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 #98247 is a reply to message #97894] Sat, 20 July 2013 08:16 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Peter Flass is currently offline  Peter Flass
Messages: 8375
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
Senior Member
On 7/19/2013 11:27 AM, jmfbahciv wrote:
> Patrick Scheible wrote:

>>

>> There's Norplant and similar hormone-based birth control that only

>> requires a shot quarterly or yearly.

>

> I'll bet the cost is equivalent to taking the pill. Those came after

> I stopped needing birth control so I don't anything about their use

> and effectiveness.


It doesn't require any logical thought or pre-planning. Those are
things most of "the poor" are bad at (if not, they usually don't stay
poor.) Many people do things on instinct - want something, go get it.
That's why so many are in debt or in jail.

--
Pete
Re: What Makes an Architecture Bizarre? [message #98248 is a reply to message #97992] Sat, 20 July 2013 08:12 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Walter Bushell is currently offline  Walter Bushell
Messages: 1834
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
Senior Member
In article <ksc4nj$edm$1@dont-email.me>,
Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote:

> On 19-Jul-13 10:27, jmfbahciv wrote:

>> Stephen Sprunk wrote:

>>> On 18-Jul-13 09:31, jmfbahciv wrote:

>>>> Take a look at how the money which the US took in from the auto

>>>> bailout. They spent it three times over and the original money

>>>> was borrowed; it didn't come from revenues.

>>>

>>> All of the bailout money was borrowed. But that doesn't prove, as

>>> you have claimed, that Congress spent $3 for every $1 it receives.

>>

>> I listened to speeches. The money Congress got back from the auto

>> makers (which was lower than what was given to them) was spent in one

>> way by Congress and spent in another way by Obama. That's two. The

>> third is repaying the original debt.

>

> Bah. Congress didn't spend the same money three times; even the above

> only has them spending it once because the "original debt" hasn't been

> paid off. And you can't spend money twice anyway; they borrowed the

> second set of money--and I've already refuted your bogus claims about

> the spending-to-revenue ratio. The repayment of those loans wasn't

> revenue anyway, and most of the loans made available were never actually

> taken in the first place.

>

> What _did_ happen was the govt paid UAW to take over the pensions and

> health insurance for retirees, and nobody expected _that_ money to ever

> come back.

>

>>>> Stephen Sprunk wrote:

>>>> > On 17-Jul-13 08:16, jmfbahciv wrote:

>>>> >> Consider the losses created with the S&L crisis in the 80s.

>>>> >> Have those debts been paid off?

>>>> >

>>>> > I thought that the FDIC and Federal Reserve, which are _not_

>>>> > part of the federal government, were the ones that bailed out

>>>> > the FSLIC?

>>>>

>>>> Not the FDIC. but even so where did those entites get their

>>>> money? The US taxpayer.

>>>

>>> Wrong. They get it via inflation, which steals wealth from

>>> everyone who holds dollars. That is a disjoint set from "US

>>> taxpayers".

>>

>> The debts incurred were paid by inflation? I'm on my edge of

>> understanding finacne and economics now. this sounds so wrong.

>

> Usually, the FDIC, NCUA and (former) FSLIC act like mutual insurance

> companies, except that their members are financial institutions. They

> charge premiums for coverage and, in the event one of them becomes

> insolved, pay that money back out.

>

> However, during the S&L crisis, it turned out that the FSLIC didn't have

> enough money to cover all the losses, so they had to get bailed out

> themselves by the Federal Reserve. Congress disbanded the FSLIC; the

> few S&Ls left were converted to "banks", now covered by the FDIC.

>

> The Federal Reserve Banks work totally differently, though. Despite the

> name, they are not really banks and do not have reserves. When they

> need to give someone money (e.g. the Treasury, in exchange for a

> Treasury bill, or the FDIC/FSLIC/NCUA during a bailout), they create new

> dollars out of thin air; this increases the money supply, which is the

> very definition of inflation.

>

>>> My state's constitution also prohibits the govt from issuing debt,

>>

>> Your state can't issue any bonds?!!! How do they get monies for

>> infrastructure? I can't believe they operate on cash-only basis;

>> states aren't that rich and don't usually allow extra cash lay

>> around.

>

> Most infrastructure is handled by counties or other local agencies,

> which can issue bonds. It's just the state that can't.

>

> The only state infrastructure I can think of offhand is the highway

> system, which is indeed paid for with cash (from fuel tax revenues).

>

>>>> >> Then the corruption has infected the CBO. It's complete

>>>> >> nonsense.... or the term "spend" means not investing.

>>>> >

>>>> > You call it corruption, but they've produced reports on exactly

>>>> > how they calculated that effect, which to date no economist in

>>>> > the world has even refuted, much less disproven.

>>>>

>>>> Economists don't seem to know how work is done. Very few seem to

>>>> go beyond the book learning.

>>>

>>> They measured what actual people _do_ with additional income. The

>>> poor spend it all to improve their standard of living. The rich,

>>> who don't need to improve their standard of living, spend some on

>>> conspicuous consumption but speculate with most of it, which means

>>> _less_ economic activity per dollar of additional income.

>>

>> that is a middle-class mindset; they are not the rich. Those high

>> wage earners who simply spend lots of money on useless things don't

>> know how to create wealth. WE are talkking about two different

>> grouops of people.

>

> No, I'm talking about the exact group that you are; you just think that

> "investing" magically creates wealth, whereas what they're really doing

> with most of their money is speculating, which does not.

>

> It is not the rich who start new businesses and create new jobs; that's

> the middle class. You seem to have the two backward.

>

>>> Wealth is the accumulated fruits of labor.

>>

>> that's an individual thing. Creating wealth on a a larger scale is

>> more like prosperity but that word has lots of baggage so I didn't

>> use it.

>

> I used the above terms in the formal macroeconomic sense.

>

>>> Labor is the production of goods and services. Obviously, the

>>> demand for labor depends on the _consumption_ of goods and

>>> services.

>>>

>>> Ergo, it is spending that creates wealth.

>>

>> This gets complicated; it's not that simple. Ford created wealth

>> because his company caused oodles of other companies, businessses and

>> trade to be created. Those companies, in turn, caused other

>> businesses and trade to be created. and this was even in the days

>> when Ford insisted that the company do all its own processing.

>

> Ford himself created very little wealth. His _workers_ are who created

> that wealth, and Ford extracted economic rent from that process, as was

> his right in return for investing capital in the process.

>

> More importantly, Ford wouldn't have made a cent if his _customers_

> didn't have money to spend on his products.

>

> Just look at the Great Depression: all the factories (capital) and

> workers (labor) were still there, ready to make things, but the

> customers didn't have any money to spend, so the economy stopped.

>

>>> Capital, which you seem to be calling wealth, is the _subset_ of

>>> wealth which is devoted to producing more wealth.

>>

>> Maybe capital is a better term but I usually associate that with an

>> entity and not an entire sector and its related sectors.

>

> It can refer to the entire economy, too, not just sectors.

>

>>> Capital extracts economic rent from labor, transferring wealth from

>>> the worker to the capitalist. That is fair if the capital makes

>>> labor more productive (e.g. by investing in machines) by a large

>>> enough margin to offset the rent, but such is not guaranteed.

>>

>> I would not call that a transfer of wealth. I would call it an

>> exchange of money for work-done. It's a contract, not wealth.

>

> Don't confuse yourself by focusing on when money changes hands; money

> and wealth are not the same thing.

>

> Think about this: I have a fishing pole, but you don't. I agree to let

> you use my pole in return for half of your catch. You catch 10 fish.

> The total wealth you (labor) created is 10 fish. I (capital) take 5 of

> the fish (rent). This is fairly easy to understand.

>

> Now, let's say the market price is $1 per fish, and instead of you

> keeping 5 fish, I pay you $5. You (labor) are still the one creating

> the wealth, and I (capital) am merely extracting some of that wealth

> from you (rent). Scale it up to a corporation or an entire economy and

> it gets more complicated, but nothing can change the fundamental truth

> that labor, not capital, creates wealth.

>

> S


That's Marxist and I prefer Harpo to Karl, and Lennon to Lenin.

If there is no fishing pole, nobody eats.

--
Gambling with Other People's Money is the meth of the fiscal industry.
me -- in the spirit of Karl and Groucho Marx
Re: What Makes a Tax System Bizarre? [message #98249 is a reply to message #97965] Sat, 20 July 2013 08:29 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Peter Flass is currently offline  Peter Flass
Messages: 8375
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
Senior Member
On 7/19/2013 12:43 PM, Lawrence Statton wrote:
>

> Geeks will be geeks. Car, computer, radio, whatever. Who knows what

> the future will bring -- will my grandchildren be able to build a

> griffin out of bald-eagle eggs and lion semen[3]?

