|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Feb 16, 2011 22:41:49 GMT -8
Will Jerry Brown be able to make real changes in the area of public employee pensions? Frankly, I think he may give it a serious try. How much success he will have is an open question. Here is a revealing look at how we got into the mess in the first place. reason.com/archives/2011/02/16/farewell-my-lovelyAzWm |
|
|
|
Post by AlwaysAnAztec on Feb 17, 2011 8:40:14 GMT -8
Will Jerry Brown be able to make real changes in the area of public employee pensions? Frankly, I think he may give it a serious try. How much success he will have is an open question. Here is a revealing look at how we got into the mess in the first place. reason.com/archives/2011/02/16/farewell-my-lovelyAzWm What a piece of poo. No specifics just a bunch of political anti-union, anti-democrat statements. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Feb 17, 2011 12:02:27 GMT -8
Will Jerry Brown be able to make real changes in the area of public employee pensions? Frankly, I think he may give it a serious try. How much success he will have is an open question. Here is a revealing look at how we got into the mess in the first place. reason.com/archives/2011/02/16/farewell-my-lovelyAzWm What a piece of poo. No specifics just a bunch of political anti-union, anti-democrat statements. If it is a bunch of poo, how did we get in this pickle? Seems to me you can try, but not explain it away without citing those issues. |
|
|
|
Post by inocuace on Feb 21, 2011 9:39:34 GMT -8
Will Jerry Brown be able to make real changes in the area of public employee pensions? Frankly, I think he may give it a serious try. How much success he will have is an open question. Here is a revealing look at how we got into the mess in the first place. reason.com/archives/2011/02/16/farewell-my-lovelyAzWm aztecwilliam, You really hate the unions, don't you? They and their pensions are not the only reason that California is in debt. Yet you conservatives fixate on it as if eliminating unions would solve all of the problems. No matter what you say the problem is multifaceted. The combination of the reduction in property tax rates, the economy and the resulting revenue stream reduction and many other factors are involved in California's budget crisis. You are telegraphing your real motivation by refusing to acknowledge that the budget crisis in California is more complex than you allow and it is partially caused by ill advised reductions in income streams. As I have said, conservatives don't want to pay taxes and they do not acknowledge that at least part of the cure is increasing income streams. |
|
|
|
Post by tuff on Feb 21, 2011 11:38:45 GMT -8
You can't keep paying these entitlements when money doesn't cover the expense. Something has to be adjusted. Raising taxes has been the f**ing answer by politicians for 50 years. Change has to come from within, not without. It's not a republican or conservative thing. It's reality. WE ARE BROKE. If the union leadership won't aloow for some short term adjustments for it's members, the only answer would be to fire X amount of emplyees to get the same results. Even I don't like that course of action.
|
|
|
|
Post by inocuace on Feb 21, 2011 14:38:30 GMT -8
You can't keep paying these entitlements when money doesn't cover the expense. Something has to be adjusted. Raising taxes has been the f**ing answer by politicians for 50 years. Change has to come from within, not without. It's not a republican or conservative thing. It's reality. WE ARE BROKE. If the union leadership won't aloow for some short term adjustments for it's members, the only answer would be to fire X amount of emplyees to get the same results. Even I don't like that course of action. Unions have been allowing for short term adjustments for many years. "Raising taxes has been the f**ing answer by politicians for 50 years."
OK then. Since you say those f**ing politicians have been raising taxes for 50 years, show me how taxes are higher, in aggregate, than they were 50 years ago. Prove it. You don't want to pay any taxes at all and that is the real problem. |
|
|
|
Post by AlwaysAnAztec on Feb 22, 2011 11:28:59 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by aztec70 on Feb 22, 2011 12:36:25 GMT -8
Conservatives never let facts get in the way of their opinions. |
|
|
|
Post by davdesid on Feb 22, 2011 15:03:09 GMT -8
Conservatives never let facts get in the way of their opinions. C'mon Mister EA, surely someone in your line of work knows that marginal tax rates and effective tax rates are apples and oranges. Surely you know that the myriad deductions and write-offs from back in the day no longer exist. Here's a tax calculator that will compute an average effective tax rate for various gross incomes for 2010. But, I suppose you and your ilk wouldn't be satisfied unless the guy making a gross of 4 million, or 400K, was only allowed to take home the same as the guy making 40K. www.dinkytown.net/java/TaxMargin.html |
|
|
|
Post by aztec70 on Feb 22, 2011 15:20:42 GMT -8
If you want to post a link that shows us that the effective tax rate of the lower and middle income have fallen, whereas the upper has risen, please post it.
