homeGeek CultureWebstoreeCards!Forums!Joy of Tech!AY2K!webcam

The Geek Culture Forums


Post New Topic  New Poll  Post A Reply
my profile | directory login | | search | faq | forum home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» The Geek Culture Forums   » News, Reviews, Views!   » Your News!   » In case you aren't depressed enough (Page 1)

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!  
This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2 
 
Author Topic: In case you aren't depressed enough
GrumpySteen

Solid Nitrozanium SuperFan
Member # 170

Icon 1 posted June 10, 2006 18:40      Profile for GrumpySteen     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
This is fairly well written

*sigh*

--------------------
Worst. Celibate. Ever.

Posts: 6364 | From: Tennessee | Registered: Jan 2000  |  IP: Logged
Metasquares
Highlie
Member # 4441

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted June 10, 2006 19:27      Profile for Metasquares   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I would be surprised if that were not happening in much of the Western world outside of the US as well.
Posts: 664 | From: Morganville, NJ | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged
ewomack
Highlie
Member # 3225

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted June 10, 2006 20:52      Profile for ewomack   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Not a bad article, but he's wrong about America having no class system. We have a horrificly rigid system of classes (the social critic Paul Fussell even said "caste" would serve as a better term). And though it doesn't stand in the way of making money, it really stands in the way of having influence or anything close to "real power". Class in America is all about connections. And if you're not born into it, well, boo hoo for you. Fussell's book "Class" provides a real eye opener for life in These States.

But overall I agree with what he's saying. Why don't the governments and elite of the US and Britain seem to care about the well being of the vast majority of thier citizens?

--------------------
Ed Womack
Get Milked

Posts: 735 | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged
dragonman97

SuperFan!
Member # 780

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted June 10, 2006 22:43      Profile for dragonman97   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Well, if you want a stupid quirk to add to the model of the gap...it's the styles of the 'nuevo riche,' and the mentality it seems to stress: "More, more, bling, etc." Basically, it results in a US equiv of chavs, buying crap they don't need, just because they think they should have it. The people who should be minimal consumers aren't, and those who could consume at such levels know better.

I think an extension of this would be a horrible bungling of an old non-P.C expression:
"The rich get richer, and the poor have children."
--becomes--
"The rich get richer, and the poor buy SUVs."

But seriously...the American Dream isn't dead...just ignored by many.

--------------------
There are three things you can be sure of in life: Death, taxes, and reading about fake illnesses online...

Posts: 9331 | From: Westchester County, New York | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Bibo
BlabberMouth, the Next Generation
Member # 1959

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted June 10, 2006 23:58      Profile for Bibo   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
...I must win! At everything I do, I must win! My car must win! My money must win! My house must win! My hair must win! My kids must win! My wiener must win! My wife must win! My mistress must win! My trip to the Bunny Ranch MUST WIN!........ I don't need more I need more! more! more!...... First in war, First in Guns...

Excerpt from:
:Viagra Culture: from the Revolting Cocks Album "Cocked and Loaded"

Posts: 1641 | From: Grand Rapids, MI | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged
Ashitaka

SuperFan!
Member # 4924

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted June 11, 2006 02:25      Profile for Ashitaka     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by ewomack:
Not a bad article, but he's wrong about America having no class system. We have a horrificly rigid system of classes (the social critic Paul Fussell even said "caste" would serve as a better term). And though it doesn't stand in the way of making money, it really stands in the way of having influence or anything close to "real power". Class in America is all about connections. And if you're not born into it, well, boo hoo for you. Fussell's book "Class" provides a real eye opener for life in These States.

But overall I agree with what he's saying. Why don't the governments and elite of the US and Britain seem to care about the well being of the vast majority of thier citizens?

I would agree that america like most places has a class system, but I think it is more possiible in America to move between classes than in other places. Though it may not happen as often as we would like.

Though mainly the rich go to the ivy league colleges, anyone can go , get the education, and ride thier laurels into the top echelons. You just have to "sell your soul", learn to act as the powerful do, learn to talk as the powerful do, and don't make any waves.

