• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Roughly 3 weeks into Trump as PEOTUS...

RJKarl said:
You would have a point about a few people if you would be talking about a huge difference in pay. If someone was going to lose 30-50% of their pay, you'd .likely have a point. At 5%, it's of very minimal consequence.

It's a myth rather than a reality.
Click to expand...

Let me put numbers to an example.

Let's say a partner at my firm makes 1m per year. He or she has the option of working four days a week for a proportional salary and takes that option. Now he or she makes 800k. In gross terms, the decision cost 200k. Come tax time though, his or her taxable income also fell by 200k so that the tax bill fell by 80k (200 times 40 percent). In exchange for giving up 120k in salary, he or she now has a day in his life back. That's why marginal tax rate is what matters for this discussion.

I never made a value judgment, other than perhaps high income earners should focus less on earning money (which equates to the marginal tax rate should be higher). From a fairness perspective, I have also consistently supported a progressive and transparent tax system. But you cannot ignore that incentives and taxes both impact behavior.

It is basic math, logic, and economics. Therefore it is fact. Not myth.
 
ONW said:
I'm honestly watching the Chief of Staff advocating "talking to people" and "shouldn't have an enemy list" Did we forget the Axis of Evil? Are we not troubled that Trump doesn't believe his own intelligence agencies over Putin? Talking to Iran, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, et al. was Obama getting bent over...
Click to expand...

When did the left turn into a bunch of neocons? Bizarro world.
 
ThinkingWithMyDeac said:
According to US media which have viewed the Fox interview in advance, Mr Trump also said:

he does not require daily intelligence briefings because he's a "smart person"

his children will run his company but will not "make deals"

the phone call with Taiwan that prompted protests from China was not planned in advance

he won't be bound by "One China" policy unless Beijing makes concessions on trade

a series of big environmental decisions including US participation in the Paris climate change deal will come quickly

The first one is definitely my favorite, he is all knowing like a god
Click to expand...

And the third is just false.
 
ONW said:
Can we all agree that Reince Priebus is a complete D-bag? "Rex Tillerson is qualified to be the SOS because he is a preeminent business person who has business contacts in every country in the world."
Click to expand...

Priebus is running the show and cutting out a lot of "Trump originals"

"According to a senior transition official, Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner, is supportive of Priebus’s staff choices because they bring a level of professionalism to the chaotic Trump team. But some at Trump Tower are alarmed that Priebus has so far not offered jobs to a number of Trump loyalists who may have been expecting them, including Michael Cohen, Corey Lewandowski, Hope Hicks, and Dave Bossie. “We didn’t fight two years against the swamp only to bring the swamp into the White House,” one senior Trump adviser told me. Sources said Trump himself may not be aware that members of his original team haven’t been offered jobs. With only about 40 West Wing positions available, Priebus is moving quickly to fill them with his choices.
Click to expand...
 
WFU Lurker said:
Let me put numbers to an example.

Let's say a partner at my firm makes 1m per year. He or she has the option of working four days a week for a proportional salary and takes that option. Now he or she makes 800k. In gross terms, the decision cost 200k. Come tax time though, his or her taxable income also fell by 200k so that the tax bill fell by 80k (200 times 40 percent). In exchange for giving up 120k in salary, he or she now has a day in his life back. That's why marginal tax rate is what matters for this discussion.

I never made a value judgment, other than perhaps high income earners should focus less on earning money (which equates to the marginal tax rate should be higher). From a fairness perspective, I have also consistently supported a progressive and transparent tax system. But you cannot ignore that incentives and taxes both impact behavior.

It is basic math, logic, and economics. Therefore it is fact. Not myth.
Click to expand...

Your math is off which makes your premise a myth.

At the heart of your premise is that that person would pay no taxes or 40% in taxes. It's about the DIFFERENCE in marginal tax rates being a disincentive.
 
 
ONW said:
Can we all agree that Reince Priebus is a complete D-bag? "Rex Tillerson is qualified to be the SOS because he is a preeminent business person who has business contacts in every country in the world."
Click to expand...

WFFaithful said:
Priebus is running the show and cutting out a lot of "Trump originals"
Click to expand...

Are there people who still think Trump is making these decisions? Lol that's cute
 
WFU Lurker said:
Let me put numbers to an example.

Let's say a partner at my firm makes 1m per year. He or she has the option of working four days a week for a proportional salary and takes that option. Now he or she makes 800k. In gross terms, the decision cost 200k. Come tax time though, his or her taxable income also fell by 200k so that the tax bill fell by 80k (200 times 40 percent). In exchange for giving up 120k in salary, he or she now has a day in his life back. That's why marginal tax rate is what matters for this discussion.

I never made a value judgment, other than perhaps high income earners should focus less on earning money (which equates to the marginal tax rate should be higher). From a fairness perspective, I have also consistently supported a progressive and transparent tax system. But you cannot ignore that incentives and taxes both impact behavior.

It is basic math, logic, and economics. Therefore it is fact. Not myth.
Click to expand...

So what is the actual problem with this?

Someone else will get paid to do it that work and pay taxes on the wages earned. There's no loss of productivity, maybe even no loss in the quality of work. Perhaps the overall taxes paid by your firm goes down if the person/people who do the work instead are at a lower tax bracket. But as the work trickles down, more people bill more hours and maybe down the line, the firm creates another job.
 
You want to see a real recession? Start a trade war with the largest importer of American goods.
 
PhDeac said:
So what is the actual problem with this?

Someone else will get paid to do it that work and pay taxes on the wages earned. There's no loss of productivity, maybe even no loss in the quality of work. Perhaps the overall taxes paid by your firm goes down if the person/people who do the work instead are at a lower tax bracket. But as the work trickles down, more people bill more hours and maybe down the line, the firm creates another job.
Click to expand...

That assumes the person picking up his slack would have been otherwise unemployed or underemployed. There is a loss of productivity from the first worker. When someone else picks up that slack, they cannot be working doing something else. You still have a loss of productivity unless you assume that the different worker would have been idle otherwise.
 
Yeah fully accept the loss, never mention Hillary again she is dead and buried and is no longer a security blanket for anger or the opposition. Most people voted for Hillary because Trump was so awful and his ideas were awful, now we are discussing his awful fucking ideas.
 
Trump going after the F35 is certainly interesting. On the one hand he seems eager to reign in some out of control government contracts, but on the other he clearly plans to spend more on defense.
 
knowell said:
That assumes the person picking up his slack would have been otherwise unemployed or underemployed. There is a loss of productivity from the first worker. When someone else picks up that slack, they cannot be working doing something else. You still have a loss of productivity unless you assume that the different worker would have been idle otherwise.
Click to expand...

Down the line? Sure. But work from that partner would be passed over to another partner and that partner's work may go to a slightly less senior partner and so forth and so on. At the bottom, perhaps there is a new job created.
 
Perry Said to Be Trump’s Top Candidate for Energy

rick-perry-dancing-gif.gif
 
The guy who wants to abolish the department, but couldn't remember the name of it?
 
Who knows if it's true, I just wanted an excuse to post that gif.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top