LoyalFanInGA v2.0 Posted October 22, 2008 Report Share Posted October 22, 2008 Joe the Plumber is indirectly related to Charles [s]K[/s]Cheating through marriage and at least 3 degrees of seperation since "close relation" isn't defined in that excerpt. You are directly related to someone whom you would personally execute because you believe that individual to be guilty of terrorism by your definition. BFD What does one have to do with the other and how does it impact the Presidential Election? [quote name='BlackJesus' post='716388' date='Oct 21 2008, 03:36 PM'][b]I don't believe "Terrorists" exist ... but if you are defining one as "someone who aids in the deliberate bombing and killing of other individuals" --- then [u]yes[/u] I guess my father who assisted the bombing runs in Gulf War I would be guilty as charged ... and should be executed .... I'll kick the stool over. [/b][/quote] I know you don't believe "Terrorists" exist. I didn't define "Terrorists," you just did. You're definition includes revolutionaries like Che, incidentally. LMAO I simply took your reasoning that if Ayers is a terrorist then so is McCain and extrapolated your logic; i.e. if McCain is a terrorist then so are all service members. Are you keeping up, Slick? PS If you keep killing off all the peons in you Socialist Fantasyland no one will be left to do the hard, unskilled labor. Meaning a pseudointellectual elitist like yourself will have to get a real job. That will really put a cramp in your internet surfing lifestyle. Or, you could seek political asylum in Cuba where you aren't allowed access to the internet without Big Brother's permission. [quote name='BlackJesus' post='713610' date='Oct 14 2008, 03:05 PM'][center] [/center][/quote] That's some disgusting behavior. I like the final message, "Do something." Yes, BJ, do something. Instead of participating in the mud slinging and meaningless debate of how Joe the Plumber is related to Kevin Bacon; you could point out that if Joe purchased a company with $250,000 of revenue annually that doesn't equate to a personal, net income of $250,000/year. After business expenses, deductions, etc., Joe's [b]income[/b] will be far less and he would pay less under Obama's tax plan. Is that too difficult your you, Goebbells? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie_B Posted October 22, 2008 Report Share Posted October 22, 2008 Kevin Bacon was in Appolo 13 with Tom Hanks Tom Hanks was in Saving Private Ryan with Matt Damon Matt Damon was in Syriana with Christopher Plummer Christopher [b]Plummer[/b]... Joe T. [b]Plummer[/b]??? :hmm: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoyalFanInGA v2.0 Posted October 22, 2008 Report Share Posted October 22, 2008 Or... If Joe's net income, after deductions, exemptions, etc did equal $250,000 or more... Congratulations, you're a successful small business owner who earns over 3x the national average for dual income families! Which means there is no reason why you can't or shouldn't pay more taxes than the average dual income family. And by "more" I mean a greater [b]%[/b] of your income, not some feeble excuse, "Well, my greater income level and lower tax percentage means I pay more money, overall." Shut up. Someone has to pay for the Wall Street Bailout and the War in Iraq. And that someone is [u]everybody[/u], you just get to pay more because you earn more. That's called "Fair." BJ, you could point out something like that... Or... We could talk about how you've probably spent more time talking to Ben Stein than Joe the Plumber has spent conversing with Charles Keating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CincyInDC Posted October 22, 2008 Report Share Posted October 22, 2008 [quote name='LoyalFanInGA v2.0' post='716650' date='Oct 22 2008, 04:40 PM']Or... If Joe's net income, after deductions, exemptions, etc did equal $250,000 or more... Congratulations, you're a successful small business owner who earns over 3x the national average for dual income families! Which means there is no reason why you can't or shouldn't pay more taxes than the average dual income family. And by "more" I mean a greater [b]%[/b] of your income, not some feeble excuse, "Well, my greater income level and lower tax percentage means I pay more money, overall." Shut up. Someone has to pay for the Wall Street Bailout and the War in Iraq. And that someone is [u]everybody[/u], you just get to pay more because you earn more. That's called "Fair." BJ, you could point out something like that... Or... We could talk about how you've probably spent more time talking to Ben Stein than Joe the Plumber has spent conversing with Charles Keating.