| 09-03-2021 23:37 |
Spongy Iris ★★★★☆
(1643) |
Into the Night wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
keepit wrote:
Where does the Treasury get the money to send to the relatively poor people? Does it borrow it from the fed?
Regardless, the money can be considered payback. Payback for what you say? Well, the relatively poor got cheated out of their worktime by rich people using laws made by rich people to take advantage and leverage the poor into giving up their time for meager wages. It's time they got paid back being forced to accept insufficient wages for their work.
I've heard rich people say to poor people this idea - "I let your daughter work here and because of me she has had enough money to go to college". What a farce! The rich person made money off the hours of the poor person. It is the rich person that should be grateful. Does anyone know how to make the rich person pay it back rather than by getting the govt to force the issue?
Treasury taxes relatively rich people, and borrows, to pay poor people, and their own salaries.
The Fed also prints money for the treasury any time the treasury wants it.
Spongy Iris wrote:
If you're a poor man, like Harvey working at a warehouse, you can't get the treasury to force the rich to pay you.
If you are a poor man, you probably have only yourself to blame.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Most warehouse worker wages probably probably aren't high enough so the worker owes any or much federal and state income taxes. So at least there's that.
This may or may not be true. It depends on how much a warehouse worker is paid.
Spongy Iris wrote:
If Harvey wanted to get the treasury to force rich people to pay him, only decent option I see available to pursue that avenue is joining the armed forces.
That doesn't cause the treasury to force 'rich people' to pay anyone.
The Treasury owes the Fed around 4.5 trillion last I checked.
For rich people to exist, there must exist poor people. Just basic accounting dude. No need to play any kind of blame game.
Most warehouse jobs barely pay a living wage.
If you join the armed forces your salary is mostly from the proceeds of taxes collected. And taxes are pretty much just that, forcing relatively rich people to pay the Treasury.
%20(1).png) |
| 09-03-2021 23:51 |
Swan ★★★★★
(5725) |
keepit wrote:
Where does the Treasury get the money to send to the relatively poor people? Does it borrow it from the fed?
Regardless, the money can be considered payback. Payback for what you say? Well, the relatively poor got cheated out of their worktime by rich people using laws made by rich people to take advantage and leverage the poor into giving up their time for meager wages. It's time they got paid back being forced to accept insufficient wages for their work.
I've heard rich people say to poor people this idea - "I let your daughter work here and because of me she has had enough money to go to college". What a farce! The rich person made money off the hours of the poor person. It is the rich person that should be grateful. Does anyone know how to make the rich person pay it back rather than by getting the govt to force the issue?
They print it and will keep doing so until the USA collapses |
| 09-03-2021 23:52 |
gfm7175 ★★★★★
(3314) |
James___ wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
keepit wrote: Hint: the money stored in the Treasury bond still exists,
There is no money stored in any bond.
Have you ever wondered whether or not you totally suck at accounting?
If the question ever occurs to you, just let me know. Don't be afraid to come to me with the hard stuff.
.
Technically speaking, the holder of the bond is storing money. If they put that bond in a container, then it's a convenient way of storing money that collects interest.
p.s., could you please stop parroting the parrot?
Technically speaking, a bond is not money, so it is the bond that is being stored inside of a container, not any sort of money.
Technically speaking, it is not the money that collects interest. It is the lender of the money who collects it.
The bondholder is not storing any money. The bondholder HAD money. He no longer has that money. He exchanged that money for a bond. He now has a bond instead, currently being stored inside of a container. |
| 10-03-2021 00:03 |
Spongy Iris★★★★☆
(1643) |
James___ wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
keepit wrote:
Where does the Treasury get the money to send to the relatively poor people? Does it borrow it from the fed?
Regardless, the money can be considered payback. Payback for what you say? Well, the relatively poor got cheated out of their worktime by rich people using laws made by rich people to take advantage and leverage the poor into giving up their time for meager wages. It's time they got paid back being forced to accept insufficient wages for their work.
I've heard rich people say to poor people this idea - "I let your daughter work here and because of me she has had enough money to go to college". What a farce! The rich person made money off the hours of the poor person. It is the rich person that should be grateful. Does anyone know how to make the rich person pay it back rather than by getting the govt to force the issue?
Treasury taxes relatively rich people, and borrows, to pay poor people, and their own salaries.
If you're a poor man, like Harvey working at a warehouse, you can't get the treasury to force the rich to pay you. Most warehouse worker wages probably probably aren't high enough so the worker owes any or much federal and state income taxes. So at least there's that.
If Harvey wanted to get the treasury to force rich people to pay him, only decent option I see available to pursue that avenue is joining the armed forces.
One thing the media has never done is to break down taxes and income. It's basically how much federal tax is paid by consumers by income, businesses by income and stock profits by income.
When treasuries charged a higher fee than, lately it's been less than 1.0% was revenue which helped the federal government pay its bills. Federal Interest Rates went up before the Great Recession of 2008.
And after that, it has stayed very low while budget deficits are on the rise. It seems that at 6% that the budget deficit was acceptable. And that under Obama the budget deficit was decreasing and then under Trump it went up again.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/200410/surplus-or-deficit-of-the-us-governments-budget-since-2000/
What this doesn't show is that the trade deficit started increasing around 2002.
Without even bothering to check, I think its safe to assume the Treasury has pretty much always run on a budget deficit since its inception. There are a few one off years they have surplus. I think deficits accelerated even more around 1970, and have really took off in the past 10 years or so.
2 people making the same income probably wind up paying different taxes very often.
Say somebody making 30,000 per year gets taxes withheld from their pay check, and they never bother to file for a refund. They paid taxes. But somebody else making 30,000 a year gets taxes withheld from their paycheck but files for a refund on Apr 15. They paid no taxes.
I guess its not just the relatively rich people who pay taxes. Its also poor workers who ignore the IRS.
|
| 10-03-2021 00:08 |
gfm7175★★★★★
(3314) |
Spongy Iris wrote:
For rich people to exist, there must exist poor people. Just basic accounting dude. No need to play any kind of blame game.
You are making use of words from my Lispy Leftist List of Linguistic Lunacy.
For this statement of yours to be understood by anyone else as you are understanding it, you need to first unambiguously define these words.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Most warehouse jobs barely pay a living wage.
Yet another word from the aforementioned list. For this statement of yours to be understood by anyone else as you are understanding it, you need to first unambiguously define this word.
Spongy Iris wrote:
If you join the armed forces your salary is mostly from the proceeds of taxes collected. And taxes are pretty much just that, forcing relatively rich people to pay the Treasury.
Again, you need to unambiguously define your terms.
I am not a "relatively rich" person. I do not earn a six (or more) figure salary/wage, yet I am "forced...to pay the treasury".
See how that works? I have defined "relatively rich" as having a yearly salary/wage that is at least six figures large. That is a definition that can be understood.
Edited on 10-03-2021 00:27 |
|
| 10-03-2021 00:37 |
Spongy Iris★★★★☆
(1643) |
gfm7175 wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
For rich people to exist, there must exist poor people. Just basic accounting dude. No need to play any kind of blame game.
