhead

>>>> than any private insurance company.

>>>>

>>>

>>> Wait until after next year. The black hole will implode.

>>>

>>> /BAH

>>

>> The problem is we can't provide the best medical care for everyone and

>> as more expensive and esoteric treatments are discovered the situation

>> is getting worse.

>

> We have people out of work and no shortage of medical supplies.

> Why can't we provide medical care?

>


Huh? We'll pick up homeless people off the street, issue them white
coats and stethoscopes and put them to work? Very few health care
professionals are unemployed.

--
Pete
Re: What Makes a Tax System Bizarre? [message #96815 is a reply to message #96603] Tue, 16 July 2013 20:35 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Peter Flass is currently offline  Peter Flass
Messages: 8375
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
Senior Member
On 7/16/2013 10:45 AM, Stephen Sprunk wrote:
> On 16-Jul-13 09:27, Dan Espen wrote:

>> Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> writes:

>>> The problem is we can't provide the best medical care for everyone

>>> and as more expensive and esoteric treatments are discovered the

>>> situation is getting worse.

>>

>> We have people out of work and no shortage of medical supplies. Why

>> can't we provide medical care?

>

> For the same reason the rest of the 6 million vacant jobs are going

> unfilled: lack of skilled workers.

>

> Why? Because our educational system is designed solely to prepare

> students for college, even though only ~30% of students actually

> graduate from college--and most of those with useless liberal-arts

> degrees. There is little interest, from educators or politicians, in

> vocational training that will actually prepare students for the

> workforce by providing them with marketable skills.

>

> S

>


The AMA (i.e. the "Doctors' Union") limits access to medical schools in
order to keep their salaries up. For the same reason they try to limit
what can be done by Nurse-Practioners, etc. This is not because they're
especially concerned with quality of care. Many qualified pre-meds have
to go overseas to get their MDs.

--
Pete
Re: What Makes an Architecture Bizarre? [message #96816 is a reply to message #96656] Tue, 16 July 2013 20:37 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Peter Flass is currently offline  Peter Flass
Messages: 8375
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
Senior Member
On 7/16/2013 11:38 AM, Walter Banks wrote:
>

>

> Peter Flass wrote:

>

>> On 7/15/2013 7:57 AM, Walter Banks wrote:

>>>

>>> Tax and government polies could easily change wealth distribution

>>> significantly with changes in those area's.

>>>

>>> The latter may very well make Obamacare ineffective and

>>> certainly inefficient compared to many other countries but

>>> it will make many companies very rich.

>>>

>>

>> I just read an interesting analogy. Most people have two good kidneys

>> and really only need one. while some people have kidney problems that

>> harm their quality of life and significantly shorten their lifespans.

>> Maybe the government needs a policy to redistribute kidneys from the

>> healthy people to the sick?

>

> I am not sure that I understand your point.


The government has as much business redistributing body parts as it has
redistributing income. It's none of their business.


--
Pete
Re: What Makes a Tax System Bizarre? [message #96817 is a reply to message #96744] Tue, 16 July 2013 20:41 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Peter Flass is currently offline  Peter Flass
Messages: 8375
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
Senior Member
On 7/16/2013 3:01 PM, Dan Espen wrote:
> Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> writes:

>

>> Ditto for many other industries. The tech industry in particular has

>> been having problems for decades, hence the H-1B visa program. Even

>> that can only provide a few hundred thousand skilled workers per year,

>> though, and that is but a drop in the bucket compared to the demand that

>> our pitiful educational system is leaving completely unmet.

>

> Every off shore worker I've seen hired was as a result of a native worker being

> fired, and not fired for cause.