|
|
|
|
Post by davdesid on Feb 22, 2011 16:03:57 GMT -8
If you want to post a link that shows us that the effective tax rate of the lower and middle income have fallen, whereas the upper has risen, please post it. I posted a link where anyone can make comparisons. Not good enough for you? Of course not. No, you post a link that shows us how EFFECTIVE tax rates of the upper income people have DRAMATICALLY fallen vis-a-vis the lower and middle. DRAMATICALLY was the scare word used. Can you do it? Didn't think so. |
|
|
|
Post by aztec70 on Feb 22, 2011 16:27:50 GMT -8
If you want to post a link that shows us that the effective tax rate of the lower and middle income have fallen, whereas the upper has risen, please post it. I posted a link where anyone can make comparisons. Not good enough for you? Of course not. No, you post a link that shows us how EFFECTIVE tax rates of the upper income people have DRAMATICALLY fallen vis-a-vis the lower and middle. DRAMATICALLY was the scare word used. Can you do it? Didn't think so. You posted a link for 2010 rates. The question under discussion is whether taxes have fallen for for the rich vs. low and middle income over the last 50 years. You dispute that. It is up to you to prove your point. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Feb 22, 2011 16:44:13 GMT -8
I posted a link where anyone can make comparisons. Not good enough for you? Of course not. No, you post a link that shows us how EFFECTIVE tax rates of the upper income people have DRAMATICALLY fallen vis-a-vis the lower and middle. DRAMATICALLY was the scare word used. Can you do it? Didn't think so. You posted a link for 2010 rates. The question under discussion is whether taxes have fallen for for the rich vs. low and middle income over the last 50 years. You dispute that. It is up to you to prove your point. No, the question was how did California's budget mess get going. Tax rates are really deceiving on the surface. When you kick in all the programs that allow about half the olks to not pay anything at all you will understand why that question is just to tough to answer quickly. |
|
|
|
Post by aztec70 on Feb 22, 2011 16:49:36 GMT -8
Let me amend my comment. I suspect the rates for the lowest income earners have fallen. It is the middle class that have borne the brunt of taxes over the years.
|
|
|
|
Post by davdesid on Feb 22, 2011 16:59:05 GMT -8
I posted a link where anyone can make comparisons. Not good enough for you? Of course not. No, you post a link that shows us how EFFECTIVE tax rates of the upper income people have DRAMATICALLY fallen vis-a-vis the lower and middle. DRAMATICALLY was the scare word used. Can you do it? Didn't think so. You posted a link for 2010 rates. The question under discussion is whether taxes have fallen for for the rich vs. low and middle income over the last 50 years. You dispute that. It is up to you to prove your point. No, the assertion made, and the one you seemingly agree with, is that tax rates for the so-called "rich" have fallen vs. everyone else over the last 50 years. My point is not about marginal rates, it's about EFFECTIVE rates. If the so-called "rich" are paying DRAMATICALLY lower taxes under the current tax environment than the lower/middle income earners, as seems to be suggested, it is up to YOU to support that conclusion. But you can't. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Feb 22, 2011 16:59:27 GMT -8
Let me amend my comment. I suspect the rates for the lowest income earners have fallen. It is the middle class that have borne the brunt of taxes over the years. What percent of total income tax is paid by the top 10% of earners? |
|
|
|
Post by aztec70 on Feb 22, 2011 17:08:59 GMT -8
Let me amend my comment. I suspect the rates for the lowest income earners have fallen. It is the middle class that have borne the brunt of taxes over the years. What percent of total income tax is paid by the top 10% of earners? What percent of income do the upper 10% pay? |
|
|
|
Post by aztec70 on Feb 22, 2011 17:10:26 GMT -8
You posted a link for 2010 rates. The question under discussion is whether taxes have fallen for for the rich vs. low and middle income over the last 50 years. You dispute that. It is up to you to prove your point. No, the assertion made, and the one you seemingly agree with, is that tax rates for the so-called "rich" have fallen vs. everyone else over the last 50 years. My point is not about marginal rates, it's about EFFECTIVE rates. If the so-called "rich" are paying DRAMATICALLY lower taxes under the current tax environment than the lower/middle income earners, as seems to be suggested, it is up to YOU to support that conclusion. But you can't. I certainly don't have time now. But, I will put a note in my Daytimer for after tax season. Can you wait? |
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Feb 22, 2011 17:27:35 GMT -8
What percent of total income tax is paid by the top 10% of earners? What percent of income do the upper 10% pay? Here is a google search that will give you a whole bunch of information about this from a lot of different sources. "percent of taxes paid by rich" |
|
|
|
Post by aztec70 on Feb 23, 2011 13:09:29 GMT -8
What percent of income do the upper 10% pay? Here is a google search that will give you a whole bunch of information about this from a lot of different sources. "percent of taxes paid by rich" You have changed the search question. My question was percent of income paid in taxes, not percent of taxes. Did you not notice? |
|
