| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
Andorra
Andorra64 Posts
On August 18 2011 00:03 Equity213 wrote: Accounting standards in the developed world are very stringent, Where have you been the last..uhm 20 years? I can't see how anybody can make such a statement in a serious discussion. | ||
|
akalarry
United States1978 Posts
On August 17 2011 23:21 Haemonculus wrote: Where the hell do you live? 80k? Most teachers make roughly half that. They also furnish their classrooms out of their own pocket. My cousin teaches 4th grade at a public school in a very rich/yuppie part of town. The PTA gave her... $80 to spend on classroom supplies. Everything else, pencils, markers, books, crayons, cleaning supplies, posters, games, paper (for 30 kids), etc, she has to buy herself. Ever wonder why your teachers in elementary school were so stingy about not mistreating crayons? Because when you break them, *she* has to go buy new ones. She's also making a fraction of that 80k you're talking about, and puts in a LOT of hours. I'm honestly rather offended that you'd insinuate that teachers are overpaid. note my last sentence. i didn't insinuate anything. my sister was a public school teacher in los angeles for 2 years. she's told me enough about the situation. not so much the money she earns (which was exactly what you said), but rather how the underprivileged children and bad parenting will never allow them to even graduate high school. also we had to buy our own crayons (just a fun anecdote, not to show our school was poor) most ppl had this: ![[image loading]](http://www.lighthouseproductionsinc.com/product_images/u/386/crayola__38833_zoom.jpg) we were so jealous when some kids had these ![[image loading]](http://www.filipinomissions.org/images/crayola_64.gif) | ||
|
Nqsty
United Kingdom118 Posts
On August 18 2011 01:25 tiffany wrote: right, the task at hand is to reduce the deficit, not pay off the debt. actually paying off the debt lost feasibility well before current times (taking a guess here but i'd say probably after the new deal or around the vietnam war) Paying off the debt is not a good idea, a fair amount of debt is a great situation and sustainable if regulated and closely monitored, which clearly it.. isn't. But paying off the debt was never an option, and no one would ever say that its a good thing to do. | ||
|
Haemonculus
United States6980 Posts
On August 18 2011 01:45 akalarry wrote: note my last sentence. i didn't insinuate anything. my sister was a public school teacher in los angeles for 2 years. she's told me enough about the situation. not so much the money she earns (which was exactly what you said), but rather how the underprivileged children and bad parenting will never allow them to even graduate high school. also we had to buy our own crayons (just a fun anecdote, not to show our school was poor) most ppl had this: we were so jealous when some kids had these No joke. The kid with the crayon box that had the built in sharpener was promoted to social god. If you want to draw thin lines, you bitches gotta crawl to ME! | ||
|
roflSloth
Canada43 Posts
The US has a massive disparity of wealth between the very rich and they very poor, and ... most poor conservatives are totally okay with this? And call the most successful investor in history wrong when he points this out? ??? I could never understand why conservative Americans value and defend personal wealth (even if it's someone else's) above all else. | ||
|
leveller
Sweden1840 Posts
| ||
TanGeng
Sanya12364 Posts
On August 18 2011 02:01 leveller wrote: So there are people out there who think its a bad idea to make multi-gabillionaires pay a little more taxes to help out everyone? I dont see why americans hate their governement, where is your compassion for your fellow man? Some people act like they would rather let poor people starve to death in a ditch than each chip in and help out. Look at yourselves monsters. People chip in and help out. Giving more money to the federal money blackhole isn't the same as helping out. | ||
|
Darksteel
Finland319 Posts
On August 17 2011 23:33 Tien wrote: Haemonculus I defend the rich because I have zero faith in how the government spends and wastes money. It isn't the rich's fault America's public debt is at 100% of GDP. Surely it weren't the poor people who ran the economy and ruined the stock market. The rich people are usually rich because they are high up in the society, thus having considerable influence on politics and economy. They could have used their socio-economic influence to guide your country to better path. Not to suggest politicians are corrupt, but I think its pretty clear they receive campaign money, endorsements etc from rich and influencial people, thus giving said people influence on who has better chance to get elected etc. | ||
|
TanGeng
Sanya12364 Posts
On August 17 2011 23:49 Rassy wrote: and full agree on the comment about silly people who dont trust the government but do trust big international cooperations (who in the end run the government) to do "the right thing" LOL It's as funny as the people scared of big corporations but fully trust the wholly owned and influenced federal government... | ||
|
Iodem
United States1173 Posts
On August 18 2011 02:01 leveller wrote: So there are people out there who think its a bad idea to make multi-gabillionaires pay a little more taxes to help out everyone? I dont see why americans hate their governement, where is your compassion for your fellow man? Some people act like they would rather let poor people starve to death in a ditch than each chip in and help out. Look at yourselves monsters. In the US, there's a bit of a belief that people deserve to keep what they have earned. The top 1% already pay 22% of all federal taxes, so the argument is somewhat to related to how much 'their fair share' should be. But the other issue is that some corporations game the system through regulations in the tax code and pay little to nothing in taxes. So in some cases, increasing tax rates really won't do much. The US Tax code needs to be reformed if you want a significant revenue increase. On August 18 2011 02:13 Darksteel wrote: Surely it weren't the poor people who ran the economy and ruined the stock market. The rich people are usually rich because they are high up in the society, thus having considerable influence on politics and economy. They could have used their socio-economic influence to guide your country to better path. Not to suggest politicians are corrupt, but I think its pretty clear they receive campaign money, endorsements etc from rich and influencial people, thus giving said people influence on who has better chance to get elected etc. If we hadn't acted like corporatists and socialized the losses and let them fail on their own, we would've been better off in the long run. | ||