--------------------
"If they're not gonna make a distinction between Muslims and violent extremists, then why should I take the time to distinguish between decent, fearful white people and racists?"

-Assif Mandvi

Posts: 3089 | From: Switzerland | Registered: Feb 2006  |  IP: Logged
Spoongirl
Uber Geek
Member # 2143

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted June 11, 2006 03:03      Profile for Spoongirl     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"Besides, the American Dream offers a way out to everyone. All someone has to do is work hard and climb the ladder towards the top. No class system or government stands in the way."

I think it's kind of making a point here, rather than saying what is. Because the next paragraph goes on to explain how that's not really true.

[ohwell]

--------------------
"And we will call it... This Land..."

Posts: 901 | From: UK | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged
ASM65816
SuperBlabberMouth!
Member # 712

Member Rated:
2
Icon 1 posted June 11, 2006 10:59      Profile for ASM65816   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
June 10, 2006 20:52
We have a horrificly rigid system of classes

[shake head]

Maybe this is just being cynical, but there are factors other than being "born to a higher caste."

Looking at all areas of society: Have you noticed favoritism towards "the cool people," over those who are most knowledgeable or dedicated?

Is "style over substance" a distinct part of human nature? People seem to prefer being famous athletes or music stars over architects, engineers, or chemists.

quote:
June 10, 2006 23:58
Excerpt from:
:Viagra Culture: from the Revolting Cocks Album "Cocked and Loaded"

That looks like the typical, and seemingly pervasive, "me, me, me" mentality, and it's not limited to any group of people.

--------------------
Once a proud programmer of Apple II's, he now spends his days and nights in cheap dives fraternizing with exotic dancers....

Posts: 1035 | From: Third rock from sun. | Registered: Mar 2001  |  IP: Logged
CommanderShroom
BlabberMouth, a Blabber Odyssey
Member # 2097

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted June 11, 2006 12:00      Profile for CommanderShroom     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Steen, that was a very thought provoking article.

I looked at my bank account this morning and saw that I have $60 USD to last me 2 weeks. And I realize that I do still live the American Dream.

I know that when someone reads that, they will ask "What fantasy land are you living in?"

Here is my reasoning. I have watched every asset I have go away in the last year of my life. Some I have given up willingly, others were just taken. But here I am. Still alive, still fighting. I know that perhaps I will never again own the house, the car, the superficially perfect life. But I had it. I had the chance to grab it, to hold it. And I have the chance to have it again. I am dirt poor. But I am not on welfare like my mother before me. And I have a job and roof over my head.

The American dream consists of working hard to make your life better. Well working hard is not just showing up. It also means making hard decisions. Looking at your life and knowing that you have paths you can take. They may lead to success, they may lead to failure. But in the end you get to decide. That is the American Dream. It is not the house, the car, the ivy league education. It is being able to make the decisions you believe are right. It is knowing that if things go well your children and their children will be better off than you.

--------------------
Does he know our big secret?
Has one of us confessed?
'Bout the wires circuits and motors
Buried in our chest

Posts: 2463 | From: Utarrrrggggghhh!!!!!!!! | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged
TheMoMan
BlabberMouth, a Blabber Odyssey
Member # 1659

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted June 11, 2006 12:36      Profile for TheMoMan         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Steen______________________A few years back I had the privledge of going to a coachs lunchen at a Big Ten school. This event was for alumni and fans of this school. The Cigars and pate were of the highest quaility, The impression I got was when the coach invited you into the recieving room and line that it was what can you bring to the alumni fund to help our athletic programs, and I do mean cash.

--------------------
Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.


Benjamin Franklin,

Posts: 5836 | From: Just South of the Huron National Forest, in the water shed of the Rifle River | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Metasquares
Highlie
Member # 4441

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted June 11, 2006 12:43      Profile for Metasquares   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by ASM65816:
Is "style over substance" a distinct part of human nature? People seem to prefer being famous athletes or music stars over architects, engineers, or chemists.

