Trump

[bgovolfan]

Aug 21, 2018 11:32:16 GMT -5 Walter said:

Aug 21, 2018 11:02:18 GMT -5 bgovolfan said:

Really not trying to be a smart ass BUT...you have no answer or opinion yet you still bitch.
IMO with you, and most politicians, it's more of a political football than anything else.

Bg(nothing personal)VolFan

To use a football analogy, I may not know much about how to be a quarterback, but I can still tell you that pulling Tom Brady and replacing him with a scatter-armed QB like, say, Tim Tebow, with the game on the line is a bad idea.
So yeah, I get to bitch when, with 4% unemployment and 3+% GDP growth, Republicans decide to put in Tebow.

IOW you know enough about Brady and Tebow to have an opinion but when it comes to taxes...not so much

Bg(but boy can I bitch)VolFan

[Deleted]

    The debate about the "fairness" or "unfairness" of graduated income tax rates is, essentially, a debate about social ethics.

    In the philosophy of social ethics, there are two basic principles-- deontology and utilitarianism.

    Deontology is about "rights."

    Utilitarianism is a philosophical concept (from the philosophers John Stuart Mill and Jeremy Bentham) about optimizing the public good.

    There is no scientific or analytic "proof" that defines "fairness."  It boils down to ethical judgment.

    Harvard philosopher John Rawls developed a philosophical paradigm for making such judgments in his magnum opus, A Theory of Justice.

    Proceed, trolls.

-- W.F. Wunderlich/ August 21, 2018

[Walter]

Aug 21, 2018 12:08:43 GMT -5 DrSchadenfreude said:

    The debate about the "fairness" or "unfairness" of graduated income tax rates is, essentially, a debate about social ethics.

    In the philosophy of social ethics, there are two basic principles-- deontology and utilitarianism.

    Deontology is about "rights."

    Utilitarianism is a philosophical concept (from the philosophers John Stuart Mill and Jeremy Bentham) about optimizing the public good.

    There is no scientific or analytic "proof" that defines "fairness."  It boils down to ethical judgment.

    Harvard philosopher John Rawls developed a philosophical paradigm for making such judgments in his magnum opus, A Theory of Justice.

    Proceed, trolls.

-- W.F. Wunderlich/ August 21, 2018

I am then arguing that "utilitarianism" should be the main driver of tax rates.
Thanks for the clarification.

[oujour76]

Aug 21, 2018 12:25:14 GMT -5 Walter said:

Aug 21, 2018 12:08:43 GMT -5 DrSchadenfreude said:

    The debate about the "fairness" or "unfairness" of graduated income tax rates is, essentially, a debate about social ethics.

    In the philosophy of social ethics, there are two basic principles-- deontology and utilitarianism.

    Deontology is about "rights."

    Utilitarianism is a philosophical concept (from the philosophers John Stuart Mill and Jeremy Bentham) about optimizing the public good.

    There is no scientific or analytic "proof" that defines "fairness."  It boils down to ethical judgment.

    Harvard philosopher John Rawls developed a philosophical paradigm for making such judgments in his magnum opus, A Theory of Justice.

    Proceed, trolls.

-- W.F. Wunderlich/ August 21, 2018

I am then arguing that "utilitarianism" should be the main driver of tax rates.
Thanks for the clarification.

Can't wait for the bumper sticker..."Utilitarianism says the rich should pay more in taxes."

[Walter]

Aug 21, 2018 12:48:33 GMT -5 oujour76 said:

Aug 21, 2018 12:25:14 GMT -5 Walter said:

I am then arguing that "utilitarianism" should be the main driver of tax rates.
Thanks for the clarification.

Can't wait for the bumper sticker..."Utilitarianism says the rich should pay more in taxes."

Oh, I forgot to mention...I'm starting a new Political party.
The Utilitarian Party.
We are the Utilitarians!

Join us!
We hate the Judean People's Front.

[oujour76]

Aug 21, 2018 13:00:27 GMT -5 Walter said:

Aug 21, 2018 12:48:33 GMT -5 oujour76 said:

Can't wait for the bumper sticker..."Utilitarianism says the rich should pay more in taxes."

Oh, I forgot to mention...I'm starting a new Political party.
The Utilitarian Party.
We are the Utilitarians!

Join us!
We hate the Judean People's Front.

Catchy...if that architect thing doesn't work out, you can always be a Hollywood screenwriter.

[daleko]

Aug 21, 2018 12:25:14 GMT -5 Walter said:

Aug 21, 2018 12:08:43 GMT -5 DrSchadenfreude said:

    The debate about the "fairness" or "unfairness" of graduated income tax rates is, essentially, a debate about social ethics.

    In the philosophy of social ethics, there are two basic principles-- deontology and utilitarianism.

    Deontology is about "rights."

    Utilitarianism is a philosophical concept (from the philosophers John Stuart Mill and Jeremy Bentham) about optimizing the public good.

    There is no scientific or analytic "proof" that defines "fairness."  It boils down to ethical judgment.

    Harvard philosopher John Rawls developed a philosophical paradigm for making such judgments in his magnum opus, A Theory of Justice.

    Proceed, trolls.

-- W.F. Wunderlich/ August 21, 2018

I am then arguing that "utilitarianism" should be the main driver of tax rates.
Thanks for the clarification.

