Fair enough, but do you notice that he opens the post with a comment about his credentials as a conservative, as if he’s saying “I know what I’m about to say will sound like heresy, but…”
I would suggest that he’s somewhat timid in his views because he knows he’d get a lot of flak for them amongst his peers.
[QUOTE=SenorBeef]
Does Martin Hyde self identify as a republican? For some reason I didn’t think he was even from the US.
[/QUOTE]
Well, he did say “We need the top AGI individuals in America…” which strongly implies he’s from the US. And he self identifies with a conservative view point. I suppose he COULD be some sort of 3rd party oriented individual, but I’d guess if he’s US and a self identified conservative he’s probably a Republican of one stripe or another. FWIW, I agree with that post entirely, though I’m most definitely NOT a Republican.
-XT
I’ve wanted to start a thread (perhaps in this very forum 
) to advocate
Often, Anecdote is the singular of data
I understand the proprieties of statistics, dangers of bias, and need for double-blind experimentation. Yet enlightened extrapolation from personal data is often useful, indeed may outperform published estimates. (An example arose in a thread where a former homeless child gave prostitution population estimates based on personal experience; Dopers laughed at her, instead citing obviously-flawed, but “published”, data.)
As an example of almost-deliberate stupidity, I’d give Shodan’s dismissal of anecdotes in his screeds against AA. I don’t think he insulted my mother intentionally, instead it’s just another example of his almost-deliberate stupidity.
You compared my mother to Laetrile. If it makes you feel better, I didn’t feel you were thinking to insult … just not thinking at all.
I’ve stopped reading his posts, because they are predictably partisan and idiotic. Even in topics where I see he responded to me, I just reply back by guessing what he probably said. Then I read his post for confirmation if I got it right. More often than not, I am.
Personally, I think his Alzheimer’s is kicking in so I think of him as the lovable racist grandpa you can’t take seriously, nor can you smother with a pillow when he’s passed out from constipation
Gee, most of us just think that it’s bad tax policy to have Romney’s income to be taxed at a low rate because of things like the carried interest deduction or the low rate for capital gains. We feel that the policy in these areas should be adjusted. We were having an interesting conversation about this, listening to pros and cons about tax policy. There is room for an adult discussion about it.
Then you keep bringing up this “evil” crap. It’s sad and immature.
Interestingly, most people can hold two ideas in thier minds simultaneously:
[QUOTE=SenorBeef]
I would suggest that he’s somewhat timid in his views because he knows he’d get a lot of flak for them amongst his peers.
[/QUOTE]
On this board? Which of his ‘conservative’ peers (I don’t actually know many self identified Republicans on this board, to be honest) would disagree with him to such an extent that he’d need to be timid with a reply like that? I can’t see Bricker or Sam Stone or any of the other ‘conservative’ 'dopers taking him to task for saying stuff like in that post, or in the rest of that thread, to be honest. Mace is considered in some circles here to be ‘conservative’ and I’d bet he pretty much agrees with a lot of that. I’m considered ‘conservative’ too, and had I seen that thread I most likely would have quoted it and just said something along the lines of ‘what Martin Hyde’ said. I actually have no idea what Shodan would have said about it…my guess is nothing, though I could be wrong there. Who else would he be ducking flak from around here? Airman Doors? Certainly not him.
-XT
I didn’t read it that way, and his is the majority view among self-described Republicans.
You are confusing Republican law makers with Republican voters.
Fair enough, I’ll concede the point.
I wasn’t making up the arguments I’ve had in which poor struggling people argued extremely strongly in favor of extending the bush tax cuts, yet actually defended the idea of ending payroll tax cuts. So it’s a prevalent attitude, just not a universal one.
There’s a populist sentiment running through the entire country right now, and that means “tax the rich” is definitely in play, not just in left wing circles.
My own position is a bit different from Martin’s. I would certainly favor getting rid of the “carried interest” loophole. I would also get rid of the AMT rate of 15% for dividends and capital gains. AMT should be AMT, and all income should be treated the same for that purpose. I would not go for a rate increase without significant spending cuts (and I’d go after the defense budget with a axe). I would note that while I am hesitant to raise taxes on any bracket, I wouldn’t claim that doing so would hurt the economy, as long as were talking about the range of increase that Obama suggests.
So, I’d say I’m not dogmatically opposed to raising taxes, but I would like to see it be done in conjunction with a lot of other stuff, and I would prefer more of an across the board increase than targeting certain groups. It doesn’t have to be evenly spread across all groups, but I don’t like the idea of 95% of Americans voting to raise taxes on the other 5%. Have some skin in the game if you’re going to raise someone else’s taxes. Not the truly poor, of course, but anyone who is more or less comfortable. Where you draw that line exactly is not too important to me, as long it’s a significant portion of the income tax paying public.
He didn’t compare your mother to Laetrile. Do you find yourself habitually losing arguments with houseplants? :smack:
FYI, “skin in the game” is among the most retarded catchphrases since the dawn of catchphrases, especially when bandied about by people (not John Mace) who keep vast amounts of their money offshore. It makes my slappin’ hand itchy. Everyone who lives here has “skin in the game”.
Here are some fun anagrams for “Regards, Shodan”
Groaned Shards
Harass Red Dong
Dad Shag Snorer
Ass Horn, Graded
Darned Gross, Ha!
Dads Ho Rangers
Grander Ass, Doh!
For what it’s worth, Shodan makes me smile and has a few good zingers now and then.
I don’t see why we’d have to raise taxes on everyone at once in what seems like an almost punitive measure (“fine, you want more taxes? eat this”). The diminishing marginal value of every additional dollar still exists.
Besides, lower classes do have a vested interest in it anyway, right? I mean, if we raise taxes on the Job Creators, there will be no one to create jobs, because they’ll all quit what they’re doing and decide to be a hobo rather than pay 2% more tax. So there’s apparently a strong disincentive to increase taxes on them anyway…
Ass Horn,
Graded
And if we do accept the premise, those paying 25% have demonstrably more skin in the game already than those paying 15%.
I like it. And if you don’t pay income taxes, you don’t have any skin in the income tax game.
[QUOTE=John Mace]
There’s a populist sentiment running through the entire country right now, and that means “tax the rich” is definitely in play, not just in left wing circles.
[/QUOTE]
Sure. Your earlier cite seems to back this up, even in Republican circles. The devil in the details being how much of a raise, on who exactly, for what purpose exactly, and whether there would be consummate cuts to go along with the increases.
Agreed. I don’t think that is radically different from what Martin was saying there…certainly not to the extent that he’d be in fear of his life or reputation for posting it to avoid your wrath.
Again, as I’ve said in other threads, I agree. The devil, as always, is in the details, and I might (or might not) disagree with you on some of those, but broadly I’d say we are pretty close. And based on what Martin said in that post you quoted I don’t think he’s off in left field either. And I’d guess, based on my own take from real Republicans (such as my father), that depending on those details that there would be less opposition to raising taxes than seems to be generally assumed…if there were real, meaningful spending and entitlement cuts to go along with them and for the purposes of lowering the deficit and overall debt.
-XT
Hey, it’s America, you’re welcome to embrace any stupid thing you like. But as previously mentioned, if the argument is that tax increases would cause the job creators to take their balls and go home thus leading to further unemployment among the poor, then you can’t also argue that the poor are unaffected by income taxes. Pick one.
[QUOTE=DianaG]
Hey, it’s America, you’re welcome to embrace any stupid thing you like. But as previously mentioned, if the argument is that tax increases would cause the job creators to take their balls and go home thus leading to further unemployment among the poor, then you can’t also argue that the poor are unaffected by income taxes. Pick one.
[/QUOTE]
You are talking about two different things here. John is talking about INCOME taxes with his ‘skin in the game’ thingy, which, as noted in several threads along these lines, the ‘rich’ don’t really pay. You seem to be talking about capital gains taxes and the like in the second part of this, and some other standard meme about balls and home, which is completely different.
But hey…it’s America, and you can say whatever you like, right? 
-XT
I’m not. I’ve many times heard the argument that small business owners won’t hire if they have to pay more income taxes.
[QUOTE=DianaG]
I’m not. I’ve many times heard the argument that small business owners won’t hire if they have to pay more income taxes.
[/QUOTE]
I’m not sure who you heard that from, but they were, um, incorrect. The taxes small business owners are worried about and what holds them back from hiring (and that IS a real issue) aren’t income taxes (more payroll taxes, social security, etc…stuff like that), by and large. And this is a third issue really, separate from the skin in the game thingy John brought up and the capital gains thingy that might stifle investment, but isn’t the reason small business owners would curtail hiring.
All of this stuff is related, which is why it’s a bad idea to just randomly push tax buttons and do easy fixes for all our problems by soaking ‘the rich’ (or, just giving them large tax breaks across the board or even vertically…contrary to popular belief among some, this isn’t a fix all either).
-XT