>


There are already open-source genetics labs (don't know what to call
them, "open source" doesn't sound right). For a small monthly fee you
get use of all the equipment. I don't know about you, but it scares the
heck out of me.


--
Pete
Re: What Makes a Tax System Bizarre? [message #98250 is a reply to message #97971] Sat, 20 July 2013 08:26 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Walter Bushell is currently offline  Walter Bushell
Messages: 1834
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
Senior Member
In article <601.983T921T6014090@kltpzyxm.invalid>,
"Charlie Gibbs" <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:

> In article <FPednb4V_eA333XMnZ2dnUVZ7t-XnZ2d@bt.com>,

> am.swallow@btinternet.com (Andrew Swallow) writes:

>

>> The ban on abortion and contraception do feel like the slave breeding

>> programs that the southern states introduced when the slave trade was

>> banned. Similar rules.

>

> Well, The Economy demands that we keep the population Ponzi scheme

> going...


Those slaves are going to be a drain mostly. Girls have dropped out of
High School because they became unwed mothers, or married to lusers
and had good and productive lives, but it's not the way to bet.

What "The Economy" needs is a middle class, but they can't afford to
raise enough children to middle class standards to keep the beast fed.

--
Gambling with Other People's Money is the meth of the fiscal industry.
me -- in the spirit of Karl and Groucho Marx
Re: What Makes a Tax System Bizarre? [message #98252 is a reply to message #97991] Sat, 20 July 2013 08:38 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Peter Flass is currently offline  Peter Flass
Messages: 8375
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
Senior Member
On 7/19/2013 3:33 PM, Lawrence Statton wrote:
> "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> writes:

>> I agree. One *should* keep up with the new stuff and learn new

>> things. Still... the guys out of school work for less money. That

>> often tips the scales in their favor.

>

> No. It doesn't. I don't know where this belief that money is the key

> comes from. The difference in salary between the youngest, greenest

> grad and the greyest greybeard is chicken-feed in the grand scheme of

> what it costs to keep a business going.

>

> I'm not for a second going to shoot myself in the foot by hiring a

> neww grad who is clueless to save myself a dollar in salary but cost

> me ten dollars in lost sales.

>


Often the new guys start out the same salary or more as the current
employees. Your current staff is alredy working for starvation wages [
;-) ] but the new hires earn the going rate.

--
Pete
Re: What Makes a Tax System Bizarre? [message #98253 is a reply to message #98115] Sat, 20 July 2013 08:44 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Peter Flass is currently offline  Peter Flass
Messages: 8375
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
Senior Member
On 7/19/2013 10:17 PM, Lawrence Statton wrote:
> "Charlie Gibbs" <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> writes:

>

>>> For the next, the "toy" was the Nintendo (or Sega, or XBox, or

>>> whatever it is this week) and you don't have to learn to program

>>> that - just just plug it in and turn it on and get some engaging

>>> entertainment.

>>

>> Passive entertainment, at that. We wrote our own entertainment.

>>

>

> It's not entirely passive, and some Smart People (Jeri Ellsworth among

> them) have made cases for the bona-fide intrinsic value of gaming.

> (Totally aside from the peace-divdend of games driving performance.)


Good training for drone pilots. Wait until the robots get into ground
warfare; the "call of duty" people will have an easy time getting jobs.

--
Pete
Re: What Makes an Architecture Bizarre? [message #98254 is a reply to message #98159] Sat, 20 July 2013 08:47 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Peter Flass is currently offline  Peter Flass
Messages: 8375
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
Senior Member
On 7/19/2013 11:09 PM, 127 wrote:
>

> Most of them never will move to the 3rd world. It's just not possible

> for the absolute vast bulk of the service sector that is where most of

> the jobs are now.


So we buy all our stuff from China and get jobs sweeping each others'
offices?


--
Pete
Re: What Makes a Tax System Bizarre? [message #98255 is a reply to message #97985] Sat, 20 July 2013 08:44 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Walter Bushell is currently offline  Walter Bushell
Messages: 1834
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
Senior Member
In article <ksc1td$ufr$1@dont-email.me>,
"Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> wrote:

> "John Levine" <johnl@iecc.com> wrote in message

> news:ks9rjj$1rts$1@leila.iecc.com...

>>> That doesn't explain the millions of _open_ jobs.

>>

>> Could you tell use where these millions of open jobs are advertised,

>> posted, or can otherwise be seen to exist?

>>

>> I hope we mean skilled jobs that pay a living wage, not part time

>> whopper assembly.

>>

>

> I think we mean real, fulfilling employment, like being a greeter at

> Walmart. This qualifies you to get food stamps.

>

> --

>

> numerist at aquaporin4 dot com


I think the previous poster meant "Whopper®" assembly. Politicians,
marketeers, financiers etcetera are whopper assemblers.

--
Gambling with Other People's Money is the meth of the fiscal industry.
me -- in the spirit of Karl and Groucho Marx
Re: What Makes a Tax System Bizarre? [message #98256 is a reply to message #98101] Sat, 20 July 2013 08:49 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Walter Bushell is currently offline  Walter Bushell
Messages: 1834
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
Senior Member
In article <b4u61bF539rU1@mid.individual.net>, "127" <127@586.com>
wrote:

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

> news:proto-846233.06505819072013@70-1-84-166.pools.spcsdns.net...

>> In article <ks9g7n$u2r$1@dont-email.me>,

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

>>

>>> Most don't, actually. For those who do, it's better to have your kids

>>> close together rather than have large gaps between them. Two years is

>>> currently accepted as the ideal spacing.

>

>> And 6 years is way too long.

>

> I'm not convinced.

>

>> The baby arrives just when the older kid is entering school

>> and the older kid gets the "We love you just as much, but

>> we are going to have to dedicate more time to the baby

>> speech.". Which goes over like a pregnant pole vaulter.

>

> Worked fine in the older larger families where that result was inevitable.


I meant the first next kid. If the first younger child is like a
couple or three years younger, then the child at 6 doesn't get the
sudden shock or not being an only.

--
Gambling with Other People's Money is the meth of the fiscal industry.
me -- in the spirit of Karl and Groucho Marx
Re: What Makes an Architecture Bizarre? [message #98257 is a reply to message #97977] Sat, 20 July 2013 09:45 Go to previous messageGo to next message
jmfbahciv is currently offline  jmfbahciv
Messages: 6173
Registered: March 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz wrote:
> In <PM0004E1DECF579569@ac810898.ipt.aol.com>, on 07/19/2013

> at 03:28 PM, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> said:

>

>> OH, bullshit.

>

> From you.

>

>> I'm talking about the current class warfare shit being used as the

>> reason to destroy this country.

>

> E.g., rewarding corporations for offshoring jobs?

>

> You're still lying.

>

And you're getting to bad as bad as speedo. I'll probably
not open your posts anymore.

/BAH
Re: What Makes an Architecture Bizarre? [message #98258 is a reply to message #98242] Sat, 20 July 2013 09:45 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 7/19/2013 11:27 AM, jmfbahciv wrote:

>>

>> I have no social circle. you are it.

>

> You're in big trouble then. Maybe we all are.

>


Being ill, and then JMF being ill, meant no work; that
was usually my social life basis.

Moving from Mass to Mich meant that I had to start
from scratch.

My mother was wearing me out so much that the only
extra energy I had went to doing her things.
the social contact I had was her.

/BAH
Re: What Makes a Tax System Bizarre? [message #98259 is a reply to message #98116] Sat, 20 July 2013 09:45 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:PM0004E1DDE189F09C@ac810898.ipt.aol.com...

>> Patrick Scheible wrote:

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

>>

>> <snip>

>>

>>>> There is "free" and then there is using it. For the

>>>> pill you have to remember to take it every day at the

>>>> same time; it's effectiveness (used to be) 95% or so.

>>>> That's all based on the little fact that there are no

>>>> irregular menstration prolbems. You have to pay tons of

>>>> money to get and use the pill. Condoms require

>>>> cooperation from the male, which is not common, although

>>>> the AIDS thing may have helped there.

>>>

>>> There's Norplant and similar hormone-based birth control that only

>>> requires a shot quarterly or yearly.

>

>> I'll bet the cost is equivalent to taking the pill.

>

> You've just lost that bet. There's a reason its used in the 3rd world.

> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norplant#Use_in_the_developing_ world


I thought we were talking about US females.

