Music Banter

Music Banter (https://www.musicbanter.com/)
-   Current Events, Philosophy, & Religion (https://www.musicbanter.com/current-events-philosophy-religion/)
-   -   What Did President Trump Do Now? (https://www.musicbanter.com/current-events-philosophy-religion/87986-what-did-president-trump-do-now.html)

Goofle 01-12-2017 08:16 AM

It's lower than that. And yeah it's surprisingly low.

Frownland 01-12-2017 08:18 AM

521, whatever. And it's not a low number unless you're confusing salary with net worth.

Goofle 01-12-2017 08:24 AM

I thought it would be over 1mil, therefore it was lower than I expected. Regardless, doesn't justify taking about 40% of their income. I don't think anything could justify that.

Frownland 01-12-2017 08:38 AM

They'll survive.

Ol’ Qwerty Bastard 01-12-2017 08:40 AM

i genuinely don't understand how anyone can feel entitled to take another person's earnings.

Frownland 01-12-2017 08:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Qwertyy (Post 1794401)
i genuinely don't understand how anyone can feel entitled to take another person's earnings.

Because they run operations, build infrastructure, and create a money-making climate for people who benefit off of the system with no mode for profit. It's the same logic as paying rent.

djchameleon 01-12-2017 08:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Goofle (Post 1794394)
I thought it would be over 1mil, therefore it was lower than I expected. Regardless, doesn't justify taking about 40% of their income. I don't think anything could justify that.

Yeah have more to take from so they have more to lose and they will be alright. They still used all the systems that are in place to gain that wealth. Why do you think it's okay to use services that the taxes pay for but not pay back into it?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frownland (Post 1794404)
Because they run operations, build infrastructure, and create a money-making climate for people who benefit off of the system with no mode for profit. It's the same logic as paying rent.

^This.

Goofle 01-12-2017 10:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frownland (Post 1794404)
Because they run operations, build infrastructure, and create a money-making climate for people who benefit off of the system with no mode for profit. It's the same logic as paying rent.

That doesn't justify taking 40% of someone's earnings.

Frownland 01-12-2017 10:45 AM

It does seem a bit low.

duga 01-12-2017 10:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Goofle (Post 1794441)
That doesn't justify taking 40% of someone's earnings.

When taking 40% of someone's money leaves them with millions, I think they'll be alright. Thinking about this in raw percentages doesn't work. Let's take someone making the lower end of the $37,950 to $91,900 bracket. This year, that person owes $5,226.25 (and anything over $37,950 is taxed at 25%), leaving them with about $32,723. On the other end, someone making the low end of the upper bracket ($418,400+) would owe $121,505.25 (anything over begin taxed about 40%). Let's put this firmly in the 1% and say the person made $2 million. That means they owe $517,000...a lot, right? Well, let's compare. The first guy has $32,723 to work with while the other guy has nearly $1.5 million to work with. Who do you think has the raw deal here?


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:42 AM.


© 2003-2021 Advameg, Inc.