cougarguard.com — unofficial BYU Cougars / LDS sports, football, basketball forum and message board  

Go Back   cougarguard.com — unofficial BYU Cougars / LDS sports, football, basketball forum and message board > non-Sports > Home Improvement and Real Estate

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-05-2007, 02:49 PM   #21
BigFatMeanie
Senior Member
 
BigFatMeanie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: South Jordan
Posts: 1,725
BigFatMeanie is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Detroitdad View Post
You are okay with some people paying more as long as it is not you? You are human after all. I have had my doubts about that for a long time.

I am against any form of regressive taxation, period. Equality in taxation, in strict, percentage of disposable income would not be horrible. But progressive taxation, of the least oppressive ilk (smallest breadth of spread between highest and lowest brackets) is the most desirable.
I take issue with you calling something that promotes equality or fairness "regressive". I take issue with people of a certain political persuasion choosing to label their ideas as "progressive" and my ideas as regressive. I hereby opt those labels for myself. I am progressive, my ideals are progressive, my flat tax ideas are progressive - any idea you espouse is hereby regressive.

See how easy it is to manipulate language to give yourself a sense of moral superiority?
BigFatMeanie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2007, 05:09 PM   #22
Detroitdad
Resident Jackass
 
Detroitdad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Roswell, New Mexico
Posts: 1,846
Detroitdad is an unknown quantity at this point
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigFatMeanie View Post
I take issue with you calling something that promotes equality or fairness "regressive". I take issue with people of a certain political persuasion choosing to label their ideas as "progressive" and my ideas as regressive. I hereby opt those labels for myself. I am progressive, my ideals are progressive, my flat tax ideas are progressive - any idea you espouse is hereby regressive.

See how easy it is to manipulate language to give yourself a sense of moral superiority?
Your point is well taken, but inapplicable. In the parlance of economics a tax is progressive if the weight of the tax falls on higher income earners (thereby pushing progressively higher tax rates as you go up the income ladder). A regressive tax is one that falls more heavily on those with lesser incomes (a gasoline tax and a sales tax, unmodified to account for income are examples). These are the terms in general use in the world of economics. They are not my terms.

By its very nature taxation is either progressive or regressive, except at the point of absolute balance. The real test is what level of progressivity or regressivity is inherent in tax policy. For instance, the flat taxers advocate a regressive taxation system with progressive features (like allowing certain items or income to be exempted), while the system we currently have is a progressive system with (mostly) regressive features such as deductions for home mortgage interest, charitable contributions, etc.

You can feel free of course to call my ideas regressive, but these are not my ideas. If you do call me regressive I will be sad and think that you are a big, fat meanie.
Detroitdad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2007, 07:59 PM   #23
BigFatMeanie
Senior Member
 
BigFatMeanie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: South Jordan
Posts: 1,725
BigFatMeanie is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Detroitdad View Post
Your point is well taken, but inapplicable. In the parlance of economics a tax is progressive if the weight of the tax falls on higher income earners (thereby pushing progressively higher tax rates as you go up the income ladder). A regressive tax is one that falls more heavily on those with lesser incomes (a gasoline tax and a sales tax, unmodified to account for income are examples). These are the terms in general use in the world of economics. They are not my terms.

By its very nature taxation is either progressive or regressive, except at the point of absolute balance. The real test is what level of progressivity or regressivity is inherent in tax policy. For instance, the flat taxers advocate a regressive taxation system with progressive features (like allowing certain items or income to be exempted), while the system we currently have is a progressive system with (mostly) regressive features such as deductions for home mortgage interest, charitable contributions, etc.

You can feel free of course to call my ideas regressive, but these are not my ideas. If you do call me regressive I will be sad and think that you are a big, fat meanie.
I prefer to use the term "graduated" if the weight of the tax increases in proportionality to the thing being taxed (i.e. the constant of proportionality is > 1) Also, in my vocabulary a flat tax is not "regressive" - it is "proportional" (i.e. it's constant of proportionality is 1).

The terms progressive/regressive may be common but the fact that they are irritates me because they are loaded terms. Progressive has a positive connotation to it while regressive has a negative connotation to it. Technical terms without a positive/negative connotation obviously exist (e.g. we can discuss tax rates as having a constant of proportionality greater than, less than, or equal to one) so why aren't they used? In my opinion, the fact that the terms progressive/regressive are in common use among economists (as opposed to technical terms without underlying connotations) does not make them valid. Instead, I consider the common usage of the terms progressive/regressive a testament to politicization and enforcing of ideologies within the field of economics.

Quote:
'When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in a rather scornful tone,' it means just what I choose it to mean, neither more nor less.'

'The question is,' said Alice, 'whether you can make words mean so many different things.'

'The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, 'which is to be master - that's all.'
I'm on a quest to make my meaning of words be master.
BigFatMeanie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2007, 11:29 PM   #24
Cali Coug
Senior Member
 
Cali Coug's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 5,996
Cali Coug has a little shameless behaviour in the past
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by UteStar View Post
The best piece of advice that I got when we bought our first house was to sit tight and do nothing drastic for the first 6 months. After 6 months, you will be comfortable with your home and see what you like and dislike. Getting rid of a living room will hurt your case especially if there is really no place to sit on the first floor except in a formal dining room. A nice spacious kitchen is awesome but it will be a setback without any real living space on that floor.

Odessa. Man, I used to do some work in Midland and Odessa. Not my dream area though I met a lot of good people there.
Probably true. Mrs. Cali doesn't like the idea anyways, so that pretty much means it won't happen!
Cali Coug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-21-2007, 07:04 PM   #25
NorCal Cat
Senior Member
 
NorCal Cat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Where do you think?
Posts: 1,201
NorCal Cat
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by surfah33 View Post
I don't think your plans would create more equity in your home. I don't know of many people who would take a formal dining room over a living room.
I agree. I wouldn't expand your kitchen if it means sacrificing your living room for a formal dining room. Updating your kitchen though, if it needs it, is usually the best thing you can do to add value to your home.
NorCal Cat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2007, 03:12 PM   #26
Mormon Red Death
Senior Member
 
Mormon Red Death's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Clinton Township, MI
Posts: 3,126
Mormon Red Death is an unknown quantity at this point
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Detroitdad View Post
You are okay with some people paying more as long as it is not you? You are human after all. I have had my doubts about that for a long time.

I am against any form of regressive taxation, period. Equality in taxation, in strict, percentage of disposable income would not be horrible. But progressive taxation, of the least oppressive ilk (smallest breadth of spread between highest and lowest brackets) is the most desirable.
You are a pinko commie...
__________________
Its all about the suit
Mormon Red Death is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:54 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.