That actually forms the core of a collection of psychological principles I use to try and make sense of society.

I stated it as "Presentation is at least as important as content."

Posts: 664 | From: Morganville, NJ | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged
Rhonwyyn

Solid Gold SuperFan!
Member # 2854

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted June 11, 2006 13:47      Profile for Rhonwyyn   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Continuing the tangent...

Wasn't it Socrates who defined rhetoric as "a good man speaking well"? Way back-in-the-day, it didn't matter so much what you said as how you said it.

--------------------
Change the way you SEE, not the way you LOOK!

Posts: 3849 | From: Lancaster, PA | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
GrumpySteen

Solid Nitrozanium SuperFan
Member # 170

Icon 1 posted June 11, 2006 17:21      Profile for GrumpySteen     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
What depresses me the most about the article isn't anything directly related to me. Through a combination of luck, skill and ability to present myself well, I have a very good job and make significantly more than my monthly living expenses are. This is partly because I'm paid well and partly because I live a simple life by choice (most people want to smack me about the time they find out that my utility bill averages about $40 a month and a few months have been less than $10). I have enough excess that I've paid off all the medical bills from my kidney transplant in the 15 months since and should have no debt at all by the end of the summer.

I have friends, however, who live paycheck to paycheck. One has no health insurance through work and she can't afford it on her own. Another works a full time job and a second part time job and still has to live in a trailer that should be condemned in what amounts to a slum because he has child support payments and that's all he can afford. A couple others are in situations just as bad.

They are the lower class the article speaks of and there's not a damn thing I can do to change that.

*sigh*

--------------------
Worst. Celibate. Ever.

Posts: 6364 | From: Tennessee | Registered: Jan 2000  |  IP: Logged
Rednivek

Member # 1148

Icon 1 posted June 12, 2006 17:01      Profile for Rednivek     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
People in poverty arent buying SUVs... they're attempting to buy food and clothes.

SUVs suck.... but what sucks worse is the pathos that elects an idiot based on moral control issues, versus caring about others as a collective nation.

Next election maybe more than the religious right will actually show up to exercise the voting rights many Americans died to obtain and protect. Then our guy over here John Conyers will lead the impeachment.

--------------------
Rednivek - Detroit, Michigan, USA

Posts: 714 | From: Detroit/Windsor | Registered: Feb 2002  |  IP: Logged
CommanderShroom
BlabberMouth, a Blabber Odyssey
Member # 2097

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted June 12, 2006 17:44      Profile for CommanderShroom     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Steen:
Another works a full time job and a second part time job and still has to live in a trailer that should be condemned in what amounts to a slum because he has child support payments and that's all he can afford. A couple others are in situations just as bad.

They are the lower class the article speaks of and there's not a damn thing I can do to change that.

*sigh*

Steen. I truly understand that. Better than you would think. Much better. But without hope and determination, what is left?

And I am pretty sure that most of our forefathers were not sure if they would make it here. But they knew what their fate would be where they were.

--------------------
Does he know our big secret?
Has one of us confessed?
'Bout the wires circuits and motors
Buried in our chest

Posts: 2463 | From: Utarrrrggggghhh!!!!!!!! | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged
Colonel Panic
BlabberMouth, the Next Generation
Member # 1200

Icon 1 posted June 12, 2006 18:35      Profile for Colonel Panic         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I think the pendulum has swung about as far right as the American people will allow it to go. If American history over the past 100 years is any gauge, I think the pedulum will swing back fairly hard, too.

We are experiencing the third rise of the conservative promise. The first occured during the 1920's when Republicans ran all branches of government. They gave us the moralist's prohibition and the great depression. The pendulum swung back hard to deliver FDR, the New Deal, and the kind of unity that demanded all Americans, rich or poor, sacrifice for victory in WWII.

After 16 years of this government, the American people having cast the deciding blow in a horrible war, and known the second-greatest period of prosperity in our nation's history things turned right again. Increasing fortunes, a growing number ofwell-to-do people, and boredom of war led to Harry S. Truman's ouster and the dawn of the second Republican age.

