|
Raskolnikov38 posted:The DNCs brilliant plan to put debates on Saturdays continues to pay dividends as last nights debate netted 6 million viewers, down two million from the previous Saturday debate and far behind the 15 million of the only Tuesday debate. Not that DWS isn't a first class moron, but aren't those debate numbers pretty much expected considering the democratic primary is boring as hell compared to the republican hotness and no one is really expecting anything exciting to happen considering Hillary has things in the bag? Also, didn't the republicans have a similar drop-off between the first and second debate?
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 20:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 03:22 |
|
|
ElrondHubbard posted:Not that DWS isn't a first class moron, but aren't those debate numbers pretty much expected considering the democratic primary is boring as hell compared to the republican hotness and no one is really expecting anything exciting to happen considering Hillary has things in the bag? Also, didn't the republicans have a similar drop-off between the first and second debate? Viewership dropped from 24 million in the first debate to 23 million the second debate.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 20:09
|
|
|
fknlo posted:This was not a good enough answer for the person that was talking about how a flat tax would be better and I was hoping there was more that I couldn't think of off the top of my head. Tell them that it fucks over low income owners and if they say that's not good enough call them a heartless rear end in a top hat (if they're devoutly Christian, call them a bad Christian), after that tell them you're done talking to them about this.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 20:09
|
|
|
Trump will make White House addresses ratings powerhouses. Product-placement galore on Trump's Reagan Desk.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 20:10
|
|
|
Nostalgia4Infinity posted:Tell them that it fucks over low income owners and if they say that's not good enough call them a heartless rear end in a top hat (if they're devoutly Christian, call them a bad Christian), after that tell them you're done talking to them about this. This really is the only way a lot of these discussions can end. If your friend wants to play around with sketchy sources that argue a flat tax somehow doesn't gently caress over poor people that's one thing, but if they flat out say "poors getting hosed over ain't a problem" then there's not a whole lot you can do to suddenly teach them empathy.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 20:20
|
|
|
This is implicit in a lot of previous posts, but money, like everything else a person might have, is subject to diminishing returns. The 100,00th dollar you earn isn't as useful to you as the first, just like the 20th mcnugget in the box isn't as satisfying as the first. So taxing incomes more as they grow means the dollars collected as taxes were less valuable to their former owners than if the same number of dollars were collected in a flat tax.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 20:25
|
|
|
fknlo posted:Can someone point me towards info on why a flat tax is dumb/doesn't work? The easier to understand the better.  First off, there are things that all human beings need, regardless of how rich or poor they are, in order to survive. Food, water, clothing, shelter. Everybody, everywhere, needs these things. And these things, unfortunately, cost a lot of money. How much they actually cost varies from location to location, but let's say we take the national average of the cost of these basic necessities for a year. We'll call this the poverty line: that is, it is the bare minimum amount of income a household needs to make annually in order to sustain basic survival. Fall below it, and the government says you can't sustain the most basic livelihood. We'll go with what the Federal Government currently says: and mark this at $24,000 a year. Now let's say you make a bit more than that annually. $75,000 year, for example. This is a middle class income (usually). These people can cover the basic necessities without worry, and so they can put the remainder of their money towards secondary concerns: choosing housing based on attractiveness rather than affordability, spending more money on entertainment, etc. They can't go too crazy, but unless they really overspend or run into a huge emergency, they can at least cover the basics. Now let's go even higher, to individuals that make $250,000. Wow, that's a lot of money! Following the baseline we established for necessities, these people can cover it and not have used even 10% of their total income. They have a lot of excess cash, and can spend lavishly without really having to worry about not being able to meet their primary needs, even in the event of emergency. This is a very simplistic model, but let's take these three examples: a household that makes $24k, one that makes $75k, and one that makes $250k, and compare them using Flat vs Progressive tax. Progressive Tax with three brackets (0% up to $24k, 15% up to $75k, 25% up to $250k): 1. The $24k family ideally isn't taxed at all, because it's recognized that taking away any income means they will fall below the poverty line, and be unable to sustain even the most basic livelihood. Sucks for the government, but this household is still putting what little money they have into the economy, so it's not as if they're net negative. 2. The $75k family is not taxed on their first $24k (again, because it's needed for basic survival), and then taxed a little bit (15%) on the remainder of their income. This shakes out to about $7650. 3. The $250k family is, again, not taxed on their first $24. They're then taxed 15% up to $75k, and then taxed 25% up to $250k. This is about $51,400. Flat Tax of 10% 1. The $24k family is taxed $2,400. This causes them to fall below the poverty line, and they cannot realistically be expected to sustain a basic living. So they need to fall back on those evil government welfare programs like food stamps to make up the difference. 2. The $75k family is taxed $7,500. 3. The $250k family is taxed $25,000. Finally, here's the end results for each of our three households in this Progressive vs Flat tax scenario: 1. For the $24k family, the difference is literally a matter of life and death. It cannot sustain itself under a flat tax, but can under a progressive. 2. For the $75k family, there's barely an appreciable difference. 3. For the $250k family, their taxes double under the progressive model. This may sound bad, but it still leaves them with ~$200k, which is over eight times what the first family makes, and double the second. Additionally, the flat tax gives the government a big headache, because they're both receiving less tax revenue overall, and have to support the $24k family. So the flat tax only helps households that don't need help, while forcing other households to need help they otherwise wouldn't with a progressive model. That help?
