Ticket refunds Democrat style

[Vegas]

If you don't understand the Democrats' version of tax refunds, maybe this will help explain it:

50,000 people went to a baseball game, but the game was rained out so a refund was due. The team was about to mail refunds when a group of Congressional Democrats stopped them and suggested that they send out the ticket refunds based on the Democrat National Committee's interpretation of fairness.

Originally the refunds were to be paid based on the price each person had paid for the tickets. Unfortunately that meant most of the refund money would be going to the ticket holders that had purchased the most expensive tickets. This, according to the DNC, is considered totally unfair.

A decision was then made to pay out the refunds in this manner:

People in the $10 seats will get back $15. After all, they have less money to spend on tickets to begin with. Call it an "Earned Income Ticket Credit." Persons "earn" it by having few skills, poor work habits, and low ambition, thus keeping them at entry-level wages.

People in the $25 seats will get back $25, because it "seems fair."

People in the $50 seats will get back $1, because they already make a lot of money and don't need a refund. After all, if they can afford a $50 ticket, they must not be paying enough taxes.

People in the $75 luxury box seats will each have to pay an additional $25 because it's the "right thing to do."

People walking past the stadium that couldn't afford to buy a ticket for the game each will get a $10 refund, even though they didn't pay anything for the tickets. They need the most help. Sometimes this is known as Affirmative Action.

Now do you understand?

If not, contact Representative Nancy Pelosi, Senator Ted Kennedy or Senator Hillary Clinton for assistance.

[pnkpanther]

i feel so sorry for the rich

[Vegas]

i feel so sorry for the rich

Do you think the rich should get punished for being successful?

[LSU]

Do you think the rich should get punished for being successful?



Taxes are punishment?

[pnkpanther]

Do you think the rich should get punished for being successful?

do you think poor not paying taxes are the "lucky ones"

[Vegas]

Taxes are punishment?

Paying a higher percentage of taxes than other people pay isn't punishment? What do you call it?

[LSU]

Paying a higher percentage of taxes than other people pay isn't punishment? What do you call it?


Government.

[LSU]

Government.


And I'll be right there to say that as my income increases, I'll have no problem whatsoever paying a higher percentage taxes.

[Vegas]

Government.

Liberals have pushed the progressive taxes by selling it to people through class envy. It's really not a good thing.

How about we change from one person one vote to one vote per dollar paid in taxes?

[LSU]

Liberals have pushed the progressive taxes by selling it to people through class envy. It's really not a good thing.

How about we change from one person one vote to one vote per dollar paid in taxes?


That sounds like a horrible idea.

But yes, people support the taxes out of jealousy. Exactly.

[IBC]

Liberals have pushed the progressive taxes by selling it to people through class envy. It's really not a good thing.

How about we change from one person one vote to one vote per dollar paid in taxes?

Luckily the Bush tax cuts have helped the poor like he said. You know damn well that many of the rich can evade taxes in a variety of ways I or most others cannot. Handouts to the rich don't work. The economy has been stimulated a bit, but not anywhere that it matters to the average lower to lower-middle class American. My taxes haven't gone down at all. Neither have 85% of people who aren't rich. Its a shame, but tis true. many of theirs, like mine have actually gone up.

[IBC]

Liberals have pushed the progressive taxes by selling it to people through class envy. It's really not a good thing.

How about we change from one person one vote to one vote per dollar paid in taxes?

That is the worst idea I have ever heard.

[pnkpanther]

Liberals have pushed the progressive taxes by selling it to people through class envy. It's really not a good thing.

How about we change from one person one vote to one vote per dollar paid in taxes?

yes that is it, clearly

wealthy have enough power in this country

my favorite study

20% of americans believe they're in top 5% earners

[Vegas]

I notice that nobody disputed the logic of the original post.

[pnkpanther]

I notice that nobody disputed the logic of the original post.

it's horrible logic...

and a large stretch

[BoredWithNoSB]

I notice that nobody disputed the logic of the original post.

Are you saying that tax refunds have no relation to tax liability? Getting a tax refund just means you were stupid and paid too much in?

If somebody has so little knowledge of tax terminology maybe they shouldn't be writing article criticising the methodology?

[Vegas]

Are you saying that tax refunds have no relation to tax liability? Getting a tax refund just means you were stupid and paid too much in?

If somebody has so little knowledge of tax terminology maybe they shouldn't be writing article criticising the methodology?

It's referring to tax cuts. The people who pay more taxes will logically get a bigger cut.