 Apply it in just once aspect of society, do you suggest? FTWIW, there are as many definitions for "utilitarianism" as there are for "socialism".  There's a ying/yang to everything. Including socialism, utilitarianism and taxation. 

[Walter]

Aug 21, 2018 13:54:29 GMT -5 daleko said:

Aug 21, 2018 12:25:14 GMT -5 Walter said:

I am then arguing that "utilitarianism" should be the main driver of tax rates.
Thanks for the clarification.

 Apply it in just once aspect of society, do you suggest? FTWIW, there are as many definitions for "utilitarianism" as there are for "socialism".  There's a ying/yang to everything. Including socialism, utilitarianism and taxation. 

Apply it as a global concept about the nature of taxation as opposed to the idea of a "fair" tax.
As I said up the thread, if 99% top marginal rate in some bizarre way somehow ends up maximizing GDP growth, HEY, then let's do it. If 1% does it, then we should that.

Obviously, that's where the political fight resides, but that is as it should be, no?

[daleko]

Aug 21, 2018 14:05:27 GMT -5 Walter said:

Aug 21, 2018 13:54:29 GMT -5 daleko said:

 Apply it in just once aspect of society, do you suggest? FTWIW, there are as many definitions for "utilitarianism" as there are for "socialism".  There's a ying/yang to everything. Including socialism, utilitarianism and taxation. 

Apply it as a global concept about the nature of taxation as opposed to the idea of a "fair" tax.
As I said up the thread, if 99% top marginal rate in some bizarre way somehow ends up maximizing GDP growth, HEY, then let's do it. If 1% does it, then we should that.

Obviously, that's where the political fight resides, but that is as it should be, no?

No. 1, I'm glad you have left the, "what is fair" argument, for anything, in your rear view mirror. I'll try to recall that going forward, should that concept pop up again. What did a 90% marginal rate do in the 50s w the net tax obligation? Lower then than today. 99% <shrug> Be it far for me to put words in your post but is what you're saying is that there is a ying and yang to every decision? A balance, in what is our system of .gov, our economic system. Take empathy or altruism out of the equation? Are you suggesting that our tax structure and system is totally screwed up, beyond complicated, bedded into politics? If so, we agree.

[Walter]

Aug 21, 2018 14:22:39 GMT -5 daleko said:

Aug 21, 2018 14:05:27 GMT -5 Walter said:

Apply it as a global concept about the nature of taxation as opposed to the idea of a "fair" tax.
As I said up the thread, if 99% top marginal rate in some bizarre way somehow ends up maximizing GDP growth, HEY, then let's do it. If 1% does it, then we should that.

Obviously, that's where the political fight resides, but that is as it should be, no?

No. 1, I'm glad you have left the, "what is fair" argument, for anything, in your rear view mirror. I'll try to recall that going forward, should that concept pop up again. What did a 90% marginal rate do in the 50s w the net tax obligation? Lower then than today. 99% <shrug> Be it far for me to put words in your post but is what you're saying is that there is a ying and yang to every decision? A balance, in what is our system of .gov, our economic system. Take empathy or altruism out of the equation? Are you suggesting that our tax structure and system is totally screwed up, beyond complicated, bedded into politics? If so, we agree.

Yes, a good and a bad. I like the analogy of eminent domain. Some folks will be treated unfairly to build that new freeway, (or whatever), but the greater good is the prime mover.
Prime example: When LAX started having the early 707s land, the jet noise was a major problem for residents in the flight path, particularly for a small seaside community between the runway and the ocean. As jets throttled up on takeoff, it was deafening. The residents complained. After trying to figure out how to fix the problem, the city ended up condemning the entire town, bought all the houses and tore down everything.

In the pic, you can still see the streets.



Now picture that little town as, say, the top 1% of taxpayers, for example.
Ying and yang.

[Deleted]

Aug 21, 2018 15:31:53 GMT -5 Walter said:

Now picture that little town as, say, the top 1% of taxpayers, for example.
Ying and yang.

Not quite sure what that has to do with anything, but whatever.

[daleko]

Aug 21, 2018 15:31:53 GMT -5 Walter said:

Now picture that little town as, say, the top 1% of taxpayers, for example.
Ying and yang.

Yep and in that world, they ended up moving to the Beaches Community, you know well. Watching beach volleyball, playing the guitar and smoking a Cuban, while drinking Pappy's. It all worked out for them. Can I hear an AMEN!

[Deleted]

wALT has Pappy's??
Time for road trip to L.A.!

[Walter]

Aug 21, 2018 16:30:45 GMT -5 @kelliers said:

wALT has Pappy's??
Time for road trip to L.A.!

My little local liquor store actually sells the stuff.
Every time I go in there I ask how many have sold.
In about 9 months he's sold 4 bottles. We both shake our heads in unison and wonder, "Why so many?".

[Deleted]

Aug 21, 2018 18:16:14 GMT -5 Walter said:

Aug 21, 2018 16:30:45 GMT -5 @kelliers said:

wALT has Pappy's??
Time for road trip to L.A.!

My little local liquor store actually sells the stuff.
Every time I go in there I ask how many have sold.
In about 9 months he's sold 4 bottles. We both shake our heads in unison and wonder, "Why so many?".

Obviously not the Pappy's daleko and I are talking about...