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 20:32
|
|
|
People defending a flat tax aren't going to care if it fucks the poor. The best strategy is to appeal to the demand for "fairness" that the flat tax is supposed to address. The rich businessman depends significantly more on the government and public infrastructure to make their money than Joe Somebody. If the court system were closed starting tomorrow most working class people would never notice but Wall Street would poo poo itself due to losing the ability to enforce contracts. If the US Navy were to be mothballed the resulting uptick in Somalia-style piracy wouldn't be a worry for us but the Waltons would have a real bad time.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 20:38
|
|
|
This fact-check article with this lede "The Democratic candidates met for the third time, and stretched the facts again:" is infuriating once you read the article and compare it with the caliber of bullshit coming from the GOP side. The "truth is in the middle" media is pissing me off more than in previous election cycles because of just how big the bullshit gap between the parties is and how everyone is still desperately trying to avoid stating the obvious
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 21:09
|
|
|
baw posted:This fact-check article with this lede "The Democratic candidates met for the third time, and stretched the facts again:" is infuriating once you read the article and compare it with the caliber of bullshit coming from the GOP side. The "truth is in the middle" media is pissing me off more than in previous election cycles because of just how big the bullshit gap between the parties are and how everyone is still desperately avoiding stating the obvious Biggest "stretching the truth" they caught: quote:Former secretary of State Hillary Clinton said 3% of her campaign donations “come from people in the finance and investment world.” That’s correct, but the total is 6% when including donations to outside groups supporting her candidacy Sure she said something we call correct, but it's "stretching the truth" because we wanted her to say something different! Here's another "we agree they said a true thing, but it's stretching the truth because we don't like it" quote:Martin O’Malley said that Sen. Bernie Sanders voted against funding research into gun-related injuries and deaths. He did, but that was 19 years ago. Sanders now says he supports such funding.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 21:12
|
|
|
baw posted:This fact-check article with this lede "The Democratic candidates met for the third time, and stretched the facts again:" is infuriating once you read the article and compare it with the caliber of bullshit coming from the GOP side. The "truth is in the middle" media is pissing me off more than in previous election cycles because of just how big the bullshit gap between the parties is and how everyone is still desperately trying to avoid stating the obvious And none of those are even lies. Most are, at best, bending the truth, or calling them lies on a technicality (the same way that "Republicans are killing Medicare" was). And that's before we get to this bullet point: quote:• Clinton said that “we lose 33,000 people a year already to gun violence.” To put that in context, 33% of those deaths were homicides; 63% were suicides. What about that is even false? That Hillary shouldn't count suicides when talking about gun violence?
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 21:15
|
|
|
The only thing that can stop a suicidal guy with a gun is a mental health professional with a gun
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 21:17
|
|
|
ComradeCosmobot posted:. And that's before we get to this bullet point: I think my blood pressure actually rose when i got to that one. I know the USA Today is milquetoast bullshit but goddamn
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 21:19
|
|
|
Swan Oat posted:The only thing that can stop a suicidal guy with a gun is a mental health professional with a gun I didn't realize cops were psychologists too
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 21:19
|
|
|
Zanzibar Ham posted:I didn't realize cops were psychologists too Ever hear of "Good cop, bad cop"?
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 21:23
|
|
|
poo poo, Jimmy Carter's grandson just passed away. He's had a tough year...
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 21:25
|
|
|
e: oh Jimmy 
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 21:26
|
|
|
Carter told the crowded church that his grandson hadn’t been feeling well Saturday and laid down to take a nap at his family’s home in Peachtree City. His mother checked on him later and discovered his heart had stopped. wtf a 28 year old can just suddenly die while sleeping?
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 21:39
|
|
|
baw posted:Carter told the crowded church that his grandson hadn’t been feeling well Saturday and laid down to take a nap at his family’s home in Peachtree City. His mother checked on him later and discovered his heart had stopped. Very yes. Maybe he had sleep apnea and it wasn't being treated, that's the cause I've heard most recently (giantbomb guy).