[Vegas]

it's horrible logic...

and a large stretch

Why?

[BoredWithNoSB]

It's referring to tax cuts. The people who pay more taxes will logically get a bigger cut.

Meh, I like my argument better. Too many people are ignorant about the tax system and pay way too much attention to marginal tax rates rather than the net tax laibility. Bad use of terms like tax refund in lieu of tax liability makes me tune right out.

The tax code favors the rich. Rich=home owners, poor= not so much. Rich=Capital Gains benefitiaries, poor=not so much. Rich=ability to fund IRA's and MSA's and HSA's and 401k's and Coverdale Accounts, Poor=not so much.

[hannitykillspuppies]

Why?

because they're baseball tickets not taxes. who in their right mind would argue that each ticketholder should not be refunded the amount they paid for their ticket? you really can't be serious. i mean the whole analogy, i guess that's what you'd call it, is moronic. people aren't paid in baseball tickets.

[LSU]

I notice that nobody disputed the logic of the original post.


I didn't see any logic in that post. Hard to dispute it when it's not there.

[hannitykillspuppies]

It's referring to tax cuts. The people who pay more taxes will logically get a bigger cut.

logically, people who pay more taxes make more money and therefore can't afford to pay taxes. logically.

[Vegas]

I didn't see any logic in that post. Hard to dispute it when it's not there.

Even Clinton agreed that tax rates were too high (but of course did nothing about that). Algore had a tax cut plan. GWB had a tax cut plan. When taxes get cut, the people who pay more will logically get a bigger cut. It's really not so hard. The logic is obvious to anyone with a logical mind.

[LSU]

Even Clinton agreed that tax rates were too high (but of course did nothing about that). Algore had a tax cut plan. GWB had a tax cut plan. When taxes get cut, the people who pay more will logically get a bigger cut. It's really not so hard. The logic is obvious to anyone with a logical mind.



A bigger cut? I guess that depends on how you define "cut". If it's a strict percentage across the board, you could say everyone gets the same "cut". However, if you get 1% back on 100k as opposed to 1% back on 1 mil, then the actual value is a log higher for the 1 mil, so is that what the "cut" is?


So, logically, it's not so logical depending on what your logic is.

But that's not what I got from the logic(?) of the baseball tickets. Life is not baseball.

[Vegas]

A bigger cut? I guess that depends on how you define "cut". If it's a strict percentage across the board, you could say everyone gets the same "cut". However, if you get 1% back on 100k as opposed to 1% back on 1 mil, then the actual value is a log higher for the 1 mil, so is that what the "cut" is?


So, logically, it's not so logical depending on what your logic is.

But that's not what I got from the logic(?) of the baseball tickets. Life is not baseball.

So logically, you only don't get the connection of the baseball ticket refunds if you're part of the "soak the rich" mentality. I get it.

[LSU]

So logically, you only don't get the connection of the baseball ticket refunds if you're part of the "soak the rich" mentality. I get it.



Yes, I want to soak the rich. That explains it.

[pnkpanther]

Even Clinton agreed that tax rates were too high (but of course did nothing about that). Algore had a tax cut plan. GWB had a tax cut plan. When taxes get cut, the people who pay more will logically get a bigger cut. It's really not so hard. The logic is obvious to anyone with a logical mind.

i'm not arguing that point

i've also argued Gore didnt emphasize his tax cuts enough during his campaign...in fact, i believe 3/4 of american making under 250,000/year benefited greater under Gore's plan then Bush's....Bush found the unique scenarios where it wasnt true, but eh....

[Vegas]

i'm not arguing that point

i've also argued Gore didnt emphasize his tax cuts enough during his campaign...in fact, i believe 3/4 of american making under 250,000/year benefited greater under Gore's plan then Bush's....Bush found the unique scenarios where it wasnt true, but eh....

Gore had very little credibility on that issue. He was tied to Clinton who had promised a middle class tax cut when he ran the first time. Instead we got a huge tax increase.

[pnkpanther]

Gore had very little credibility on that issue. He was tied to Clinton who had promised a middle class tax cut when he ran the first time. Instead we got a huge tax increase.


I didnt pay taxes during clinton adminstration

[pnkpanther]

I by no means am Pro Gore, but i think bush adminstration will go down as one of the worse in history and Gore, couldnt be worse, just not possible

[LSU]

I'm an economics rube...so consider that with my ideas...

Why not tax 10 or 15% on the first 100k made, then add 5% for every step after that?

