• 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!

President Obama to propose 2 years of free community college for all students

PhDeac said:
jhmd, can you list the entitlements that require no effort? Don't give hypotheticals. Just as they are created, which entitlements require no effort whatsoever?
Click to expand...

When the government sends you a check for not being employed.
 
PH - would love to see you respond to the real issue. Why is our current system insufficient for any under privileged youth that desires to attend community college?

Is 5700 less than 4000?
 
jhmd2000 said:
Pours coffee, logs on, checks the OGB....

Soft, millennial rich kids struggling to ascertain the differences between earning things, being given things and being able to take things from other people?
Yep, soft, millennial rich kids struggling to ascertain the differences between earning things, being given things and being able to take things from other people.

SNAFU. And....scene.
Click to expand...

OASDI payments are based on earnings. Paul Ryan's family's survivors benefits were tied to his late father's earnings. Disability payments are related to previous salary. If you have a problem with that, it's your own fault for coming up with a shitty definition of what's not an entitlement.
 
ImTheCaptain said:
agree with PH, free money is free money. just because you had to "risk" or "invest" capital doesn't make it not-free. It just means it was available to you to begin with. Is writing off a capital loss not an entitlement? That one is more of a head-scratcher than the child deduction
Click to expand...

So it is not work to research and determine which investment is likely to earn more (and hopefully not lose a ton of) money? How is that any different than a host of other jobs involving research for a variety of things? Just because you are doing it for yourself in exchange for the profits as opposed to doing it for the man for a W-2, or doing it at 11pm instead of 9-5? That makes no sense.

And with regard to writing off a capital loss, our tax system is an income tax system. That means you pay a tax number calculated off of the amount of your income; so if you have less income, then you pay less tax. And if your position is that a capital loss is not a reduction of income (because it is free money) generating a lower tax, then a capital gain should not be an addition of income to raise your tax. You can't have it one way and not the other.

ETA: And, because you're in full blown Kramer mode, you don't "write off" a capital loss. Capital gains and capital losses are netted against each other to determine the total amount of capital gain or loss for the year. If it is a net gain, you pay tax on it. If it is a net loss, subject to very minimal limitations, you can't use that loss against ordinary income, so you just eat it.

 
Last edited:
PhDeac said:
jhmd, can you list the entitlements that require no effort? Don't give hypotheticals. Just as they are created, which entitlements require no effort whatsoever?
Click to expand...

I almost said WIC but then I remembered that carrying a baby to term and raising it is quite an endeavor.
 
The last two pages are emblematic of the level of political discourse in this country. We can't even talk about public policy without reducing it all to a "bad word" like "entitlements" and then arguing about whether the policy is or is not within the definition of the "bad word". Come on.
 
The problem, dearest Tuffalo, is when the UI is extended past the original "earned" benefit, and becomes a daisy chain of dependency far beyond the "earnings" portion.

The real problem is that you think this ultimately helps people. In the long run, the evidence is clear enough that "something for nothing" checks end up three generations down the line with the frazzled liberals who championed their initial passage having to explain why entire swaths of our country are being left behind (spoiler alert: they don't think it's their fault!). Don't argue with me, argue with the fifth rotation of the dependency cycle you guys set into motion.
 
SNAP requires one to fill out an application and verify information. You need a tax return to do it. Filling out a tax return takes effort. I think jhmd is saying there are no entitlements.
 
TuffaloDeac10 said:
Excellent point. UI is based on having worked in the period before claiming it and job searching while on it. Also not an entitlement per your own definition.
Click to expand...

Yeah I don't see UI as an entitlement because you have earned it through previous labor. Food stamps are an entitlement and a good one. All entitlements are not bad, but it is a ridiculous notion to claim that reducing someone's tax burden is an entitlement. That is ridiculous. If reducing taxes is an entitlement that would mean that government has a God given right to a certain percentage of everyone's income. Which is basically what we fought against to start this country.
 
TuffaloDeac10 said:
SNAP requires one to fill out an application and verify information. You need a tax return to do it. Filling out a tax return takes effort. I think jhmd is saying there are no entitlements.
Click to expand...

I think Tuffalo is making a disingenuous argument because his genuine ones have failed with catastrophic effect.
 
2&2 Slider To Leyritz said:
So it is not work to research and determine which investment is likely to earn more (and hopefully not lose a ton of) money? How is that any different than a host of other jobs involving research for a variety of things? Just because you are doing it for yourself in exchange for the profits as opposed to doing it for the man for a W-2, or doing it at 11pm instead of 9-5? That makes no sense.

And with regard to writing off a capital loss, our tax system is an income tax system. That means you pay a tax number calculated off of the amount of your income; so if you have less income, then you pay less tax. And if your position is that a capital loss is not a reduction of income (because it is free money) generating a lower tax, then a capital gain should not be an addition of income to raise your tax. You can't have it one way and not the other.
Click to expand...

The number of people in this country who actually do any work analyzing their own personal investments, as opposed to paying the financial industry exorbitant fees to (allegedly) do that work on their behalf, is very small. Those that do it are usually not very good at it, and a lot of research indicates that stock picking is little more than gambling and you would almost universally be better off parking your cash in a low-fee index fund.

Nonetheless, if we assume that the work of researching stocks and taking risks with your money is in fact work, and equivalent to ditch digging, that begs the question of why that work is rewarded with tax rates several notches lower than the rate imposed on ditch digging, or lawyering, or architecture, or medicine, especially when the impact of OASDI, SSI, and state and local taxes are included in the effective rate.
 