>


Fired for be-cause the other guy will work cheaper (and probably harder
unless they want to get sent back)

--
Pete
Re: What Makes a Tax System Bizarre? [message #96818 is a reply to message #96678] Tue, 16 July 2013 20:41 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Anne &amp; Lynn Wheel is currently offline  Anne &amp; Lynn Wheel
Messages: 3156
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
re:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013i.html#91 What Makes a Tax System Bizarre?

another graph ... from today

About That "Incomes Are Rising" Claim...
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-07-16/guest-post-about-in comes-are-rising-claim

.... "the truth is the economy is only improving for a thin slice of the
households"

1920 bottom 90% earned 60% of total income, dropping to 50% of total
income in 1930 ... raises to approx. 70% 1950-1980 and then starts
dropping to 50% of total income ... approx. corresponds to avg. hourly
income in the sept2011 nytimes article. The top 0.1% (making more than
$1.7m) increase to 10.4% of total income.

a little on jobs:

David Brooks Wonders Why Men Can't Find Jobs: Comedy Ensues
http://www.rollinstone.com/politics/blogs/taibblog/david-bro oks-wonders-why-men-cant-find-jobs-comedy-ensues-20130716

wiki: Income inequality in the United States
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_inequality_in_the_United _States

a few recent posts referencing web resources on income inequality
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012f.html#14 Free $10 Million Loans For All! and Other Wall Street Notes
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012m.html#65 General Mills computer
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012n.html#2 General Mills computer
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012p.html#44 Search Google, 1960:s-style
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012p.html#50 Search Google, 1960:s-style
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013d.html#86 What Makes an Architecture Bizarre?

a few of the references:

Income inequality in America: The 99 percent
http://www.economist.com/blogs/dailychart/2011/10/income-ine quality-america
Fix income inequality with $10 million loans for everyone!
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/fix-income-inequality -with-10-million-loans-for-everyone/2012/04/13/gIQATUQAFT_st ory.html
The Unequal State of America: A Reuters series
http://www.reuters.com/subjects/income-inequality
It's the Inequality, Stupid
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2011/02/income-inequalit y-in-america-chart-graph
How clearly do we see the rising inequality in America? How do we feel
about it? Much depends on these answers.
http://fabiusmaximus.com/2012/09/27/liscio-income-inequality -research-polls43607/
Eight Key Charts About the Growing Income Inequality in the United
States
http://johnhively.wordpress.com/2012/09/17/eight-key-charts- about-the-growing-income-inequality-in-the-united-states/

--
virtualization experience starting Jan1968, online at home since Mar1970
Re: What Makes an Architecture Bizarre? [message #96821 is a reply to message #96816] Tue, 16 July 2013 21:21 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Walter Banks is currently offline  Walter Banks
Messages: 1000
Registered: July 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
Peter Flass wrote:

> On 7/16/2013 11:38 AM, Walter Banks wrote:

>>

>>

>> Peter Flass wrote:

>>

>>> On 7/15/2013 7:57 AM, Walter Banks wrote:

>>>>

>>>> Tax and government polies could easily change wealth distribution

>>>> significantly with changes in those area's.

>>>>

>>>> The latter may very well make Obamacare ineffective and

>>>> certainly inefficient compared to many other countries but

>>>> it will make many companies very rich.

>>>>

>>>

>>> I just read an interesting analogy. Most people have two good kidneys

>>> and really only need one. while some people have kidney problems that

>>> harm their quality of life and significantly shorten their lifespans.

>>> Maybe the government needs a policy to redistribute kidneys from the

>>> healthy people to the sick?

>>

>> I am not sure that I understand your point.

>

> The government has as much business redistributing body parts as it has

> redistributing income. It's none of their business.

>


I would agree with you it is not the governments
business to redistribute wealth or body parts.

It is also not the governments position to favour
one segment of the population over another. There
are a lot of examples of this in the current discussion.

A company that exports jobs and circulation of
cash outside of the country should be held responsible
for the jobs displaced in this country as a result of their
economic activity. I fully support companies that
engage in international commerce, I also believe
that they should be held responsible for their
behaviour. A company that complains that they
shouldn't be taxed to support welfare cases is
a complex problem on many levels.