0-100k 15%
100k - 199k 20%
200k - 299k 25%
300k - 399k 30%
400k - 499k 35%
500k and anything above that 40%

Is that enough tax income? Is it too much? And that's any income...wages, tips, salaries, interest, cap gains, etc...whatever...

[Vegas]

I'm an economics rube...so consider that with my ideas...

Why not tax 10 or 15% on the first 100k made, then add 5% for every step after that?

0-100k 15%
100k - 199k 20%
200k - 299k 25%
300k - 399k 30%
400k - 499k 35%
500k and anything above that 40%

Is that enough tax income? Is it too much? And that's any income...wages, tips, salaries, interest, cap gains, etc...whatever...

What's wrong with a flat tax? It's perfectly fair. If you make 10x more money, you pay 10x more tax? Why does the rate have to be progressive?

[pnkpanther]

I'm an economics rube...so consider that with my ideas...

Why not tax 10 or 15% on the first 100k made, then add 5% for every step after that?

0-100k 15%
100k - 199k 20%
200k - 299k 25%
300k - 399k 30%
400k - 499k 35%
500k and anything above that 40%

Is that enough tax income? Is it too much? And that's any income...wages, tips, salaries, interest, cap gains, etc...whatever...

I'm in favor of progressive taxes, but i feel max should be about 30%.

[LSU]

What's wrong with a flat tax? It's perfectly fair. If you make 10x more money, you pay 10x more tax? Why does the rate have to be progressive?


To generate money for the gov't. Hell, if there's too much tax flow in, by all means, cut the last progression so that it's capped at 35%. If that's still too much, cut it back to 30, and make the steps 125k or 150k instead of 100k.

There's a damn deficit that grows by the second...taxes are needed so we don't have to cede land to China as collateral for the next loan.

[LSU]

I'm in favor of progressive taxes, but i feel max should be about 30%.



I just threw some numbers out...I don't know what's feasible or what's needed...

[BoredWithNoSB]

I'm an economics rube...so consider that with my ideas...

Why not tax 10 or 15% on the first 100k made, then add 5% for every step after that?

0-100k 15%
100k - 199k 20%
200k - 299k 25%
300k - 399k 30%
400k - 499k 35%
500k and anything above that 40%

Is that enough tax income? Is it too much? And that's any income...wages, tips, salaries, interest, cap gains, etc...whatever...


If we eliminated deductions, that would be a tax hike on most every taxpayer. Most people don't pay an effectvie tax rate anywhere near their marginal rate. When you hear somebody say they pay 35% of their income to federal taxes, they are full of shit.

All this whining about taxes is just silly. The only way to lower the tax rate effectively would be to also remove deductions. That would destroy the social engineering aspect of the tax code and conservatives would be pissed becuase churches would be among the largest to get smacked down. Also, the rich would get hit hardest as they often have lower efective tax rates than the middle class and below.

[pnkpanther]

What's wrong with a flat tax? It's perfectly fair. If you make 10x more money, you pay 10x more tax? Why does the rate have to be progressive?


life isnt fair.

if i had to do a flat tax, first 40K exempted, 25% after that, tax everything, capital gains, labor, you name it. No deductions for "Losses"

[pnkpanther]

but if we do flat tax, i want some sort of agreement that littlemans wages will grow at same rate as CEO's

[Vegas]

To generate money for the gov't. Hell, if there's too much tax flow in, by all means, cut the last progression so that it's capped at 35%. If that's still too much, cut it back to 30, and make the steps 125k or 150k instead of 100k.

There's a damn deficit that grows by the second...taxes are needed so we don't have to cede land to China as collateral for the next loan.

There aren't enough rich people to generate the kinds of revenue you're talking about.

But looking at your post and getting back to the original idea of this thread, your tax cuts will affect the highest paying the most. Cutting rates across the board will have the largest dollar amounts saved by those paying the most.

[BoredWithNoSB]

life isnt fair.

if i had to do a flat tax, first 40K exempted, 25% after that, tax everything, capital gains, labor, you name it. No deductions for "Losses"

What about rental losses? Are you saying that if I rent my condo and make money from it I'm going to get taxed on the earnings, but if I lose money I can't remove it from my income? This is already true under PAL rules, but there's anough ways around those. Unfortunately, I'll say it again, the rich are more adept at navigating around PAL rules than Joe Idiot taxpayer.

[LSU]

If we eliminated deductions, that would be a tax hike on most every taxpayer. Most people don't pay an effectvie tax rate anywhere near their marginal rate. When you hear somebody say they pay 35% of their income to federal taxes, they are full of shit.