Dwight Eisenhower was a moderate man, but his congress betrayed his moderation with the scourge of McCarthyism. His administration led us to a significant recession. So in 1960 the American people, including a number of dead ones in Chicago, elected John F. Kennedy President. The pendulum had turned again.

After 8 years of the Clinton Presidency, and the greatest period of prosperity our nation has known, the Republican appeals to a large number of newly prosperous people were accepted once again. And once again the promises have fallen flat. Once again their representations of a "higher moral ground" have vanished into quicksand, the promises of wealth for many have turned to wealth for a very few. They have also proven inept a leading a nation to victory in war, and have resorted to mere bullying of those who disagree with them.

The American people are smart and are growing weary of the empty promises. It is time for the pendulum to swing hard left again.

CP

--------------------
Free! Free at last!

Posts: 1809 | From: Glacier Melt, USA | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged
Thorned0Fortress
Geek
Member # 4435

Icon 1 posted June 12, 2006 21:01      Profile for Thorned0Fortress   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
The British are coming, the British are coming!

Did anyone see the Oprah a while back, where they interviewed families living in poverty ?
It sucks because you can't save, every bit of your paycheck gets used. And if you get fired you are in the hole because you can't get a job quick enough to recover.

Posts: 235 | From: texas | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged
Ashitaka

SuperFan!
Member # 4924

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted June 13, 2006 04:28      Profile for Ashitaka     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Thorned0Fortress:
The British are coming, the British are coming!

Did anyone see the Oprah a while back, where they interviewed families living in poverty ?
It sucks because you can't save, every bit of your paycheck gets used. And if you get fired you are in the hole because you can't get a job quick enough to recover.

1. "Did anybody see the Oprah a while back" Girl, do you know where you are posting.

Ok, this is long but bear with me.

2. Poverty like many of society’s great problems is full of more complex interactions than most people, including me, can fully grasp. I believe very few people can grasp this problem with all its interrelated interactions. It is like trying to calculate the gravitational interaction of stars in star clusters. There are too many variables and every variable changes other things in calculating the “solution”.

If you tax the rich to care better for the poor; the rich don’t have as much expendable cash, they don’t spend as much, and the entire economy slumps, sending even more below the poverty line. Solutions seem to always have a cyclical relationship with too many uncontrolled variables.

If you try to educate the poor, you know the : teach a man to fish, you get some success but there are still problems. The poor, because they lack education on average, on average, do not understand the value of obtaining education. They do not understand how much they should sacrifice to obtain it. I used to volunteer for a charitable organization that gave food, clothing, and other items to people in times of need. These poor people, who were truly in need, 90% of the time had a bigger TV than me and Cable. I think these people needed to learn to sell their TV rather than not feed their children, but what do you say, I won’t give you old lima beans to feed your hungry 5 year old unless you sell your television. What if they then refuse? I went without TV, cable , a car, and many other things to pay my way through Uni.

Other analyses end with other non-perfect solutions.

What I think it boils down to is, like the question “is P equal to NP” , that poverty is an unsolved problem of man. At stake is our society, the bounty isWine, women(or men), and eternal glory to the first to solve it.

--------------------
"If they're not gonna make a distinction between Muslims and violent extremists, then why should I take the time to distinguish between decent, fearful white people and racists?"

-Assif Mandvi

Posts: 3089 | From: Switzerland | Registered: Feb 2006  |  IP: Logged
Callipygous
BlabberMouth, a Blabber Odyssey
Member # 2071

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted June 13, 2006 07:03      Profile for Callipygous     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Ashitaka:
2. Poverty like many of society’s great problems etc etc......, the bounty isWine, women(or men), and eternal glory to the first to solve it.

Your justifications are a modern day version of that phrase used by the rich and smug in 19th century Britain, "the Poor are always with us." Luckily the great reformers of the 19th century prevailed and the Western world at least, is a better place for it. The problem is a complex one yes, and poverty will never be completely eradicated, but that is no excuse for not attempting to relieve the worst inequities of the current situation and trying to build a better world.