A 100 years ago governments had protectionist
policies that protected employment. This is an
over simplification of a solution but governments
in the last 20 years have failed to protect its
citizens in a uniform manner.

Thanks for your clarification.

w..
Re: What Makes an Architecture Bizarre? [message #96870 is a reply to message #96821] Tue, 16 July 2013 22:03 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Rod Speed is currently offline  Rod Speed
Messages: 3507
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> wrote
> Peter Flass wrote

>> Walter Banks wrote

>>> Peter Flass wrote

>>>> Walter Banks wrote


>>>> > Tax and government polies could easily change wealth

>>>> > distribution significantly with changes in those area's.


>>>> > The latter may very well make Obamacare ineffective and

>>>> > certainly inefficient compared to many other countries but

>>>> > it will make many companies very rich.


>>>> I just read an interesting analogy. Most people have two good kidneys

>>>> and really only need one. while some people have kidney problems that

>>>> harm their quality of life and significantly shorten their lifespans.

>>>> Maybe the government needs a policy to redistribute kidneys from the

>>>> healthy people to the sick?


>>> I am not sure that I understand your point.


>> The government has as much business redistributing body parts

>> as it has redistributing income. It's none of their business.


> I would agree with you it is not the governments

> business to redistribute wealth or body parts.


The voters feel otherwise with welfare particularly
and have done for centurys now.

> It is also not the governments position to favour

> one segment of the population over another.


That is just plain wrong with taxation alone.

> There are a lot of examples of this in the current discussion.


Yes, because that is what the voters want, even if they
don't realise that and cannot articulate that clearly.

> A company that exports jobs and circulation

> of cash outside of the country should be held

> responsible for the jobs displaced in this

> country as a result of their economic activity.


It isn't even possible. And is mindlessly parochial too.

> I fully support companies that engage

> in international commerce,


So why should the places that buy US goods and
services be any different to the US buying goods
and services from outside the US ?

How would you feel if the US Congress said
that no one should be allowed to buy what you
produce because it comes from a foreign country ?

And didn't allow you to do business in the US
because you are a foreigner ?

> I also believe that they should be

> held responsible for their behaviour.


Its not even possible with international trade.

> A company that complains that they

> shouldn't be taxed to support welfare

> cases is a complex problem on many levels.


Particularly when its so easy for international
companys to avoid paying tax at all.

> A 100 years ago governments had protectionist policies


Yes.

> that protected employment.


That is very arguable indeed, particularly
with the sort of mindless protectionism that
happened during the great depression.

> This is an over simplification of a solution


It isn't in fact anything like a solution.

> but governments in the last 20 years have failed

> to protect its citizens in a uniform manner.


Essentially because that isn't even possible once
you have the immense differences in labor costs
between the modern first world and places like
China where the cost of moving what is made
in China is such a small part of the retail price.

In spades with stuff like call centers where it
doesn't cost any more do have that done in
places like India or the Philippines and we
have the same massive discrepancy in labor
costs.

> Thanks for your clarification.
Re: What Makes a Tax System Bizarre? [message #96871 is a reply to message #96174] Tue, 16 July 2013 22:54 Go to previous messageGo to next message
wclodius is currently offline  wclodius
Messages: 16
Registered: March 2013
Karma: 0
Junior Member
Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> wrote:

> In article <b4hjogFdfgtU1@mid.individual.net>,

> "jklam" <jkl@nlgrf.com> wrote:

>

>> "Walter Bushell" <proto@panix.com> wrote in message

>> news:proto-BD5D1E.22170514072013@70-1-84-166.pools.spcsdns.net...

>>> In article <b4h17hFa1gvU1@mid.individual.net>,

>>> "jklam" <jkl@nlgrf.com> wrote:

>>>

>>>>

>>>> Yes, but FICA/SECA are not true taxes, they are more a system

>>>> where you pay into the system while working and get that back

>>>> when you have retired etc.

>>>

>>> The government reserves the right to change the benefits you get, if

>>> any at any time.