All this whining about taxes is just silly. The only way to lower the tax rate effectively would be to also remove deductions. That would destroy the social engineering aspect of the tax code and conservatives would be pissed becuase churches would be among the largest to get smacked down. Also, the rich would get hit hardest as they often have lower efective tax rates than the middle class and below.


My marginal was 15%...effective 8%.

[Vegas]

but if we do flat tax, i want some sort of agreement that littlemans wages will grow at same rate as CEO's

You want government control over wages? That's a horrible idea.

[LSU]

There aren't enough rich people to generate the kinds of revenue you're talking about.

But looking at your post and getting back to the original idea of this thread, your tax cuts will affect the highest paying the most. Cutting rates across the board will have the largest dollar amounts saved by those paying the most.


Yes, $$ amounts...but percentage? That gets back to what a "cut" is...a percentage or a dollar amount...if you cut taxes 1%, everyone gets their "cut" back as a percent, and it's equal throughout...if you look at the $$ amount, it's not equal because 1% for 1 mil is 10x 1% of 100k.

Definition of "cut"...

To relate it to the baseball story, the "cut" would be everyone gets 95% of their ticket value back. Everyone gets the same % cut, but the people that paid more money for their tickets get more back.

There's 2 stories being told here...I'm having a hard time figuring out which one I should be focusing on.

[pnkpanther]

You want government control over wages? That's a horrible idea.

you're trying to make me feel guilty over tax rate of the rich

think about this, in 1982 the average CEO made 42 times as much as worker

now the average CEO makes 431 times what average worker makes....

[Jiddy78]

If you don't understand the Democrats' version of tax refunds, maybe this will help explain it:

50,000 people went to a baseball game, but the game was rained out so a refund was due. The team was about to mail refunds when a group of Congressional Democrats stopped them and suggested that they send out the ticket refunds based on the Democrat National Committee's interpretation of fairness.

Originally the refunds were to be paid based on the price each person had paid for the tickets. Unfortunately that meant most of the refund money would be going to the ticket holders that had purchased the most expensive tickets. This, according to the DNC, is considered totally unfair.

A decision was then made to pay out the refunds in this manner:

People in the $10 seats will get back $15. After all, they have less money to spend on tickets to begin with. Call it an "Earned Income Ticket Credit." Persons "earn" it by having few skills, poor work habits, and low ambition, thus keeping them at entry-level wages.

People in the $25 seats will get back $25, because it "seems fair."

People in the $50 seats will get back $1, because they already make a lot of money and don't need a refund. After all, if they can afford a $50 ticket, they must not be paying enough taxes.

People in the $75 luxury box seats will each have to pay an additional $25 because it's the "right thing to do."

People walking past the stadium that couldn't afford to buy a ticket for the game each will get a $10 refund, even though they didn't pay anything for the tickets. They need the most help. Sometimes this is known as Affirmative Action.

Now do you understand?

If not, contact Representative Nancy Pelosi, Senator Ted Kennedy or Senator Hillary Clinton for assistance.



That's a pitiful analogy....Using sports no less...What a f*cking douche that wrote that...

[Vegas]

Also, the rich would get hit hardest as they often have lower efective tax rates than the middle class and below.

Where did you get this idea?

Here are the facts:

84.6% of all taxes are paid by the top 25%

96.7% of all taxes are paid by the top 50%

36.9% of all taxes are paid by the top 1%

[pnkpanther]

You want government control over wages? That's a horrible idea.

no, i want an agreement between rich and people they hire

[pnkpanther]

Where did you get this idea?

Here are the facts:

84.6% of all taxes are paid by the top 25%

96.7% of all taxes are paid by the top 50%

36.9% of all taxes are paid by the top 1%

eye,
wealth distrubution follows same path...

top 1% control 39% america's wealth

[BoredWithNoSB]

Where did you get this idea?

Here are the facts:

84.6% of all taxes are paid by the top 25%

96.7% of all taxes are paid by the top 50%

36.9% of all taxes are paid by the top 1%


http://www.economics.neu.edu/exploring/index.php?pid=8&eid=56

In 1976, the wealthiest 1% of Americans possessed 19% of total household wealth, whereas at the turn of the twenty-first century, the same 1% enjoy 40% of all wealth

Sounds like they are paying less than the rest as a percentage of income. 36.9%<40%.

[Vegas]

no, i want an agreement between rich and people they hire

There already is such an agreement. It's called a salary. If the worker doesn't like it, they can go find another job.

