[QUOTE=McP3000;16814161]how are you rich if you're going to have less money

and how are you going to be rich anyway? Out of curiosity.[/QUOTE]

Well if I make 100k and I pay 50% taxes, then I still take home as much as someone making 50k who pays no taxes. And neither of those scenarios are even close to reality.

Well consider that I'm 22 and have already gotten job offers that would land me as an individual in the top quartile of household incomes in the US and...

its not like lower class folk need more nike dunks either steve

[QUOTE=Angmar;16814165]It's not like the government is going to take all of your money, you'll still be wealthy, just not as wealthy as you were before, boohoo.[/QUOTE]
i dont see how the amount of money has anything to do with the inherently immoral concept. You're thinking in very surface level terms.

why are we talking about tax in the rock and metal thread on its 2000 page milestone

because there's always taxes and death

[QUOTE=Permanent Solution;16814173]Well if I make 100k and I pay 50% taxes, then I still take home as much as someone making 50k who pays no taxes. And neither of those scenarios are even close to reality.[/quote]
I know its not a reality because that would be a horribly immoral thing for the government to do.

[quote]Well consider that I'm 22 and have already gotten job offers that would land me as an individual in the top quartile of household incomes in the US and...[/QUOTE]
That isn't rich. Rich is considered the top tax bracket which is in the 300k's i think. unless you wanna get sticky and talk about subjective definitions of being rich, but lets not.
But then again you're also in the top %1 of people under the age of 30 so congrats man. :P

Whats the job?

[QUOTE=hismajestythepope;16814175]its not like lower class folk need more nike dunks either steve[/QUOTE]

god dammit

[QUOTE=McP3000;16814177]i dont see how the amount of money has anything to do with the inherently immoral concept. You're thinking in very surface level terms.[/QUOTE]

I'm impressed by your impressive vocabulary!

wow steve, and you laugh at silverfang for replying **** like that

[QUOTE=Angmar;16814186]I'm impressed by your impressive vocabulary![/QUOTE]
erm what

the highly evocative use of eloquent passages makes this conversation a pleasure to process auditorily.

[QUOTE=Altmer;16814191]the highly evocative use of eloquent passages makes this conversation a pleasure to process auditorily.[/QUOTE]
hey you know how to use a thesaurus too

I know what those words mean, but I really don't get what his point is tbh!

np joanna newsom

what dont you understand steve

[QUOTE=McP3000;16814192]hey you know how to use a thesaurus too[/QUOTE]

problem is that was off the top of my head

steve why are we the only smart people on mx?

its so lonely :( :( :(

Posting on mx lowers your IQ

What the hell is thinking on surface terms suppose to [B]f[/B]ucking mean.

you have a shallow mind

you must broaden your horizons and deepen your bottoms

****

[QUOTE=McP3000;16814184]I know its not a reality because that would be a horribly immoral thing for the government to do.


That isn't rich. Rich is considered the top tax bracket which is in the 300k's i think. unless you wanna get sticky and talk about subjective definitions of being rich, but lets not.
But then again you're also in the top %1 of people under the age of 30 so congrats man. :P

Whats the job?[/QUOTE]
Perhaps, but the point stands that you can be wealthy very easily even being taxed more than the poor.

[quote]The New York Times has used the quintiles to define class. It has assigned the quintiles from lowest to highest as bottom fifth, lower middle, middle, upper middle, and top fifth.[14]
Data All households Lowest fifth Second fifth Middle fifth Fourth fifth Highest fifth Top 5%
Households (in 1000s) 113,146 22,629 22,629 22,629 22,629 22,629 5,695
Lower limit $0 $0 $18,500 $34,738 $55,331 $88,030 $157,176
Median number of income earners 1 0 1 1 2 2 2[/quote]
Might be hard to read, but that definition pins upper class at 88k/year...so maybe 5 years down the road for me to be upper class as a single income earner. Were I married to just about anyone, I would already be pushing upper class at that rate.

the idea that rich means in the top tax bracket is silly.

That job was with the US patent office which would pay me to become a patent lawyer and make 500k/year in many cases, but I'm sticking to school for now.