You are making use of words from my Lispy Leftist List of Linguistic Lunacy.
For this statement of yours to be understood by anyone else as you are understanding it, you need to first unambiguously define these words.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Most warehouse jobs barely pay a living wage.
Yet another word from the aforementioned list. For this statement of yours to be understood by anyone else as you are understanding it, you need to first unambiguously define this word.
Spongy Iris wrote:
If you join the armed forces your salary is mostly from the proceeds of taxes collected. And taxes are pretty much just that, forcing relatively rich people to pay the Treasury.
Again, you need to unambiguously define your terms.
I am not a "relatively rich" person. I do not earn a six (or more) figure salary/wage, yet I am "forced...to pay the treasury".
See how that works? I have defined "relatively rich" as having a yearly salary/wage that is at least six figures large. That is a definition that can be understood.
The median wage in the US is about 50,000 per year. If you are above it, you are relatively rich and will probably owe federal and state income taxes. If you are below it you are relatively poor and probably won't owe much or any federal and state income taxes.
If you make 20,000 per year and you live in a city, it is barely enough to live on. You will need to be very flexible in figuring out your living arrangements.
Happy now?
Edited on 10-03-2021 00:39 |
| 10-03-2021 01:02 |
gfm7175★★★★★
(3314) |
Spongy Iris wrote:
gfm7175 wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
For rich people to exist, there must exist poor people. Just basic accounting dude. No need to play any kind of blame game.
You are making use of words from my Lispy Leftist List of Linguistic Lunacy.
For this statement of yours to be understood by anyone else as you are understanding it, you need to first unambiguously define these words.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Most warehouse jobs barely pay a living wage.
Yet another word from the aforementioned list. For this statement of yours to be understood by anyone else as you are understanding it, you need to first unambiguously define this word.
Spongy Iris wrote:
If you join the armed forces your salary is mostly from the proceeds of taxes collected. And taxes are pretty much just that, forcing relatively rich people to pay the Treasury.
Again, you need to unambiguously define your terms.
I am not a "relatively rich" person. I do not earn a six (or more) figure salary/wage, yet I am "forced...to pay the treasury".
See how that works? I have defined "relatively rich" as having a yearly salary/wage that is at least six figures large. That is a definition that can be understood.
The median wage in the US is about 50,000 per year. If you are above it, you are relatively rich and will probably owe federal and state income taxes. If you are below it you are relatively poor and probably won't owe much or any federal and state income taxes.
If you make 20,000 per year and you live in a city, it is barely enough to live on. You will need to be very flexible in figuring out your living arrangements.
Happy now?
A bit happier, yes.
Notice how you and I were on totally different pages with regard to the words "relatively rich"? I was thinking a value of $100K and above, while you were thinking a value of only half that.
And now, because of your clarifications, tax owings can also be more accurately discussed, since you have named some hard dollar figures to make reference to.
"Living wage" can also be discussed a bit better now.
Isn't it better to at least somewhat define your terminology? |
| 10-03-2021 01:06 |
IBdaMann ★★★★★
(14475) |
gfm7175 wrote: I have defined "relatively rich" as having a yearly salary/wage that is at least six figures large.
Unfortunately you committed an egregious Leftist error that really needs to be included in your list (my apologies).
The left seeks to define how wealthy you are (net worth) by the income you earn at present. This error would cause any accountant to be fired immediately ... which is why Leftists do it, i.e. they are all about trashing and redefining any and all rules of economics, accounting and finance.
I don't mean to beat up on you; if Leftists hadn't worked so hard over the decades to legitimize this notion, it would never occur to you to equate one's wages with one's wealth or with one's social worth as Leftists routinely do.
.
I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit
A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles
Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris
Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit
If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles
Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles
Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn
You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.
The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank
:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude
IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist |
| 10-03-2021 01:44 |
Into the Night ★★★★★
(21699) |
James___ wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
keepit wrote: Hint: the money stored in the Treasury bond still exists,
There is no money stored in any bond.
Have you ever wondered whether or not you totally suck at accounting?
If the question ever occurs to you, just let me know. Don't be afraid to come to me with the hard stuff.
.
Technically speaking, the holder of the bond is storing money.
Not even technically speaking. A bond is not money. It does not store money.
James___ wrote:
If they put that bond in a container, then it's a convenient way of storing money that collects interest.
A bond does not store money.
The Parrot Killer
Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles
Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan |
| 10-03-2021 01:50 |
Into the Night★★★★★
(21699) |
Spongy Iris wrote:
The Treasury owes the Fed around 4.5 trillion last I checked.
Nope. The Treasury doesn't owe the Fed a damn thing. That's the beauty of creating the Fed. The Fed can write the Treasure a rubber check any time the Treasury wants it. It does not have to be paid back.
Spongy Iris wrote:
For rich people to exist, there must exist poor people.
Define 'rich people'. Define 'poor people'. Why must one or either exist at all?
Spongy Iris wrote:
Just basic accounting dude.
Nope. Accounting has nothing to do with defining words or class warfare.
Spongy Iris wrote:
No need to play any kind of blame game.
Then stop playing it.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Most warehouse jobs barely pay a living wage.
Blaming the warehouses again, eh? Who are YOU to define a 'living wage'? You are not the king.
Spongy Iris wrote:
If you join the armed forces your salary is mostly from the proceeds of taxes collected.
Nope. Most of it is from printed money nowadays.
Spongy Iris wrote:
And taxes are pretty much just that, forcing relatively rich people to pay the Treasury.
So you define the Treasury as 'poor people'??
The Parrot Killer
Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles
Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan |
| 10-03-2021 01:53 |
Into the Night★★★★★
(21699) |
Swan wrote:
keepit wrote:
Where does the Treasury get the money to send to the relatively poor people? Does it borrow it from the fed?
Regardless, the money can be considered payback. Payback for what you say? Well, the relatively poor got cheated out of their worktime by rich people using laws made by rich people to take advantage and leverage the poor into giving up their time for meager wages. It's time they got paid back being forced to accept insufficient wages for their work.
I've heard rich people say to poor people this idea - "I let your daughter work here and because of me she has had enough money to go to college". What a farce! The rich person made money off the hours of the poor person. It is the rich person that should be grateful. Does anyone know how to make the rich person pay it back rather than by getting the govt to force the issue?
They print it and will keep doing so until the USA collapses
The federal government has already collapsed. The Democrats are converting it to an oligarchy to implement fascism.
How long will people keep accepting the US dollar generally? Who knows? I do know that people are already looking around for another currency. Interest seems to be centering around either digital currency (like Bitcoin) or gold and silver...possibly a combination of them.
The Parrot Killer
Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles
Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan |
| 10-03-2021 01:55 |
Into the Night★★★★★
(21699) |
gfm7175 wrote:
James___ wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
keepit wrote: Hint: the money stored in the Treasury bond still exists,
There is no money stored in any bond.
Have you ever wondered whether or not you totally suck at accounting?
If the question ever occurs to you, just let me know. Don't be afraid to come to me with the hard stuff.
