Fuck its silent in here.......

[morpheus]

DPD.  Damnit, I didn't heed my own advice.

[Slaky]

DPD.  Damnit, I didn't heed my own advice.

You took the morphbait.

[Eli]

... the stupidly high corporate tax in the U.S.

Those poor, poor people.

[Gilgamesh]

"Fair share." Stephen King is supposed to be a descriptive writer yet all he can do is use a pedestrian phrase like "fair share" to exclaim how much he should pay in taxes. But, his creative personal attacks (seriously, Stephen, are these the best you can do?) really add something to this debate I've seen nowhere else.

When you can determine what share is "fair" and why it is so, you are free to get back to me. Gil and RV described a system they felt was fair. I disagreed with their rates, but that's something we can at least work with.

Stephen King offers none of that, but he does offer a very poor understanding of economics and finance.

I am just hopeful we can all pay our "fair share" and most important, get rid of all the "loopholes" and everything then will be grand.

But, don't worry! The President is on it, complaining about tax loopholes, while proposing several new tax loopholes during the State of the Union!

And fuck yeah, R-V, he absolutely should pay the IRS what he thinks he should be taxed.

Finally, the number of Americans with 0 federal income tax is around 50%. How many of them are rich?

This I totally agree with TJ on: "But, don't worry! The President is on it, complaining about tax loopholes, while proposing several new tax loopholes during the State of the Union!"  That was absurd and stupid.

However, this "And fuck yeah, R-V, he absolutely should pay the IRS what he thinks he should be taxed" while I can understand the argument, seems out of place for me.

If I think there should be a traffic control device at a particular intersection, and I advocate for that before the city council or whatever, am I obligated to obey a non-existant traffic control device before I convince others to come around to my position?

[World's #1 Astros Fan]

My cat's breath smells like cat food.

[Brownie]

"Fair share." Stephen King is supposed to be a descriptive writer yet all he can do is use a pedestrian phrase like "fair share" to exclaim how much he should pay in taxes. But, his creative personal attacks (seriously, Stephen, are these the best you can do?) really add something to this debate I've seen nowhere else.

When you can determine what share is "fair" and why it is so, you are free to get back to me. Gil and RV described a system they felt was fair. I disagreed with their rates, but that's something we can at least work with.

Stephen King offers none of that, but he does offer a very poor understanding of economics and finance.

I am just hopeful we can all pay our "fair share" and most important, get rid of all the "loopholes" and everything then will be grand.

But, don't worry! The President is on it, complaining about tax loopholes, while proposing several new tax loopholes during the State of the Union!

And fuck yeah, R-V, he absolutely should pay the IRS what he thinks he should be taxed.

Finally, the number of Americans with 0 federal income tax is around 50%. How many of them are rich?

This I totally agree with TJ on: "But, don't worry! The President is on it, complaining about tax loopholes, while proposing several new tax loopholes during the State of the Union!"  That was absurd and stupid.

However, this "And fuck yeah, R-V, he absolutely should pay the IRS what he thinks he should be taxed" while I can understand the argument, seems out of place for me.

If I think there should be a traffic control device at a particular intersection, and I advocate for that before the city council or whatever, am I obligated to obey a non-existant traffic control device before I convince others to come around to my position?

King -- and Buffett -- saying he wants to be taxed more is disingenuous. He wants to be generous with others' money, which isn't being generous at all.  Hell, he doesn't have to go to great pains to file his income taxes. Fill out a 1040EZ, report all income as ordinary, and be done with it.

Truthfully, I wouldn't advise anyone except a loudmouth like King to pay the government a little extra. Hate the game, not the player.

I guess the common ground to be had in this debate is that enough Ds and Rs agree with enough of what Morph said and what Bowles-Simpson proposed, that rhetoric like Stephen King's essay (which is so beneath his ability anyway) is years behind where we should be.

[morpheus]

... the stupidly high corporate tax in the U.S.