<snip>

/BAH
Re: What Makes a Tax System Bizarre? [message #98260 is a reply to message #97862] Sat, 20 July 2013 09:45 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 18-Jul-13 09:31, jmfbahciv wrote:

>> 127 wrote:

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

>>> news:ks7bdm$935$1@dont-email.me...

>>>> Ironically, _after_ they have a kid, the govt is willing to give

>>>> them free birth control. But not before, when it would save the

>>>> government literally trillions of dollars.

>>>

>>> I doubt many of those who do end up pregnant would bother to use it

>>> even if it was free.

>>

>> The males sure don't. There's myths out there which say that using

>> condoms doesn't give full satisfaction.

>

> It ain't a myth. I assume you're female?


Yup. Do female condoms also not give the same sensations?

>

>> so birth control is usually left up to the female.

>

> RISUG, when it finally gets approved, will be the first real option to

> change that. Whether it actually does, though, remains to be seen,

> especially now that so many states have banned telling kids the truth

> about birth control (and STDs).


It's the absence of training which is the big problem. Instead
the rabids want to control who fucks and when they fuck and how
many kids they are to produce.

/BAH
Re: What Makes an Architecture Bizarre? [message #98261 is a reply to message #97864] Sat, 20 July 2013 09:46 Go to previous messageGo to next message
jmfbahciv is currently offline  jmfbahciv
Messages: 6173
Registered: March 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
Lawrence Statton wrote:
> Peter Flass <Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com> writes:

>> What the hell does Facebook do that's useful? Or Twitter, Instagram, ...

>

> Or the NFL or the NBA or the Yankees?

>

> Pragmatic utility is not the sole measure of value.

>

those comm devices are teaching people who have had no exposure to
Western Civilization and self-determination ideas.

/BAH
Re: What Makes a Tax System Bizarre? [message #98263 is a reply to message #97910] Sat, 20 July 2013 09:46 Go to previous messageGo to next message
jmfbahciv is currently offline  jmfbahciv
Messages: 6173
Registered: March 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
Lawrence Statton wrote:
>

> [Still trimming comp.arch ... please do the same]

>

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

>>> I think health care is a right in a civilized society.

>>> A healthy population makes a country far more

>>> competitive on the world stage.

>>

>> That's doesn't make it a right where other people have

>> to pay for the expenses.

>

> Yes, we do. Really. Our humanity demands it.

>

You are willing to pay $200K+ to prevent a miscarriage?
Note that miscarriages are nature's way of dumping a problem.

/BAH
Re: What Makes an Architecture Bizarre? [message #98265 is a reply to message #98162] Sat, 20 July 2013 09:46 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 19-Jul-13 10:27, jmfbahciv wrote:

>> Stephen Sprunk wrote:

>>> On 18-Jul-13 09:32, jmfbahciv wrote:

>>>> Robert Wessel wrote:

>>>> > Tax deferred* 401k and IRA distributions, as well as SS income

>>>> > (above a certain total income limit)

>>>>

>>>> which is very low.

>>>

>>> Not necessarily; you can sock away a lot of money in 401k/403b and

>>> IRA accounts. SS benefits are generally pitiful, though.

>>

>> But the amount you can extract each year without paying taxes is

>> small. You can't even extract the interest/dividends the fund pays.

>

> Right; above ~$20k in "earned" income, including 401k/403b and IRA

> distributions, you're going to be paying income taxes. I don't recall

> if those distributions are also subject to FICA taxes.


So far they're not but somebody in this thread suggested it. I object
to that one too.
>

> The rich, in contrast, get _their_ retirement* savings taxed at the much

> lower rates for "unearned" income.


So what? They've already paid taxes on the earned income which bought
the stocks, bonds and bills which produce unearned income.
>

> (* Not that the rich can really retire, since they've never done an

> honest day's work in the first place.)


Yea. that attitude is why I thought you were talking aobut different
a very different definition of wealth.
>

>>> If you think stock/bond ownership is "normal", that says a lot

>>> about the lack of variety in your social circle.

>>

>> I have no social circle. you are it.

>

> That explains a lot.


I'm working reestablishing information pathways but it takes time
and energy; I don't have much of hte latter.
>

>>>> If you are, then people are really in deep shit and don't know it

>>>> yet.

>>>

>>> Actually, most of them _do_ know they're in really deep shit; they

>>> just don't understand how to _get out_ of their situation because

>>> they also see that the entire deck is stacked against them.

>>

>> WEll, it's called don't spend money. But that's like spitting into

>> the wind and not getting wet.

>

> Right, because basic human needs like food, shelter, clothing, health

> care, etc. are totally optional. Just cut that spending out of your

> budget and your problems are solved! Why can't the poor see that?


The "ppor" of the US also have TVs, cable , and other so-called
necessities which were never on my mother's shopping lists when I was
young.

/BAH
Re: What Makes an Architecture Bizarre? [message #98267 is a reply to message #98113] Sat, 20 July 2013 09:46 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:PM0004E1DEFC4F4D81@ac810898.ipt.aol.com...

>> Peter Flass wrote:

>>> On 7/18/2013 10:32 AM, jmfbahciv wrote:

>>>>

>>>> Are you telling me that most people will not have bought their own

>>>> stocks

>>>> and bonds, reinvesting dividends, for their retirement? Are you telling

>>>> met that most people are not doing any saving for their retirement but

>>>> are depending on the US government and their employer for income after

>>>> retirement?

>>>

>>> Yes and yes.

>>>

>>> * Average savings of a 50 year old $43,797

>>> * Percentage of Americans over 65 who rely completely on Social

>>> Security 35%

>>> * Percentage of Americans who don’t save anything for retirement 36%

>>> (http://www.statisticbrain.com/retirement-statistics/)

>>>

>>> I can't claim to be a retirement genius, because most of my saving was

>>> done automatically, but I *did* think about it from time to time and

>>> make some decisions.

>>>

>>>>

>>>> If you are, then I'm beginning to understand why none of you

>>>> understand what I'm talking about. If you are, then people are really

>>>> in deep shit and don't know it yet.

>>>

>>> Yes, except their expecting the "uncle sam faiery" to bail them out.

>

>> Which is why SS and other government freebies

>

> SS isnt a government freebie, you pay for what you eventually receive.


No, you don't. Some people don't pay anything.

<snip>

/BAH
Re: What Makes a Tax System Bizarre? [message #98268 is a reply to message #98054] Sat, 20 July 2013 09:46 Go to previous messageGo to next message
jmfbahciv is currently offline  jmfbahciv
Messages: 6173
Registered: March 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
greymausg wrote:
> On 2013-07-19, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:

>> Peter Flass wrote:

>>> On 7/18/2013 3:32 PM, Andrew Swallow wrote:

>>>> On 17/07/2013 23:47, Stephen Sprunk wrote:

>>>> > On 17-Jul-13 16:23, Peter Flass wrote:

>>>> >> On 7/17/2013 11:24 AM, Stephen Sprunk wrote:

>>>> >>> There's one serious problem with your theory: 1.5 million women per

>>>> >>> year choose abortion. That shows they _don't_ want to have a kid,

>>>> >>> despite the supposedly wonderful life of a welfare queen. So why

>>>> >>> did they get pregnant in the first place? Because birth control is

>>>> >>> simply too expensive for someone without health insurance.

>>>> >>

>>>> >> Abstinence is free.

>>>> >

>>>> > And, in practice, it doesn't actually work.

>>>> >

>>>> > Sadly, my state mandated the oxymoronic "abstinence-only sex education",

>>>> > and within a few years our teen pregnancy rate went from the middle of

>>>> > the pack to the highest in the country. Gov. Perry declared the program

>>>> > a "success", which makes me wonder what his goal really was--or if he's

>>>> > so stupid that he doesn't realize being #1 is a bad thing in this case.

>>>> >

>>>> > S

>>>> >

>>>>

>>>> The ban on abortion and contraception do feel like the slave breeding

>>>> programs that the southern states introduced when the slave trade was

>>>> banned. Similar rules.

>>>>

>>>

>>> The origin of Planned Parenthood was the Eugenics movement. The idea

>>> was to stop the undesirables from breeding.

>>>

>>>

>> Then it must have changed into stop breeding undesirables.

>>

>> /BAH

>

> Ireland is a very traditional, stratified society, yet I can identify

> people whose grandparents were the `dregs of society', yet the present

> generation are productive citizens. Free education did that, plus the need

> for people to improve their lot. Affordable health systems made it

> desirable to campeign against general problems, rather than profiting by

> treating the problems when they affect the rich.

>

> Socialism grew when the wealthier classes realized that life was better

> when the poor were treated properly, rather than spending money keeping

> them subject.

