32 year old welfare recipient on why she sits at home and takes welfare, rather than work

[Buddhas Hand]

Right, but the bigger your income is, the closer you get to the marginal rate being your actual tax rate. For example, if you make $1,000,000, your actual tax rate is 41.71% where your marginal tax rate is 43.70%. As you said, this shifts the tax burden to those with higher incomes.

WTF has this got to do with the conversation I was having with Korean hockey Fan about what % of tax a person who is earning a $100, 000 pays , you seem fixated on what millionaires pay in tax , I believe that a person earning $1,000,000 or more should be paying 50%. I never said it shifts the tax burdens to those with higher incomes, my exact words were ,that it shifts some of the burden of paying the taxes from those who are less able to do so to those who are more able to do so , simple logic really.

[Buddhas Hand]

I'm sorry, but I value a safer, healthier, well educated population to your right to have more than you need.

And we have way more natural resources in canada than norway does. A lot more than 6 times as much, as would be the percentage difference in population, so you're "point" isn't really much of one.

And you know what's worse than having your money taken? 28,000,000 pissed off starving people. It's good for the wealthy too.

One would think they could have afforded a good education that includes lessons in history. You can only boot stomp the poor for so long. There's not that much difference between inherited wealth and inherited titles and the idea that it's just a matter of working hard is asinine. http://www.theguardi...y-complex-tasks

Enlightened Self interest. It seems like these parasites subscribe to the theory of Unenlightened self interest , otherwise known simply as greed , the theory of USI argues that when most or all persons act according to their own selfishness, that the group suffers loss as a result of conflict, decreased efficiency and productivity because of lack of cooperation, and the increased expense each individual pays for the protection of their own interests. If a typical individual in such a group is selected at random, it is not likely that this person will profit from such a group ethic.

Some individuals might profit, in a material sense, from a philosophy of greed, but it is believed by proponents of enlightened self-interest that these individuals constitute a small minority and that the large majority of persons can expect to experience a net personal loss , USI can result in the tragedy of commons , this is a economics theory by Garrett Hardin ,according to which the depletion of a shared resource by individuals, acting independently and rationally according to each one's self-interest, despite their understanding that depleting the common resource is contrary to the group's long-term best interests. Look at our world and decide for yourself which path we are taking, I think it is painfully obvious myself.

[ronthecivil]

^Keep on winning people over by calling them parasites. Brilliant political posturing!

[GoodBadUgly]

The fact that we all need to co-exist in a 'system' is the problem to begin with. Exchanging time for money is not for everyone.

[Jimayo]

The fact that we all need to co-exist in a 'system' is the problem to begin with. Exchanging time for money is not for everyone.

Well then, you need to go back to before we formed tribes. Because the basis of the society was cooperation to take down mastodons. Everyone could get more meat if they worked together.

[ahzdeen]

WTF has this got to do with the conversation I was having with Korean hockey Fan about what % of tax a person who is earning a $100, 000 pays , you seem fixated on what millionaires pay in tax , I believe that a person earning $1,000,000 or more should be paying 50%.

Because picking an arbitrary number of $100,000 does not show the full picture of how the tax system works. The idea of a progressive tax is that the percentage of tax you pay increases as your income increases. I also picked an arbitrary number of $1,000,000 to illustrate that point.

I never said it shifts the tax burdens to those with higher incomes, my exact words were ,that it shifts some of the burden of paying the taxes from those who are less able to do so to those who are more able to do so , simple logic really.

I don't see the difference between what you said and what I said other than the word "some". I guess I wasn't clear on how much of the tax burden shifted.

[Buddhas Hand]

^Keep on winning people over by calling them parasites. Brilliant political posturing!

Ron it is obvious that some people cannot be won over , that they are greedy and feel self-entitled. It was not directed at a any person participating in this thread.

[Buddhas Hand]

Because picking an arbitrary number of $100,000 does not show the full picture of how the tax system works. The idea of a progressive tax is that the percentage of tax you pay increases as your income increases. I also picked an arbitrary number of $1,000,000 to illustrate that point.

I don't see the difference between what you said and what I said other than the word "some". I guess I wasn't clear on how much of the tax burden shifted.

I did not pick any number , KHF did and whined about having to part with 40% of his earnings if/when he earns $100,000 , I merely presented information that illustrated he was wrong, do you actually read all the posts ?. Those were not the words I used and there is a difference but you would not be able to comprehend it, it takes a compassionate empathetic person to do so.

[KoreanHockeyFan]

Ron it is obvious that some people cannot be won over , that they are greedy and feel self-entitled. It was not directed at a any person participating in this thread.

Don't why you're labeling people who want lower taxes as parasites and some kind of evil villain that doesn't give a crap about anyone else. People are simply trying to enjoy life was much as they can. Is that a crime? I enjoy material things and I want a nice house. And to do that I need to work hard and make money.

[ahzdeen]

I did not pick any number , KHF did and whined about having to part with 40% of his earnings if/when he earns $100,000 , I merely presented information that illustrated he was wrong, do you actually read all the posts ?.

From the sounds of his original post, he just picked a number. He could have said "If I make $1m and the government gets to take $417,100 of it" and the point still stands.

Those were not the words I used and there is a difference but you would not be able to comprehend it, it takes a compassionate empathetic person to do so.

Maybe you can explain it to me since I seem to be such a cruel, heartless, and worthless human being.

I never said it shifts the tax burdens to those with higher incomes, my exact words were ,that it shifts some of the burden of paying the taxes from those who are less able to do so to those who are more able to do so , simple logic really.