.
Technically speaking, the holder of the bond is storing money. If they put that bond in a container, then it's a convenient way of storing money that collects interest.
p.s., could you please stop parroting the parrot?
Technically speaking, a bond is not money, so it is the bond that is being stored inside of a container, not any sort of money.
Technically speaking, it is not the money that collects interest. It is the lender of the money who collects it.
The bondholder is not storing any money. The bondholder HAD money. He no longer has that money. He exchanged that money for a bond. He now has a bond instead, currently being stored inside of a container.
A bond is not money, whether technically speaking or not.
A bond is an IOU note (also known as a Debt Note or Promissory Note) issued by the government. Someone buys this note on the faith that they will get their principle back with interest, like any debt.
The Parrot Killer
Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles
Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
Edited on 10-03-2021 01:56 |
| 10-03-2021 02:01 |
James___★★★★★
(5513) |
Into the Night wrote:
gfm7175 wrote:
James___ wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
keepit wrote: Hint: the money stored in the Treasury bond still exists,
There is no money stored in any bond.
Have you ever wondered whether or not you totally suck at accounting?
If the question ever occurs to you, just let me know. Don't be afraid to come to me with the hard stuff.
.
Technically speaking, the holder of the bond is storing money. If they put that bond in a container, then it's a convenient way of storing money that collects interest.
p.s., could you please stop parroting the parrot?
Technically speaking, a bond is not money, so it is the bond that is being stored inside of a container, not any sort of money.
Technically speaking, it is not the money that collects interest. It is the lender of the money who collects it.
The bondholder is not storing any money. The bondholder HAD money. He no longer has that money. He exchanged that money for a bond. He now has a bond instead, currently being stored inside of a container.
A bond is not money, whether technically speaking or not.
A bond is an IOU note (also known as a Debt Note or Promissory Note) issued by the government. Someone buys this note on the faith that they will get their principle back with interest, like any debt.
Printed money is just another type of instrument. They both have cash value and are redeemable. All you guys are doing is arguing semantics. I've had bonds before and deposited them into my bank account. Counted just the same as a dollar bill. And then I spent it with my debit card without handling any dollar bills of various denominations.
Yep, I can say that my bank treated it as money. And if something is treated as money then it's money. It had a specific cash value just as dollar bills have. So obviously you guys have never had any bonds before. So in this instance you are not speaking from experience.
Edited on 10-03-2021 02:01 |
| 10-03-2021 02:06 |
Into the Night★★★★★
(21699) |
Spongy Iris wrote:
Without even bothering to check, I think its safe to assume the Treasury has pretty much always run on a budget deficit since its inception.
Nope. The Treasure building used to be where they held the gold and silver used for government business. That is not a budget deficit.
Spongy Iris wrote:
There are a few one off years they have surplus.
They do not have a surplus or a deficit. The Treasury is simply the Treasury.
Spongy Iris wrote:
I think deficits accelerated even more around 1970, and have really took off in the past 10 years or so.
The Treasury has no deficits or surplus. They simply exist.
Spongy Iris wrote:
2 people making the same income probably wind up paying different taxes very often.
True. Different deductions, different circumstances, etc.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Say somebody making 30,000 per year gets taxes withheld from their pay check, and they never bother to file for a refund. They paid taxes. But somebody else making 30,000 a year gets taxes withheld from their paycheck but files for a refund on Apr 15. They paid no taxes.
WRONG. They both paid taxes. I see you fell for the IRS scam. Witholding IS taxes. Witholding too much may result in a refund, but the amount withheld that was NOT refunded is STILL taxes. EVERYONE working pays taxes. Everyone. Folks that aren't working at all pay taxes.
Spongy Iris wrote:
I guess its not just the relatively rich people who pay taxes. Its also poor workers who ignore the IRS.
Everyone pays taxes. Even the homeless.
Anyone that buys anything pays taxes.
The Parrot Killer
Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles
Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan |
| 10-03-2021 02:30 |
Into the Night★★★★★
(21699) |
Spongy Iris wrote:
gfm7175 wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
For rich people to exist, there must exist poor people. Just basic accounting dude. No need to play any kind of blame game.
You are making use of words from my Lispy Leftist List of Linguistic Lunacy.
For this statement of yours to be understood by anyone else as you are understanding it, you need to first unambiguously define these words.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Most warehouse jobs barely pay a living wage.
Yet another word from the aforementioned list. For this statement of yours to be understood by anyone else as you are understanding it, you need to first unambiguously define this word.
Spongy Iris wrote:
If you join the armed forces your salary is mostly from the proceeds of taxes collected. And taxes are pretty much just that, forcing relatively rich people to pay the Treasury.
Again, you need to unambiguously define your terms.
I am not a "relatively rich" person. I do not earn a six (or more) figure salary/wage, yet I am "forced...to pay the treasury".
See how that works? I have defined "relatively rich" as having a yearly salary/wage that is at least six figures large. That is a definition that can be understood.
The median wage in the US is about 50,000 per year.
According to the Census Bureau, the median income for 2019 (latest figures) is $68,703.
According to HUD, the median income level for 2019 is $78,500.
According to Balance, the median income level for 2019 is $35,977.
So you want to choose $50,000. Okay. One randU number is as good as the next. They are both garbage numbers made up in someone's head.
Spongy Iris wrote:
If you are above it, you are relatively rich
So this is your arbitrary definition of 'rich people'. Gotit.
Spongy Iris wrote:
and will probably owe federal and state income taxes.
They will owe federal taxes. Some States have no income tax.
Spongy Iris wrote:
If you are below it you are relatively poor
So this is your arbitrary of 'poor people'. Gotit.
Spongy Iris wrote:
and probably won't owe much or any federal and state income taxes.
They will owe federal taxes. According to the IRS for the year 2020 taxes, the first tax bracket is from $0 to $9,875, and they will owe 10% of their income. If they earned more than that, they will owe $987.50 plus 12% of the amount over $9,875 up to $40,125. If they earned more than that, they will owe $4,617.50 plus 22% of the amount over $40,125 up to $85,525. Since $50,000 is less than $85525, they will owe a total of $6790 if they are making $50000, your arbitrary cutoff for 'poor people'. This is for single filers with no deductions (other than self). The Standard Deduction this past year is $12400, so you can subtract that from your income before figuring your taxes. Thus, the $50000 filer will show $38600 in taxable income. I'll let you do the rest of the math yourself.
Spongy Iris wrote:
If you make 20,000 per year and you live in a city, it is barely enough to live on.
Who are YOU to decide what is 'enough to live on'? You are not the king.
Spongy Iris wrote:
You will need to be very flexible in figuring out your living arrangements.
Frankly, I'd leave the city and get a better job.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Happy now?
Are you?
The Parrot Killer
Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles
Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan |
|
| 10-03-2021 02:37 |
Into the Night★★★★★
(21699) |
James___ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
gfm7175 wrote:
James___ wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
keepit wrote: Hint: the money stored in the Treasury bond still exists,
There is no money stored in any bond.
Have you ever wondered whether or not you totally suck at accounting?