>

> A lot of the silly neoconservative ideas got popular when new technologies

> changed the makeup of the wealthy classes. A lot of these scum are

'new-rich'
> without any feeling of responsibility to society in general.


I knew I should have defined the term. when a female gets
pregnant when she doesn't want a kid, that kid is undesirable.

/BAH
Re: What Makes a Tax System Bizarre? [message #98269 is a reply to message #97911] Sat, 20 July 2013 09:46 Go to previous messageGo to next message
jmfbahciv is currently offline  jmfbahciv
Messages: 6173
Registered: March 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
Lawrence Statton wrote:
>

> [sparing comp.arch from this continuing hell ... ]

>

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

>> this is unbelievable. Every school which had a PDP-10 had lots

>> of kiddies who could code. Everyone wanted to play with the "toy".

>

> And that's how it was for my generation, but I fear that I'm the last.

>

> For the next, the "toy" was the Nintendo (or Sega, or XBox, or

> whatever it is this week) and you don't have to learn to program that

> - just just plug it in and turn it on and get some engaging

> entertainment.

>

> When I was working in the video game "biz", I was asked at a panel

> discussion, "What is your favorite game?" And I answered deadpan

> "cc". (The C compiler).

>

>

>> GUI and PC have a lot to answer for. people who buy a system todya

>> have no idea and receive no hints about what's underneath. Even

>> the Unixes of this world hide basic computing skills.

>

> That's a red herring -- people buy tools because they want to use

> those tools to do their job, or make thier lives easier. Those whose

> constitution requires them to know how it works will find out, but the

> vast majority of users of <anything> don't really care how to build

> it, or how it works, they just want to write their book, or balance

> their accounts, or see pictures of kittens, or chat with their

> grandchildren, or ....


It's not a red herring. Forcing all computer interaction to remain
at the level of GUI is what I was talking about. I've got no
problems with having an "easy" useful user interface. However, when
the user needs something more comoplicated, access to that layer
of usage should be possible and not need extreme finger wrestling
to get there and remain there.

>

>> I said it once and I'll state it again with stronger lanugage.

>> Every kid should have a copy of DEC's _Introduction to

>> Programming_.

>

> I'm torn in two on this issue -- I genuinely believe that learning to

> program to some level of compentency will force a person to think

> logically about solving a problem, and that can't possibly be a bad

> thing. On the other hand, I've met enough people who just CAN'T seem

> to break a problem down logically - they can only seem to absorb

> information holistically - that it would be like forcing me to learn

> oilpainting. I doubt I'd ever get good at it, and I'd hate being

> forced to learn it, and hate them for trying.


Note that I never said they had to learn it. It can set on their
shelves for the rest of their lives but everyone should have it.
Those who get curious are exactly the ones you want to hire when
they grow up.

I would add an appendix with a listing of other books which might
be of interest and those books could piont at topics which include
the arts, scinences and other unexpected areas.

>

> The first Real Important Lesson of Adulthood: Everyone is created

> unequal. I am unique. There are others like me, but many, many

> others totally unlike me.


I learned that when I was about 6 or 7.


>

> My first exposure to that was in differential calculus -- this shit is

> so EASY! What kind of brain-damaged MORON are you that this isn't

> immediately obvious??! My second exposure was integral calclus. This

> shit is so HARD! What kind of brain-damaged MORON am I that this

> isn't immediately obvious??!


ROTHFLMAO. Your thinking style is very interesting.

/BAH
Re: What Makes an Architecture Bizarre? [message #98270 is a reply to message #97963] Sat, 20 July 2013 09:46 Go to previous messageGo to next message
jmfbahciv is currently offline  jmfbahciv
Messages: 6173
Registered: March 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
Patrick Scheible wrote:
> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> writes:

>

>> Patrick Scheible wrote:

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

>>>

>>>> Morten Reistad wrote:

>>>> > In article <51E38421.1070508@SPAM.comp-arch.net>,

>>>> > Andy (Super) Glew <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> wrote:

>>>> >>On 7/14/2013 12:45 PM, jklam wrote:

>>>> >>> That doesn't work with the US income tax system because the amount you

>>>> >>> pay in US income tax is not dependant on where your primary residence

>> is.

>>>> >>>

>>>> >>> What matters is if you are a US citizen for tax purposes or not.]

>>>> >>

>>>> >>So have the income and hold the income producing property in an offshore

>>>> >>company that you control.

>>>> >>

>>>> >>Leave the money offshore, for offshore expenses.

>>>> >

>>>> > Indeed. The idea of incorporating offshore is what secures the

>>>> > tax base. Even I have an offshore pension fund. I will be taxed

>>>> > to death if I use it as a non-pensioner, but can take income from

>>>> > it when I retire. And if I retire in some low-tax jurisdiction

>>>> > it will be taxed at that low rate.

>>>>

>>>> And why should one have to do all of this juggling? Don't governments

>>>> understand that high tax rates result in the wealth moving out of the

>>>> country?

>>>

>>> Even if the tax rates are low, there's always some pathetic hellhole of

>>> another country that will tolerate tax rates 2% lower and attract the

>>> businesses that shop around for the best tax havens.

>>

>> But your use of the term hellhole says it all. Why move to a hellhoe

>> if there environs of the original are good? There are lots of additional

>> costs and that doesn't include transporting the capitalized assets

>> offshore.

>

> Again, multinationals thrive by moving their costs to where labor is

> cheapest and taxes are lowest. That tends to create miserable living

> conditions for the population,


Which population? the residents of the country they moved to?

That's complete nonsense. What it does is start establishing
a middle class in that country.

> and maybe the multinational has to build

> their own compound with their own security, electricity, and water

> purification,


Yes. and their employees learn that those things are valuable. Their
politicians will have to steer the monies into establishing a real,
working infrastructure instead of pissing it away on guns and wars.
The people who work begin to create nests which have toilets and
plumbing and floors. Their neighbors see the improvments and want
them, too. So the neighbors find work which will fund those
improvements. All of a sudden, there is a labor force who doesn't
have any work so the politicians invite more manufacturing. those
companies move in IFF the pols ahve stopped shooting each other
and started to expend resources on infrastructure. they are
fortunate in that they can skip the copper lines for comm and
go straight to cell phones, etc.



> but it's still cheaper than operating in a country with

> decent living conditions and 1st world tax rates. Their only

> involvement in the 1st world can be selling to the consumers there, who

> still work for the businesses that haven't moved to the 3rd world yet.


that "3rd" world will soon become just as expensive. the key to which
countries keep their manufacturing is how they treat the businesses.
Bad treatement: busiinesses will move elsewhere. That's normal
and should not be changed. If the US wants to get those companies
back into the US, then they had better make the business
environment attractive for business. TAxing and feeing the shit
out of them is NOT going to convince a single business to move back.



/BAH
Re: What Makes a Tax System Bizarre? [message #98271 is a reply to message #97974] Sat, 20 July 2013 09:46 Go to previous messageGo to next message
jmfbahciv is currently offline  jmfbahciv
Messages: 6173
Registered: March 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
Patrick Scheible wrote:
> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> writes:

>

>> Patrick Scheible wrote:

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

>>

>> <snip>

>>

>>>> There is "free" and then there is using it. For the

>>>> pill you have to remember to take it every day at the

>>>> same time; it's effectiveness (used to be) 95% or so.

>>>> That's all based on the little fact that there are no

>>>> irregular menstration prolbems. You have to pay tons of

>>>> money to get and use the pill. Condoms require

>>>> cooperation from the male, which is not common, although

>>>> the AIDS thing may have helped there.

>>>

>>> There's Norplant and similar hormone-based birth control that only

>>> requires a shot quarterly or yearly.

>>

>> I'll bet the cost is equivalent to taking the pill. Those came after

>> I stopped needing birth control so I don't anything about their use

>> and effectiveness.

>

> Yes, the cost is similar to the Pill, but the woman doesn't have to

> remember to take it every day. They're as effective as the Pill in

> theory, and more in practice because of not having to remember.

>

>>> There's IUDs that cost a fair

>>> amount to put in, but last for 5-7 years without requiring any new

>>> doctor's visits.

>>

>> Unless they fall out.

>

> They can't just fall out. The IUD spreads out to be about the same

> width as the nonpregnant woman's uterus, which is much bigger than the

> cervix.


I had a friend who had to have one because getting pregnant again would
probably kill her. She saw it flush down the toilet and decided to
get pregnant; she really really wanted another kid.

>

>>> Costs money upfront but over the whole time period

>>> it's inexpensive. If one isn't in a monogamous relationship, one should

>>> be using condoms as well to prevent disease transmission.

>>

>> Yea, try to get the male who refuses to put one on.

>

> The males may not be crazy about them, but they like sleeping alone even

> less.



