LawTalkers - Waiting for Fitzgerald

Originally posted by Secret_Agent_Man
And he says -- "No -- 98% of the population is middle class or poor."

Sebby apparently thinks of "rich" in absolute, not relative, terms measured against certain symbols of conspicuous consumption and/or ability to make certain lifestyle choices.

S_A_M

P.S. Do those numbers reflect wages, or income from all sources?

But why define "rich" by percentages of the population? Someone making $6 million a year isn't anything like someone making $200K. It should be about how far that money goes. If everyone made $5-6M a year and prices/COL were the same as now, then we'd all be rich; we wouldn't say the $5M people were poor.

Penske_Account

10-20-2005 05:44 PM

The Republic is dead. Long live the . . .

Quote:

Originally posted by nononono
Oh, but just think of the endless conversations we can have. Imagine, the PB all the time!

I role play that in my office late night. Often.

nononono

10-20-2005 05:44 PM

Where Rockefellers walk with sticks.

Quote:

Originally posted by Not Bob
Please. No way could I have tedious arguments of insidious intent with you.

True, true. :)

nononono

10-20-2005 05:45 PM

The Republic is dead. Long live the . . .

Quote:

Originally posted by Penske_Account
I role play that in my office late night. Often.

Who wins?

Penske_Account

10-20-2005 05:46 PM

For RT

Quote:

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
What is babyjesussuperstar doing about middle east peace--and the hate? Same thing as for the last 1000 years-crusades?

He is empowering the Israelis to destroy the hate or at least cordon it off in Gaza.

Penske_Account

10-20-2005 05:47 PM

The Republic is dead. Long live the . . .

Quote:

Originally posted by nononono
Who wins?

One of my socks, usually.

Not Bob

10-20-2005 05:48 PM

He shoots; he scores!

Quote:

Originally posted by nononono
Who wins?

He does, every time.

bilmore

10-20-2005 05:48 PM

The Republic is dead. Long live the . . .

Quote:

Originally posted by nononono
I can't believe it's even been suggested. Norm Coleman rocks, generally speaking.

Not only suggested, but, as of last week, the thinking in State was that we were going to roll over on a UN fait accompli. (Did I spell that right? I hate france.) The proposal was written, the talks were done, and the "international community" was ready to write URLs. Scary.

Penske_Account

10-20-2005 05:52 PM

He shoots; he scores!

Quote:

Originally posted by Not Bob
He does, every time.

Yes, social justice is a cultural must in Seattle and I play by the rules.

Hank Chinaski

10-20-2005 05:52 PM

A Question of Balance

Quote:

Originally posted by nononono
But why define "rich" by percentages of the population? Someone making $6 million a year isn't anything like someone making $200K. It should be about how far that money goes. If everyone made $5-6M a year and prices/COL were the same as now, then we'd all be rich; we wouldn't say the $5M people were poor.

the difference between 200k and 6m per year is only in the number and quality of toys, and how many leeches you can feed.

nononono

10-20-2005 05:52 PM

The Republic is dead. Long live the . . .

Quote:

Originally posted by bilmore
Not only suggested, but, as of last week, the thinking in State was that we were going to roll over on a UN fait accompli. (Did I spell that right? I hate france.) The proposal was written, the talks were done, and the "international community" was ready to write URLs. Scary.

How could this be? I used to be a big fan of the UN, or at leastthe potential of it, but no way would I trust that organization with this.

nononono

10-20-2005 05:56 PM

A Question of Balance

Quote:

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
the difference between 200k and 6m per year is only in the number and quality of toys, and how many leeches you can feed.

I've solved the problem by putting my leeches on diets. They're a little pale, but it builds character. Besides, it works with the never too rich or too thin theme.

taxwonk

10-20-2005 05:57 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
Eliminating for new mortgages, while understandable, creates a massive problem for anyone looking to buy a new house or sell their old one. Dropping the deduction will have an effect on housing prices. So to reduce the severity of that, one needs to gradualize that effect. So one needs to phase out for existing and new mortgages.

I was simply noting what the proposals said. I am most definitely not advocating eliminating the mortgage interest deduction, any more than I am in favor of eliminating the deduction for state taxes. I think either one is going to be disastrous for the housing market, which will create a huge drag on the economy, if not a full-blown depression.

I either favor a true flat tax or a tax which is progressive and provides incentives that increase upward mobility. I would pay for the continued deductions by (i) eliminating the AMT; (ii) taxing interest, dividends, and wages at the same rate; (iv) raising the minimum estate allowance to $10 million and eliminating the basis step-up at death.

taxwonk

10-20-2005 05:58 PM

A Question of Balance

Quote:

Adjusted gross income.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:13 AM.

Page 227 of 334