>>

>> But has to consider what the voters will do to them at the ballot box

>> if they are stupid enough to try that.

>

> The majority of the person under 50 I know don't believe SS will be

> there for them. Perhaps they will make SS means tested first and then

> with many people figuring they won't get it, gradually drop the

> benefits. Some of the brightest minds are working on the problem of SS.


Then the majority of people under 50 that you know are misguided. I
suspect they are falling into an either-or faliacy, that if they might
not get all the benefits of current retirees then they will get nothing.
As the US post-war baby-boom works it way into retirement we will face
many of the problems that Japan had to deal with when its post-war baby
bust became the core of its work force. It caused them problems, and it
will cause us problems, but not the catastrophy that the above implies.
We have a lot of options: postpone benefits to improve the
worker/retiree ratio; raise taxes including those on social security
benefits; make specific cults in selected benefits; means testing; or
not adjusting benefits to reflect inflation. The result many not be as
good as it has been for those who have retired in the past twenty years,
but it will probably be better than my parents woud have received, and
will undoubtably be better than my grand-parents received.
Re: What Makes a Tax System Bizarre? [message #96960 is a reply to message #96662] Wed, 17 July 2013 08:23 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Shmuel (Seymour J.) M is currently offline  Shmuel (Seymour J.) M
Messages: 3286
Registered: July 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
In <51E56CBA.D6A4617E@bytecraft.com>, on 07/16/2013
at 11:54 AM, Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> said:

> Is there some reason that SS was not fully funded from contributions?


Startup,

--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT <http://patriot.net/~shmuel>

Unsolicited bulk E-mail subject to legal action. I reserve the
right to publicly post or ridicule any abusive E-mail. Reply to
domain Patriot dot net user shmuel+news to contact me. Do not
reply to spamtrap@library.lspace.org
Re: What Makes an Architecture Bizarre? [message #96999 is a reply to message #96671] Wed, 17 July 2013 09:16 Go to previous messageGo to next message
jmfbahciv is currently offline  jmfbahciv
Messages: 6173
Registered: March 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
Rod Speed wrote:
>

>

> "jmfbahciv" <See.above@aol.com> wrote in message

> news:PM0004E1A00F26C434@aca2448a.ipt.aol.com...

>> Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:

>>> On 15 Jul 2013 12:55:04 GMT

>>> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:

>>>

>>>> Ibmekon wrote:

>>>> > On Sun, 14 Jul 2013 15:21:30 -0400, Anne & Lynn Wheeler

>>>> > <lynn@garlic.com> wrote:

>>>> >

>>>> >>

>>>> >>re:

>>>> >>http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013i.html#79 What Makes an Architecture

>>>> Bizarre?

>>>> >>http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013i.html#80 What Makes an Architecture

>>>> Bizarre?

>>>> >>http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013i.html#81 What Makes a Tax System

>>>> >>Bizarre?

>>>> >>

>>>> >>hot off the presses

>>>> >>

>>>> >>Insight: Apple controversy lays bare complex Irish tax web

>>>>

>>>> http://news.yahoo.com/insight-apple-controversy-lays-bare-co mplex-irish-ta

x-
>>>> 090728679.html

>>>> >>

>>>> >>TAXED AT 0.004 PERCENT

>>>> >

>>>> > And if you can pay a year in advance, it would really help us out of a

>>>> > hole.

>>>>

>>>> ROTFLMAO.

>>>>

>>>> DEC got tax breaks, too. So they built a manufacturing plant and hired

>>>> a lot of people. That was the goal of the tax breaks. keep the

>>>> productive people in Ireland rather than losing their home-grown brains

>>>> and brawn.

>>>

>>> The only catch is that most companies leave (or shrink their sites)

>>> as soon as the tax incentives times out, leaving all that (now

>>> experienced)

>>> brains and brawn hunting for jobs that aren't there because nobody

>>> thought

>>> to use the tax incentives to build up *local* businesses that might stick

>>> around because they're not multinationals who can afford to chase round

>>> the

>>> globe for the best tax deals.