[/quote] I think a point a lot of people miss is that total income isn't taxed at one overall rate. Various ranges or slices of income are taxed at various rates. Check this out... # 10% on income between $0 and $8,025 # 15% on the income between $8,025 and $32,550; plus $802.50 # 25% on the income between $32,550 and $78,850; plus $4,481.25 # 28% on the income between $78,850 and $164,550; plus $16,056.25 # 33% on the income between $164,550 and $357,700; plus $40,052.25 # 35% on the income over $357,700; plus $103,791.75 So if you make $78,850 per year and Richie Rich makes $300,000, Richie pays the same tax as you on his first $78,850. Of course he has lawyers and tax accountants at his disposal, so he'll probably pay less than you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoyalFanInGA v2.0 Posted October 22, 2008 Report Share Posted October 22, 2008 [quote name='CincyInDC' post='716657' date='Oct 22 2008, 10:11 AM']I think a point a lot of people miss is that total income isn't taxed at one overall rate. Various ranges or slices of income are taxed at various rates. Check this out... # 10% on income between $0 and $8,025 # 15% on the income between $8,025 and $32,550; plus $802.50 # 25% on the income between $32,550 and $78,850; plus $4,481.25 # 28% on the income between $78,850 and $164,550; plus $16,056.25 # 33% on the income between $164,550 and $357,700; plus $40,052.25 # 35% on the income over $357,700; plus $103,791.75 So if you make $78,850 per year and Richie Rich makes $300,000, Richie pays the same tax as you on his first $78,850. Of course he has lawyers and tax accountants at his disposal, so he'll probably pay less than you.[/quote] Good point. [b]Simplified[/b] Example: $0-8,025=$803 in taxes paid for this income slice $8,025-32,550=$3,679 in taxes paid for this income slice $32,550-78,850=$11,575 in taxes paid for this income slice etc etc So Joe Blow has an net, annual, taxable income of $79,000 (which puts him in the 28% tax bracket)=$16,099 in taxes (803+3679+11575+42) 79,000-16,099=$62,901 take home pay after taxes, which means he is keeping 80% of his income and he is being taxed at an overall rate of 20% Joe Plumber makes $250,000 in net, annual, taxable income. Joe Plumber complains, "I'm paying 33% in taxes. I'm paying 5% more than the guy being taxed 28%. I pay more and it isn't fair." Or is it. Joe Plumber will pay $68,252 in taxes (803+3679+11575+23996+28199 for each income slice) 250,000-68,252=$181,748 in take home pay after taxes, which means he keeps 73% of his income and is taxed at an overall rate of 27%. So he is paying 7% more, not the 5% he complained about; but at an effective rate of 27%, not 33%. Now here is the kicker: Joe Plumber's take home pay is $181,748. Joe Blow's take home pay is $62,901. Or Joe Plumber's take home pay is 289% more than Joe Blow's take home pay. Now this is where Richie Rich and his crew jump in with, "But, he is paying 4x as much in taxes." Okay...that only digs into Joe Plumber's pocket an extra 7%. Big deal. Joe Plumber can afford it. When you charge a percentage of any larger amount it will always equal a larger amount. But, it doesn't affect someone's quality of life in quite the same way. Which means Joe Plumber's idea of sacrifice means getting the Escalade instead of the Range Rover. Joe Blows idea of sacrifice is not paying for health insurance and hope no one in his family gets sick or injured. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChicagoBengal Posted October 22, 2008 Report Share Posted October 22, 2008 [quote name='Jamie_B' post='716647' date='Oct 22 2008, 08:30 AM']Kevin Bacon was in Appolo 13 with Tom Hanks Tom Hanks was in Saving Private Ryan with Matt Damon Matt Damon was in Syriana with Christopher Plummer Christopher [b]Plummer[/b]... Joe T. [b]Plummer[/b]??? :hmm:[/quote] Wait a second...wait a second...wait a second... Jamie, are you making the claim that Joe the Plumber is somehow affiliated with the Syrians? He must be a terrorist! Yusef the Plumber!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoyalFanInGA v2.0 Posted October 22, 2008 Report Share Posted October 22, 2008 [quote name='ChicagoBengal' post='716734' date='Oct 22 2008, 02:06 PM']Wait a second...wait a second...wait a second... Jamie, are you making the claim that Joe the Plumber is somehow affiliated with the Syrians? He must be a terrorist! Yusef the Plumber!!![/quote] You've heard of pipe bombs, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie_B Posted October 22, 2008 Report Share Posted October 22, 2008 [quote name='ChicagoBengal' post='716734' date='Oct 22 2008, 02:06 PM']Wait a second...wait a second...wait a second... Jamie, are you making the claim that Joe the Plumber is somehow affiliated with the Syrians? He must be a terrorist! Yusef the Plumber!!![/quote] Just another domestic terrorist Obama is rubbing shoulders with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChicagoBengal Posted October 22, 2008 Report Share Posted October 22, 2008 [quote name='LoyalFanInGA v2.0' post='716737' date='Oct 22 2008, 01:17 PM']You've heard of pipe bombs, right?