and before you jump all over me yes i realize that the tax code is based on marginal income and not straight percentage, either way though the conclusion holds.
You either didn't understand what the first poster was trying to say, or are an idiot. Perhaps you should go back t ECON-101, or better yet, 2nd grade math.
Lets do a little experiment
20 people in the country
1 makes $5,000,000 (5%)
19 each make $10,000 (95%)
People above 100,000 pay 44% of their income
People below pay 30% of their income
Top 5% pay (1,000,000 *.44) = $440,000 or 88% of the total
Bottom 95% pay (19 * 10,000 *.30) = $57,000 or 11% of the total
These numbers are completely made up but show how the top 5% of income earners could pay for the majority of taxes
Maybe your school needs more of the accountability Bush keeps talking about.
you are right that it is not illegal for someone to being socialist in the US. I believe that if a group of socialists within the US decided to form a group that would pool their assets, income, etc. that they could do that, i'm sure some people do but i can't think of a good example, the problem is that us capitalists don't want to be forced into socialism, as far as i care if someone can't provide food, shelter, etc for themselves. and can't convince others to help them out then sure, let em starve. people don't have some inherent right to what you call the essentials of life. (btw, very few actually starve here)
This is why we have a saying here at my work.
"canadians suck"
So, are you going to vote for gore or nader? or someone else? my point is that i want people like you to waste your vote. so go ahead, make my day, vote for nader.
Just to clarify, i don't like gore OR nader, thats why i want nader to get some votes so he drags gore and future democrats down too!!! there is no danger of him actually WINNING so i don't mind how many votes he gets, and if getting a large enough support base means that green party candidates get into the debates from now on, GOOD, all it will accomplish is dragging down future democratic candidates for pres. which is my ultimate goal.
I consider myself a small "L" libertarian who doesn't want to waste his vote in such a close election. so i'm going with Bush, however if it looked like it wasn't such a close election i think i'd have to vote for nader.
Why? because i can only hope that his party gets their "= billing" in the next election and is able to split the vote of the democrats in two for a couple years, giving the republications a greater majority than they have, so if you like what nader has to say AT ALL, please vote for him.
(my first post on/. ever, although i've read it nearly every day for 2 years.)
Slashdot Mirror
and before you jump all over me yes i realize that the tax code is based on marginal income and not straight percentage, either way though the conclusion holds.
You either didn't understand what the first poster was trying to say, or are an idiot. Perhaps you should go back t ECON-101, or better yet, 2nd grade math. .44) = $440,000 or 88% of the total
.30) = $57,000 or 11% of the total
Lets do a little experiment
20 people in the country
1 makes $5,000,000 (5%)
19 each make $10,000 (95%)
People above 100,000 pay 44% of their income
People below pay 30% of their income
Top 5% pay (1,000,000 *
Bottom 95% pay (19 * 10,000 *
These numbers are completely made up but show how the top 5% of income earners could pay for the majority of taxes
Maybe your school needs more of the accountability Bush keeps talking about.
you are right that it is not illegal for someone to being socialist in the US. I believe that if a group of socialists within the US decided to form a group that would pool their assets, income, etc. that they could do that, i'm sure some people do but i can't think of a good example, the problem is that us capitalists don't want to be forced into socialism, as far as i care if someone can't provide food, shelter, etc for themselves. and can't convince others to help them out then sure, let em starve. people don't have some inherent right to what you call the essentials of life. (btw, very few actually starve here)
This is why we have a saying here at my work.
"canadians suck"
So, are you going to vote for gore or nader? or someone else? my point is that i want people like you to waste your vote. so go ahead, make my day, vote for nader.
Just to clarify, i don't like gore OR nader, thats why i want nader to get some votes so he drags gore and future democrats down too!!! there is no danger of him actually WINNING so i don't mind how many votes he gets, and if getting a large enough support base means that green party candidates get into the debates from now on, GOOD, all it will accomplish is dragging down future democratic candidates for pres. which is my ultimate goal.
I consider myself a small "L" libertarian who doesn't want to waste his vote in such a close election. so i'm going with Bush, however if it looked like it wasn't such a close election i think i'd have to vote for nader. Why? because i can only hope that his party gets their "= billing" in the next election and is able to split the vote of the democrats in two for a couple years, giving the republications a greater majority than they have, so if you like what nader has to say AT ALL, please vote for him. (my first post on /. ever, although i've read it nearly every day for 2 years.)