>>

>> I suspect there were a lot of local businesses around the DEC plant which

>> provided things for the people and the DEC plant. The big prolbem is

>> to have one, and only one, company come in. Massachusetts had serious

>> problems when DEC was destroyed because of the number of people who used

>> to work for DEC.

>>

>> The states which made car manufacturing attractive are doing pretty well

>> compared to Michigan whose manufacturing base got punished and punished

>> and punished until moving out of the country became "cheaper" than putting

>> up

>> with the expensive bullshit.

>

> It moved out of the country because labor costs are much lower where it

> moved to.


Strange. Ohio and the Carolings are still in the US last time I looked.
Those states made building and running a manufacturing plant profitable
and that's why they got the businesses to move in.

>

> Even DEC did plenty of that.

>

Why is profit such a swear word?

/BAH
Re: What Makes an Architecture Bizarre? [message #97000 is a reply to message #96669] Wed, 17 July 2013 09:16 Go to previous messageGo to next message
jmfbahciv is currently offline  jmfbahciv
Messages: 6173
Registered: March 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
Rod Speed wrote:
> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote

>> Stephen Sprunk wrote

>>> Peter Flass wrote

>>>> jklam wrote

>

>>>> >> In all of the above cases, he'd still be a billionaire

>>>> >> today, which is far more than he ever expected.

>

>>>> > Yes, he would still be stinking rich even if that capital

>>>> > gain was taxed at 95% and he would still try to do that.

>

>>>> This is a "feel good" argument. That guy was just lucky and

>>>> a lot sess deserving than the lady who cleans the toilets in

>>>> his house, so let's take it from him and give it to her.

>

>>> I'd be satisfied if he paid (at least) the same effective

>>> tax rate that she did on her (much smaller) earnings.

>

>>> Even Warren Buffet says it's ridiculous that he

>>> pays a lower tax rate than his secretary does.

>

>> Warren Buffet was comparing earned income to unearned income.

>

> Nope, he is talking about tax rates.

>

>> His secretary has a salary which is in the highest tax bracket.

>

> He pays a lower tax rate than she does anyway.


He pays a lower rate because his income is unearned. There is a
difference.


<snip>

/BAH
Re: What Makes an Architecture Bizarre? [message #97001 is a reply to message #96577] Wed, 17 July 2013 09:17 Go to previous messageGo to next message
jmfbahciv is currently offline  jmfbahciv
Messages: 6173
Registered: March 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
Peter Flass wrote:
> On 7/15/2013 8:55 AM, jmfbahciv wrote:

>>

>> this is just plain flat out wrong. Unearned income such as interest,

>> capital gains, and dividends are the primary source of income for the

>> retired middle class.

>

> Good point. Anyone with a retirement plan or a 401-k is dependent on

> these source of income, whether they think about it or not.

>

It gets completely forgotten when this ridiculous class warfare
rhetoric starts. Maybe that's the goal of Congress....keep up
the class warfare rhetoric so they can get access to all of that
lovely cash. Although most of it is no longer cash but insurance.

Anytime somebody starts to demand that unearned income be taxed at the
same level as the high income bracket, or higher as some suggestions
here implied, I get very, very worried becuase these people are
intelligent and have spent a lifetime doing analytical thinking.
If they're swallowing that D.C. rhetoric, then the ones who
believe their superiors, which is a majority, also have the same
kinds of thinking.

/BAH
Re: What Makes an Architecture Bizarre? [message #97002 is a reply to message #96663] Wed, 17 July 2013 09:16 Go to previous messageGo to next message
jmfbahciv is currently offline  jmfbahciv
Messages: 6173
Registered: March 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
Stephen Sprunk wrote:
> On 16-Jul-13 07:22, jmfbahciv wrote:

>> Stephen Sprunk wrote:

>>> On 15-Jul-13 07:55, jmfbahciv wrote:

>>>> Peter Flass wrote:

>>>> > The fair way is to let everyone keep the money they earn (or

>>>> > "earn") except for the _minimum_ required to run the

>>>> > government.