[/quote] [quote name='Jamie_B' post='716740' date='Oct 22 2008, 01:25 PM']Just another domestic terrorist Obama is rubbing shoulders with.[/quote] Double Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nati Ice Posted October 22, 2008 Report Share Posted October 22, 2008 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoyalFanInGA v2.0 Posted October 23, 2008 Report Share Posted October 23, 2008 [quote name='Nati Ice' post='716749' date='Oct 22 2008, 02:47 PM'][/quote] "The tax cut proposed by Barack Obama is three times bigger" Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't $1000 one thousand times bigger than $0? Not three times bigger? See, this is exactly why rich people need to pay higher taxes; to fix the public education system in this country. And after you read, "three times bigger," shouldn't you hear some cheesy 80s soundtrack from a Michael J. Fox movie like [i]The Secret to my Success[/i], for example? "Oh, Yeah" by Yello. [i]Ooooooh, yeeeeeaaaahhhhh.....BOMP BOMP.....beautiful.....BOMP BOMP[/i] Well, shouldn't you? (Now, I can't get that damn song out of my head.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|Bengal Migration| Posted October 23, 2008 Report Share Posted October 23, 2008 1000 x 0 = 0 but yes, you have proven that we need to fix the public education system in this country. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoyalFanInGA v2.0 Posted October 23, 2008 Report Share Posted October 23, 2008 [quote name='KangarWhoDey' post='716963' date='Oct 23 2008, 04:42 AM']1000 x 0 = 0 but yes, you have proven that we need to fix the public education system in this country. [/quote] LMAO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CincyInDC Posted October 23, 2008 Report Share Posted October 23, 2008 [quote name='LoyalFanInGA v2.0' post='716962' date='Oct 23 2008, 11:10 AM']"The tax cut proposed by Barack Obama is three times bigger" [b]Correct me if I'm wrong[/b], but isn't $1000 one thousand times bigger than $0? Not three times bigger? See, this is exactly why rich people need to pay higher taxes; to fix the public education system in this country. (Now, I can't get that damn song out of my head.)[/quote] OK, I'll bite. $1,000 is 1000 times larger than $1. $1,000 is infinitely larger than $0. But then again, so is $0.01. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoyalFanInGA v2.0 Posted October 23, 2008 Report Share Posted October 23, 2008 [quote name='CincyInDC' post='716974' date='Oct 23 2008, 06:12 AM']OK, I'll bite. $1,000 is 1000 times larger than $1. $1,000 is infinitely larger than $0. But then again, so is $0.01.[/quote] You, sir, are on the right track. Unlike Kangar. I'm not an accountant, but I did sleep at a Holiday Inn Express once. The percentage increase of 0 is a mathematical quandry. Percent increase=[(Q1-Q2)/Q2]x100% Percent increase is meaningless if Q2=0. Q1=1000, Q2=0 1000-0=1000 1000/0=0 0X100%=0% If we define Q2 as something other than 0, the closer we approach 0 the more the percent difference approaches infinity. Let's continue to use dollars and cents as our example. If we define Q2 as $1 instead of $0 1000-1=999 999/1=999 999x100%=99,900% increase Since I'm a horseshoes and hand grenades kinda guy, I'm going to round that off to 100,000% increase. If we define Q2 as $.01 instead of $0 1000-.01=999.99 999.99/.01=99,999 99,999x100%=9,999,900% increase Again, horseshoes and hand grenades kinda guy...10 million percent increase. Now if Al is a guy making 20K a year, a tax savings of 1K is a material difference. If Al is a guy making 200K a year, a tax savings of 1K is an immaterial difference. But, I'm sure Kangar won't mind getting a check for $0 instead of $1000 because he is correct; there is 0% increase difference between the two. :geek: You were saying what about fixing the public education system, Kangar? Maybe next time we'll use apples instead of dollars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|Bengal Migration| Posted October 23, 2008 Report Share Posted October 23, 2008 [quote]Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't $1000 one thousand times bigger than $0?