Wrangor said:
Yeah I don't see UI as an entitlement because you have earned it through previous labor. Food stamps are an entitlement and a good one. All entitlements are not bad, but it is a ridiculous notion to claim that reducing someone's tax burden is an entitlement. That is ridiculous. If reducing taxes is an entitlement that would mean that government has a God given right to a certain percentage of everyone's income. Which is basically what we fought against to start this country.
Click to expand...

There's literally nothing in the declaration about the size of the tax burden, just that it wasn't consented to. There are more words about immigration than taxes.
 
Liquid Karma said:
From the group of people that came up with the euphemism "spending through the tax code."

Don't spend years talking about shifting the tax burden to the 1% to benefit the poor and then marginalize the upper middle class by removing a plan that encourages them to save for college. While families in that 150-200k range are certainly comfortable, we are by no means wealthy. This income group will see little to no financial aid (outside of student loans) to send their kids to increasingly more expensive colleges, and the 529 plan, while a small time investment vehicle to help them save, is better than nothing. Until recent legislation that finally started indexing the AMT to inflation, they got smoked by the AMT on an annual basis as well. There is a huge gap between the poor/middle class and the wealthy in this country. That means there are a lot of people stuck in between, and they have phased out of almost every meaningful deduction other than the mortgage interest deduction. They make too much to receive many breaks from the tax code, but don't make enough to rape and pillage the tax code the way the truly wealthy do. They don't need any more help, but they really don't need any more of the burden shifted to them by taking any more from them than is already being done.

You'll get zero argument from me that the poor get shit on in this country. I'm all for tax changes that alleviate their burden and improve their situation, and there is a small group of ultra wealthy persons in this country with the means to subsidize that tax reform. It's the people who have made a fortune during the recession and for years before that at the expense of those who need the help the most. You will never hear me complain that it's unfair for the poor and middle class to have access to mortgage or student loan interest deductions (I do however question whether abolishing both would actually be better for everyone...reign in college and housing costs). You won't hear me complain about child care credits. What you will hear me complain about is a tax code that marginalizes the upper part of the middle class, particularly when people have to do mental gymnastics to proclaim that a tax advantaged college savings plan, where a person puts in their own already taxed dollars and can only withdraw it for a single purpose without paying a penalty, is an entitlement. It's not an entitlement, it's an inducement to encourage a specific responsible behavior and likely wouldn't need to exist if college costs weren't escalating out of control.

And I'm not trying to elicit pity for the poor poor upper middle class. I'm well aware, and more grateful than you can imagine, for what my wife and I have been able to build together. We are very fortunate and give back as much as we can over the course of the year, but I'm also admittedly very sensitive to issues that I feel affect my own situation.

Countdown until PhDeac reduces my entire position to "you only vote with your wallet then?"
Click to expand...

So you would like for someone other than yourself to pay for the programs you vote for? Seems reasonable. Don't see why your children should be allowed to continue to enjoy lavish birth advantages, though. We, as a society, are going to have to get rid of that 529 crap so that children will become astrophysicists instead of joining gangs.
 
Deacon923 said:
The number of people in this country who actually do any work analyzing their own personal investments, as opposed to paying the financial industry exorbitant fees to (allegedly) do that work on their behalf, is very small. Those that do it are usually not very good at it, and a lot of research indicates that stock picking is little more than gambling and you would almost universally be better off parking your cash in a low-fee index fund.

Nonetheless, if we assume that the work of researching stocks and taking risks with your money is in fact work, and equivalent to ditch digging, that begs the question of why that work is rewarded with tax rates several notches lower than the rate imposed on ditch digging, or lawyering, or architecture, or medicine, especially when the impact of OASDI, SSI, and state and local taxes are included in the effective rate.
Click to expand...

So the ditch digging contracting company that hires subcontractors to dig the ditch, that isn't work? Howabout the lawyer that hires an outside firm for document review? The architect who hires an engineer to look at a particular systems design? That is the same process as someone hiring a third party to manage their investments. And if it is not work, then great, as none of the proceeds would be subject to income tax.

And the investment work is rewarded with preferential tax treatment because long-term investment is a massive factor in what drove our economy to the top of the world; furthermore, the gambling day trader is not given any such treatment, as his short term gains are taxed the same as the ditch digger's W-2s.
 
To those of you who have somehow managed to miss why incentivizing the positive behavior of saving and investing to avoid crushing, nondischargeable student loan debt is a good tax expenditure, and subsidizing self-destructive choices like teenage, single parenthood and perpetual dependency is a bad behavior, I would encourage you to go out and meet more people. Maybe spend some time off-line. Can't hurt.
 
TuffaloDeac10 said:
It's not my fault that your own argument is so vulnerable to amateur deconstructionist trolling
Click to expand...

But let's be clear: it is your fault when the policies you advocate help lead to cyclical dependency. That is certainly your fault.
 
jhmd2000 said:
But let's be clear: it is your fault when the policies you advocate help lead to cyclical dependency. That is certainly your fault.
Click to expand...

I don't think I support any policies (at least not in the sense that they're my ideal policies) that cause dependency. UI could hardly do that as a 26-99 week program, and neither could Medicare-At-Birth. I don't think EITC or UBI or negative income taxation fit that bill. Bike lanes? C'mon, man! The Georgist land tax and zoning reform have nothing to do with dependency. And my favorite policy, workers seizing the means of production a la Anarchist Catalonia, is certainly not dependence on government! So I think you're lost.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top