Your economic arguments as to why its best not to interfere are weak and unconvincing. The notion that any redistribution of wealth must always be accompanied by harm to the economy is based on your right wing political faith rather than facts, and even if it were true, I'd rather live in a more just world than a wealthier one.

--------------------
"Knowledge is Power. France is Bacon" - Milton

Posts: 2922 | From: Brighton - UK | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged
GameMaster
BlabberMouth, a Blabber Odyssey
Member # 1173

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted June 13, 2006 19:03      Profile for GameMaster   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Over the past 25 years the median US family income has gone up 18 percent. For the top one percent, however, it has gone up 200 percent. A quarter of a century ago the top fifth of Americans had an average income 6.7 times that of the bottom fifth. Now it is 9.8 times.

A lot of numbers without basis for comparison.
1. A fifth is a lot of people in a country this size, and so I wonder if you break that fifth into peices who is getting the most of it.

2. Population increase!?!?! A fifth is also a heck of a lot more people... So it stands to reason the bottom of that fifth had to have increases in salary also.

3. Inflation, small on a personal level but when you look at a fifth of the country's salary...

4. What was the increase/decrese in the other 4 fifths?
And still the American government is set on tax breaks for the rich.

And everyone else, but let's not look at that...

Bush's first-term tax cuts notoriously benefited the upper strata of American taxpayers. So much so that even Warren Buffet, the second richest man in the world who benefited to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars, has said the tax cuts 'scream of injustice'.

But he has no problem with a unbalenced system where you just pay a flat percentage of your profits... Or even a flat sales tax... Taxing consumption rather than production makes sense on sooo many fronts:

1. Rich consume more, so they'll pay proportionally more money.

2. Taxing production is penalizing sucess, and promotes spending over saving. Taxing consumption promotes saving and investing.

Still the tax cuts go on. This week one of the main political debates in Washington has been about scrapping the 'estate tax' whereby those who inherit large amounts from their relatives will be taxed on it.

If I work my whole life saving for my children to have a better life, why should the government tax my children (when I've already paid the damn tax on it once) be penalized for my death?

This overwhelmingly affects the wealthy. The estate tax is already set so high ($4m) that only one in 200 estates pay any tax at all when they are inherited.

How many people die a year.... Common, 1 in 200 is a lot when taking into account popluation and death tolls.

Unlike the UK's inheritance tax, which affects more and more Britons as house prices increase, this is not a problem faced by Joe and Jennifer Public.

Yes it does... It's a slipery slope... Tax it for the rich, then you'll tax it for the poor some time down the road. Few laws are removed from the book, but we have a whole branch of government whose full time job is to add more laws.

Moreover, why tax any one person more or less than any other? Tax the sucessful more than other people... penalize those who do, and reward those who don't ... Come on people!!!!

Yet the White House and many politicians, overwhelmingly Republican, want to get rid of it. The lobbying campaign against it has been financed mostly by 18 business dynasties, including the family that owns WalMart. At the same time the Bush administration has sanctioned millions of dollars of cuts to Medicare, Medicaid and the education budget as part of a measure aimed at reducing the spiraling deficit. This is, frankly, obscene.

I know I'm going to sound like a cold hearted republician for this but... Medicare and Medicaid should be handled by the states. There is no mention of them in constitution, and the congress and senate way overstepped their grasp when they assigned us all our aushwitz numbers (SSN)...

TFA talks about the poor getting poorer, but simply comparing money values isn't any good. Compare real standards of living. Someone who is "poor" (below the poverty line) here can still have an apartment, TV with cable, food on the table and buy their 12 kids the newest Nikes.

--------------------
My Site

Posts: 3038 | From: State of insanity | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged
GrumpySteen

Solid Nitrozanium SuperFan
Member # 170

Icon 1 posted June 13, 2006 20:05      Profile for GrumpySteen     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
GameMaster wrote:
If I work my whole life saving for my children to have a better life, why should the government tax my children (when I've already paid the damn tax on it once) be penalized for my death?