If the question ever occurs to you, just let me know. Don't be afraid to come to me with the hard stuff.
.
Technically speaking, the holder of the bond is storing money. If they put that bond in a container, then it's a convenient way of storing money that collects interest.
p.s., could you please stop parroting the parrot?
Technically speaking, a bond is not money, so it is the bond that is being stored inside of a container, not any sort of money.
Technically speaking, it is not the money that collects interest. It is the lender of the money who collects it.
The bondholder is not storing any money. The bondholder HAD money. He no longer has that money. He exchanged that money for a bond. He now has a bond instead, currently being stored inside of a container.
A bond is not money, whether technically speaking or not.
A bond is an IOU note (also known as a Debt Note or Promissory Note) issued by the government. Someone buys this note on the faith that they will get their principle back with interest, like any debt.
Printed money is just another type of instrument.
Nope. Printed money, or fiat currency, is money designated as 'money' by a government. A debt is not money.
James___ wrote:
They both have cash value and are redeemable.
A promissory note is not money. It is NOT redeemable until the note is paid, and only with the one issuing the note.
James___ wrote:
All you guys are doing is arguing semantics.
Inversion fallacy. That is what YOU are doing.
James___ wrote:
I've had bonds before and deposited them into my bank account.
You can't deposit a debt into your bank account.
James___ wrote:
Counted just the same as a dollar bill.
It is not a dollar bill. It is a promissory note.
James___ wrote:
And then I spent it with my debit card without handling any dollar bills of various denominations.
I don't believe you. You are making shit up again.
James___ wrote:
Yep, I can say that my bank treated it as money.
Nope. Banks won't take promissory notes as money.
James___ wrote:
And if something is treated as money then it's money.
It is not treated as money.
James___ wrote:
It had a specific cash value just as dollar bills have.
Irrelevant.
James___ wrote:
So obviously you guys have never had any bonds before.
Yes I have. I choose not to invest in so flaky an investment, however. I do not hold bonds anymore.
James___ wrote:
So in this instance you are not speaking from experience.
I don't believe you.
The Parrot Killer
Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles
Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan |
| 10-03-2021 04:09 |
James___★★★★★
(5513) |
Into the Night wrote:
James___ wrote:
So in this instance you are not speaking from experience.
I don't believe you.
So? |
| 10-03-2021 04:48 |
IBdaMann★★★★★
(14475) |
James___ wrote:And if something is treated as money then it's money.
Nope. At that point it is bartering since it isn't money.
I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit
A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles
Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris
Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit
If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles
Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles
Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn
You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.
The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank
:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude
IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist |
| 10-03-2021 17:37 |
gfm7175★★★★★
(3314) |
IBdaMann wrote:
gfm7175 wrote: I have defined "relatively rich" as having a yearly salary/wage that is at least six figures large.
Unfortunately you committed an egregious Leftist error that really needs to be included in your list (my apologies).
The left seeks to define how wealthy you are (net worth) by the income you earn at present. This error would cause any accountant to be fired immediately ... which is why Leftists do it, i.e. they are all about trashing and redefining any and all rules of economics, accounting and finance.
I don't mean to beat up on you; if Leftists hadn't worked so hard over the decades to legitimize this notion, it would never occur to you to equate one's wages with one's wealth or with one's social worth as Leftists routinely do.
.
You're fine; you're just making a really good point about the sneaky shit that leftists do with linguistics.
What's infuriating is that, in any other application, I know full well what net worth is, and how money is not wealth, yet have never given any thought to this particular application and the illegitimacy surrounding how this notion gets framed (as legitimization and usage of such framework, due to many years of unquestioned exposure to it, has become akin to "muscle memory"), and that's obviously precisely what leftists wish for to occur.
But yeah, please keep correcting and explaining any such mind trap that I haven't clearly noticed and mentally processed the illegitimacy of. That's a large part of why I'm here.
EDIT: In terms of adding this to my list, I think that this falls a bit outside the scope of my list. My list is meant for words/phrases that leftists make use of that effectively hold no meaning (or are otherwise vague, unspecified, nonsensical).
This, instead, is about a particular error in thought that is being made. Maybe this would make for a better entry within your "debunking sig" list? The claim that is being debunked could be something along the lines of "One's present day salary/wage defines their wealth". I'm not very crafty with words, but I think the idea is there. If you don't think this falls within the purview of your debunking sig list, then maybe there should be a separate list specifically for these sorts of thought errors that leftists have created/promoted over the years...
Edited on 10-03-2021 18:31 |
| 11-03-2021 01:52 |
Spongy Iris★★★★☆
(1643) |
Into the Night wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
The Treasury owes the Fed around 4.5 trillion last I checked.
Nope. The Treasury doesn't owe the Fed a damn thing. That's the beauty of creating the Fed. The Fed can write the Treasure a rubber check any time the Treasury wants it. It does not have to be paid back.
Spongy Iris wrote:
For rich people to exist, there must exist poor people.
Define 'rich people'. Define 'poor people'. Why must one or either exist at all?
Spongy Iris wrote:
Just basic accounting dude.
Nope. Accounting has nothing to do with defining words or class warfare.
Spongy Iris wrote:
No need to play any kind of blame game.
Then stop playing it.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Most warehouse jobs barely pay a living wage.
Blaming the warehouses again, eh? Who are YOU to define a 'living wage'? You are not the king.
Spongy Iris wrote:
If you join the armed forces your salary is mostly from the proceeds of taxes collected.
Nope. Most of it is from printed money nowadays.
Spongy Iris wrote:
And taxes are pretty much just that, forcing relatively rich people to pay the Treasury.
So you define the Treasury as 'poor people'??
There's no such thing as a free lunch dude. You must think money grows on trees.
Rich people have savings. Poor people have debt. Each exists because the the world is not egalitarian.
Oh wait nevermind. Join the army. Its a free lunch says The Parrot.
I'm giving an example of a low paying job, and comparing such to the cost of living. Now please, kneel before me
Not all taxes collected go toward paying the salaries of government administrators. Others go toward paying poor people who feel like they have no options in life. An example is people who join the Army.
|
| 11-03-2021 02:07 |
Spongy Iris★★★★☆
(1643) |
Into the Night wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
gfm7175 wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
For rich people to exist, there must exist poor people. Just basic accounting dude. No need to play any kind of blame game.
You are making use of words from my Lispy Leftist List of Linguistic Lunacy.
For this statement of yours to be understood by anyone else as you are understanding it, you need to first unambiguously define these words.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Most warehouse jobs barely pay a living wage.
Yet another word from the aforementioned list. For this statement of yours to be understood by anyone else as you are understanding it, you need to first unambiguously define this word.
Spongy Iris wrote:
If you join the armed forces your salary is mostly from the proceeds of taxes collected. And taxes are pretty much just that, forcing relatively rich people to pay the Treasury.
Again, you need to unambiguously define your terms.
I am not a "relatively rich" person. I do not earn a six (or more) figure salary/wage, yet I am "forced...to pay the treasury".
