-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
US PoliGAF 2012 | The Romney VeepStakes: Waiting for Chris Christie to Sing
- Thread starter Invisible_Insane
- Start date
- Status
Frank the Great
Banned
the amount of money "taken out of your paycheck" has literally no meaning, other than the wrong-headed psychological defensive reaction most people feel.
as long as there is horizontal equity in the tax rates then the amount of money taken out makes no difference. if less money is taken out you would get paid less to compensate for the difference. the economy evens itself out in the end. this is why people paying over 50% in taxes in some countries don't see a drastic dip in their standard of living. it literally makes no difference in the long run.
most people get offended when they see the taxes on their pay stub, and i guess i can forgive them for not thinking of the long term economic consequences, but they are still really complaining about nothing in the end. as long as everyone in the same situation pays the same amount, no harm is done to any individual's economic fortunes.
as long as there is horizontal equity in the tax rates then the amount of money taken out makes no difference. if less money is taken out you would get paid less to compensate for the difference. the economy evens itself out in the end. this is why people paying over 50% in taxes in some countries don't see a drastic dip in their standard of living. it literally makes no difference in the long run.
most people get offended when they see the taxes on their pay stub, and i guess i can forgive them for not thinking of the long term economic consequences, but they are still really complaining about nothing in the end. as long as everyone in the same situation pays the same amount, no harm is done to any individual's economic fortunes.
AlteredBeast
Fork 'em, Sparky!
I wish... That includes federal and state taxes, btw, as well as OASI. Did not mean to be disingenuous, I meant the amount of pure deductions from my checks every month.
AlteredBeast
Fork 'em, Sparky!
Literally no meaning? I mean, I know I am still making more money than I would making les money at a lower tax rate, but it still feels kind of like you are getting gyped. I guess that is where greed and corporate America gets it, the more money I make, the more I feel like Gollum trying to squirrel it away and protect it.
Good point.
lol, check out this one: http://www.theonion.com/video/breaking-witch-who-granted-beyonce-fame-returns-to,27002/
Just saw this on Nate Silvers blog
So only 1.6-2% more showed up in Iowa compared to 2008 and it was down ~6-7% in NH compared to 2008....look at that GOP voter enthusiasm. Mitts got them all locked up, he better pray he can captain the Nobama train since the diehards who vote in these primaries don't even want him that much
So only 1.6-2% more showed up in Iowa compared to 2008 and it was down ~6-7% in NH compared to 2008....look at that GOP voter enthusiasm. Mitts got them all locked up, he better pray he can captain the Nobama train since the diehards who vote in these primaries don't even want him that much
Frank the Great
Banned
i know you feel like you are getting screwed, but that is not my point. my point is that if the top tax rate was to actually go lower, it still wouldn't do anything in the long run for you. since the value of your labor would stay the same after the rate change, your bargaining power in the labor market would decrease in proportion to the decrease in the rate. your employer would, over time, adjust your salary so that your take-home pay is essentially the same as it was before.
your salary is what the market determines is fair value for your services. the amount taken out for taxes is taken into consideration when the market makes this determination. any change in the proportion of taxes taken out of your salary would not change the underlying fair value of your services, it would only change the amount your employer would need to pay out in order to meet that amount.
this is why horizontal equity is really important. the above scenario only happens if everyone in the same position is taxed at the same rates, so the market can properly adjust itself.
speculawyer
Member
Saw that one earlier today. Awesome as usual.
Btw, does anyone else find the "U.S." part in the thread title a little disorienting. Not used to seeing that in Poligaf threads. It'd be nice if Hitokage or another mod could remove that part, thx.
AlteredBeast
Fork 'em, Sparky!
Not literally me, since I was hired for a set amount, on the contrary, in my job, I will never get a pay-raise. Cost of living goes up? I better work harder. Luckily, the company i work for is incredibly fair as far as paying commission goes. But, since most of my pay is commission, my tax rate is much higher than my actual income would reflect. I get the meaning of what you are saying, but at least I am in a position to where I can work harder than expected and make more money, if I so desire.
cooljeanius
Member
I believe 3rd place was the worst Huntsman was willing to do and still stay in it, so by that measure I expect him to stick around a little longer.
a Ron Paul Romney ticket is a ticket to Fael; a cirque do so lame fiasco tent.
AlteredBeast
Fork 'em, Sparky!
Not any way that it is going to happen. Daniels, Christie, Pawlenty and maybe a couple of others are pretty much the only ones in contention.
Dreams-Visions
Member
Serious question: Does Newt's wife's hair MOVE?
I was watching his speech and at the end, she turned around a couple of times and that shit didn't move a millimeter. It was eerie.
I was watching his speech and at the end, she turned around a couple of times and that shit didn't move a millimeter. It was eerie.
protection from t-rex.
AlteredBeast
Fork 'em, Sparky!
To be fair, her face doesn't move a whole lot either. I think it is the only hair/face combo that has a PETE rating for recyclability.
PhoenixDark
Banned
I'd smash. Put dat face on Michelle Obama's body and mmm
Snowman Prophet of Doom
Member
So Huntsman is maybe the only Repub that I have any real respect for, meaning that I'm fairly sad that he's not doing well. Maybe in a few years? He'd certainly appeal to moderates in the general elections more than the rest of the crazies.
Doesn't he support Ryan's plan though? I'd like to respect him based on a lot of things he says, but supporting that plan is lunacy.
Also, I'm betting on Chris Christie running in 2016 anyway, and he seems like a more charismatic moderate than Huntsman.
jamesinclair
Banned
Delegates:
Romney
23
Paul
10
Its a two horse race, which is pretty fucking impressive considering how much the media, on both sides, have done their hardest to downplay ron paul.
Also, WTF does cnn not give the results for buddy? I fucking hate when the media picks and chooses who gets reported on. News my ass.