<grin>

>

>>> Followups set to a.f.c.

>>

>> OK. c.a. deleted. and I've forgotten why I have to do this by hand.

>

> Are you still using AOL?


It's not AOL. It's Pineapple News and I figured out what was happening
last time but have forgtten it ...again.

> I have the feeling a complying Usenet

> newsreader is not their highest priority...


I"m still using their bare bones just dial in software. I stopped studying
their usage a decade ago.

/BAH
Re: What Makes an Architecture Bizarre? [message #98272 is a reply to message #97871] Sat, 20 July 2013 09:46 Go to previous messageGo to next message
jmfbahciv is currently offline  jmfbahciv
Messages: 6173
Registered: March 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> In article <m37ggpoz43.fsf@garlic.com>, lynn@garlic.com

> (Anne & Lynn Wheeler) writes:

>

>> One some of the visits, some of the electronic companies couldn't

>> help but brag about what they were doing in conjunction with their

>> auto companies and various parts of the technology.

>

> Shortly before I met the lady who is now my wife (1987), she had

> gone on a trip to Japan with a friend. While there they toured

> one of the large manufacturers (Mitsubishi IIRC). The tour guide

> declined to show them much of their electronics development,

> claiming that much of it was still under wraps. "I'll show

> you our automotive department instead," he said, exuding the

> confidence that came from knowing they were so far ahead of

> U.S. manufacturers that they had nothing to worry about.

>

> Japanese auto makers have a good reason to be confident - they

> build good cars that just feel right. My wife was driving a

> Honda Civic when I met her. We're now on our second Honda after

> that one: a 1998 CR-V that has 450,000 km on it and still runs

> like a dream. Part of that is due to the dealer; we still go

> there for regular maintenance because they show another quite

> un-American trait: they've never ripped us off.

>

and they know it's the female who spends the money to buy the
new car :-). The reason I've been buying Hondas since I
encountered Toyota's "uncustomer service" is because of their
service department. I figured the cars worked so well because
the service was good.

/BAH
Re: What Makes an Architecture Bizarre? [message #98273 is a reply to message #97856] Sat, 20 July 2013 09:46 Go to previous messageGo to next message
jmfbahciv is currently offline  jmfbahciv
Messages: 6173
Registered: March 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz wrote:
> In <PM0004E1C9CC596856@ac81348a.ipt.aol.com>, on 07/18/2013

> at 02:31 PM, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> said:

>

>> Then why is the US on the brink of bankruptcy?

>

> The republican


and the Democrats know that money isn't free. and you keep
calling me a liar.



> policy of borrow and spend. Between the bush tax cut

> and two off-budget wars, it was predictable.

>


/BAH
Re: What Makes a Tax System Bizarre? [message #98274 is a reply to message #98107] Sat, 20 July 2013 09:46 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:PM0004E1DDC06BDA39@ac810898.ipt.aol.com...

>> Lawrence Statton wrote:

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

>>>>

>>>> CBS radio news reported a list of skills which are missing. IIRC,

>>>> IT work was 4th or 5th on the list. Somehow I can't believe that

>>>> one.

>>>>

>>>

>>> I don't know why you don't believe it.

>>

>> BEcause it's so odd. I would have thought that there are plenty

>> of people with those skills. I'm just simply utterly surprised.

>> I wasn't trying to challenge your veracity.

>>

>>

>>> I see it, Sprunk sees it.

>>> Other people I've worked with see it. I'll say it again in short

>>> words that even you can understand: Qualified candidates are getting

>>> to be as rare as hen's teeth.

>>>

>>> Those who *can* do it, already have jobs and aren't looking, but there

>>> are more jobs than people who can fill them.

>>>

>>> Yes, everytime we post an ad looking for developers, I drown in a sea

>>> of résumés, but the staggering majority of them are either

>>> exaggerations, half-truths, or bald-faced-lies. I've stopped even

>>> BOTHERING to check academic references, because I've found near-zero

>>> correlation between education and ability.

>>

>> that's always been a problem.

>>

>>>

>>> Disturbingly - since I started trying to quantify these data, I've

>>> found the very slight correlation to be negative. Masters in Computer

>>> Science from Stanford; can't write ten lines of code in a week. Music

>>> Major from Weaselpiss State College, but who learned BASIC on his MSX

>>> system in 1984; HIRE THIS GUY NOW!

>>

>> <grin> that means things never change; we always had a disaster when

>> we hired a CS flavor. They were so sutck in their little black box

>> that they couldn't develop a way out of a push down list call.

>>

>>>

>>> The way I see it is thusly: There was a time, during the darkest days

>>> of the "first internet bubble" where anyone who could successfully

>>> lift and open "HTML For Dummies" got a job as a "Web Developer", and

>>> these people were often able to jump from job to job earning good

>>> money doing very little or nothing, but building an impressive list of

>>> sites they worked at. Fast forward a decade, and now clients realize

>>> that the ability to rattle off a fistful of buzzwords at an interview

>>> is no substitute for actual ability.

>>>

>>> If this is the sea of "qualified applicants who can't find work", I

>>> feel no pity for them. The advice I have for them is: Actually

>>> *learn* your craft, and in the mean-time, learn to ask "would you like

>>> fries with that?"

>>>

>>> There was a recent article on Slashdot [A light-weight news/

>>> information site for the geek set] about the poor quality of

>>> candidates. They link to the following six-year-old blog piece:

>>>

>>>

>>> http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/2007/02/why-cant-programmer s-program.html

>>> http://tinyurl.com/cant-program

>>>

>>> One of the quotes:

>>>

>>> Like me, the author is having trouble with the fact that 199 out of

>>> 200 applicants for every programming job can't write code at all. I

>>> repeat: they can't write any code whatsoever.

>>>

>>> Read the article - it goes on to posit a trivial programming exercise

>>> that (according to author) the MAJORITY of candidates (that is in

>>> excess of 50%),who were already prescreened to have at least a degree

>>> in Computer Science, CANNOT COMPLETE.

>>>

>>> FWIW: It took me about 45 seconds to write a solution, that worked

>>> with zero defects on the first attempt.

>>

>> this is unbelievable. Every school which had a PDP-10 had lots

>> of kiddies who could code. Everyone wanted to play with the "toy".

>>

>> GUI and PC have a lot to answer for. people who buy a system todya

>> have no idea and receive no hints about what's underneath. Even

>> the Unixes of this world hide basic computing skills.

>>

>> I said it once and I'll state it again with stronger lanugage.

>> Every kid should have a copy of DEC's _Introduction to

>> Programming_.

>

> Nope, because few kids are interested in programming.


Programming is like knowing how to drive. It's whre you
are coming from and where you are going which is the interesting
part. If today's kids never see what's involved with real
programming, they' aren't going to know that it exists.

The whole point is to expose them to knowledge, hard-earned
knowledge, so that they (not their parents, not the dumbed-
down schools and not their peers) can decide how curious
they are.

The people Lawrence wants are those who have that particular
itch and have to scratch it.

/BAH
Re: What Makes an Architecture Bizarre? [message #98276 is a reply to message #97908] Sat, 20 July 2013 09:46 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 19-Jul-13 10:27, jmfbahciv wrote:

>> Peter Flass wrote:

>>> On 7/18/2013 10:32 AM, jmfbahciv wrote:

>>>> If you are, then I'm beginning to understand why none of you

>>>> understand what I'm talking about. If you are, then people are

>>>> really in deep shit and don't know it yet.

>>>

>>> Yes, except their expecting the "uncle sam faiery" to bail them

>>> out.

>>

>> Which is why SS and other government freebies are putting the US into

>> bankruptcy. people have transferred responsibility of their lives to

>> the government. That's what communism is.

>

> SS is not a "freebie"; you have to pay in to get benefits.


No, you don't. You can collect on someone else's contributions.
That's one of the main problems with SS. There iisn't a 1::1
contributor::receiver ratio.

>

> That the buffoons in Congress have consistently failed to collect

> _enough_ payments to cover the cost of benefits is a different matter.


And they've kept changing who can receive benefits and how much those
who haven't contributed can receive.

/BAH
Re: What Makes an Architecture Bizarre? [message #98277 is a reply to message #98110] Sat, 20 July 2013 09:46 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:PM0004E1DEE6165738@ac810898.ipt.aol.com...

>> Peter Flass wrote:

>>> On 7/18/2013 10:32 AM, jmfbahciv wrote:

>>>> Peter Flass wrote:

>>>> > On 7/17/2013 9:16 AM, jmfbahciv wrote:

>>>> >>

>>>> >> Why is profit such a swear word?