[LSU]

There already is such an agreement. It's called a salary. If the worker doesn't like it, they can go find another job.



Yes, it's that simple. Pick up and move to another city. There's great jobs open all over the place, people just aren't looking.

[Vegas]

Yes, it's that simple. Pick up and move to another city. There's great jobs open all over the place, people just aren't looking.

What are you trying to say? That people are slaves to their jobs?

[pnkpanther]

There already is such an agreement. It's called a salary. If the worker doesn't like it, they can go find another job.

i just want salary increase by % to match what a CEO's is

i dont have the exact numbers, but they're not far off

1984 average pay of CEO was about 350K
Average Worker made 25K

2004, Average CEO makes about 25 million a year
2004.Average Worker makes about 35-40K

I had a study in a BOOK, i dont have a LINK, but i'm not making it up, the numbers maybe off a bit, but general principal is evident..

[pnkpanther]

What are you trying to say? That people are slaves to their jobs?

some areas yes

[LSU]

What are you trying to say? That people are slaves to their jobs?


Not necessarily...slaves to what they have to do to live. You buy a house, buy a couple cars, pay for some daycare, in some places pay for schooling, all that jazz, then your company gives the CEO a 40 million dollar bonus package and leaves you sitting with the salary of yesteryear. Now, there's a job for you 300 miles away that pays another 5 or 10 grand a year. So go do it. Sell your house, pay taxes on the amount you make off of it, pay seller's fees, pay for a company to box your stuff up and move it, buy a new house, slap down a down payment, pay for all the costs of moving, and work for 2 years before you even break even for moving.

[Vegas]

i just want salary increase by % to match what a CEO's is

i dont have the exact numbers, but they're not far off

1984 average pay of CEO was about 350K
Average Worker made 25K

2004, Average CEO makes about 25 million a year
2004.Average Worker makes about 35-40K

I had a study in a BOOK, i dont have a LINK, but i'm not making it up, the numbers maybe off a bit, but general principal is evident..

So work harder and get an MBA. Get yourself a CEO job. The opportunities are available to everyone.

[pnkpanther]

gains on sale of home are tax free just so long as homesteaded for 2 years and "profit" is under 250 for single guy, 500 for married

[IBC]

Yes, much worse if you look at 1970 and on. GM was our biggest employer. Wage was around 45k for your average worker. The CEO made the equivalent of 500k. Today it is walmart, the average worker makes about 10, and the CEO makes 18 million. Those numbers are adjusted.

[LSU]

So work harder and get an MBA. Get yourself a CEO job. The opportunities are available to everyone.


Not really. Particularly if some people in the country don't want to pay taxes that are used to send people to school.


And that's just business. There's no MBA for plumbers.

[IBC]

So work harder and get an MBA. Get yourself a CEO job. The opportunities are available to everyone.
C'mon man.

[pnkpanther]

So work harder and get an MBA. Get yourself a CEO job. The opportunities are available to everyone.

the classic mantra

do you think a kid from streets of detroit are just as likely to reach level of CEO as a kid from an affluent family?

no, oppurtunities arent there for everyone.

dont bitch about "unfair" taxes when wealth gap is growing in America, rich are getting richer and poor are getting poorer, i wont feel bad about higher tax rates, just wont happen

[LSU]

gains on sale of home are tax free just so long as homesteaded for 2 years and "profit" is under 250 for single guy, 500 for married


Gotcha. I figured that one could get challenged...

[Vegas]

Not really. Particularly if some people in the country don't want to pay taxes that are used to send people to school.


And that's just business. There's no MBA for plumbers.


A plumber can go to school and get an MBA if he/she is so motivated. People have gone to school for years on their own initiative. The government paying for it isn't what makes it happen.

[Vegas]

the classic mantra

do you think a kid from streets of detroit are just as likely to reach level of CEO as a kid from an affluent family?

no, oppurtunities arent there for everyone.

dont bitch about "unfair" taxes when wealth gap is growing in America, rich are getting richer and poor are getting poorer, i wont feel bad about higher tax rates, just wont happen

Making excuses for the kid from the streets of Detroit don't help. Don't tell that person what isn't likely. Tell that person what is possible.

And yes, the opportunities are there for everyone.

[IBC]

Making excuses for the kid from the streets of Detroit don't help. Don't tell that person what isn't likely. Tell that person what is possible.

And yes, the opportunities are there for everyone.

All those CEO jobs available and nobody will get an MBA to get them.