See how that works? I have defined "relatively rich" as having a yearly salary/wage that is at least six figures large. That is a definition that can be understood.
The median wage in the US is about 50,000 per year.
According to the Census Bureau, the median income for 2019 (latest figures) is $68,703.
According to HUD, the median income level for 2019 is $78,500.
According to Balance, the median income level for 2019 is $35,977.
So you want to choose $50,000. Okay. One randU number is as good as the next. They are both garbage numbers made up in someone's head.
Spongy Iris wrote:
If you are above it, you are relatively rich
So this is your arbitrary definition of 'rich people'. Gotit.
Spongy Iris wrote:
and will probably owe federal and state income taxes.
They will owe federal taxes. Some States have no income tax.
Spongy Iris wrote:
If you are below it you are relatively poor
So this is your arbitrary of 'poor people'. Gotit.
Spongy Iris wrote:
and probably won't owe much or any federal and state income taxes.
They will owe federal taxes. According to the IRS for the year 2020 taxes, the first tax bracket is from $0 to $9,875, and they will owe 10% of their income. If they earned more than that, they will owe $987.50 plus 12% of the amount over $9,875 up to $40,125. If they earned more than that, they will owe $4,617.50 plus 22% of the amount over $40,125 up to $85,525. Since $50,000 is less than $85525, they will owe a total of $6790 if they are making $50000, your arbitrary cutoff for 'poor people'. This is for single filers with no deductions (other than self). The Standard Deduction this past year is $12400, so you can subtract that from your income before figuring your taxes. Thus, the $50000 filer will show $38600 in taxable income. I'll let you do the rest of the math yourself.
Spongy Iris wrote:
If you make 20,000 per year and you live in a city, it is barely enough to live on.
Who are YOU to decide what is 'enough to live on'? You are not the king.
Spongy Iris wrote:
You will need to be very flexible in figuring out your living arrangements.
Frankly, I'd leave the city and get a better job.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Happy now?
Are you?
Married with children making 50,000 per year will owe no Federal tax.
|
| 11-03-2021 02:13 |
Spongy Iris★★★★☆
(1643) |
Into the Night wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
Without even bothering to check, I think its safe to assume the Treasury has pretty much always run on a budget deficit since its inception.
Nope. The Treasure building used to be where they held the gold and silver used for government business. That is not a budget deficit.
Spongy Iris wrote:
There are a few one off years they have surplus.
They do not have a surplus or a deficit. The Treasury is simply the Treasury.
Spongy Iris wrote:
I think deficits accelerated even more around 1970, and have really took off in the past 10 years or so.
The Treasury has no deficits or surplus. They simply exist.
Spongy Iris wrote:
2 people making the same income probably wind up paying different taxes very often.
True. Different deductions, different circumstances, etc.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Say somebody making 30,000 per year gets taxes withheld from their pay check, and they never bother to file for a refund. They paid taxes. But somebody else making 30,000 a year gets taxes withheld from their paycheck but files for a refund on Apr 15. They paid no taxes.
WRONG. They both paid taxes. I see you fell for the IRS scam. Witholding IS taxes. Witholding too much may result in a refund, but the amount withheld that was NOT refunded is STILL taxes. EVERYONE working pays taxes. Everyone. Folks that aren't working at all pay taxes.
Spongy Iris wrote:
I guess its not just the relatively rich people who pay taxes. Its also poor workers who ignore the IRS.
Everyone pays taxes. Even the homeless.
Anyone that buys anything pays taxes.
Many people making $30,000 per year can probably deduct enough and qualify for enough exemptions to get all their tax withheld refunded.
Also, food is not taxable.
|
| 11-03-2021 02:26 |
IBdaMann★★★★★
(14475) |
Spongy Iris wrote:Also, food is not taxable.
So you are one of those who believes that one's income determines one's wealth? You believe that "rich" and "poor" is a function of current income, yes?
I'm just highlighting examples for gfm7175.
.
I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit
A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles
Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris
Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit
If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles
Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles
Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn
You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.
The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank
:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude
IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist |
| 11-03-2021 09:56 |
Into the Night★★★★★
(21699) |
Spongy Iris wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
The Treasury owes the Fed around 4.5 trillion last I checked.
Nope. The Treasury doesn't owe the Fed a damn thing. That's the beauty of creating the Fed. The Fed can write the Treasure a rubber check any time the Treasury wants it. It does not have to be paid back.
Spongy Iris wrote:
For rich people to exist, there must exist poor people.
Define 'rich people'. Define 'poor people'. Why must one or either exist at all?
Spongy Iris wrote:
Just basic accounting dude.
Nope. Accounting has nothing to do with defining words or class warfare.
Spongy Iris wrote:
No need to play any kind of blame game.
Then stop playing it.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Most warehouse jobs barely pay a living wage.
Blaming the warehouses again, eh? Who are YOU to define a 'living wage'? You are not the king.
Spongy Iris wrote:
If you join the armed forces your salary is mostly from the proceeds of taxes collected.
Nope. Most of it is from printed money nowadays.
Spongy Iris wrote:
And taxes are pretty much just that, forcing relatively rich people to pay the Treasury.
So you define the Treasury as 'poor people'??
There's no such thing as a free lunch dude. You must think money grows on trees.
It does. Paper comes from trees. Paper money is no exception.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Rich people have savings. Poor people have debt.
False dichotomy fallacy.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Each exists because the the world is not egalitarian.
Each exists only because you attempt to define them. That is the only reason each exists.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Oh wait nevermind. Join the army. Its a free lunch says The Parrot.
There ain't no such thing as a free lunch.
Spongy Iris wrote:
I'm giving an example of a low paying job, and comparing such to the cost of living. Now please, kneel before me
I kneel before no one but God.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Not all taxes collected go toward paying the salaries of government administrators. Others go toward paying poor people who feel like they have no options in life. An example is people who join the Army.
Taxes are not the only way the government raises money.
The Parrot Killer
Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles
Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan |
| 11-03-2021 10:00 |
Into the Night★★★★★
(21699) |
Spongy Iris wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
gfm7175 wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
For rich people to exist, there must exist poor people. Just basic accounting dude. No need to play any kind of blame game.
You are making use of words from my Lispy Leftist List of Linguistic Lunacy.
For this statement of yours to be understood by anyone else as you are understanding it, you need to first unambiguously define these words.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Most warehouse jobs barely pay a living wage.
Yet another word from the aforementioned list. For this statement of yours to be understood by anyone else as you are understanding it, you need to first unambiguously define this word.
Spongy Iris wrote:
If you join the armed forces your salary is mostly from the proceeds of taxes collected. And taxes are pretty much just that, forcing relatively rich people to pay the Treasury.
Again, you need to unambiguously define your terms.
I am not a "relatively rich" person. I do not earn a six (or more) figure salary/wage, yet I am "forced...to pay the treasury".
See how that works? I have defined "relatively rich" as having a yearly salary/wage that is at least six figures large. That is a definition that can be understood.
The median wage in the US is about 50,000 per year.
According to the Census Bureau, the median income for 2019 (latest figures) is $68,703.
