quote:

Originally posted by George Smiley Nope

We went into the wrong field obviously - when you study economics (greed), you make money. When you study politics (service), you make a pittance.

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by Lebezniatnikov We went into the wrong field obviously - when you study economics (greed), you make money. When you study politics (service), you make a pittance.

Heh!

One thing I noticed about America is that a politics degree and masters in international relations will be considered vocational for departments such as State. Whereas over here, to join the civil service graduate scheme (including foreign office), you just need a degree in anything (which obviously decreases your chances of getting a job there!). Likewise, if you wanted to join the CIA etc, over there a masters in terrorism would be ideal, whereas over here, Mi5, Mi6 and GCHQ want graduates from any discipline!

quote:

Originally posted by George Smiley Heh! One thing I noticed about America is that a politics degree and masters in international relations will be considered vocational for departments such as State. Whereas over here, to join the civil service graduate scheme (including foreign office), you just need a degree in anything (which obviously decreases your chances of getting a job there!). Likewise, if you wanted to join the CIA etc, over there a masters in terrorism would be ideal, whereas over here, Mi5, Mi6 and GCHQ want graduates from any discipline!

CIA and FBI have changed their desired specialities. for obvious reasons they now desire graduates of arab and near east studies as well as people who studied arabic and farsi. the fbi generally likes to hire lawyers, accountants, and the people that i just described.

quote:

Originally posted by Lebezniatnikov We went into the wrong field obviously - when you study economics (greed), you make money. When you study politics (service), you make a pittance.

that should have been obvious. government officials can get some pretty sweet perks if you have the right position: traveling first class (usually international) is a nice perk. plus the 9-5 schedule is pretty nice. but then again, the schedule is the main reason for the salary.

quote:

Originally posted by George Smiley Is that true? I'm sure you can back those (irrelevant btw) figures up with hard facts?

Source of actual article accompanying the facts on the chart---> http://online.wsj.com/article/SB119786208643933077.html




Source showing how "rich" pay highest percentage of taxes in 40 years---> http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121...=googlenews_wsj

quote:

Originally posted by The17sss Source of actual article accompanying the facts on the chart---> http://online.wsj.com/article/SB119786208643933077.html Source showing how "rich" pay highest percentage of taxes in 40 years---> http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121...=googlenews_wsj

there's about a 20% spread there, which would be consistent with a progressive system. It's highly misleading to say (as i believe you have asserted before) that the top 5% pay 60% of the taxes without stating they also earn about 40% of all income. it doesn't look so bad when you say how much of the pie they actually eat. the simple fact that 5% of the population earns 40% of all income is grossly disproportionate. that disparity isn't for lack of desire or effort. it's likely caused by lack of access to resources.

Last edited by jerZ07002 on Oct-28-2008 at 18:21

quote:

Originally posted by George Smiley One thing I noticed about America is that a politics degree and masters in international relations will be considered vocational for departments such as State.

Yeah... this is the idea... eventually at least.

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by jerZ07002 there's about a 20% spread there, which would be consistent with a progressive system. It's highly misleading to say (as i believe you have asserted before) that the top 5% pay 60% of the taxes without stating they also earn about 40% of all income. it doesn't look so bad when you say how much of the pie they actually eat.

Not to mention the fact that the growing divide between rich and poor in this country is frightening - the upper percentages are seeing wage increases while the poorer percentages are seeing nothing of the kind.

So as relative income increases, so too should relative taxation.

___________________

Let's just post this ole classic for shits & giggles...

quote:

Bar Stool Economics: Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this: The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing. The fifth would pay $1. The sixth would pay $3. The seventh would pay $7. The eighth would pay $12. The ninth would pay $18. The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59. So, that's what they decided to do. The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve. "Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20."Drinks for the ten now cost just $80. The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes so the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men - the paying customers? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that e everyone would get his 'fair share?' They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer. So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay. And so: The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings). The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33%savings). The seventh now paid $5 instead of $7 (28%savings). The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings). The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% savings). The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings). Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings. "I only got a dollar out of the $20,"declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man," but he got $10!" "Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only saved a dollar, too. It's unfair that he got ten times more than I!" "That's true!!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get $10 back when I got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!" "Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison. "We didn't get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!" The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up. The next night the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn't have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill! And that, boys and girls, journalists and college professors, is how our tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.

quote:

Originally posted by Lebezniatnikov Not to mention the fact that the growing divide between rich and poor in this country is frightening - the upper percentages are seeing wage increases while the poorer percentages are seeing nothing of the kind. So as relative income increases, so too should relative taxation.

On its face I don't have a problem with increasing wages for rich. The problem is the lack of access to resources that will allow people who are less fortunate to break the cycle of poverty and dispair. So, it doesn't trouble me that the rich make more, so long as they contribute what is necessary to provide the access to resources for every citizen.

quote:

Originally posted by Shakka Let's just post this ole classic for shits & giggles...

moral of the story is: don't reduce taxes!


on a more serious note, there are few productive places in the world where the taxing system on individuals is not progressive. you really can't go anywhere important (for business purposes) and escape taxation. Plus, the US has some great Ex-pat laws subjecting its citizens to tax for 10 years (i think) post renouncing citizenship. you can't simply say i don't want to be taxed in the US so i'll move. it's not that easy.