[geeks] Re: [rescue] Computerfests (was: first real server hardware)

[Dan Duncan]

On Sun, 18 Apr 2004, Andrew Weiss wrote:
> > Wow, goodbye charitable contributions.  Your method will significantly
> > drop the budgets of organizations that do a lot of work helping
> > people.
> >
> > You don't really want that, do you?
>
> I don't think so... it doesn't work like that.

Then how does it work?  I base the amount of my contributions
on what will be deductible and pass that on to the charities.

Many simply give because of the deduction.

(and of course, some lie about what they give which doesn't
really play into it)

> > If I take time out of my already busy day to either work extra
> > hours or get a second job to better help ends meet, not only
> > does that extra income take a serious toll on my time and energy,
> > but I should be rewarded by having to pay taxes at a higher
> > RATE on that extra income than I pay on my other income?
> >
> > What the fuck kind of sick mind thinks that is ok?
> >
> Because it is OK. Yes penalize people for being overly successful.

Why?  Why tell people they may as well just stay home and sponge
off everyone else?

> What kind of sick mind thinks it is ok to charge minimum wage earners
> or people working two jobs just to make ends meet taxes at a rate they
> cannot afford

YOU are the one advocating an increasing tax rate on that second
job, not me.  I'm against it.

> to pay yet let someone who makes $100G a year manipulate
> his taxes to pay next to nothing.

I had an Elvis year once, but I had spent 9 months of the previous year
unemployed and running through my savings.  I came close to
losing my house.  I don't get to do income averaging, so I got shafted
by YOUR system for that year and trust me, I paid a $SHITLOAD of taxes.
If I made the same amount averaged over the two years, I'd have paid all
the same bills (mortgage, utilities, food) and paid less in taxes.
Instead I used my savings, managed to replenish MOST of it, and paid
considerably more in taxes, and got to bust my ass harder than I ever
had and which I don't EVER want to have to go through again.
I'm surprised I still had hair, my original heart, and my health.
It's not healthy to struggle that hard.  I'm used to contracting
work, where the pay is good for a while and bad for a while, but
the 9 month run was a little rough.

I got the short end of it, but the taxpayers who won't work for
a living got more than they would have otherwise.

Yeah, what a GREAT system.

> To your point... you make more
> money... you pay a bit more in taxes.. period.

Except it's not a bit more.  The rate also increases.  If I bust
my ass to make a little more, YOUR APPROVED METHOD not only
taxes me for the extra income, which I suppose is fair enough,
but bumps the RATE at which that income is taxed as well.

How is that fair?

> > Why should any individual pay, for example, more than $100k a year
> > in taxes?
>
> If they make a million dollars a year they should probably pay 300G's a
> year in taxes at least.

Why?  What benefit are they getting for their money?

> > Do they receive more benefit for their money?
>
> Yes they do.  They probably own more cars...

Which they paid for out of pocket and are already taxed separately.

> more houses...

Which they paid for out of pocket and are already taxed separately.

> send their kids to more expensive schools

Which they pay for out of pocket IN ADDITION TO what they pay
in taxes for public schools.

> and because they stimulate the economy
> more and are more important to the economy's bottom line they have a
> greater responsibility to make it continue to work smoothly for those
> who cannot afford to do so.

So... since they ALREADY stimulate the economy they might as well
ALSO pay more taxes?

I'm not going down that path.  Taking something from someone simply
because they have it and you don't is getting too close to robbery.

Justify it any way you like, but it's thievery.

> Because Bill Gates is morally bereft and a criminal.  It's the only
> legal way to punish the man after the government realized it lacked the
> balls or power to do so.  Lawrence Ellison is also an a$$hole of the
> extreme type.... and many more... Carly Fiorina anyone... and this is
> all just people in our own field.

People who represent a fraction of a percent of the people who
make over $100G a year.

> We're not talking about penalizing
> hard working and quite successful people...

Yes.  You are.

-DanD

-- 
#  Dan Duncan (kd4igw)  dand at pcisys.net  http://pcisys.net/~dand
# Many people would rather die than think; in fact, most do.
# -- Bertrand Russell