According to HUD, the median income level for 2019 is $78,500.
According to Balance, the median income level for 2019 is $35,977.
So you want to choose $50,000. Okay. One randU number is as good as the next. They are both garbage numbers made up in someone's head.
Spongy Iris wrote:
If you are above it, you are relatively rich
So this is your arbitrary definition of 'rich people'. Gotit.
Spongy Iris wrote:
and will probably owe federal and state income taxes.
They will owe federal taxes. Some States have no income tax.
Spongy Iris wrote:
If you are below it you are relatively poor
So this is your arbitrary of 'poor people'. Gotit.
Spongy Iris wrote:
and probably won't owe much or any federal and state income taxes.
They will owe federal taxes. According to the IRS for the year 2020 taxes, the first tax bracket is from $0 to $9,875, and they will owe 10% of their income. If they earned more than that, they will owe $987.50 plus 12% of the amount over $9,875 up to $40,125. If they earned more than that, they will owe $4,617.50 plus 22% of the amount over $40,125 up to $85,525. Since $50,000 is less than $85525, they will owe a total of $6790 if they are making $50000, your arbitrary cutoff for 'poor people'. This is for single filers with no deductions (other than self). The Standard Deduction this past year is $12400, so you can subtract that from your income before figuring your taxes. Thus, the $50000 filer will show $38600 in taxable income. I'll let you do the rest of the math yourself.
Spongy Iris wrote:
If you make 20,000 per year and you live in a city, it is barely enough to live on.
Who are YOU to decide what is 'enough to live on'? You are not the king.
Spongy Iris wrote:
You will need to be very flexible in figuring out your living arrangements.
Frankly, I'd leave the city and get a better job.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Happy now?
Are you?
Married with children making 50,000 per year will owe no Federal tax.
I have already shown you what a $50000 earner would owe. The standard deduction for a married version simply allows $24800, leaving a taxable income of $25200.
Yes...they owe income tax.
The Parrot Killer
Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles
Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan |
| 11-03-2021 10:12 |
Into the Night★★★★★
(21699) |
Spongy Iris wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
Without even bothering to check, I think its safe to assume the Treasury has pretty much always run on a budget deficit since its inception.
Nope. The Treasure building used to be where they held the gold and silver used for government business. That is not a budget deficit.
Spongy Iris wrote:
There are a few one off years they have surplus.
They do not have a surplus or a deficit. The Treasury is simply the Treasury.
Spongy Iris wrote:
I think deficits accelerated even more around 1970, and have really took off in the past 10 years or so.
The Treasury has no deficits or surplus. They simply exist.
Spongy Iris wrote:
2 people making the same income probably wind up paying different taxes very often.
True. Different deductions, different circumstances, etc.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Say somebody making 30,000 per year gets taxes withheld from their pay check, and they never bother to file for a refund. They paid taxes. But somebody else making 30,000 a year gets taxes withheld from their paycheck but files for a refund on Apr 15. They paid no taxes.
WRONG. They both paid taxes. I see you fell for the IRS scam. Witholding IS taxes. Witholding too much may result in a refund, but the amount withheld that was NOT refunded is STILL taxes. EVERYONE working pays taxes. Everyone. Folks that aren't working at all pay taxes.
Spongy Iris wrote:
I guess its not just the relatively rich people who pay taxes. Its also poor workers who ignore the IRS.
Everyone pays taxes. Even the homeless.
Anyone that buys anything pays taxes.
Many people making $30,000 per year can probably deduct enough and qualify for enough exemptions to get all their tax withheld refunded.
Possibly, but not probably. They will still owe income tax. They will always owe other taxes as well, regardless of their deductions, such as SS tax, Medicare tax, and quite probably local and State taxes.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Also, food is not taxable.
Food is taxable. Every bit of food you eat is taxed.
There is a tax to buy the land and to maintain it.
There is a tax for the farmhouse.
There is a tax for the equipment.
There is a tax for the fuel for the equipment.
There is a tax to maintain the equipment.
There is a tax to buy the seed.
There is a tax to use the water to grow the seed into a crop.
There is a tax to buy and use pesticides.
There is a tax to harvest and bundle the crop.
There is a tax to ship the product to market.
There is a tax to sell the actual product once it has reached market.
There is a tax for the buyer to store the product.
There is a tax for the buyer to pay for heat, light, and for each employee they may employ.
There is a tax for the sale of different foods,which vary from State to State, which may exempt some foods, but not all.
There is a tax on the consumer to drive to the market (fuel taxes, road taxes, etc).
Taxes are everywhere.
A simple gallon of gasoline is:
Taxed to obtain the rights to drill for it.
Taxed to drill it.
Taxed to move it to the refinery.
Taxed to store it at the refinery.
Taxed to refine ti.
Taxed to store the finished product.
Taxed to move that product to the gas stations.
Taxed to put it in the in ground tank at the gas station.
Taxed to store it in the in ground tank at the gas station.
Taxed to pump it out of the in ground tank at the gas station.
Taxed to drive down public roads to burn that gasoline (sometimes known as 'road taxes, fuel taxes, etc)
EVERYONE pays taxes.
The Parrot Killer
Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles
Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan |
| 11-03-2021 17:51 |
gfm7175★★★★★
(3314) |
IBdaMann wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:Also, food is not taxable.
So you are one of those who believes that one's income determines one's wealth? You believe that "rich" and "poor" is a function of current income, yes?
I'm just highlighting examples for gfm7175.
.
Thank you. |
| 11-03-2021 17:53 |
gfm7175★★★★★
(3314) |
Spongy Iris wrote:
Married with children making 50,000 per year will owe no Federal tax.
Yes, they will. I don't have the tax table in front of me, but after the standard deduction (which should be around 24K-ish for a married couple) gets taken out, roughly half of the original amount will remain as "taxable income".
They will be owing Federal income taxes.
Source: I did my own taxes, and remember roughly what the standard deduction was for a single person
Edited on 11-03-2021 17:57 |
| 11-03-2021 21:10 |
Into the Night★★★★★
(21699) |
gfm7175 wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
Married with children making 50,000 per year will owe no Federal tax.
Yes, they will. I don't have the tax table in front of me, but after the standard deduction (which should be around 24K-ish for a married couple) gets taken out, roughly half of the original amount will remain as "taxable income".
They will be owing Federal income taxes.
Source: I did my own taxes, and remember roughly what the standard deduction was for a single person
$12400
The Parrot Killer
Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles
Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan |
| 11-03-2021 22:40 |
Spongy Iris★★★★☆
(1643) |
gfm7175 wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
Married with children making 50,000 per year will owe no Federal tax.
Yes, they will. I don't have the tax table in front of me, but after the standard deduction (which should be around 24K-ish for a married couple) gets taken out, roughly half of the original amount will remain as "taxable income".
They will be owing Federal income taxes.
Source: I did my own taxes, and remember roughly what the standard deduction was for a single person
You do know you can claim exemptions for your children don't you?
|
|
| 11-03-2021 23:09 |
IBdaMann★★★★★
(14475) |
Spongy Iris wrote:You do know you can claim exemptions for your children don't you?
