Tuesday, June 28, 2016

Re: [AvC] Re: Income inequality



On Jun 29, 2016, at 4:19 AM, Marc James Hugh Robson <mjhrobson@gmail.com> wrote:

Warren Buffett pointed out a while ago that he paid less tax than his secretary, as a percentage of income. This he claimed is a feature of US tax breaks for the rich.

It is. Many people in the US are unaware of the many tax breaks available only to the wealthy and denied to the non-wealthy. 

Here's just one of them:

 "Why investment managers pay lower tax rates than their secretaries.

"Some of the wealthiest people in America manage hedge funds, private equity funds, or real estate partnerships, and typically, these investment managers receive a very small salary, relative to their total compensation. But don't feel too sorry for them—they're not working for free. Instead, most of their compensation comes in the form of a share of the fund or project they manage. This ownership share is called a "carried interest." And currently, it's usually taxed as a capital gain instead of ordinary income.
Okay, why does this matter, and what does it mean in plain English? It means that when the manager's tax bill comes due, he owes the federal government 20 percent in taxes– the current tax rate on long-term capital gains– rather than the 39.6 percent rate that applies to ordinary income. This dodge halves his effective tax rate on these earnings. It's just this loophole that Mitt Romney used to pay less than 15 percent— based on the legal capital gains tax rate at the time—on the millions he cleared while head of Bain Capital. This compares to the nearly 40 percent in federal income tax that a top surgeon, or anyone else whose earnings are defined as ordinary income, pays on his money.

"Congress has been trying to eliminate this loophole since 2007, but every time they get close to a fix, lobbyists beat them back. After all, no one likes to pay more taxes. But some of us pay more than the favored few."

Search the Internet for "tax breaks available only to the wealthy."

The tax code is heavily influenced by wealthy people.  They and the politicians who are in their pocket know how to write the code to favor themselves and make ordinary wage earners pay more. They have influence over the tax code that ordinary people can only dream of. 

LL

 

[AvC] Mythicist Milwaukee researches parallels between ancient beliefs and modern religious practices

https://www.google.com/search?q=MYTHICIST+MILWAUKEE

Comment by a Jesus believer:
http://deeperwaters.ddns.net/?p=9110
They're out there saying that there never was a historical Jesus. The whole idea is a myth. Now how many scholars in NT and classics teaching at an accredited university hold to this position? None. It's a joke in academic circles. MM is in the position of having to defend a ludicrous position and sadly marrying it to atheism. Be a smarter atheist, like Bill:

BelikeBillHistoricalJesus
Now I'm not saying be like Bill in his atheism of course, but be like Bill in that you can at least recognize the evidence points to a historical Jesus.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Atheism vs Christianity" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to atheism-vs-christianity+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/atheism-vs-christianity.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[AvC] Re: An ontological proof of Satan's existence.

Sorry to impose, Alan; if being and good are synonymous and we turned the analogue around, might the result instead suggest, not being and evil are synonymous?

On Tuesday, June 28, 2016 at 5:13:26 PM UTC-4, Alan Wostenberg wrote:
 Being and good are transcendental -- to be is to be good. So to "turn it  around" would mean that being and evil are equivalent: to be, is to be evil.   Follow that out. 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Atheism vs Christianity" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to atheism-vs-christianity+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/atheism-vs-christianity.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [AvC] Re: Income inequality

Warren Buffett pointed out a while ago that he paid less tax than his secretary, as a percentage of income. This he claimed is a feature of US tax breaks for the rich.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Atheism vs Christianity" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to atheism-vs-christianity+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/atheism-vs-christianity.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[AvC] Re: Facts outweigh beliefs.



On Tuesday, June 28, 2016 at 5:37:10 PM UTC-4, Kent Jennings wrote:
Which is why I dislike the word fact. It implies more than can be delivered. 

Agreed! Often misused or misapplied. The term may be a candidate for the discard pile of civil debate. 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Atheism vs Christianity" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to atheism-vs-christianity+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/atheism-vs-christianity.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[AvC] Surprising Results!

A recent experiment produced surprising results. 

We plotted the complimentary pair of nets pictured below and constructed the two resulting tetrahedrons. If you haven't conducted something similar, make a prediction and consider performing the experiment; you may be surprised at the results.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Atheism vs Christianity" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to atheism-vs-christianity+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/atheism-vs-christianity.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[AvC] Re: Is God Evil?

On Tuesday, June 28, 2016 at 3:36:57 PM UTC-7, Alan Wostenberg wrote:
> "If you are convinced by the ontological proof for the existence of God,
> then you have to accept as well the ontological proof for the existence
> of Satan" - Tex.          Is that true? 
>
> Only on assumption there is a
> symmetry between good and evil -- e.g. evil is a thing on par with
> good.  But if they are asymmetrical? If evil is not a thing but a privation
> -- an absence of some perfection due a thing? The "ontological proof of
> satan" would prove his non-existence, since pure evil would be absolute
> non-existence. 

Ecclesiastes 4 and Schopenhauerwould say that non existence is better than existence.


> One could swap the terms as Kent proposes and call good a privation of evil in a sort of algebraic manipulation of symbols, but when we apprehend the meaning of terms, that entails, owing to the convertibility of being and good (to be is to be good), that to be, is to be evil. I suppose that is what you mean by "...or simply accept that God is Satan"? 
>
> Are you thinking our options are:
>
> I. dualism: two principles in everlasting opposition: good and evil
> II. monism: one principle.      Evil is illusory (pantheism). Or good is illusory (Buddhism?)

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Atheism vs Christianity" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to atheism-vs-christianity+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/atheism-vs-christianity.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.