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 21:40
|
|
|
Enjoy your short meaningless lives while they last
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 21:44
|
|
|
ohgodwhat posted:Enjoy your short meaningless lives while they last I spent all day surfing reddit.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 21:46
|
|
|
baw posted:Carter told the crowded church that his grandson hadn’t been feeling well Saturday and laid down to take a nap at his family’s home in Peachtree City. His mother checked on him later and discovered his heart had stopped. There's any number of things that can have you feeling a bit unwell and kill you within 12 hours. The staph that is omnipresent on your body and in your life is stupidly lethal if it gets into your blood and spreads, for example. There's been tons of little plagues throughout history that tore through a population then died out that do exactly what you're describing. We have no idea of the treatments for these diseases, their vectors, the warning signs, if they'll come back or not. We're rapidly losing effective treatments to the stuff we DO know about. Also, looks up the Spanish Flu - you've probably heard about it but the scale and lethality of it (esp to young adults) probably wasn't emphasized. basically ohgodwhat posted:Enjoy your short meaningless lives while they last It's no mystery why they call nature a mother Epic High Five fucked around with this message at 22:04 on Dec 20, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 22:02
|
|
|
Fortunately being dead would kinda own so i'm not too worried. Def gonna check on my wife throughout the night though
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 22:11
|
|
|
Carter doesn't deserve this 
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 22:11
|
|
|
Shifty Pony posted:People defending a flat tax aren't going to care if it fucks the poor. Best way I've found to appeal to libertarians espousing a flat tax is by pointing out that it is inefficient. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marginal_utility#Market_price_and_diminishing_marginal_utility The value of every dollar you have/earn is inversely correlated with your much you make. Any amount of money will increase the quality of life of a poor person drastically more than a rich person.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 22:15
|
|
|
If those poors wanted more money they'd stop being poor, pull themselves up by their bootstraps, and earn their keep:
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 22:19
|
|
|
Why can't poors just stop being poor? Why can't gays just stop being gay? Why can't Muslims just accept Jesus? They believe so strongly in willpower!
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 22:22
|
|
|
Salvor_Hardin posted:Best way I've found to appeal to libertarians espousing a flat tax is by pointing out that it is inefficient. It's fun to bring up marginal utility to libertarians because they consider themselves "common sense" economic experts but usually have no idea what it is. Then you watch them flail and avoid the question since they have too much pride to simply ask what marginal utility is.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 22:26
|
|
|
Logikv9 posted:Why can't poors just stop being poor? Why can't gays just stop being gay? Why can't Muslims just accept Jesus? They believe so strongly in willpower! There is only one solution for all of these. Guns.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 22:28
|
|
|
baw posted:wtf a 28 year old can just suddenly die while sleeping? Yup. I knew a 30 year old triathlete that went to lay down because he wasn't feeling well and bam, heart attack. His wife didn't find him until later that day. Get your will prepared, y'all.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 22:31
|
|
|
PUGGERNAUT posted:Ted Cruz's Twitter is unintentionally hilarious. I can't believe it's not a parody.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 22:32
|
|
|
baw posted:
Happened to a goon a few months ago.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 22:33
|
|
|
Truly the golden cow America deserves
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 22:33
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Happened to a goon a few months ago. That means the chances of it happening to another goon are pretty low right? we should all be ok, congratulations everyone
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 22:34
|
|
|
Your body is pretty drat dumb and will try and kill you at every chance. Best just keep your liver busy oxidizing ethanol. Glug glug glug.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 22:38
|
|
|
Salvor_Hardin posted:Best way I've found to appeal to libertarians espousing a flat tax is by pointing out that it is inefficient. I've never met a real life libertarian who actually gave a poo poo about efficiency, or honestly who was even willing to acknowledge that the purpose of the economy is to distribute resources. Inefficiencies are meaningless to someone who thinks economic policies are things you should get ideologically attached to.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 22:39
|
|
|
fosborb posted:Yup. I knew a 30 year old triathlete that went to lay down because he wasn't feeling well and bam, heart attack. His wife didn't find him until later that day. Well first I'll have to get some assets worth bequeathing.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 22:43
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Happened to a goon a few months ago. He OD'd, though
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 22:53
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:Biggest "stretching the truth" they caught: Not counting donations to Hillary's Super PACs as donations to her campaign may be correct in a technical sense, but it is stretching the truth. That money is going to her nomination just as surely as if it was donated directly.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 23:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 03:22 |
|
|
ComradeCosmobot posted:And none of those are even lies. Most are, at best, bending the truth, or calling them lies on a technicality (the same way that "Republicans are killing Medicare" was). And that's before we get to this bullet point: so only 4% of whatever counts as "gun violence" doesn't end in someone dying?
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 23:13
|
|