Why should the government tax anything you buy, then? You already paid the damn tax on it when you made the money.

Why should the government decide to cut taxes on estates worth over 4 million, when they're still charging poor people taxes on the bare necessities of life?

Moreover, why tax any one person more or less than any other? Tax the successful more than other people... penalize those who do, and reward those who don't ... Come on people!!!!

So come up with a fair way of taxing everyone that doesn't feature the poor being bent over without so much as a reach-a-round when it comes to little items like food and clothing.

I know I'm going to sound like a cold hearted republician for this but... Medicare and Medicaid should be handled by the states. There is no mention of them in constitution

The constitution didn't mention freedom of speech, the right for women to vote and a whole lot of other things. We've had to fix it a number of times because it wasn't right.

And if you knew a damn thing about history, you would know why the federal government was the only agency that could do what was necessary in 1935.

Whether those things should have since been handed over to the states is another issue, but please pull your foot out of your mouth and try to demonstrate a basic understanding of what you're complaining about.

TFA talks about the poor getting poorer, but simply comparing money values isn't any good. Compare real standards of living. Someone who is "poor" (below the poverty line) here can still have an apartment, TV with cable, food on the table and buy their 12 kids the newest Nikes.

That's funny. I have one friend who can't afford health insurance and another who works two jobs so he can afford luxuries like food. I don't recall either of them having cable, twelve kids or the Newest Nikes.

Tell me honestly, have you ever been in a situation where you didn't know when or where your next meal would come from? Where you had to sleep in your car because you couldn't afford a place to live?

Here's an experiment for you to try. Take $600 and live on it for a month. That has to pay your rent, utilities, food, gas, insurance (if you can afford it) and everything else. Then do that every month for a year with no savings to fall back on if your car breaks down or you need to visit the doctor (and remember, if the $600 didn't cover health insurance, you have pay the full amount the doctor charges).

It's easy to preach about how unfair taxes are to the rich when you're comfortable and you have money. It's a hell of a lot harder when you have to choose between paying food or rent.

--------------------
Worst. Celibate. Ever.

Posts: 6364 | From: Tennessee | Registered: Jan 2000  |  IP: Logged
Sxeptomaniac

Member # 3698

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted June 14, 2006 11:03      Profile for Sxeptomaniac   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by GameMaster:

If I work my whole life saving for my children to have a better life, why should the government tax my children (when I've already paid the damn tax on it once) be penalized for my death?

Having known some people in my old hometown, as well as some relatives, who would be affected by the estate tax, I really don't think it's such a bad thing that the children will actually have to work a bit to keep up their standard of living. Some of them particularly need a dose of the real world.

--------------------
Let's pray that the human race never escapes from Earth to spread its iniquity elsewhere. - C. S. Lewis

Posts: 1590 | From: Fresno, CA | Registered: Mar 2005  |  IP: Logged
Xanthine

Solid Nitrozanium SuperFan!
Member # 736

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted June 14, 2006 11:40      Profile for Xanthine     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
You pay taxes on the money you earned/acquired. Your children do the same. After you're dead it's not yours anymore.

The estate tax was established as a reaction against the aristocracy in Europe. A fair number of the peopel invovled in founding this country were second sons, bastard sons, and other types that got screwed over by the inheritance laws in Europe. They also believed in working for a living.

The tax codes in the country are more thana little fscked up. According to the tables my sister did not have any taxable income last year (no surprise; she was very sick and lviing at home most of the year). Yet somehow she still ended up having to pay more than $400 to the IRS. She's got a temp job now and is paying for health insurance out of pocket, which is expensive, and she's starting teacher school this winter so things are looking up, but as it is she's not saving any money and she can barely make ends meet. And then there's all these rich people getting tax cuts. Kinda makes you wonder.