|
Tien
Russian Federation4447 Posts
On August 17 2011 23:54 thebigdonkey wrote: I haven't seen anyone argue that spending isn't the problem. It has been the problem for a decade now, everyone agrees on that, thus it's largely irrelevant to this discussion. The issue is somehow, during that time we were cutting taxes when we shouldn't have been. Nobody is proposing that any increased revenues simply be dumped back into more wasteful spending, I think all of us just want to start filling in the debt hole we've dug ourselves. In the near future, if our politicians have half a brain, taxes will be rising on almost every group. All I'd like to see is a reevaluation of how the wealthiest are taxed. If the government can seriously get its fiscal house in order, I'll happily chuck a few more % points in tax dollars. But the farce that the Republicans and Democrats put together was just a politic theater, and is not going to do much to change the course. | ||
|
BlackFlag
499 Posts
On August 18 2011 02:19 TanGeng wrote: It's as funny as the people scared of big corporations but fully trust the wholly owned and influenced federal government... I nether trust the government nor corporations, but the government is at least acountable by the citizens. The government has to be there for everyone, corporations, by definition, only care about profit and are only acountable to their share-holders, who are a minority of the population of a country. Bit of a difference, heh? | ||
|
Tien
Russian Federation4447 Posts
On August 17 2011 23:49 Rassy wrote: and full agree on the comment about silly people who dont trust the government but do trust big international cooperations (who in the end run the government) to do "the right thing" LOL You think large unions and pension funds don't bribe the government? Where do you think the democratic party gets most of their funding from? Definitely not the rich corporations. Government is bribed by both sides. | ||
|
BlackFlag
499 Posts
On August 18 2011 02:23 Iodem wrote: In the US, there's a bit of a belief that people deserve to keep what they have earned. The top 1% already pay 22% of all federal taxes, so the argument is somewhat to related to how much 'their fair share' should be. But the other issue is that some corporations game the system through regulations in the tax code and pay little to nothing in taxes. So in some cases, increasing tax rates really won't do much. The US Tax code needs to be reformed if you want a significant revenue increase. If we hadn't acted like corporatists and socialized the losses and let them fail on their own, we would've been better off in the long run. How much of the wealth do the top 5-10% own? 50%? 75%? (I don't want to look it up right now) So it would only be sensible if the pay taxes accordingly. | ||
|
Bibdy
United States3481 Posts
At the end of the day, I don't see how that's the rich's fault. That's the fault of our people not being educated/skilled enough to fulfill the jobs that are being created in the West. Should we just force people to create businesses in the US and incur the heavy costs of maintaining such a business here (benefits, much higher wages than they could get overseas)? I think the real problem is the rising costs of education. It's getting more expensive for a family just to REMAIN middle-class and downright impossible for most poor families to dig themselves out of a hole - even if they did only have one child, there's little to no chance they could afford higher education for them. So, they just have a shit-ton of kids for whatever reasons (religion, culture, hoping one wins the lottery), they inevitably don't get much education and only adds to the problem. ![[image loading]](http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2008/12/03/education/03newcollegesub_large.jpg) How many of you plan to put multiple kids through college in the next two decades? I'm betting you'll have a much harder time of it than your parents had. | ||
|
Jermstuddog
United States2231 Posts
On August 18 2011 02:31 BlackFlag wrote: How much of the wealth do the top 5-10% own? 50%? 75%? (I don't want to look it up right now) So it would only be sensible if the pay taxes accordingly. Probably been linked already, but here: http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html The top 5% own 62% of wealth in the US. Another fun fact is the bottom 40% own 0.03% of the wealth in the US. | ||
|
Tien
Russian Federation4447 Posts
| ||
|
Evilmystic
Russian Federation266 Posts
On August 18 2011 02:01 leveller wrote: So there are people out there who think its a bad idea to make multi-gabillionaires pay a little more taxes to help out everyone? I dont see why americans hate their governement, where is your compassion for your fellow man? Some people act like they would rather let poor people starve to death in a ditch than each chip in and help out. Look at yourselves monsters. If someone is poor, it's his very own problem, not somebody else's. You get what you earn, that's the only fair and sustainable condition. | ||
|
Haemonculus
United States6980 Posts
http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/investment_manager.html An interesting article from an investor who works with the top 1%. Basically his thoughts on all the economic issues we're facing. Pretty interesting. | ||
|
Deja Thoris
South Africa646 Posts
On August 18 2011 02:29 Tien wrote: You think large unions and pension funds don't bribe the government? Where do you think the democratic party gets most of their funding from? Definitely not the rich corporations. Government is bribed by both sides. I've read the debate you are having with Haemalicous and can't help but agree with him. Your thinking strikes me as absolute. "Revenues aren't the problem, spending is!" That isn't really the debate. Debate Warren Buffets statement and what he says is pretty undeniable and common sense. The "governement wastes money" is a seperate topic. I agree that the government is wasteful and that things need to improve there. When the problem is as big as the defecit you need to tackle it from all angles. Improving government revenue by increasing the tax burden on the rich will help for sure. There is no "one shot" magic bullet to kill the defecit, it's going to be 100's or 1000's of smaller initiatives that eventually whittle it away. | ||
| ||
|
|
PiGosaur Cup
The PondCast
Kung Fu Cup
IntoTheTV X SOOP
SHIN vs GuMiho
Clem vs Classic
OSC
WardiTV Invitational
GSL
Epic.LAN
Replay Cast
Sparkling Tuna Cup
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
