Please tell me you understand how tax liability works. If not, the discussion needs to focus only on that concept until you do.

Let me know which you prefer.

People who try to do that either don’t understand how taxes work or are hoping to score pseudo-jargonistic, simplistic, populist attack points.
 
Which are you? Serious question, btw. Which describes you?

 
And with so many of my questions unanswered.

rogerb on August 30, 2012 at 6:13 PM

let’s leave it, you’re not making any attempt to address in a coherent way what i’m saying .

Not derogatory. Descriptive. Just like your “taxpayer” accolade. What, don’t you like the “taxpayer/drain” rule you established?
 
rogerb on August 30, 2012 at 8:54 AM

 
i didn’t establish anything. all i was suggesting that if you pay tax you’re by definition a taxpayer
 
sesquipedalian on August 30, 2012 at 2:39 PM

 
Sorry, but why are you agreeing with me there?
 

i think you misunderstood me and are making a big deal out of it. i did just come up with the shorthand…
 
sesquipedalian on August 30, 2012 at 2:39 PM

 
Not at all. Just pointing out a small block on which larger structures are built.

Not derogatory. Descriptive. Just like your “taxpayer” accolade. What, don’t you like the “taxpayer/drain” rule you established?

nonsense. you’re forcing the ‘drain’ part into the conversation, i didn’t establish anything. all i was suggesting that if you pay tax you’re by definition a taxpayer, and the statement that ’50% of people don’t pay taxes’ is patently false.

also, ‘taxpayer’ is obviously not an emotionally charged word like ‘leeches.’ you pay taxes because you have to, you leech because you choose to.

FWIW, I’m not sure if you realize how much damage you did to your overall position with that.

“You’re not nerdy (smart) enough” to understand something you made up and you readily admit no one else knows about or uses?

of all i wrote, you latch on to this? i think you misunderstood me and are making a big deal out of it. i did just come up with the shorthand, but if you’re used to reading texts whose author properly notes alterations to quoted material, it’s not all that difficult to figure out what ‘m.i.’ stands for. in any case, i didn’t mean to admonish you.

oh, and you’re not nerdy enough – it stands for ‘my italics.’
 
sesquipedalian on August 29, 2012 at 9:50 PM

i’m not aware of the m.i. shorthand being used by anyone, i just came up with it.
 
sesquipedalian on August 30, 2012 at 8:26 AM

 
FWIW, I’m not sure if you realize how much damage you did to your overall position with that.
 
“You’re not nerdy (smart) enough” to understand something you made up and you readily admit no one else knows about or uses? Trust me, we all understand your stance on dividends and pretend taxpayers much better now.
 
Well played. I’m sure that’s an isolated example, though.
 

i usually have strong arguments.

 
Thanks for that one.

That requires, by your same definition, that each instant government support is handed out OR each time they spend the money from a government handout, they’re called either a leech and/or drain on the county/state/country.

and technically, you’re right. your choice of derogatory terms for those who accept help from the government – farmers, energy producers, people on welfare, etc. – renders a false moral judgment.

rogerb on August 29, 2012 at 10:45 PM

exactly. that’s what i hope would change. capital gains should be considered personal income just like salary (unless it’s reinvested of course). it’s ridiculous that you can choose a profession in which your tax rate will be by default less the half of others in your income range.

the only argument you could make as to why capital gains shouldn’t be taxed is a utilitarian one – it encourages investment. but there’s a much greater utility to be won from homologizing all types of personal income (greater revenues) along with a strong moral argument (fair burden sharing).

i’m not aware of the m.i. shorthand being used by anyone, i just came up with it. nobody cares to note their own edits anymore, maybe apart from larison. (on here, i gotta be extra meticulous because if you have strong arguments you attack my syntax and grammar, and i usually have strong arguments.)

that’s not true, though. a tax is a tax, regardless of whether you receive government support at the same time….wingnuttia. it’s a lie.

 
A lie? No, it’s your justification. Paying a tax doesn’t make one a taxpayer. At the instant money changed hands
 
Scratch that. Fine. We’ll go with your definition. Each time money goes in then they are taxpayers. If a $0.04 tax is paid on a pack of Juicy Fruit, they’re a taxpayer.
 
That requires, by your same definition, that each instant government support is handed out OR each time they spend the money from a government handout, they’re called either a leech and/or drain on the county/state/country. Your choice.
 
Deal? Let me know which you prefer. I’m guessing leech.
 
Your rules, btw. Nicely done.
 

I suppose I’m not hip enough to know what m.i. means, but if you’re asking if I’d like to see all incomes, from $20K/year to $20M/year, actually have an equal tax liability, then yes. Yes I would.

rogerb on August 29, 2012 at 9:03 PM

so paying twice mitt romney’s rate does bother you somewhat.

sesquipedalian on August 29, 2012 at 9:50 PM

 
I phrased that poorly, and your misunderstanding isn’t entirely your fault. The immediate partisan phrasing is, but still.
 