>>>> >>

>>>> >

>>>> > Everyone likes to see a company produce something useful that people

>>>> > want to buy, sell a lot of them, and make a fair profit. Most of those

>>>> > things are not part of current business practices. They're all weasels

>>>> > these days. They fire people and move stuff overseas, play games to

>>>> > avoid paying taxes, try to cheat everyone in sight, and usually don't

>>>> > do

>>>> > anything useful in the first place.

>>>> >

>>>> Why do you assume that 100% of business is doing this?

>>>>

>>>

>>> Because enough are that it's unusual to see otherwise. Apple invents

>>> good products that people want; they're even moving some manufacturing

>>> back to the US. M$ sells (mostly) cr@p and uses monopoly power to try

>>> to force people to buy it. All of Wall Street are crooks; everyone has

>>> their hand out for government money.

>>>

>>>

>> Small business isn't on Wall Street yet. Nor are they bought out unless

>> they're doing something somebody else wants.

>>

>> The computer biz has this model. STartups create a foobar; if it works

>> well and is useful, the big companies buy out the FOOBAR Corp.

>

> Didn’t happen with DEC, Microsoft, or Apple.


You're mixing apples and dried up fruits again. Microsoft, and I suspect
Apple, do exactly this. I talked with one guy who, with 4 others,
do the startup business and then get bought out after a couple years.
They do another "project". Instead of the projects DEC would begin and
fund, this model would have another group outside of the company do the
creations.

>

> And it isnt just startups that create a foobar either, most obviously

> with all of DEC, Xerox, IBM, Microsoft, Apple, etc etc etc.



Take another look.

>

>> Then the previous owners of FOOBAR startup

>> another company with another idea.

>

> There are a few examples of that, but not very many at all.


You should get out more, keep your mouth shut and listen to people
who are doing this work.

/BAH
Re: What Makes an Architecture Bizarre? [message #98279 is a reply to message #98120] Sat, 20 July 2013 09:46 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:PM0004E1DE04FE222E@ac810898.ipt.aol.com...

>> Rod Speed wrote:

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

>>>> Rod Speed wrote

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

>>>> >> 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.

>>>

>>>> > That is just one of the reasons. The other is because he

>>>> > has a lot more deductions available to him as well.

>>>

>>>> What kind of deductions do you think he has?

>>>

>>> The cost of doing business. Costs that she does

>>> not have because she is just a wage slave.

>>>

>>>> He can take interest expense

>>>

>>> Yes.

>>>

>>>> but not much else.

>>>

>>> Bullshit. Her wages for starters.

>>

>> She doesn't work for Buffet. she works for the corpooration.

>> he doesn't deduct her wages from his personal income. her wages

>> which are very, very, very good for a scretary, are an expense

>> of the company. I havent' been keeping track of the stock price

>> of those shares.

>>

>>

>>>

>>>> >> There is a difference.

>>>

>>>> > You seriously 'think' that that is any news to anyone ?

>>>

>>>> It is here. People keep producing one of the stupidest

>>>> quotes of the last 3 deecades and use it to "prove" that

>>>> the middle class and retireees should have their tax rates

>>>> doubled or tripled.

>>>

>>> You're lying now. No one has EVER said anything about

>>> doubling or tripping the tax rates on the middle class

>>> and retirees in here and I read every single post in here.

>

>> If unearned income is taxed, those people's taxes will go up.

>

> But it wont be DOUBLED OR TRIPLED.


My 2013 taxes will be doubled. If mine are doubled, people making
a log more than I am will be tripled...hint they're in a higer tax
bracket.


>

>> Every suggestion posted would double my income tax each year.

>

> Another bare faced lie. The suggestion that the top 1% should

> pay the same tax RATE as the next lowest group would have no

> effect what so ever on your income tax each year.



Except the suggestion doesn't affect ONLY the top 1%. It affects
everyone.


<snip> I'm getting tired.

/BAH
Re: What Makes a Tax System Bizarre? [message #98280 is a reply to message #98049] Sat, 20 July 2013 09:46 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 19-Jul-13 10:27, jmfbahciv wrote:

>> Andrew Swallow wrote:

>>> The ban on abortion and contraception do feel like the slave

>>> breeding programs that the southern states introduced when the

>>> slave trade was banned. Similar rules.

>>

>> Of course it is. And all women become chattel.

>

> Become? Women were chattel at least as far back as the invention of

> marriage, probably since shortly after we started walking upright and

> the species became sexually dimorphic.


I know. I are one.

>

> That started to change in the 1970s,


No, it started to change during WWII.

> but the neocons are desperately

> trying to drag us back to the 1950s.


Nah, they want to go further back than that. that's why
I'm so damned critical of the Democrat leadership; I'd like to have
the far right become another memory.

> I understand why male neocons

> might desire that, but I don't understand female neocons at all.


do you have a couple of decades? I can explain the circumstances
but I can't explain the logic because there ain't any. when it
comes to Xtian religion, illogic is admired and sought.

/BAH
Re: What Makes an Architecture Bizarre? [message #98315 is a reply to message #97992] Sat, 20 July 2013 10:20 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
Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> writes:
> However, during the S&L crisis, it turned out that the FSLIC didn't have

> enough money to cover all the losses, so they had to get bailed out

> themselves by the Federal Reserve. Congress disbanded the FSLIC; the

> few S&Ls left were converted to "banks", now covered by the FDIC.


regulator responsible for S&Ls was asked by the chief executive to
eliminate regulation and cut their reserve requirements in half ... when
he wouldn't do it ... he was asked to resign so somebody could be
appointed that would.

cutting their reserves in half made them vulnerable to wallstreet
vultures selling junk bonds ... and cutting regulation allowed S&Ls to
be bought up by people that would loot all the assets in number of ways
(gave rise to the references about the "best way to rob a bank is to own
one"). Recent reference
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013b.html#50 How to Cut Megabanks Down to Size

references that for the S&L crisis, over 700 people did jail time ...
this time, even though the magnitude of the looting was much larger
.... nobody has done jail time (indication how they have not only bought
the regulators but also the rest of the infrastructure)

also has references to the S&L regulator that cut the regulations allowing
S&Ls to be looted
http://www.amazon.com/Two-Trillion-Dollar-Meltdown-ebook/dp/ B001S49AV2

loc655-67: By the time Pratt had finished, it was possible for a single
individual to take control of an S&L, then organize and lend to multiple
subsidiaries -- for land acquisition, construction, building management,
and the like -- and create his own small real estate empire entirely
with depositors' money.

loc657-58: Or more commonly, to pretend to create a real estate empire
while siphoning deposits into, say, personal jet planes, a favorite in
Texas.

loc660-61: Another owner with a $1.8 billion loan book had bought six
Learjets before the Feds noticed that 96 percent of his loans were
delinquent.

.... snip ...

during the S&L crisis, securitized instruments had been used to
obfuscate fraudulent mortgages. in the late 90s we were asked to look at
improving the integrity of supporting documents (as countermeasure of
using securitization to obfuscate faudulent mortgages). an old really
long-winded post from jan1999 on the subject ... mentions gov. is
carrying the S&L bail-out "off-book"
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aepay3.htm#riskm

later, loan originators discovered that they could pay rating agencies
for triple-A rating on securitized mortgages (even when both the sellers
and rating agencies knew they were weren't worth triple-A ... testimony
from Oct2008 congressional hearings into rating agencies). The triple-A
ratings on toxic CDOs allowed loan originators to do no-down,
no-documentation, liar loans w/o regard to borrower's qualifications or
loan quality (triple-A trumps supporting documentation). W/o supporting
documentation, there was no longer any issue about their integrity.

other past posts mentioning "Two Trillion Dollar Meltdown"
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2010p.html#28 A small amount of Evidence. (In which, the end of banking and the rise of markets is suggested.)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2010p.html#45 TCM's Moguls documentary series
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011b.html#59 Productivity And Bubbles
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011g.html#76 The Two Trillion Dollar Meltdown: Easy Money, High Rollers, and the Great Credit Crash
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011k.html#66 50th anniversary of BASIC, COBOL?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012i.html#41 Lawmakers reworked financial portfolios after talks with Fed, Treasury officials
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012k.html#89 Auditors Don't Know Squat!
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012m.html#71 General Mills computer

--
virtualization experience starting Jan1968, online at home since Mar1970
Re: What Makes a Tax System Bizarre? [message #98317 is a reply to message #97862] Sat, 20 July 2013 11:05 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Ahem A Rivet's Shot is currently offline  Ahem A Rivet's Shot
Messages: 4843
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
On Fri, 19 Jul 2013 09:05:59 -0500
Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote:

> On 18-Jul-13 09:31, jmfbahciv wrote:


>> so birth control is usually left up to the female.