>>>>

>>>> that's the prolbem. The people in charge of governments spend

>>>> three times what they take in, no matter how much money is

>>>> received.

>>>

>>> The FY2013 federal budget has $3.8T of spending for $2.9T in

>>> revenues, which is not even close to three to one.

>>

>> Now count Social Security,

>

> That's included in both above numbers.


OK. SS usually isn't.

>

>> the now-delayed medical insurance sosts,

>

> You mean Obamacare, which by House Republicans' own admission will

> actually _save_ the govt money?



You don't get it. If money is "saved", Congress will spend 3x
the "saved" money. That's how they write their bills. They
add riders which will "take care" of the savings. When two or
more of these riders are added to a bill and then it becomes law,
there is no savings but a triple increase in expenditures.


>

>> bailouts,

>

> AFAIK, there are none in the FY2013 budget--or proposed off-budget.


Where is funding for Sallie Mae and Freddie Mac coming from? They are
still in deep shit. Consider the losses created with the S&L crisis in the
80s. Have those debts been paid off?

>

>> and whatever else is going to be spent in the long-term.

>

> Congress could do any variety of things in the future; however, you have

> accused them of spending $3 for every $1 in tax revenue, which AFAIK has

> _never_ been true. Even our most leftist politicians have never

> proposed anything even remotely approaching that.


See above. A lot of legislatures are doing that.

>

>>>> Voters and the rest have come to expect all freebies from the

>>>> government.

>>>

>>> Especially big business, which gets hundreds of billions in

>>> corporate welfare and tax loopholes.

>>

>> What does big business do with monies not handed over to the

>> governments? letmesee....oh, they pay out wages to the people who

>> work for them.

>

> Income taxes only apply to profits, which is _after_ wages are

> paid--even the ridiculous salaries and bonuses that executives pay

> themselves.


But your proposals are requiring that profits be "controlled" to a low
level or none.

>

>>> ... except that the CBO's studies show that the rich _don't_ spend

>>> their money; they mostly hoard it.

>>

>> Where? Their mattresses? That's just complete nonsense.

>

> Take it up with the CBO.


Then the corruption has infected the CBO. It's complete nonsense....
or the term "spend" means not investing.

>

>>> That same amount of money in the hands of the working classes (or

>>> the govt) generates far more economic activity--and therefore real

>>> wealth.

>>

>> Those working classes work for companies you want to punish.

>

> I don't want to "punish" anyone. However, taxes _are_ necessary to fund

> public services, and IMHO the levying of those taxes should be as fair

> as possible--rather than giving rich individuals and certain

> multi-national corporations loopholes that allow them to pay nothing,

> which results in higher taxes on the rest of us.


I agree. However, the problems are not because someone doesn't pay
taxes. The problems are cuased by Congress spending money as if
there was an infinite supply. Once wealth creation stops, the supply
will disappear within 50 years.

/BAH
Re: What Makes an Architecture Bizarre? [message #97003 is a reply to message #96590] Wed, 17 July 2013 09:17 Go to previous messageGo to next message
jmfbahciv is currently offline  jmfbahciv
Messages: 6173
Registered: March 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
Peter Flass wrote:
> On 7/15/2013 5:18 PM, 127 wrote:

>>

>>

>> "Stephen Sprunk" <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote in message

>> news:ks1o55$hds$1@dont-email.me...

>>>

>>> Borrowing money to buy things doesn't generate wealth;

>>

>> It can do when what is bought is used to produce wealth like

>> with a new factory or a service industry that produces wealth.

>

> For fun I have been doing some research on a local guy, George West, who

> became very rich in the 1800s. He started out with nothing as an

> immigrant, worked for a couple of paper manufacturers to learn the

> business, He moved here and bought a small paper mill, then another and

> another, etc. He improved the process for making paper bags and made so

> many he became known as "The Paper Bag King." He needed access to

> capital at every stage, and wound up with a whole bunch of factories and

> a large number of employees. Of course his grandsons squandered it all,

> but that's another story.