[BoredWithNoSB]

A plumber can go to school and get an MBA if he/she is so motivated. People have gone to school for years on their own initiative. The government paying for it isn't what makes it happen.

I'm, lving proof that an MBA doesn't lead straight to the CEO's office. It gave me a decent chunck of money, but I had a head start due to a good schooling in a top district. It takes a little more than the MBA, it takes connections, which are much easier leveraged if you have them from birth.

There's a reason why my boss who I learned today doesn't even know how to use MS Project and has an associates degree is my Boss.

[Jiddy78]

Liberals have pushed the progressive taxes by selling it to people through class envy. It's really not a good thing.

How about we change from one person one vote to one vote per dollar paid in taxes?

WHAT? The fed can print money at will...The fraud would be rampant...Checks and balances would be deader than it already is...My God Vegas. You tryin' to destroy the country? We'd be a shell for dictatorship. (edited)

[LSU]

A plumber can go to school and get an MBA if he/she is so motivated. People have gone to school for years on their own initiative. The government paying for it isn't what makes it happen.


Bullshit. Have you gotten a tuition bill lately? It ain't cheap. And yes, a plumber can get an MBA...but can you get into a program without a bachelor's degree? If not, then there's 4 years, plus then the cost of the MBA program (from what I've heard, also not cheap) and the time to do the MBA. Then you get out and the market is saturated and you go back to being a plumber because you make 5k more a year and don't have the connections that Joe Deeppockets does...

It takes a bitch of a lot more than motivation.

And I'm against the notion that people should have to go to school to make a decent wage. Hell, even people with 4 year degrees in some fields (science, for instance) sometimes have a hard time making more than 22-25k out of college.

[Vegas]

I'm, lving proof that an MBA doesn't lead straight to the CEO's office. It takes a little more than that, it takes connections, which are much easier leveraged if you have them from birth.

There's a reason why my boss who I learned today doesn't even know how to use MS Project and has an associates degree is my Boss.

I believe I said work hard and get an MBA.

[pnkpanther]

Making excuses for the kid from the streets of Detroit don't help. Don't tell that person what isn't likely. Tell that person what is possible.

And yes, the opportunities are there for everyone.

you're an idealist, i'm not telling people what they can and cant do, but there is nothing wrong with accepting reality, we cant/wont all be rich, our whole society is based on class difference.

you didnt answer my question though

is kid from detroit just as likely to be a CEO as a kid from an affluent family?

where does military concentrate their recruiting? wealthy neighborhoods or poor?

[hannitykillspuppies]

I'm, lving proof that an MBA doesn't lead straight to the CEO's office. It gave me a decent chunck of money, but I had a head start due to a good schooling in a top district. It takes a little more than the MBA, it takes connections, which are much easier leveraged if you have them from birth.

There's a reason why my boss who I learned today doesn't even know how to use MS Project and has an associates degree is my Boss.

stop complaining there's another job out there. quit and go to that one. it's that easy according to vegas.

[BoredWithNoSB]

I believe I said work hard and get an MBA.

ummmm...

well.....

shitt...

I mean, Hey, I won employee of the month somehow based on my postings here. So, I must be working hard on a comparatvie basis??

[Vegas]

Bullshit. Have you gotten a tuition bill lately? It ain't cheap. And yes, a plumber can get an MBA...but can you get into a program without a bachelor's degree? If not, then there's 4 years, plus then the cost of the MBA program (from what I've heard, also not cheap) and the time to do the MBA. Then you get out and the market is saturated and you go back to being a plumber because you make 5k more a year and don't have the connections that Joe Deeppockets does...

It takes a bitch of a lot more than motivation.

And I'm against the notion that people should have to go to school to make a decent wage. Hell, even people with 4 year degrees in some fields (science, for instance) sometimes have a hard time making more than 22-25k out of college.

I don't dispute that education is expensive nor do I dispute that it takes time. But the time in a person's life goes by regardless of whether they pursue an education. Just because it's expensive or takes time doesn't mean someone can't do it.

[Jiddy78]

I notice that nobody disputed the logic of the original post.


I will...The exposure to destroying the voice of the many for the few would be disastrous..."Could" it be better for the country? Yeah, if THEY choose so...Not "WE"...

What "logic" are you looking for in response to the illogic presented?

[Jiddy78]

Even Clinton agreed that tax rates were too high (but of course did nothing about that). Algore had a tax cut plan. GWB had a tax cut plan. When taxes get cut, the people who pay more will logically get a bigger cut. It's really not so hard. The logic is obvious to anyone with a logical mind.

Destruction of our democracy is logical?

