George W. Bush is a prick. He's looking for Rita
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 112,963
Likes: 150
From: Doh!!
Originally Posted by NikePenguin,Sep 26 2005, 07:35 PM
Carly Fiorina was a "market failure"... which the market corrected. 
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 16,702
Likes: 0
From: █ SF, CA █
Originally Posted by S2020,Sep 26 2005, 10:09 PM
if you talk to HP employees, alot of them think that Carly wasn't so bad for the company. She was forced out b/c the HP board answers to wall st.
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 112,963
Likes: 150
From: Doh!!
Originally Posted by jedwards,Sep 26 2005, 04:01 PM
If you look at the big earners and the percent of tax paid, then look at the average joe (not the impoverished) you'll see a disproportionate amount of taxes paid. In other words, 20 people earning $50K per year pay more in tax than one person earning a cool million. Not if the millionaire doesn't use loopholes etc but they all do if they're smart.
Besides, the first $30K of your earnings pays for the major shite you *need* like food, lodging and basic transportation. The next $20K pays for upgrades. After that it's all luxury. Taxing income over $50K is not the same as taxing under $50K.
a "normal" $1mil income = $400K in tax
a "normal" $50K income pay less than $20K in tax --> therefore 20 * $50K in tax < $400K
s, we regulate ourselves here, no need for outside mods.
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 112,963
Likes: 150
From: Doh!!
Originally Posted by jasonw,Sep 26 2005, 09:09 PM
Those are the employees that weren't laid off!
You may have a point there.
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 16,702
Likes: 0
From: █ SF, CA █
Originally Posted by S2020,Sep 26 2005, 10:12 PM
gonna have to disagree with you on this one JEd
a "normal" $1mil income = $400K in tax
a "normal" $50K income pay less than $20K in tax --> therefore 20 * $50K in tax < $400K
a "normal" $1mil income = $400K in tax
a "normal" $50K income pay less than $20K in tax --> therefore 20 * $50K in tax < $400K
That leaves $600,000
Assuming a married couple:
First $14,600 = $1,460
14,601
Registered User
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 38,617
Likes: 1
Originally Posted by jasonw,Sep 26 2005, 09:49 PM
You originally said the level of income proves the benefit to society. That is different from how much customers value the service being provided.
We basically have a system of socialism for those at the top and capitalism for those at the bottom. When who you know matters more than what you know, society is dumbed down.
We basically have a system of socialism for those at the top and capitalism for those at the bottom. When who you know matters more than what you know, society is dumbed down.
If I sell a product and make $1M, my customers have benefited by at least $1M. The amount they benefit over $1M is called consumer surplus. It is a benefit to society but cannot be measured. As a seller, I have to make a profit on my product in order to continue to provide the product. This profit (an economic profit, not an accounting profit) is called producer surplus. The total benefit to society from the exchange is actually the sum of consumer and producer surpluses.
Unfortunately, consumer and producer surplus cannot be measured. However, I could only earn the $1M if the marketplace valued my product more than $1M.
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 112,963
Likes: 150
From: Doh!!
OK, then a $50K income, given the same proportional deduction for the $50K earner then we have less than $5K worth of taxes.
the fact still remains that the wealthy pays a higher percentage of their taxable income
the fact still remains that the wealthy pays a higher percentage of their taxable income
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 112,963
Likes: 150
From: Doh!!
[QUOTE=jasonw,Sep 26 2005, 09:22 PM] What you are leaving out is deductions. And there isn't a 40% rate. A "normal" $1mil income should have $400,000 in mortgage interest(and other deductions) to write off...
That leaves $600,000
Assuming a married couple:
First $14,600 = $1,460
14,601
That leaves $600,000
Assuming a married couple:
First $14,600 = $1,460
14,601