Now you are shifting goalposts. Into the Night claimed that it was possible to not owe taxes, just not probable.
Into the Night wrote:Spongy Iris wrote:Many people making $30,000 per year can probably deduct enough and qualify for enough exemptions to get all their tax withheld refunded.
Possibly, but not probably.
You are now adding new factors into the equation which weren't previously there.
.
I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit
A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles
Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris
Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit
If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles
Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles
Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn
You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.
The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank
:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude
IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist |
| 12-03-2021 00:47 |
Swan★★★★★
(5725) |
Into the Night wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
gfm7175 wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
For rich people to exist, there must exist poor people. Just basic accounting dude. No need to play any kind of blame game.
You are making use of words from my Lispy Leftist List of Linguistic Lunacy.
For this statement of yours to be understood by anyone else as you are understanding it, you need to first unambiguously define these words.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Most warehouse jobs barely pay a living wage.
Yet another word from the aforementioned list. For this statement of yours to be understood by anyone else as you are understanding it, you need to first unambiguously define this word.
Spongy Iris wrote:
If you join the armed forces your salary is mostly from the proceeds of taxes collected. And taxes are pretty much just that, forcing relatively rich people to pay the Treasury.
Again, you need to unambiguously define your terms.
I am not a "relatively rich" person. I do not earn a six (or more) figure salary/wage, yet I am "forced...to pay the treasury".
See how that works? I have defined "relatively rich" as having a yearly salary/wage that is at least six figures large. That is a definition that can be understood.
The median wage in the US is about 50,000 per year.
According to the Census Bureau, the median income for 2019 (latest figures) is $68,703.
According to HUD, the median income level for 2019 is $78,500.
According to Balance, the median income level for 2019 is $35,977.
So you want to choose $50,000. Okay. One randU number is as good as the next. They are both garbage numbers made up in someone's head.
Spongy Iris wrote:
If you are above it, you are relatively rich
So this is your arbitrary definition of 'rich people'. Gotit.
Spongy Iris wrote:
and will probably owe federal and state income taxes.
They will owe federal taxes. Some States have no income tax.
Spongy Iris wrote:
If you are below it you are relatively poor
So this is your arbitrary of 'poor people'. Gotit.
Spongy Iris wrote:
and probably won't owe much or any federal and state income taxes.
They will owe federal taxes. According to the IRS for the year 2020 taxes, the first tax bracket is from $0 to $9,875, and they will owe 10% of their income. If they earned more than that, they will owe $987.50 plus 12% of the amount over $9,875 up to $40,125. If they earned more than that, they will owe $4,617.50 plus 22% of the amount over $40,125 up to $85,525. Since $50,000 is less than $85525, they will owe a total of $6790 if they are making $50000, your arbitrary cutoff for 'poor people'. This is for single filers with no deductions (other than self). The Standard Deduction this past year is $12400, so you can subtract that from your income before figuring your taxes. Thus, the $50000 filer will show $38600 in taxable income. I'll let you do the rest of the math yourself.
Spongy Iris wrote:
If you make 20,000 per year and you live in a city, it is barely enough to live on.
Who are YOU to decide what is 'enough to live on'? You are not the king.
Spongy Iris wrote:
You will need to be very flexible in figuring out your living arrangements.
Frankly, I'd leave the city and get a better job.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Happy now?
Are you?
Married with children making 50,000 per year will owe no Federal tax.
I have already shown you what a $50000 earner would owe. The standard deduction for a married version simply allows $24800, leaving a taxable income of $25200.
Yes...they owe income tax.
LOL some people make millions of dollars and pay no taxes on that money |
| 12-03-2021 01:41 |
IBdaMann★★★★★
(14475) |
Swan wrote:LOL some people make millions of dollars and pay no taxes on that money
All governments crave the power to decide the winners and the losers; they don't want any of their subjects inadvertently winning on their own merit. Therefore governments ensure the tax laws are complicated so that when they tweak the codes to let the elite escape tax burdens, no one points to the government. They just stare off into space in confusion at the impregnable tax code that requires a team of dedicated professional CPAs to be able to begin to understand some of it.
.
I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit
A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles
Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris
Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit
If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles
Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles
Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn
You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.
The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank
:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude
IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist |
| 12-03-2021 02:37 |
HarveyH55 ★★★★★
(5197) |
Swan wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
gfm7175 wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
For rich people to exist, there must exist poor people. Just basic accounting dude. No need to play any kind of blame game.
You are making use of words from my Lispy Leftist List of Linguistic Lunacy.
For this statement of yours to be understood by anyone else as you are understanding it, you need to first unambiguously define these words.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Most warehouse jobs barely pay a living wage.
Yet another word from the aforementioned list. For this statement of yours to be understood by anyone else as you are understanding it, you need to first unambiguously define this word.
Spongy Iris wrote:
If you join the armed forces your salary is mostly from the proceeds of taxes collected. And taxes are pretty much just that, forcing relatively rich people to pay the Treasury.
Again, you need to unambiguously define your terms.
I am not a "relatively rich" person. I do not earn a six (or more) figure salary/wage, yet I am "forced...to pay the treasury".
See how that works? I have defined "relatively rich" as having a yearly salary/wage that is at least six figures large. That is a definition that can be understood.
The median wage in the US is about 50,000 per year.
According to the Census Bureau, the median income for 2019 (latest figures) is $68,703.
According to HUD, the median income level for 2019 is $78,500.
According to Balance, the median income level for 2019 is $35,977.
So you want to choose $50,000. Okay. One randU number is as good as the next. They are both garbage numbers made up in someone's head.
Spongy Iris wrote:
If you are above it, you are relatively rich
So this is your arbitrary definition of 'rich people'. Gotit.
Spongy Iris wrote:
and will probably owe federal and state income taxes.
They will owe federal taxes. Some States have no income tax.
Spongy Iris wrote:
If you are below it you are relatively poor
So this is your arbitrary of 'poor people'. Gotit.
Spongy Iris wrote:
and probably won't owe much or any federal and state income taxes.
They will owe federal taxes. According to the IRS for the year 2020 taxes, the first tax bracket is from $0 to $9,875, and they will owe 10% of their income. If they earned more than that, they will owe $987.50 plus 12% of the amount over $9,875 up to $40,125. If they earned more than that, they will owe $4,617.50 plus 22% of the amount over $40,125 up to $85,525. Since $50,000 is less than $85525, they will owe a total of $6790 if they are making $50000, your arbitrary cutoff for 'poor people'. This is for single filers with no deductions (other than self). The Standard Deduction this past year is $12400, so you can subtract that from your income before figuring your taxes. Thus, the $50000 filer will show $38600 in taxable income. I'll let you do the rest of the math yourself.
Spongy Iris wrote:
If you make 20,000 per year and you live in a city, it is barely enough to live on.
Who are YOU to decide what is 'enough to live on'? You are not the king.
Spongy Iris wrote:
You will need to be very flexible in figuring out your living arrangements.
Frankly, I'd leave the city and get a better job.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Happy now?