Those poor, poor people.

http://c457332.r32.cf2.rackcdn.com/Economics_in_one_lesson.pdf

[ChuckD]

... the stupidly high corporate tax in the U.S.

Those poor, poor people.

http://c457332.r32.cf2.rackcdn.com/Economics_in_one_lesson.pdf

I made it to the first hyperbole. Which is to say, stopped reading at the first sentence.

[Quality Start Machine]

The American economy, like any disease, generates more profit in the treatment than the cure.

There's really a simple and logical conclusion: Neither the collection nor the distribution of revenue has any balance or logic, and is not in the better interests of the American people.

If everyone acted on that conclusion, then a combination of tax and spending reform would put us in far better stead.

Of course, there are a lot of lobbyists filling the trough where politicians feed. That will prevent the cure from ever happening.

[morpheus]

The American economy, like any disease, generates more profit in the treatment than the cure.

There's really a simple and logical conclusion: Neither the collection nor the distribution of revenue has any balance or logic, and is not in the better interests of the American people.

If everyone acted on that conclusion, then a combination of tax and spending reform would put us in far better stead.

Of course, there are a lot of lobbyists filling the trough where politicians feed. That will prevent the cure from ever happening.

Fork is... right?  Yes.  FORK IS RIGHT!

[morpheus]

... the stupidly high corporate tax in the U.S.

Those poor, poor people.

http://c457332.r32.cf2.rackcdn.com/Economics_in_one_lesson.pdf

I made it to the first hyperbole. Which is to say, stopped reading at the first sentence.

DPD.  I'm happy to help.  From page 5:

From this aspect, therefore, the whole of economics can be reduced to a single lesson, and that lesson can be reduced to a single sentence.  The art of economics consists in looking not merely at the immediate but at the longer effects of any act or policy; it consists in tracing the consequences of that policy not merely for one group but for all groups.

[Tinker to Evers to Chance]

... the stupidly high corporate tax in the U.S.

Those poor, poor people.

http://c457332.r32.cf2.rackcdn.com/Economics_in_one_lesson.pdf

I made it to the first hyperbole. Which is to say, stopped reading at the first sentence.

DPD.  I'm happy to help.  From page 5:

From this aspect, therefore, the whole of economics can be reduced to a single lesson, and that lesson can be reduced to a single sentence.  The art of economics consists in looking not merely at the immediate but at the longer effects of any act or policy; it consists in tracing the consequences of that policy not merely for one group but for all groups.

So what you're saying is I'm a dope for buying this book when I could have downloaded it for free.

[Eli]

... the stupidly high corporate tax in the U.S.

Those poor, poor people.

http://c457332.r32.cf2.rackcdn.com/Economics_in_one_lesson.pdf

I made it to the first hyperbole. Which is to say, stopped reading at the first sentence.

DPD.  I'm happy to help.  From page 5:

From this aspect, therefore, the whole of economics can be reduced to a single lesson, and that lesson can be reduced to a single sentence.  The art of economics consists in looking not merely at the immediate but at the longer effects of any act or policy; it consists in tracing the consequences of that policy not merely for one group but for all groups.

So what you're saying is I'm a dope for buying this book when I could have downloaded it for free.

Don't you understand the free market?

[CT III]

From this aspect, therefore, the whole of economics can be reduced to a single lesson, and that lesson can be reduced to a single sentence.  The art of economics consists in looking not merely at the immediate but at the longer effects of any act or policy; it consists in tracing the consequences of that policy not merely for one group but for all groups.

Economics is no more an art than voice over.

[Eli]

From this aspect, therefore, the whole of economics can be reduced to a single lesson, and that lesson can be reduced to a single sentence.  The art of economics consists in looking not merely at the immediate but at the longer effects of any act or policy; it consists in tracing the consequences of that policy not merely for one group but for all groups.

Economics is no more an art than voice over.

Oh man, I had totally forgotten about that guy. I'm not sure how.