[QUOTE=Ghoul Hunter;16814201]steve why are we the only smart people on mx?

its so lonely :( :( :([/QUOTE]
lol

wtf josh :(

I wish someone would just come along and shoot me in the face


I'm in so much pain :(

[QUOTE=Mr. Ron;16814220]I wish someone would just come along and shoot me in the face


I'm in so much pain :([/QUOTE]

*takes bait*

wtf josh

[QUOTE=Permanent Solution;16814214]Perhaps, but the point stands that you can be wealthy very easily even being taxed more than the poor.[/QUOTE]

but dude honestly, why not just cut spending rather than increase taxing?

thats all i can say. our government spends too much money on programs where the money isnt going where its supposed to.

lets look at the minnesota bridge collapse incident, state departments of transportation are funded by the federal government, mndot employees spent money on themselves instead of on bridge repairs, an interstate bridge between two major cities collapsed and both st. paul and minneapolis had traffic back ups that kept people out of work or got people to work 4 hours late.

if things like this are going on in our nation, why should taxes be increased to throw more money into these programs? shouldnt the government focus more on regulating the spending as opposed to taxes?

id say they should but, as you see government officials will let bridges that were pronounced hazardous to collapse just to hold onto tax dollars.

[QUOTE=hismajestythepope;16814216]lol[/QUOTE]

At least we don't give stupid reasons for being anti-Obama.

OMG THE GUY CANNOT BE TRUSTED ACORN AHHHH

Mappy cutting spending would be nice but that's a lot easier said than done.

don't support either candidate they're both terrible

[QUOTE=Angmar;16814231]Mappy cutting spending would be nice but that's a lot easier said than done.[/QUOTE]

who cares if it isnt easy? its necessary. we should vote to fix a corrupt government, not to put more money in that corrupt governments hands.

Dude I'm not disagreeing with you, but I'm just saying that we need to be realistic, the government should cut down on unnecessary spending yes, but a lot of the times they don't know the project or whatever was bad until the money was put into it.

omg why are mappy, jammie, mc3000 and i the only smarts on mx waaaaaah others don't agree wiht us

[QUOTE=Angmar;16814239]Dude I'm not disagreeing with you, but I'm just saying that we need to be realistic, the government should cut down on unnecessary spending yes, but a lot of the times they don't know the project or whatever was bad until the money was put into it.[/QUOTE]

how is it not being realistic to say that we need to reform our government to make sure every programs money is spent on what its supposed to be spent on?

increasing taxes does nothing but further the issues that were having with our government as is.

Hey guys I have a 3.6 GPA I am a smart too :/

you're only smart if you agree with us

[QUOTE=Angmar;16814231]At least we don't give stupid reasons for being anti-Obama.

OMG THE GUY CANNOT BE TRUSTED ACORN AHHHH[/QUOTE]

Yeah this is what I'm really sick of. I mean have a good reason and I can respect that but people pick a couple big words and drop in a Bill Ayers and they're automatically a "well informed intelligent individiual." Though this doesn't mean anybody on here. Mainly people that I used to go to church with. I'm sick of people voting Republican because that's the Christian thing to do. Retards.

[QUOTE=hismajestythepope;16814248]how is it not being realistic to say that we need to reform our government to make sure every programs money is spent on what its supposed to be spent on?[/QUOTE]

It's just not gonna happen anytime soon, I think it's achievable but a problem too frequently overlooked or considered unimportant.

[QUOTE=Dimmu Burger;16814253]Yeah this is what I'm really sick of. I mean have a good reason and I can respect that but people pick a couple big words and drop in a Bill Ayers and they're automatically a "well informed intelligent individiual." Though this doesn't mean anybody on here. Mainly people that I used to go to church with. I'm sick of people voting Republican because that's the Christian thing to do. Retards.[/QUOTE]

Yeah, if Obama really wanted to pull the "minor association" card on McCain he could pull out just as much or more stuff on him, the truth is you can't always control who you're associated with and the way the Republicans have been running their campaign in that respect is very hypocritical.

its not gonna happen anytime soon so we better increase taxes and start new social programs while our government is still in need of desperate reform in order for any of these programs to work!

also, steve disliking a politician for being [I]shady[/I] is stupid? stfu. i get it, you think saying youre liberal makes you smart.

[QUOTE=Mr. Ron;16814236]don't support either candidate they're both terrible[/QUOTE]

what happend to you being smart and supporting obama

wtf man

[QUOTE=Dimmu Burger;16814253]I'm sick of people voting Republican because that's the Christian thing to do. Retards.[/QUOTE]

Just like all the people voting Democrat because that's the young person thing to do.