[/quote] Only you didn't identify Q2 as being greater than zero in your initial statement, did you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoyalFanInGA v2.0 Posted October 23, 2008 Report Share Posted October 23, 2008 [quote name='KangarWhoDey' post='717023' date='Oct 23 2008, 09:16 AM']Only you didn't identify Q2 as being greater than zero in your initial statement, did you? [/quote] No, I didn't. I was making a joke which I didn't know would be taken so literally. Kinda like this one: [color="#FF0000"]Doc, this morning I woke up with like 1000 herpes sores on my penis and yesterday I had zero herpes sores on my penis![/color] [color="#000080"]Well, there has been a 0% increase in the number of herpes sores on your penis, so what you're really telling me is the treatment is working.[/color] Technically, there is a 0% increase in the number of sores on the poor guy's penis, but instinctively he knows that doesn't seem right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|Bengal Migration| Posted October 23, 2008 Report Share Posted October 23, 2008 [quote name='LoyalFanInGA v2.0' post='717032' date='Oct 24 2008, 12:50 AM'][b]I was making a joke[/b] which I didn't know would be taken so literally.[/quote] So was I. Both times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoyalFanInGA v2.0 Posted October 23, 2008 Report Share Posted October 23, 2008 [quote name='KangarWhoDey' post='717034' date='Oct 23 2008, 09:55 AM']So was I. Both times. [/quote] Well then, I misunderstood you. Sorry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|Bengal Migration| Posted October 23, 2008 Report Share Posted October 23, 2008 [quote name='LoyalFanInGA v2.0' post='717035' date='Oct 24 2008, 01:04 AM']Well then, I misunderstood you. Sorry.[/quote] An apology in the J&D forum? I'm not sure if I should or At least we've derailed the thread from the Joe the Plumber crap. Though the points you and CincyInDC made about the tax brackets were quite good.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-GoBengals- Posted October 23, 2008 Report Share Posted October 23, 2008 [quote name='Tigers Johnson' post='714213' date='Oct 16 2008, 10:28 AM']So, he is a close relative(which they did not say how) to the son-in-law of Charles Keating... No bloodlines?...right? Wow...you are really grasping at straws... I had a second cousin who's brother in law beat up his wife once... I guess that makes me a wife beater... yeah....that makes sense. [/quote] funny that you took as far as anyone caring enough to be "gasping at straws" isnt obama winning in every poll known to man? even in hilljack ohio? no one said "BOOOYAAAH BITCHES IN YOUR MCCAIN FACES MOTHERFUCKS!!!! CHALK IT UP AS A WIN!!111" no.. no one aid anything like that, just posted that its comical that the mccain n; co campaign didnt check it out before spending 25% of a debate on the guy. and frankly the not being registered to vote part is the funniest.... and you being a wife beater isnt important to this campaign, thats your and your sisters business.... its funny that you took the article so seriously as to claim someone is grasping at straws.....hilarious even... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoyalFanInGA v2.0 Posted October 23, 2008 Report Share Posted October 23, 2008 [quote name='KangarWhoDey' post='717042' date='Oct 23 2008, 10:31 AM']An apology in the J&D forum? I'm not sure if I should or At least we've derailed the thread from the Joe the Plumber crap. Though the points you and CincyInDC made about the tax brackets were quite good.. [/quote] LOL Reading your first comment, it sure seemed to imply to me I was the dumbass product of a broken system. But, maybe the reason I misunderstood your comment is because I [i]AM[/i] the dumbass product of a broken system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie_B Posted October 23, 2008 Report Share Posted October 23, 2008 BOOOYAAAH BITCHES IN YOUR MCCAIN FACES MOTHERFUCKS!!!! CHALK IT UP AS A WIN!!111 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|Bengal Migration| Posted October 23, 2008 Report Share Posted October 23, 2008 [quote name='LoyalFanInGA v2.0' post='717053' date='Oct 24 2008, 01:56 AM']LOL Reading your first comment, it sure seemed to imply to me I was the dumbass product of a broken system. But, maybe the reason I misunderstood your comment is because I [i]AM[/i] the dumbass product of a broken system. [/quote] the almighty ninja generally infers it's a joke - though at your expense. at least the way i tend to use it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoyalFanInGA v2.0 Posted October 23, 2008 Report Share Posted October 23, 2008 [quote name='KangarWhoDey' post='717057' date='Oct 23 2008, 11:04 AM']the almighty ninja generally infers it's a joke - though at your expense. at least the way i tend to use it [/quote] I see. So I was right about the dumbass part. :rofl: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.