Yes. that seems to be the trend. The 3rd or 4th generation aren't trained
to work and have no incentive becuase they were never poor. so their
spending/saving/investing styles are based on the assumption that money
never runs out. This is what I call middle class thinking. The people
who are really rich (you never hear about them) are trained from age 1
how to create wealth.

I'm trying to think about the consequences when governments destroy
this training infrastructure. The USSR would have lost that knowledge
with the imposition of Communism. It seems like the royalty in Europe
are being taxed out of business but I'm not sure about that. The
training can't be started at college level; it has to be a mindset
which is learned when very young.

I'm beginning to think that the reason some people here disagree with
me sot blatently is because they've never been poor and have the
"middle class" mindset as their hidden assumption.

/BAH
Re: What Makes an Architecture Bizarre? [message #97004 is a reply to message #96576] Wed, 17 July 2013 09:17 Go to previous messageGo to next message
jmfbahciv is currently offline  jmfbahciv
Messages: 6173
Registered: March 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
Peter Flass wrote:
> On 7/15/2013 7:57 AM, Walter Banks wrote:

>>

>> Tax and government polies could easily change wealth distribution

>> significantly with changes in those area's.

>>

>> The latter may very well make Obamacare ineffective and

>> certainly inefficient compared to many other countries but

>> it will make many companies very rich.

>>

>

> I just read an interesting analogy. Most people have two good kidneys

> and really only need one. while some people have kidney problems that

> harm their quality of life and significantly shorten their lifespans.

> Maybe the government needs a policy to redistribute kidneys from the

> healthy people to the sick?


<grin> [clapping emoticon here] They're not going to get it.

/BAH
Re: What Makes a Tax System Bizarre? [message #97005 is a reply to message #96661] Wed, 17 July 2013 09:17 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
jmfbahciv is currently offline  jmfbahciv
Messages: 6173
Registered: March 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
Walter Banks wrote:
>

>

> jmfbahciv wrote:

>

>> John Levine wrote:

>>>> The majority of the person under 50 I know don't believe SS will be

>>>> there for them. Perhaps they will make SS means tested first and then

>>>> with many people figuring they won't get it, gradually drop the

>>>> benefits. Some of the brightest minds are working on the problem of SS.

>>>

>>> That's really sad, and tells us how successful the right wing

>>> disinformation machine is.

>>

>> Are you kidding? When I was 25, I didn't expect to collect SS. It was

>> having trouble that far back.

>>

>>>

>>> The reality is that the gap between SS expenditure and SS revenue is

>>> not large. If we took the income cap off the SS tax to make it less

>>> regressive, that would be enough to fund SS forever. Even with no

>>> changes, it will be decades before there's any shortfall at all.

>>

>> And people won't be able to collect until they're 85.

>>

>>>

>>> Medicare is a financial black hole, but it's the same black hole as

>>> the whole US medical non-system, and Medicare has much lower overhead

>>> than any private insurance company.

>>>

>>

>> Wait until after next year. The black hole will implode.

>

> I would be willing to take a small wager that it will not as soon

> as the accounting is in for costs related to the currently

> un-insured being covered.


There will be more uninsured when employers drop the benefit (it's
still a benefit, not a right).

/BAH
Pages (231): [ «    147  148  149  150  151  152  153  154  155  156  157  158  159  160  161  162    »]  Switch to threaded view of this topic Create a new topic Submit Reply
Previous Topic: Next SCCAN meeting - Saturday, January 18
Next Topic: Most Americans still own a VCR
Goto Forum:
  

-=] Back to Top [=-
[ Syndicate this forum (XML) ] [ RSS ] [ PDF ]

Current Time: Thu Mar 28 09:57:32 EDT 2024

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.16834 seconds