Between these two statements, if you equate people with higher incomes and those that are more able to pay taxes, I don't see where the difference is (other than, as stated, the inclusion of the word "some"). I'm genuinely curious as to where you see the difference?

[Buddhas Hand]

Don't why you're labeling people who want lower taxes as parasites and some kind of evil villain that doesn't give a crap about anyone else. People are simply trying to enjoy life was much as they can. Is that a crime? I enjoy material things and I want a nice house. And to do that I need to work hard and make money.

First off do you concede you were wrong when you claimed that a person earning $100,000 pays 40% in tax ? Secondly I despise greedy selfish people ,twice in this thread you have admitted to be selfish , not caring about those less fortunate than you are. I have posted figures that show more than a third of our species live in conditions that you would not call living , Poverty is the principal cause of hunger. The causes of poverty include poor people's lack of resources, an extremely unequal income distribution in the world and within specific countries, conflict, and hunger itself, The last 2 sentences are from www.worldhunger.org/articles/Learn/world hunger facts 2002.htm , for those people to live a better life we have to sacrifice some of the luxuries we enjoy, yet still live a comfortable happy life.

[Buddhas Hand]

From the sounds of his original post, he just picked a number. He could have said "If I make $1m and the government gets to take $417,100 of it" and the point still stands.

Maybe you can explain it to me since I seem to be such a cruel, heartless, and worthless human being.

Between these two statements, if you equate people with higher incomes and those that are more able to pay taxes, I don't see where the difference is (other than, as stated, the inclusion of the word "some"). I'm genuinely curious as to where you see the difference?

Take that up with KHF he choose the figure and made an erroneous claim , looks like that college edjamaction ain't workin out. I never have and never would call another member of this board worthless , do not try and insinuate I am/ would. Your posts have displayed that you have no empathy for those less fortunate than yourself ,every generation has a sense of entitlement , this generations is sickening.

[KoreanHockeyFan]

Quit pumping your own tires. Seriously? You're not going to get anyone else listening with that type of arrogance.

I guess I'll concede that my claim was incorrect? Don't know why you're so adamant on proving me wrong. It still doesn't justify the reasoning behind how taxation increases the well being of people. There's a fine line between a dream and a reality. Maybe if you took some economics and political sciences courses at my college, you'd at least understand why this generation is the way it is. You'd understand how this world really works and why certain things like increased taxation will not solve our problems.

Yes, there are some greedy pigs out there. Look at your own financial system, it's a mess. But what's taxation going to do? They'll just spend more money lobbying and on lawyers to find clever ways to circumvent the system.

I'm all for making the better a world place. Who the hell isn't? It's your methods I'm having problems with. Slapping a 50% tax on those who make over a million doesn't do anything. You really think government is the one who knows how to put our money to good use? You should know that by looking at your own congress down south. Did you not learn anything from past communist countries? Or at least those who tried to achieve a communist society?

This world runs on incentives. People want to enjoy their lives. Settling for "just what they need" is total crap. Who would want to do that? I sure don't. I have one life to live, and settling for "just enough" doesn't cut it because I don't get another chance to do this all over again.

[Buddhas Hand]

Quit pumping your own tires. Seriously? You're not going to get anyone else listening with that type of arrogance.

I guess I'll concede that my claim was incorrect? Don't know why you're so adamant on proving me wrong. It still doesn't justify the reasoning behind how taxation increases the well being of people. There's a fine line between a dream and a reality. Maybe if you took some economics and political sciences courses at my college, you'd at least understand why this generation is the way it is. You'd understand how this world really works and why certain things like increased taxation will not solve our problems.

Yes, there are some greedy pigs out there. Look at your own financial system, it's a mess. But what's taxation going to do? They'll just spend more money lobbying and on lawyers to find clever ways to circumvent the system.

I'm all for making the better a world place. Who the hell isn't? It's your methods I'm having problems with. Slapping a 50% tax on those who make over a million doesn't do anything. You really think government is the one who knows how to put our money to good use? You should know that by looking at your own congress down south. Did you not learn anything from past communist countries? Or at least those who tried to achieve a communist society?

This world runs on incentives. People want to enjoy their lives. Settling for "just what they need" is total crap. Who would want to do that? I sure don't. I have one life to live, and settling for "just enough" doesn't cut it because I don't get another chance to do this all over again.

Pumping my own Tyres ? Pointing out you made a mistake is arrogance ? No one is listening to us KHF. You made a mistake, maybe , just maybe if you admit to your mistake you might not make the same mistake again , personally I find that the best way not to repeat the mistakes I have made. I have been studying politics and economics long before you were a gleam in your old mans eye , you could not even work out how your own tax system worked until I enlightened you. My countries economic system is fantastic , we rode out the GFC on the back of the resources boom , admittedly that is starting to slow down somewhat , and we lead the world in personal credit card debt , but with the right management our economy should continue to grow. You say you want to make the world a better place , yet on the other hand you say you are selfish , which one is it , selfish people do not make the world a better place, a society is judged by how it looks after its most vulnerable members , the world is our society , as I have pointed out it is in our own self interest to help those less fortunate than us.. I know exactly why this generation is the way it is , a sickening sense of self entitlement , it has never suffered any hardship , has been coddled and is soft. You talk about incentives , funny how this generation focuses on money rather than a job well done, that is my incentive , trying to be the best I can be in all things work , play and acquiring knowledge.