George W. Bush is a prick. He's looking for Rita
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 28,318
Likes: 9
From: This is not my house!
Originally Posted by S2020,Sep 27 2005, 11:48 AM
Put it another way.
Corporate fat cats cheating the working man not withstanding.
I grew up on welfare and food stamps. I don't see this as a way of life so I busted my ass in college, medical school, and residency. I still work 60+hours/wk
So now I should pay more tax to support a 3rd generation welfare receiving family sitting at home eating Doritos watching Jerry Springer? I don't think so.
Corporate fat cats cheating the working man not withstanding.
I grew up on welfare and food stamps. I don't see this as a way of life so I busted my ass in college, medical school, and residency. I still work 60+hours/wk
So now I should pay more tax to support a 3rd generation welfare receiving family sitting at home eating Doritos watching Jerry Springer? I don't think so.
Stereotypes make it easier for us to formulate unfair opinions. This isn't what you did when you were supported by the state. You were given the opportunity to get away from food stamps. That's where my taxes are going; to help some hard working guy become an engineer and eye doctor. I like that a lot better and someone does it.
Member
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 82,468
Likes: 1,193
Originally Posted by jasonw,Sep 27 2005, 02:49 PM
And the fact that the economy/job growth has taken a crap after the tax cuts.
I believe that ecomony is growing (albeit at a slower PACE than previous year to year rates-and with the national unemployment at 5% (which is pretty damn close to full employment) ) is at the lowest in years.
Registered User
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 38,617
Likes: 1
Originally Posted by jedwards,Sep 27 2005, 11:55 AM
Can we also deduce that the laziest States are:
and the hardest working are:
Tennesee, South Dakota and Nevada where amongst onther States there is noo state tax
while the lazy states are:
NEW YORK 7.7%
IDAHO
MINNESOTA
HAWAII
NORTH CAROLINA
MAINE
NEW JERSEY
IOWA
OREGON
CALIFORNIA 9%
Where taxes are highest?
http://www.taxadmin.org/fta/rate/ind_inc.html
and the hardest working are:
Tennesee, South Dakota and Nevada where amongst onther States there is noo state tax
while the lazy states are:
NEW YORK 7.7%
IDAHO
MINNESOTA
HAWAII
NORTH CAROLINA
MAINE
NEW JERSEY
IOWA
OREGON
CALIFORNIA 9%
Where taxes are highest?
http://www.taxadmin.org/fta/rate/ind_inc.html
Of course we can't deduce that from those figures. The relationship is not going to be that simple.It is a bit like your example of the window washer that can't move to Switzerland or Nevad to avoid paying taxtes. (Although, why can't he wash windows in Nevada?)
For whatever reasons, California has had the resources to develop a strong economy. However, as the cost of doing business has increased, there are businesses that are moving out of the state (or are moving significant amounts of employment out of the state). While the wage level is probably the biggest reason, taxes ( and incentives from other states, negative tax?) increase the incentive to move.
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 16,702
Likes: 0
From: █ SF, CA █
Originally Posted by zdave87,Sep 27 2005, 12:01 PM
Is the economy/job growth in the negative or postive, as compared to last year/past few years?
I believe that ecomony is growing (albeit at a slower PACE than previous year to year rates-and with the national unemployment at 5% (which is pretty damn close to full employment) ) is at the lowest in years.
I believe that ecomony is growing (albeit at a slower PACE than previous year to year rates-and with the national unemployment at 5% (which is pretty damn close to full employment) ) is at the lowest in years.
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 28,318
Likes: 9
From: This is not my house!
Originally Posted by S2020,Sep 27 2005, 11:44 AM
OK then 50%
I'm gonna give half of my income to The Man?
On top of that, sales tax?
I'm gonna give half of my income to The Man?
On top of that, sales tax?
The fact the the WTimes is discredited in that article discredits your argument when you cite it to support that argument.
The point isn't that "Ninh you are wrong"... the point is that article (and that paper) is crap which was the original premise.
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 28,318
Likes: 9
From: This is not my house!
Originally Posted by NikePenguin,Sep 27 2005, 11:52 AM
The argument is that higher taxes lead to less work (not lazy ) as individuals place a higher value on an hour of leisure than on an hour of additional work.
I'm not sure there is much empirical evidence to support it, however.
One place one might look to use as an example (how good of an example, though?), is at certain welfare recipients. The evidence there suggests that people would rather work less (none to very little), than to work much more for only a very little more in income.
It's all about margins.
) as individuals place a higher value on an hour of leisure than on an hour of additional work.I'm not sure there is much empirical evidence to support it, however.
One place one might look to use as an example (how good of an example, though?), is at certain welfare recipients. The evidence there suggests that people would rather work less (none to very little), than to work much more for only a very little more in income.
It's all about margins.
except that "lazy" was used.
Member
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 82,468
Likes: 1,193
Originally Posted by jedwards,Sep 27 2005, 03:00 PM
"sitting at home eating Doritos watching Jerry Springer?"
Stereotypes make it easier for us to formulate unfair opinions. This isn't what you did when you were supported by the state. You were given the opportunity to get away from food stamps. That's where my taxes are going; to help some hard working guy become an engineer and eye doctor. I like that a lot better and someone does it.
Stereotypes make it easier for us to formulate unfair opinions. This isn't what you did when you were supported by the state. You were given the opportunity to get away from food stamps. That's where my taxes are going; to help some hard working guy become an engineer and eye doctor. I like that a lot better and someone does it.
How come you never see a Democrat standing side by side with a person who worked his/her way out of the welfare system and announce "This is a person that all of you can be. You can get off of the public welfare dole" Why not? It's because the people that are supported by & large by the gov't welfare programs are Democrats and he/she is afraid of losing that voter base.