--------------------
And it's one, two, three / On the wrong side of the lee / What were you meant for? / What were you meant for?
- The Decemberists

Posts: 7670 | From: the lab | Registered: Mar 2001  |  IP: Logged
Stereo

Solid Nitrozanium SuperFan!
Member # 748

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted June 14, 2006 12:40      Profile for Stereo     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by GameMaster:
1. Rich consume more, so they'll pay proportionally more money.

I stopped reading there. True, the rich consumes more in absolute numbers, per capita. But proportionally to their salary... sorry, no. Rich people can afford savings. Poors can't; many of them spend their income to the last cent just to live day to day. So taxing only consumption means the rich's savings are exempt from taxes; while the poor's whole salary is taxed. (And what happens to the richs' investments made outside the country?)

Would you propose to tax the consumption based on the necessity to life, that could be done - up to some point. Say milk, juice and bread have no tax, but pop, sugary drinks and chips do. (Hey, that might even help people loose weight!) But what about ground meat versus t-bones? How do you tax a teen's only pair of shoes (because his last one is worn out/too small) vs. his sixth (because it's the hip one to own)?

And still, there would be a chance that rich people will decide to postpone (or even avoid) purchases because they now cost more than they are willing to pay. (What do you expect? if you take out the income tax, the sales tax will go way up to make up for it.) With those luxury items being left on the shelves, there will be less money going to the sales(wo)man, and all the way up to the manufacturer. Can you spell lost jobs? And the jobs getting the cut won't be the boss' and upper management's, I'll bet you. So low-paid men and women who had a job and an income now have none, because the richs decided to keep more of their money. I don't call that fair. Do you?

No. The only way to increase a country's whealth is to increase the purchasing power of its poors. They are the ones who have the greatest number of unfulfilled needs and wants.

--------------------
Eppur, si muove!

Galileo Galilei

Posts: 2289 | From: Gatineau, Quebec, Canada | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
The Famous Druid

Gold Hearted SuperFan!
Member # 1769

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted June 14, 2006 14:35      Profile for The Famous Druid     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by GameMaster:
Over the past 25 years the median US family income has gone up 18 percent. For the top one percent, however, it has gone up 200 percent. A quarter of a century ago the top fifth of Americans had an average income 6.7 times that of the bottom fifth. Now it is 9.8 times.


Ok, I've read and re-read the following several times, and honestly can't make any sense of it at all.
A lot of numbers without basis for comparison.
1. A fifth is a lot of people in a country this size, and so I wonder if you break that fifth into peices who is getting the most of it.

Yes, you could slice the population into, say, deciles instead, but quintiles (fifths) is the more commonly used method. If you did slice it into deciles, you'd find that the top 10% was getting even more than the 9.8 quoted above.

2. Population increase!?!?! A fifth is also a heck of a lot more people... So it stands to reason the bottom of that fifth had to have increases in salary also.
The population increased, therefor it stands to reason that the poorest 1/5 have increased earnings????? WTF?????

3. Inflation, small on a personal level but when you look at a fifth of the country's salary...
You see the same percentage increase. The figures you quoted show the top fifth increasing their share of the cake, and can't be explained by 'inflation'.


And still the American government is set on tax breaks for the rich.

And everyone else, but let's not look at that...

While increasing spending at record levels (a further 8% increase this year).
What happens when you increase government spending and decrease taxes?
A record deficit.
Back in the old days when the Democrats were in government, most Republicans agreed that deficits were a very bad thing. They went on and on about 'fiscal responsibility' at every opportunity, but these days most Republicans would much rather talk about something (anything) else.

--------------------
If you watch 'The History Of NASA' backwards, it's about a space agency that has no manned spaceflight capability, then does low-orbit flights, then lands on the Moon.

Posts: 10668 | From: Melbourne, Australia | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged


All times are Eastern Time
This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2 
 
Post New Topic  New Poll  Post A Reply Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | Geek Culture Home Page

© 2015 Geek Culture

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.4.0



homeGeek CultureWebstoreeCards!Forums!Joy of Tech!AY2K!webcam