Yep, the female has the vested interest in ensuring that it happens.

> RISUG, when it finally gets approved, will be the first real option to


You have to ask yourself how many women are going to believe a man
who tells them it's all right I'm using XYZ.

--
Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays
C:>WIN | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see
You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/
Re: What Makes a Tax System Bizarre? [message #98319 is a reply to message #97397] Fri, 19 July 2013 08:31 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Morten Reistad is currently offline  Morten Reistad
Messages: 2108
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
Senior Member
In article <PM0004E1C894AD8BCC@ac81348a.ipt.aol.com>,
jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
> Stephen Sprunk wrote:

>> On 16-Jul-13 14:01, 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 ...

>>

>> What I said above was about US-based workers; offshoring is another

>> matter entirely.

>>

>>> was as a result of a native worker being fired, and not fired for

>>> cause.

>>

>> "Fired" means terminated for cause. What you're referring to are

>> layoffs, which is when jobs are eliminated.

>

> CBS radio news reported a list of skills which are missing. IIRC,

> IT work was 4th or 5th on the list. Somehow I can't believe that

> one.


I can. The US is exporting IT jobs everywhere. I have at least half a
dozen friends & aquaintances working for US IT companies that came
to them, here in ex$pen$ive scandinavia; all of them seemingly out
of desperation for finding manpower.

-- mrr
Re: What Makes an Architecture Bizarre? [message #98320 is a reply to message #97401] Fri, 19 July 2013 17:26 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Morten Reistad is currently offline  Morten Reistad
Messages: 2108
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
Senior Member
In article <PM0004E1CA0DE6058B@ac81348a.ipt.aol.com>,
jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
> Walter Banks wrote:

>>

>>

>> jmfbahciv wrote:

>>

>>> 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.

>>>

>>

>> Why shouldn't unearned income be taxed as income?

>

> Among other things, it's already been taxed at least twice

> at the higher rates of earned income.


You keep focusing on the individual tax rates. These are
only a minor part of the taxes for the 1%. They keep their
wealth in corporations, and take out a pretty high part of
their consomption through corporate channels, as expenses
for perfectly legitimate business endeavours. Like yacht
races, formula 1 events etc.

These corporations are localised in states with decent
business climates. Like Delaware, Nevada, Ireland, Cyprus etc.
This is not "just" about the tax rate, it is about the
whole business climate. Different corporations go for
different jurisdictions.

>> Earned income is limited to what can be earned in 2000

>> hours of labour a year, unearned income is when income

>> goes exponential. (Losses in unearned income are linear

>> and earnings are a power function) there is a lot of incentive

>> to make a living that way.

>

> I don't understand what you mean. Unearned income, IME,

> is dividends from owning stock shares and interest from

> bank accounts and owning bonds (including t-bills, etc.).


The really rich will never take out a wage/salary; or
only do so as a diversion for the taxman. The real bills
are invoiced, from some company.

> If you want to start a philosophical discussion about

> why unearned income tax rates should be less than earned

> income tax rates, I'd be happy to participate.

>

> The current tax rates are trying to herd people to save

> more money via stocks, bonds, and government paper.

> Do you really want to stop that?


There is also a quite intense level of competition
between jurisdictions when it comes to corporate tax
rates. The EU are converging on ca 20%, with even
Sweden at 22% in the latest budget.

-- mrr
Re: What Makes an Architecture Bizarre? [message #98321 is a reply to message #97645] Fri, 19 July 2013 14:13 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Morten Reistad is currently offline  Morten Reistad
Messages: 2108
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
Senior Member
In article <b4rbgeFhchiU1@mid.individual.net>, 127 <127@586.com> wrote:
>

>

> "Patrick Scheible" <kkt@zipcon.net> wrote in message

> news:86k3knda97.fsf@chai.my.domain...

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

>>

>>> Morten Reistad wrote:


distribution limites to a.f.c.

>>>> In article <51E38421.1070508@SPAM.comp-arch.net>,

>>>> Andy (Super) Glew <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> wrote:

>>>> >On 7/14/2013 12:45 PM, jklam wrote:

>>>> >> That doesn't work with the US income tax system because the amount you

>>>> >> pay in US income tax is not dependant on where your primary residence

>>>> >> is.

>>>> >>

>>>> >> What matters is if you are a US citizen for tax purposes or not.]

>>>> >

>>>> >So have the income and hold the income producing property in an offshore

>>>> >company that you control.

>>>> >

>>>> >Leave the money offshore, for offshore expenses.

>>>>

>>>> Indeed. The idea of incorporating offshore is what secures the

>>>> tax base. Even I have an offshore pension fund. I will be taxed

>>>> to death if I use it as a non-pensioner, but can take income from

>>>> it when I retire. And if I retire in some low-tax jurisdiction

>>>> it will be taxed at that low rate.

>>>

>>> And why should one have to do all of this juggling? Don't governments

>>> understand that high tax rates result in the wealth moving out of the

>>> country?

>>

>> Even if the tax rates are low, there's always some pathetic hellhole of

>> another country that will tolerate tax rates 2% lower and attract the

>> businesses that shop around for the best tax havens.

>

> And it doesn’t have to be a pathetic hellhole either,

> places like Ireland have tax rates much lower than that.


Ireland is mentioned, it rains a lot there. And in Switzerland
it snows. But there are lots of nice, tropical places; around
40 in total.

And you have Uruguay, Antigua&Berbuda which will grant a citizenship
against a permanent incoming investment of $100k. You still own the
money, it just has to be invested in the country.

Then you have Cyprus, Malta, the Azores, Bermuda, Cayman and half
the countries up the antilles strip. Not my idea of "pathetic
hellholes".

Note that the "transperency directives" from the EU/US have backfired;
and the EU and the US are now in the receiving end of this
action, and will likely remain there for the next 1-2 decades.
Taking the heat off immigration procedures in Berbuda, among
other things.

-- mrr
Re: What Makes an Architecture Bizarre? [message #98322 is a reply to message #98320] Sat, 20 July 2013 11:59 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
Morten Reistad <first@last.name> writes:
> There is also a quite intense level of competition

> between jurisdictions when it comes to corporate tax

> rates. The EU are converging on ca 20%, with even

> Sweden at 22% in the latest budget.


OECD unveils plan to end 'golden era' of tax avoidance; David Cameron
has called on the world's leaders to get behind a global crackdown on
tax avoidance and "break down the walls of corporate secrecy"
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/consumert ips/tax/10190406/OECD-unveils-plan-to-end-golden-era-of-tax- avoidance.html

OECD Proposes Plan for Crackdown on Companies' Tax Avoidance
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/print/2013-07-19/oecd-proposes -plan-for-crackdown-on-companies-tax-avoidance.html
Tax evasion, faltering global economy, top G20 agenda
http://www.newagebd.com/detail.php?date=2013-07-19&nid=5 7573#.UelM0421FjQ

and recent update: Release of offshore records draws worldwide response
http://www.icij.org/blog/2013/04/release-offshore-records-dr aws-worldwide-response


other recent posts
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013d.html#36 Bank Whistleblower Claims Retaliation And Wrongful Termination
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013e.html#27 Secrecy for Sale: Inside the Global Offshore Money Maze
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013e.html#46 Secrecy for Sale: Inside the Global Offshore Money Maze
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013e.html#89 What Makes an Architecture Bizarre?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013e.html#93 What Makes an Architecture Bizarre?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013e.html#95 Secrecy for Sale: Inside the Global Offshore Money Maze
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013f.html#6 What Makes an Architecture Bizarre?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013f.html#69 The cloud is killing traditional hardware and software
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013g.html#80 'Big four' accountants 'use knowledge of Treasury to help rich avoid tax'
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013g.html#86 How Wall Street Defanged Dodd-Frank
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013g.html#91 'Big four' accountants 'use knowledge of Treasury to help rich avoid tax'
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013h.html#25 'Big four' accountants 'use knowledge of Treasury to help rich avoid tax'
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013h.html#41 Is newer technology always better? It almost is. Exceptions?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013h.html#55 OT: "Highway Patrol" back on TV
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013i.html#90 What Makes an Architecture Bizarre?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013j.html#0 What Makes a Tax System Bizarre?


--
virtualization experience starting Jan1968, online at home since Mar1970
Re: What Makes a Tax System Bizarre? [message #98324 is a reply to message #98260] Sat, 20 July 2013 13:07 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Andrew Swallow is currently offline  Andrew Swallow
Messages: 1705
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
On 20/07/2013 14:45, jmfbahciv wrote:
{snip}

>

> It's the absence of training which is the big problem. Instead

> the rabids want to control who fucks and when they fuck and how

> many kids they are to produce.