[Vegas]

you're an idealist, i'm not telling people what they can and cant do, but there is nothing wrong with accepting reality, we cant/wont all be rich, our whole society is based on class difference.

you didnt answer my question though

is kid from detroit just as likely to be a CEO as a kid from an affluent family?

where does military concentrate their recruiting? wealthy neighborhoods or poor?

I wasn't talking about what's likely. I was talking about what's possible.

[pnkpanther]

I don't dispute that education is expensive nor do I dispute that it takes time. But the time in a person's life goes by regardless of whether they pursue an education. Just because it's expensive or takes time doesn't mean someone can't do it.


some people are backed in corners and struggle to make ends meet, they cant just go to colelge and not earn

[hannitykillspuppies]

I wasn't talking about what's likely. I was talking about what's possible.

anything is possible.

[LSU]

I don't dispute that education is expensive nor do I dispute that it takes time. But the time in a person's life goes by regardless of whether they pursue an education. Just because it's expensive or takes time doesn't mean someone can't do it.


It sure as hell makes it a lot more difficult if you have a family to support and need to finish at least 6 years of full time schooling before you get out and make a wage...sure, student loans are there, and when you make 50k after you're done, that 100k in loans will be a distant memory...well, for the 6 months in deferment, but when that $1000 a month bill comes due to pay it all back, well, then you consolidate and start using credit cards to pay for food.

Time does go by, but if you make 35k a year and stand to lose that for 6 years to go back to school to maybe make more money after you're done...is that something a lot of people are going to go gung ho about??

Unless you've got a wife (or spouse) that's making good coin, going back to school is not much of an option unless you're single to begin with.

[Vegas]

stop complaining there's another job out there. quit and go to that one. it's that easy according to vegas.

When did I say it was easy?

[Vegas]

some people are backed in corners and struggle to make ends meet, they cant just go to colelge and not earn

There is a huge difference between "can't" and "won't" is there not?

[Jiddy78]

What about rental losses? Are you saying that if I rent my condo and make money from it I'm going to get taxed on the earnings, but if I lose money I can't remove it from my income? This is already true under PAL rules, but there's anough ways around those. Unfortunately, I'll say it again, the rich are more adept at navigating around PAL rules than Joe Idiot taxpayer.


DING DING DING!!!

[LSU]

There is a huge difference between "can't" and "won't" is there not?


Yes, but just because one can't doesn't mean one wouldn't if they could...and "could" is very relative to what "is" and what "is" is what is.

[hannitykillspuppies]

When did I say it was easy?

If the worker doesn't like it, they can go find another job.
you make it seem pretty simple with that simple reply.

[Jiddy78]

So work harder and get an MBA. Get yourself a CEO job. The opportunities are available to everyone.


I'm significantly destroying my higher educated brethren in salary on just an undergrad...I ensured that my salary was connected to production in my job...That alone was worth more than a million MBA's...Period.

[hannitykillspuppies]

There is a huge difference between "can't" and "won't" is there not?

there also a big a difference between possible and probable, no?

[Vegas]

there also a big a difference between possible and probable, no?

There is a difference, but people who give up on improbable things by calling them impossible is a sad thing.

[LSU]

There is a difference, but people who give up on improbable things by calling them impossible is a sad thing.


Hey, you called evolution impossible.

[Vegas]

Hey, you called evolution impossible.

And in the context of spontaneous generation of life from chemicals based on random processes and raw energy and mutations making fully formed functioning systems, I stand by that.

[LSU]

And in the context of spontaneous generation of life from chemicals based on random processes and raw energy and mutations making fully formed functioning systems, I stand by that.

A wise man once said this:


people who give up on improbable things by calling them impossible is a sad thing.

[LSU]

There is a difference, but people who give up on improbable things by calling them impossible is a sad thing.


Anyway, back to this...


I don't think going back to school is a matter of impossible or improbable, but perhaps more along the lines of impractical depending on where one is in one's life.

[Vegas]

Anyway, back to this...


I don't think going back to school is a matter of impossible or improbable, but perhaps more along the lines of impractical depending on where one is in one's life.

But still, it's a choice.

[hannitykillspuppies]

There is a difference, but people who give up on improbable things by calling them impossible is a sad thing.are they giving up on the improbable because they say it's impossible or because they say it's impractical?

[LSU]

Regarding going back to school, I'll give this story.