You lump all rates together. You can’t do that. I don’t pay twice Mitt’s because we’re not paying on the same measure. Wages and dividends are different things. Discussing rates between the two is apples and chipmunks. They’re not the same and can’t be similarly discussed.
 
People who try to do that either don’t understand how taxes work or are hoping to score pseudo-jargonistic, simplistic, populist attack points.
 
Which are you? Serious question, btw. Which describes you?
 
And, fwiw, I don’t want dividends taxed at all. Leave them free to invest in innovation.
 
(OT- I’m a different kind of nerdy. I didn’t recognize your “m.i.” as the accepted “italics mine” of the professional MLA or Chicago writing styles. Is it blog-speak?)

If someone pays $500 in sales tax but gets $1000 in entitlements, they have no tax liability. (FWIW, they have a negative tax liability. They’re making money.)

that’s not true, though. a tax is a tax, regardless of whether you receive government support at the same time. this is important because of this malarkey about half of Americans not paying taxes that’s been proliferating freely in wingnuttia. it’s a lie.

I suppose I’m not hip enough to know what m.i. means, but if you’re asking if I’d like to see all incomes, from $20K/year to $20M/year, actually have an equal tax liability, then yes. Yes I would.

rogerb on August 29, 2012 at 9:03 PM

so paying twice mitt romney’s rate does bother you somewhat.

i could see a radically simplified tax code, where you pay the same rate on every cent you earn, be it salary, capital gains or lottery winnings, with rates of 15%-35% depending on gross income, no loopholes, deductions, charity bullshit, anything. but flat tax, nah.

oh, and you’re not nerdy enough – it stands for ‘my italics.’

Paying taxes means you have a tax liability.
 
rogerb on August 29, 2012 at 7:14 PM

 
every time you purchase something, for example.
 
sesquipedalian on August 29, 2012 at 7:26 PM

 
You’re kidding, right?
 
Taxes aren’t an instantaneous thing. “Every time you purchase something” is still exactly wrong if you will get more from the state annually than you pay to the state annually.
 
If someone pays $500 in sales tax but gets $1000 in entitlements, they have no tax liability. (FWIW, they have a negative tax liability. They’re making money.)
 
Please tell me you understand how tax liability works. If not, the discussion needs to focus only on that concept until you do.
 

how about the second part, though?
 

It’s also… expenditures.

 
m.i.
 
sesquipedalian on August 29, 2012 at 7:26 PM

 
I suppose I’m not hip enough to know what m.i. means, but if you’re asking if I’d like to see all incomes, from $20K/year to $20M/year, actually have an equal tax liability, then yes. Yes I would.
 
And when politicians vote to increase taxes, they’re raised equally across the board.

cane_loader on August 29, 2012 at 8:56 PM

Keep us posted! Prayers and thoughts for your safety.

well, stay safe then. i’m sorry about your house.

sesquipedalian on August 29, 2012 at 8:46 PM

Thanks. The worst is yet to come. Sorry I was rude.

BTW, Obama is also the guy who hosted a White House concert and got onstage and sang Hey Jude with Paul McCartney while oil was spilling onto the shores of the Gulf. He doesn’t give a crap about a state if it means nothing to him electorally.

Doughboy on August 29, 2012 at 4:46 PM

Ah, I remember it well! The night my 50-year crush on Paul McCartney ended abruptly. He’s dead to me now.

cane_loader on August 29, 2012 at 8:00 PM

well, stay safe then. i’m sorry about your house.

cane_loader on August 29, 2012 at 8:00 PM

Good luck with that. Looks awful.

this is the medicine you prescribe to others – is it too bitter for you?

sesquipedalian on August 29, 2012 at 7:50 PM

Wind is howling around my damaged house right now and I am bone-tired from the prep and you can stick it where the sun doesn’t shine.

How about we Louisianans vote to slap a state surtax on everything you use that comes through our ports, since you depend on us to live your lifestyle and don’t care how the oil and gas you use affects our enviroment.

Selfish azz.

cane_loader on August 29, 2012 at 7:38 PM

Preach it, brother. :-)

Selfish azz.

cane_loader on August 29, 2012 at 7:38 PM

this is the medicine you prescribe to others – is it too bitter for you?

The guy who actually runs the federal government’s emergency-response apparatus is in Charlottesville, Virginia as I write this desperately trying to convince college students that letting him rocket the country towards a fiscal meltdown is good for their future.

Are you desperately trying to convince those Wahoos or is Obama? I’m no grammarian but it seems as if a comma is missing or something. Just sayin’