Are you?
Married with children making 50,000 per year will owe no Federal tax.
I have already shown you what a $50000 earner would owe. The standard deduction for a married version simply allows $24800, leaving a taxable income of $25200.
Yes...they owe income tax.
LOL some people make millions of dollars and pay no taxes on that money
That's not entirely accurate... They own millions of dollars in assets, and their business they own makes millions, but they don't personally have millions in liquid cash, for personal use. They may not pay personal income tax, but they do pay taxes, on what they own. |
| 12-03-2021 22:56 |
Into the Night★★★★★
(21699) |
Swan wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
gfm7175 wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
For rich people to exist, there must exist poor people. Just basic accounting dude. No need to play any kind of blame game.
You are making use of words from my Lispy Leftist List of Linguistic Lunacy.
For this statement of yours to be understood by anyone else as you are understanding it, you need to first unambiguously define these words.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Most warehouse jobs barely pay a living wage.
Yet another word from the aforementioned list. For this statement of yours to be understood by anyone else as you are understanding it, you need to first unambiguously define this word.
Spongy Iris wrote:
If you join the armed forces your salary is mostly from the proceeds of taxes collected. And taxes are pretty much just that, forcing relatively rich people to pay the Treasury.
Again, you need to unambiguously define your terms.
I am not a "relatively rich" person. I do not earn a six (or more) figure salary/wage, yet I am "forced...to pay the treasury".
See how that works? I have defined "relatively rich" as having a yearly salary/wage that is at least six figures large. That is a definition that can be understood.
The median wage in the US is about 50,000 per year.
According to the Census Bureau, the median income for 2019 (latest figures) is $68,703.
According to HUD, the median income level for 2019 is $78,500.
According to Balance, the median income level for 2019 is $35,977.
So you want to choose $50,000. Okay. One randU number is as good as the next. They are both garbage numbers made up in someone's head.
Spongy Iris wrote:
If you are above it, you are relatively rich
So this is your arbitrary definition of 'rich people'. Gotit.
Spongy Iris wrote:
and will probably owe federal and state income taxes.
They will owe federal taxes. Some States have no income tax.
Spongy Iris wrote:
If you are below it you are relatively poor
So this is your arbitrary of 'poor people'. Gotit.
Spongy Iris wrote:
and probably won't owe much or any federal and state income taxes.
They will owe federal taxes. According to the IRS for the year 2020 taxes, the first tax bracket is from $0 to $9,875, and they will owe 10% of their income. If they earned more than that, they will owe $987.50 plus 12% of the amount over $9,875 up to $40,125. If they earned more than that, they will owe $4,617.50 plus 22% of the amount over $40,125 up to $85,525. Since $50,000 is less than $85525, they will owe a total of $6790 if they are making $50000, your arbitrary cutoff for 'poor people'. This is for single filers with no deductions (other than self). The Standard Deduction this past year is $12400, so you can subtract that from your income before figuring your taxes. Thus, the $50000 filer will show $38600 in taxable income. I'll let you do the rest of the math yourself.
Spongy Iris wrote:
If you make 20,000 per year and you live in a city, it is barely enough to live on.
Who are YOU to decide what is 'enough to live on'? You are not the king.
Spongy Iris wrote:
You will need to be very flexible in figuring out your living arrangements.
Frankly, I'd leave the city and get a better job.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Happy now?
Are you?
Married with children making 50,000 per year will owe no Federal tax.
I have already shown you what a $50000 earner would owe. The standard deduction for a married version simply allows $24800, leaving a taxable income of $25200.
Yes...they owe income tax.
LOL some people make millions of dollars and pay no taxes on that money
Everyone pays taxes.
The Parrot Killer
Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles
Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan |
| 12-03-2021 22:57 |
Into the Night★★★★★
(21699) |
HarveyH55 wrote:
Swan wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
gfm7175 wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
For rich people to exist, there must exist poor people. Just basic accounting dude. No need to play any kind of blame game.
You are making use of words from my Lispy Leftist List of Linguistic Lunacy.
For this statement of yours to be understood by anyone else as you are understanding it, you need to first unambiguously define these words.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Most warehouse jobs barely pay a living wage.
Yet another word from the aforementioned list. For this statement of yours to be understood by anyone else as you are understanding it, you need to first unambiguously define this word.
Spongy Iris wrote:
If you join the armed forces your salary is mostly from the proceeds of taxes collected. And taxes are pretty much just that, forcing relatively rich people to pay the Treasury.
Again, you need to unambiguously define your terms.
I am not a "relatively rich" person. I do not earn a six (or more) figure salary/wage, yet I am "forced...to pay the treasury".
See how that works? I have defined "relatively rich" as having a yearly salary/wage that is at least six figures large. That is a definition that can be understood.
The median wage in the US is about 50,000 per year.
According to the Census Bureau, the median income for 2019 (latest figures) is $68,703.
According to HUD, the median income level for 2019 is $78,500.
According to Balance, the median income level for 2019 is $35,977.
So you want to choose $50,000. Okay. One randU number is as good as the next. They are both garbage numbers made up in someone's head.
Spongy Iris wrote:
If you are above it, you are relatively rich
So this is your arbitrary definition of 'rich people'. Gotit.
Spongy Iris wrote:
and will probably owe federal and state income taxes.
They will owe federal taxes. Some States have no income tax.
Spongy Iris wrote:
If you are below it you are relatively poor
So this is your arbitrary of 'poor people'. Gotit.
Spongy Iris wrote:
and probably won't owe much or any federal and state income taxes.
They will owe federal taxes. According to the IRS for the year 2020 taxes, the first tax bracket is from $0 to $9,875, and they will owe 10% of their income. If they earned more than that, they will owe $987.50 plus 12% of the amount over $9,875 up to $40,125. If they earned more than that, they will owe $4,617.50 plus 22% of the amount over $40,125 up to $85,525. Since $50,000 is less than $85525, they will owe a total of $6790 if they are making $50000, your arbitrary cutoff for 'poor people'. This is for single filers with no deductions (other than self). The Standard Deduction this past year is $12400, so you can subtract that from your income before figuring your taxes. Thus, the $50000 filer will show $38600 in taxable income. I'll let you do the rest of the math yourself.
Spongy Iris wrote:
If you make 20,000 per year and you live in a city, it is barely enough to live on.
Who are YOU to decide what is 'enough to live on'? You are not the king.
Spongy Iris wrote:
You will need to be very flexible in figuring out your living arrangements.
Frankly, I'd leave the city and get a better job.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Happy now?
Are you?
Married with children making 50,000 per year will owe no Federal tax.
I have already shown you what a $50000 earner would owe. The standard deduction for a married version simply allows $24800, leaving a taxable income of $25200.
Yes...they owe income tax.
LOL some people make millions of dollars and pay no taxes on that money
That's not entirely accurate... They own millions of dollars in assets, and their business they own makes millions, but they don't personally have millions in liquid cash, for personal use. They may not pay personal income tax, but they do pay taxes, on what they own.
He is also confusing assets with income.
The Parrot Killer
Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles
Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan |