The Top 1%

[orogenicman]

SM,

Thank you for the clean bill of health, but I'm still not doing clickage on orogefuglyfossil's site.

boe

That's because you are a troll. But you knew this already.

 

[SteadyMercury]

I said it was a possibility since javascript is vulnerable to malicious attacks, warnings of which have been out about this all year.

And I'm saying this is silly, it would be pointless to alert on a website just because it has javascript since you'd alert on almost every website thus rendering the alerts worthless noise.

HTML, javascript, and CSS are the fundamental building blocks of the modern web, the mere presence of any of them isn't going to trip any alerts.

 

[orogenicman]

And yet:

https://www.bit9.com/forms/adwords-...=2-Solutions&gclid=CNHM5pvJgrsCFfBDMgodjXkA8g

That's all I'm saying on the subject other than that there is no malicious software issue with the link I provided in the OP.

 

[SteadyMercury]

And yet:

https://www.bit9.com/forms/adwords-...=2-Solutions&gclid=CNHM5pvJgrsCFfBDMgodjXkA8g

Hah hah you still don't understand there is a difference between javascript and java, if you did you'd wouldn't continue bringing java vulnerabilities into a discussion about alerts happening because of javascript.

That's all I'm saying on the subject other than that there is no malicious software issue with the link I provided in the OP.

Agreed, it doesn't seem there is any malicious software in your link, and yes it is better you stop saying things on a subject you clearly have no clue about.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Fine. What you are telling me then is that you can't be bothered to even watch the video to find out what this thread is actually all about. In which case - TROLL!

I was warning my fellow users that the hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of security hardware and monitoring systems I employ identified that link as not safe due to malware.

Others can do with that information as they please.

 

[Uncensored2008]

None of which is malware, so STOP!!!

I'm not addressing whether it is malware, I'm merely pointing out your claim that merely having javascript will cause a site to be alerted on is ridiculous, since almost every site uses javascript.

I just ran the site you linked to through a few online diagnostic tools, they found 0 threats.

Besides, I stated clearly that the alert was from 7 subscribed RBL's. My Palo Alto Appliance blocks if more than 1 RBL tags a site.

 

[jasonnfree]

Quite frankly. Let's suppose your billionaire Has a $1,000,000,000/year salary. Of course he can afford to pay for food stamps for those less fortunate, but he is already paying enough in taxes to pay for the food stamps of about 3,000 people. He is paying to rebuild a quarter million Toyota transmissions or the salaries of the entire Congress for 3 years.... In return for what? What services worth a quarter billion dollars does he receive?

Does Chevrolet charge you more for a minivan than they do your neighbor who makes 10% less/year?

In return for what? For the roads that keep his business thriving. For all the other infrastructure. For the safety that our military, police and firefighters give him. For the cures for disease that our tax dollars make possible, and much more. For the joy in knowing that he helped 3,000 people who needed it. He isn't paying to rebuild a quarter of a million transmissions. That claim is clearly ludicrous.

Of course he isn't paying to rebuild transmissions, but you think he should pay for services that would allow others to.

Sure he enjoys the benefit of infrastructure. We all do, and in large part, we all benefit equally. Roads benefit everyone as in "provide for the common welfare"
Foodstamps, do not provide for the common welfare. They provide a service for a specific subset that our rich guy is excluded from.

And the use of the safety nets such as food stamps increases when the economy goes down. How do you know the billionaire is paying enough? Historically, the extremely wealthy are paying less in taxes.

 

[SteadyMercury]

Historically, the extremely wealthy are paying less in taxes.

I don't believe this.

Mitt Romney took a lot of heat for paying an effective tax rate of 14.1%, but he paid almost 2 million in taxes. Did you pay more than 2 million dollars in taxes?

 

[orogenicman]

Fine. What you are telling me then is that you can't be bothered to even watch the video to find out what this thread is actually all about. In which case - TROLL!

I was warning my fellow users that the hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of security hardware and monitoring systems I employ identified that link as not safe due to malware.

Others can do with that information as they please.

Can I give you some advice? You should ask for a refund, because - damn.

 

[orogenicman]

Historically, the extremely wealthy are paying less in taxes.

I don't believe this.

Mitt Romney took a lot of heat for paying an effective tax rate of 14.1%, but he paid almost 2 million in taxes. Did you pay more than 2 million dollars in taxes?

As we all know, the extremely wealthy get that way not via what they are paid in salary, but by their investments, i.e., capital gains. So if you look at capital gains taxes you will see that when Kennedy was president, Capital gains taxes were off the charts. And our Federal budget had a surplus, the economy was booming, and unemployment was very low. Fast forward to today - capital gains taxes are at historic lows, the rich are getting richer while everyone else is getting poorer, the economy is lame, and unemployment is high.

 

[SteadyMercury]

Fast forward to today - capital gains taxes are at historic lows, the rich are getting richer while everyone else is getting poorer, the economy is lame, and unemployment is high.

Capital gains taxes have been as low as 7%, and they were 20% in the early 80s.

For the wealthy in 2013 they are 20% + 3.8% surcharge = 23.8% which given above would not be a historic low.

Also, everyone else isn't getting poorer.

 

[Rshermr]

Fast forward to today - capital gains taxes are at historic lows, the rich are getting richer while everyone else is getting poorer, the economy is lame, and unemployment is high.

Capital gains taxes have been as low as 7%, and they were 20% in the early 80s.

For the wealthy in 2013 they are 20% + 3.8% surcharge = 23.8% which given above would not be a historic low.

Also, everyone else isn't getting poorer.

Uh, 7%???? When was that??? Rates have varied quite a bit, but were at about 29% from 1993 through 1996. Which was when the us economy was doing better than at pretty much any time in us history.
http://www.ctj.org/pdf/regcg.pdf

Not sure what your point is. But capital gains taxes do not have that major an effect on the economy in general. But lowering them generally has a good effect when aggregate demand is high, because companies then have an interest in investing in plant and equipment.

 

[Rshermr]

Historically, the extremely wealthy are paying less in taxes.

I don't believe this.

Mitt Romney took a lot of heat for paying an effective tax rate of 14.1%, but he paid almost 2 million in taxes. Did you pay more than 2 million dollars in taxes?

Well, me boy, the truth is that the wealthy ARE paying less in taxes than ever before. Here are a few articles that discuss the subject:
Top 1% Got 93% of Income Growth as Rich-Poor Gap Widened - Bloomberg

In the U.S., the Rich Are Getting Richer While the Poor Get Poorer -- Fusion.

The Rich Are Getting Richer And Everyone Else Is Getting Hosed - Business Insider

State of Working America preview: The rich get richer | Economic Policy Institute

Haves and have nots: America's rich get richer

A Look at the Numbers: How the Rich Get Richer | Mother Jones

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/26/opinion/the-rich-get-even-richer.html?_r=0

In This Recovery, the Rich Get Richer | Smart Charts, What Matters Today | BillMoyers.com

Why the Rich Are Getting Richer | Foreign Affairs

By the way, the issue is not how much Romney, or anyone else paid. It is the RATE. If you make a billion bucks, and pay $3M in taxes, then you apparently think that proves the wealthy are paying enough? Too much??? Jesus, that is a ignorant concept.

 

[SteadyMercury]

Uh, 7%???? When was that??? Rates have varied quite a bit, but were at about 29% from 1993 through 1996. Which was when the us economy was doing better than at pretty much any time in us history.

1913-1931 7%
1931-1934 12.5%

Not sure what your point is.

Capital gains for the wealthy, at 23.8%, are not at historic lows. See above.

 

[SteadyMercury]

Well, me boy, the truth is that the wealthy ARE paying less in taxes than ever before.

I'm not reading all those links you regurgitated, me boy, could you post the data showing the wealthy are paying less in taxes than ever before?

By the way, the issue is not how much Romney, or anyone else paid. It is the RATE. If you make a billion bucks, and pay $3M in taxes, then you apparently think that proves the wealthy are paying enough? Too much???

That is your issue apparently.

I'm interested in the claim the wealthy are paying less in taxes than ever before.

I've made no statement about whether $3M (or any amount) on a billion proves the wealthy are paying enough or too much, so I have no idea who you are arguing with there.

 

[Rshermr]

Uh, 7%???? When was that??? Rates have varied quite a bit, but were at about 29% from 1993 through 1996. Which was when the us economy was doing better than at pretty much any time in us history.

1913-1931 7%
1931-1934 12.5%

Not sure what your point is.

Capital gains for the wealthy, at 23.8%, are not at historic lows. See above.

Where is your source, me boy???? I gave you a good one, which, should you have checked it, would have proven that there was no 7% cap gains rate. Ever. Including in 1913. The rate varied between 15% and 72% between 1913 and 1921. Please see if you are capable of reading this:
http://www.ctj.org/pdf/regcg.pdf
It is really very, very very simple. In plain english. Where, again, was your source??? I am beginning to suspect you have an agenda based source. Because, you see, there is only one truth.
And that is not your statement.

The rate from 1922 through 1933 was 12.5%. During the run up to the great depression, and for a few years after the start of same. The rate went to 31.5% in 1934, which is quite different than 12.5%.

So, did you have a link???

 

[Rshermr]

Well, me boy, the truth is that the wealthy ARE paying less in taxes than ever before.

I'm not reading all those links you regurgitated, me boy, could you post the data showing the wealthy are paying less in taxes than ever before?

By the way, the issue is not how much Romney, or anyone else paid. It is the RATE. If you make a billion bucks, and pay $3M in taxes, then you apparently think that proves the wealthy are paying enough? Too much???

That is your issue apparently.

I'm interested in the claim the wealthy are paying less in taxes than ever before.

I've made no statement about whether $3M (or any amount) on a billion proves the wealthy are paying enough or too much, so I have no idea who you are arguing with there.

But, you say Romney payed a couple million, which you seemed to indicate that proved the wealthy payed more than whatever it is you think that others do not think they pay. Really, trying to say that some amount paid by some wealthy person or entity proves anything is stupid, me boy. Because, you see (or at least any rational person can see) only the percentage makes any difference.
But, you are a non feedback organism. No use trying to help you. You refuse to read the information out there. So tell me, is ignorance bliss??

 

[SteadyMercury]

Where is your source, me boy???? I gave you a good one, which, should you have checked it, would have proven that there was no 7% cap gains rate. Ever.

Capital Gains Taxation: From The Encyclopedia of Taxation and Tax Policy

"From 1913 to 1921, capital gains were taxed at ordinary rates, initially up to a top rate of 7 percent."

You're welcome.

 

[SteadyMercury]

But, you say Romney payed a couple million, which you seemed to indicate that proved the wealthy payed more than whatever it is you think that others do not think they pay.

No, it proved he paid a lot in taxes. A couple million bucks is a lot of money.

Because, you see (or at least any rational person can see) only the percentage makes any difference.

Only the percentage makes a difference if the total amount isn't a convenient for your feeble argument.

The wealthy pay a lot in taxes, much more than the people who aren't wealthy. That is a fact.

Capital gains taxes are not at historical lows. That is another fact. Me boy.

 

[expat_panama]

But, you say Romney payed a couple million, which you seemed to indicate that proved the wealthy payed more than whatever it is you think that others do not think they pay... ... only the percentage makes any difference.

Only the percentage makes a difference if the total amount isn't a convenient for your feeble argument...

--or if you don't care about the deficit.