They want to do the fun bits. Fun for the person giving the orders that
is. So they are not interested in doing the work part of the teaching.

Andrew Swallow
Re: What Makes an Architecture Bizarre? [message #98325 is a reply to message #98265] Sat, 20 July 2013 13:24 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Stephen Sprunk is currently offline  Stephen Sprunk
Messages: 2166
Registered: March 2013
Karma: 0
Senior Member
On 20-Jul-13 08:46, jmfbahciv wrote:
> Stephen Sprunk wrote:

>> On 19-Jul-13 10:27, jmfbahciv wrote:

>>> Stephen Sprunk wrote:

>>>> Not necessarily; you can sock away a lot of money in 401k/403b

>>>> and IRA accounts. SS benefits are generally pitiful, though.

>>>

>>> But the amount you can extract each year without paying taxes is

>>> small. You can't even extract the interest/dividends the fund

>>> pays.

>>

>> Right; above ~$20k in "earned" income, including 401k/403b and IRA

>> distributions, you're going to be paying income taxes. I don't

>> recall if those distributions are also subject to FICA taxes.

>

> So far they're not but somebody in this thread suggested it. I

> object to that one too.


I don't object to it, as long as the rich have to pay the same taxes.

>> The rich, in contrast, get _their_ retirement* savings taxed at the

>> much lower rates for "unearned" income.

>

> So what? They've already paid taxes on the earned income which

> bought the stocks, bonds and bills which produce unearned income.


In most cases, they inherited their wealth and sat on their asses for
their entire life, watching the unearned income compound itself--at a
far lower tax rate than people who actually created that wealth.

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 an Architecture Bizarre? [message #98326 is a reply to message #98322] Sat, 20 July 2013 13:31 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Andrew Swallow is currently offline  Andrew Swallow
Messages: 1705
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
On 20/07/2013 16:59, Anne & Lynn Wheeler wrote:
> Morten Reistad <first@last.name> writes:

>> There is also a quite intense level of competition

>> between jurisdictions when it comes to corporate tax

>> rates. The EU are converging on ca 20%, with even

>> Sweden at 22% in the latest budget.

>

> OECD unveils plan to end 'golden era' of tax avoidance; David Cameron

> has called on the world's leaders to get behind a global crackdown on

> tax avoidance and "break down the walls of corporate secrecy"

> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/consumert ips/tax/10190406/OECD-unveils-plan-to-end-golden-era-of-tax- avoidance.html

>


He will find that manufacturing occurs in China. China buys its raw
materials directly, mostly from the third world. No money for western
governments there. The rest of the world will discover that western
government are bankrupt.

Andrew Swallow
Re: What Makes an Architecture Bizarre? [message #98356 is a reply to message #98248] Sat, 20 July 2013 14:02 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Stephen Sprunk is currently offline  Stephen Sprunk
Messages: 2166
Registered: March 2013
Karma: 0
Senior Member
On 20-Jul-13 07:12, Walter Bushell wrote:
> In article <ksc4nj$edm$1@dont-email.me>, Stephen Sprunk

> <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote:


Please, folks, trim your quotes.

>> Think about this: I have a fishing pole, but you don't. I agree

>> to let you use my pole in return for half of your catch. You catch

>> 10 fish. The total wealth you (labor) created is 10 fish. I

>> (capital) take 5 of the fish (rent). This is fairly easy to

>> understand.

>>

>> Now, let's say the market price is $1 per fish, and instead of you

>> keeping 5 fish, I pay you $5. You (labor) are still the one

>> creating the wealth, and I (capital) am merely extracting some of

>> that wealth from you (rent). Scale it up to a corporation or an

>> entire economy and it gets more complicated, but nothing can change

>> the fundamental truth that labor, not capital, creates wealth.

>

> That's Marxist and I prefer Harpo to Karl, and Lennon to Lenin.


No, it's Georgist.

Under Marxism, she confiscates my pole and sends me to a "re-education
camp" to brainwash me into believing it was hers all along.

Under US-style capitalism, the govt taxes her $5 of "earned" income at
40% but my $5 of "unearned" income at 10%, then gives me a no-bid govt
contract for $10 (note the deficit) for two wars to secure a supply of
cheaper foreign fish that will put her out of work.

> If there is no fishing pole, nobody eats.


You can catch fish without a pole, just not as efficiently.

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 an Architecture Bizarre? [message #98357 is a reply to message #97887] Sat, 20 July 2013 14:10 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Stephen Sprunk is currently offline  Stephen Sprunk
Messages: 2166
Registered: March 2013
Karma: 0
Senior Member
On 19-Jul-13 10:27, jmfbahciv wrote:
> Stephen Sprunk wrote:

>> On 16-Jul-13 07:21, jmfbahciv wrote:

>>> Buffet is nuts.

>>

>> This is where we fundamentally disagree. He is quite possibly the

>> savviest investor of our era, which requires an understanding of

>> economics and finance that is undoubtedly better than ours. So,

>> when he publicly takes a position on something (which is rare) that

>> is against his own self-interest (even rarer), that is worth paying

>> attention to.

>

> I did pay attention; he's nuts.


Would that I had his particular affliction, because it seems to be quite
lucrative.

>>> You are again lumpiing unearned income with earned income.

>>

>> Whether income is "earned" or "unearned" is often a matter of how

>> you do the accounting--and the current tax code provides enormous

>> incentive to classify as much as possible as "unearned" to get a

>> lower tax rate.

>>

>> I fundamentally disagree with the notion that unearned income

>> should be taxed at a lower rate than earned income. If anything,

>> it should be taxed at a _higher_ rate, but for now I'd settle for

>> the same rate.

>

> It is going to be the same rate as of this year.


Really? I can't believe a change that significant made it through
Congress at all, much less without the media mentioning it once.

> I strongly disagree with you on this point.


It's a free country; you have the right to be wrong.

> My taxes are going to double beause the rates for unearned income

> have doubled.


Cite?

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 an Architecture Bizarre? [message #98358 is a reply to message #98357] Sat, 20 July 2013 14:24 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
Dan Espen is currently offline  Dan Espen
Messages: 3867
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> writes:

> On 19-Jul-13 10:27, jmfbahciv wrote:

>> Stephen Sprunk wrote:

>>> On 16-Jul-13 07:21, jmfbahciv wrote:

>>>> Buffet is nuts.

>>>

>>> This is where we fundamentally disagree. He is quite possibly the

>>> savviest investor of our era, which requires an understanding of

>>> economics and finance that is undoubtedly better than ours. So,

>>> when he publicly takes a position on something (which is rare) that

>>> is against his own self-interest (even rarer), that is worth paying

>>> attention to.

>>

>> I did pay attention; he's nuts.

>

> Would that I had his particular affliction, because it seems to be quite

> lucrative.

>

>>>> You are again lumpiing unearned income with earned income.

>>>

>>> Whether income is "earned" or "unearned" is often a matter of how

>>> you do the accounting--and the current tax code provides enormous

>>> incentive to classify as much as possible as "unearned" to get a

>>> lower tax rate.

>>>

>>> I fundamentally disagree with the notion that unearned income

>>> should be taxed at a lower rate than earned income. If anything,

>>> it should be taxed at a _higher_ rate, but for now I'd settle for

>>> the same rate.

>>

>> It is going to be the same rate as of this year.

>

> Really? I can't believe a change that significant made it through

> Congress at all, much less without the media mentioning it once.

>

>> I strongly disagree with you on this point.

>

> It's a free country; you have the right to be wrong.

>

>> My taxes are going to double beause the rates for unearned income

>> have doubled.

>

> Cite?


She has to be talking about dividends, but as usual...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qualified_dividend

Qualified dividends, as defined by the United States Internal Revenue
Code, are ordinary dividends that meet specific criteria to be taxed
at the lower long-term capital gains tax rate rather than at higher
tax rate for an individual's ordinary income. From 2003 to 2007,
qualified dividends were taxed at 15% or 5% depending on the
individual's ordinary income tax bracket, and from 2008 to 2012, the
tax rate on qualified dividends was reduced to 0% for taxpayers in the
10% and 15% ordinary income tax brackets, and starting in 2013 the
rates on qualified dividends are 0%, 15% and 20%. The 20% rate is for
taxpayers in the 39.6% tax bracket.

The ordinary dividend tax rate appears to be unchanged.

--
Dan Espen
Pages (231): [ «    156  157  158  159  160  161  162  163  164  165  166  167  168  169  170  171    »]  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 20:00:16 EDT 2024

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.17381 seconds