There's a very annoying person in our lab...she's nearing 50 years old. She got a degree in hotel and restaurant management or something like that...she worked, and I think worked in France for awhile. She got sick of it. Went back to school for, of all things, aquaculture. Got a job in or around Kona, Hawaii. Got paid diddly for it, relative to cost of living...decided she wanted to be a fish vet, so at the ripe old age of about 44 or so, came to do a masters degree (to get research experience) and just recently this year got accepted to the vet school to get the DVM for clinical experience. She'll be around 52 or so by the time she finishes. Right now she's working full time for the lab as well as doing her degree...she's single (understandably by her personality) and has somewhat of a nestegg put away from what her parents left her from what I understand...

So, there's living proof that people can go back to school...and barely get by on what she makes to do it all as a single person with no husband or kids...and she'll be taking out megabucks for student loans for vet school (around 20-25k per year, four years).

She's doing what she wants, and good for her...but practical? Reasonable??

[LSU]

But still, it's a choice.



But a choice of which may have more risk/less reward for some than others...so to paint it as "everybody's" opportunity is not taking that into account.

[BoredWithNoSB]

But a choice of which may have more risk/less reward for some than others...so to paint it as "everybody's" opportunity is not taking that into account.

I think the risk part is the key. I'm willing to take a risk that could cost me $5,000 to make $5,000, because that's not going to break me. I'm hesitant to take a risk that could cost me $100,000 to make $100,000 because that would pretty much break me

Now, figure I had a parnet in the background willing to prop me up if I lost $100,000. Well, that risk looks a lot riskier now.

Its all about expected value and the value placed on riosk is much higher as disposable income is lower.

[LSU]

I think the risk part is the key. I'm willing to take a risk that could cost me $5,000 to make $5,000, because that's not going to break me. I'm hesitant to take a risk that could cost me $100,000 to make $100,000 because that would pretty much break me

Now, figure I had a parnet in the background willing to prop me up if I lost $100,000. Well, that risk looks a lot riskier now.

Its all about expected value and the value placed on riosk is much higher as disposable income is lower.


Amount of time to break even on the initial investment is also key...if med school or vet school costs 100k, a person getting the degree at age 28 has much more "income time" to pay that off, i.e., they'll be in the workforce for another 30 years, whereas a 43 year old getting the degree has a significantly less about of time to pay back the initial investment to even get to even.

[IBC]

You also don't take into account that there are other motivators besides money. For some of us, it isn't important. I try to live me life in a seamless transition between what I believe, and what I do. I am able to do that, and never could as a CEO of a large company. I was a elementary school teacher (I know, according to dittoheads that is pathetic), and I now work for a nonprofit teaching nonviolence. I am proud of what I do, and wouldn't trade it for profit motive in a million years. I dedicate myself to soemthing more important than money, and do rely on the generosity of others and government to fund what I do. All of it goes back to the community. Almost all of it (minus student loans, car, and an unhealthy obsession with Best Buy) goes back to the community in which I live. Or at the least, my state. Do i buy things made other places? Yes. Do I buy them from locally owned business? Yes. Screw CEOs. You rich folks wanna know what your money pays for? Me. Redistribution of wealth is necessary IMO in a free market economy. Without it would be feudalism, and it isn't far from that now.

[pnkpanther]

There is a huge difference between "can't" and "won't" is there not?

well i suppose single mothers could stop working and go to school and leave kids unattended, i'm sure thats good

[IBC]

well i suppose single mothers could stop working and go to school and leave kids unattended, i'm sure thats good

Don't be such a pessimist. It's not they they can't leave their kids alone, its that they won't.

[Jiddy78]

Regarding going back to school, I'll give this story.


There's a very annoying person in our lab...she's nearing 50 years old. She got a degree in hotel and restaurant management or something like that...she worked, and I think worked in France for awhile. She got sick of it. Went back to school for, of all things, aquaculture. Got a job in or around Kona, Hawaii. Got paid diddly for it, relative to cost of living...decided she wanted to be a fish vet, so at the ripe old age of about 44 or so, came to do a masters degree (to get research experience) and just recently this year got accepted to the vet school to get the DVM for clinical experience. She'll be around 52 or so by the time she finishes. Right now she's working full time for the lab as well as doing her degree...she's single (understandably by her personality) and has somewhat of a nestegg put away from what her parents left her from what I understand...

So, there's living proof that people can go back to school...and barely get by on what she makes to do it all as a single person with no husband or kids...and she'll be taking out megabucks for student loans for vet school (around 20-25k per year, four years).

She's doing what she wants, and good for her...but practical? Reasonable??


Hundreds of thousands of stories like this...