Romney
23
Paul
10
Its a two horse race, which is pretty fucking impressive considering how much the media, on both sides, have done their hardest to downplay ron paul.
Also, WTF does cnn not give the results for buddy? I fucking hate when the media picks and chooses who gets reported on. News my ass.
AlteredBeast
Fork 'em, Sparky!
Ehhh, Bachmann and Cain almost got as many votes as Roemer. You don't deserve to be reported on if you can only barely beat people who aren't even running.
Paul isn't going to do very well in SC or Florida. His hot streak will end last, but Romney has got the wrapped up.
This was the state, more than any other, that Huntsman was banking on. It was the one most ideologically fit for him. And he got 17% (rounding up). And it's all downhill from here.
It's a Romney/Paul race, and even that won't last long.
The Onion nails it.
I totally lost it.
:lol
Hilarious, and spot-on.
platypotamus
Member
It's pretty disingenuous to claim a two horse race when third place is Santorum only 2 delegates back from Paul, particularly when he's liable to gain the most from Gingrich/Perry when they drop out. It's either a 3 horse race, or a 1 horse race.
The Onion nails it.
I totally lost it.
The Onion does it again!
Repeat after me:
"Anyone but Obama."
They are putting their grudges to the side and picking the person they think is most able to beat Obama in the GE. They are picking wisely.
Not to mention I'm sure pretty much every goddamn GOPer in the state thinks Obama is a Muslim, so OF COURSE they'd vote for a Mormon over him.
NihonTiger90
Member
Is that all delegates? Because if so, you should note this: Romney had 8 delegates pledged before Iowa. Paul had zero.
jamesinclair
Banned
Thats the thing, most websites list michelle, some list cain, almost none list buddy. He beat them both.
It was a two-horse race back in june or whenver perry came in, remember that?
He didnt win in Iowa :/
PhoenixDark
Banned
Santorum has nearly as many delegates as Paul, and should have more after SC.
I think it's safe to assume Perry will drop out if he flops in SC. But if Gingrich stays in the race that will further hand it to Romney. Someone needs to fall on the sword and allow one conservative challenger to take on Romney. At which point it'll become a three man race amongst Romney, Paul, and the conservative white hope (Santorum?)
jamesinclair
Banned
No. If romney does over 50% of a state, he gets 100% of delegates in it.
Splitting the vote helps all the non-romneys.
If Gringich runs out, his 15% wont all run to crazy old gay rick. Many will just vote for romney.
Sye d'Burns
Member
jamesinclair
Banned
According to Kosmo, its proportional unless a candidate exceeds 50%.
PhoenixDark
Banned
cagelessrat
Member
Iowa is a caucus. The delegates won't be decided until March, so these delegate counts don't mean a lot right now. They aren't directly tied to the popular vote.
jamesinclair
Banned
Democracy as it should be!
The Librarian
Banned
God dammit. There is no "bottom 50% who pay nothing." They pay SS tax, Medicare tax, several state and local taxes...
You've been told this MANY TIMES BEFORE. Yet you keep ignoring it.
You're so dense.
Yea. .. many of the March states have skirted the rules by enacting that 50% clause.
Isn't there a general rule that uncertain races will always have a greater turnout than ones that are decided? I don't have any specific evidence to back that up, but it seems like it should be unquestionably true.
In 2008, NH was very much up for grabs:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/nh/new_hampshire_republican_primary-193.html
As far as this go around, Romney has held a commanding lead since last march:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ep...ire_republican_presidential_primary-1581.html
Mortrialus
Banned
Can we get a source please? I didn't see anyone post that.
I think it's Ygelsias .. I remember reading it yesterday.
Did you know, you can copy-paste the first line into Google and find the answer? It's an amazing new technology.
edit: Wasn't Ygelsias, I forgot he has a new job. It was some other TP blogger.
Pai Pai Master
Banned
It's very sad that no one's really pointing this out. Those only focusing on the out-of-context bit by Romney are just as out of touch as he is.
Invisible_Insane
Member
RustyNails
Member
CNN: Obama could break even on jobs
NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- The job market is getting better, but it's far from healed. Will President Obama be able to turn things around in time to save his own job?
From the labor market's height in January 2008 to its bottom in February 2010, 8.8 million jobs were cut, and the unemployment rate soared as high as 10% in October 2009.
Obama has taken a lot of heat for that.
But only about half of those job losses -- or 4.3 million -- happened under his watch.
And by measuring his record against that benchmark, it looks like Obama could actually break even, and maybe even come out ahead on jobs.
As of December, roughly two thirds of the jobs lost during Obama's presidency have been recovered.
How much will the improvement help Obama's chances? History is a dubious measure.
George W. Bush ended his first term with a loss of 152,000 jobs and a higher unemployment rate than when he began, and he still won re-election.
But unemployment is a bigger issue today than it was then. (Check the unemployment rate in your state.)
And no president since Franklin D. Roosevelt has been elected for a second term with an unemployment rate over 7.2%.
As of December, 13 million people remain unemployed. Try convincing them that Obama has solved the country's economic woes.
"Having a high level at 8% unemployment -- that's going to be hard for him to overcome," said Dean Baker, co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research. "If I'm President Obama, I don't want to be in the position of telling people this is a good economy -- that strategy is going to fall flat."
Berkshire Hathaway is mainly interested in value investments. Buffett usually only purchases companies that he plans to hold for a long, long time. Assuming that people are complaining about Bain Capital being an "asset stripper" or "cigar-butt cutting" as far as I'm aware Buffett did that many decades ago but during the 60s and 70s he began to dislike the ethical consequences of asset stripping. I don't know much about Bain, it sounds like they partook in asset stripping but I doubt they did it exclusively.
- Status