PORTLAND CYCLE FESTIVAL

On Mon, 14 Nov 2016 12:14:21 -0800 (PST), Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On Monday, November 14, 2016 at 6:27:39 AM UTC-5, John B Slocomb wrote:
On Sun, 13 Nov 2016 22:50:11 -0500, Frank Krygowski wrote:

I don't mind paying a reasonable amount of tax. It's the price we pay
for civilization.

The word "reasonable" is not very definitive. I would assume that a
Dane who, I read, paid 62.3% in income tax in 2006 and now pays only
55.8% probably feels that his rate is quite "reasonable".
(http://www.tradingeconomics.com/denm...ncome-tax-rate)

One can only speculate whether you would too :-)

I suppose I'd have to live there a while to form an opinion. But IIRC the
Danes are frequently rated to be among the world's most content citizens.

Here's a link that quickly googled up:
http://www.usnews.com/news/best-coun...rates-of-taxes

- Frank Krygowski

Yup. I've read those sort of warm fuzzy feeling sort of articles and I
also used to play golf with the Bangkok Representative for SAS which
includes Danish crew members. They were so unhappy with the tax rates
that they were paying that the Pilot's Union no longer lobbied for
higher wages.

The discussion was initiated by my questioning a news article I had
read about a Dane having to pay something like 110% of his salary in
taxes... it was actually true although there were extenuating
conditions.

And Frank, that was 30 years, or more, ago.

http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/i...march_thr.html

On 11/15/2016 6:50 AM, John B Slocomb wrote:
On Mon, 14 Nov 2016 12:14:21 -0800 (PST), Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On Monday, November 14, 2016 at 6:27:39 AM UTC-5, John B Slocomb wrote:
On Sun, 13 Nov 2016 22:50:11 -0500, Frank Krygowski wrote:

I don't mind paying a reasonable amount of tax. It's the price we pay
for civilization.

The word "reasonable" is not very definitive. I would assume that a
Dane who, I read, paid 62.3% in income tax in 2006 and now pays only
55.8% probably feels that his rate is quite "reasonable".
(http://www.tradingeconomics.com/denm...ncome-tax-rate)

One can only speculate whether you would too :-)

I suppose I'd have to live there a while to form an opinion. But IIRC the
Danes are frequently rated to be among the world's most content citizens.

Here's a link that quickly googled up:
http://www.usnews.com/news/best-coun...rates-of-taxes

- Frank Krygowski

Yup. I've read those sort of warm fuzzy feeling sort of articles and I
also used to play golf with the Bangkok Representative for SAS which
includes Danish crew members. They were so unhappy with the tax rates
that they were paying that the Pilot's Union no longer lobbied for
higher wages.

The discussion was initiated by my questioning a news article I had
read about a Dane having to pay something like 110% of his salary in
taxes... it was actually true although there were extenuating
conditions.

And Frank, that was 30 years, or more, ago.

OK, as I see it, here are the contradictory data:

On one hand, there are repeated surveys that claim Danes are the world's
happiest people. That's just asking questions, of course, and polls
obviously (obviously!) can be wrong.

But IIRC there are also plenty of objective data confirming that life in
Denmark is pretty darned good - longevity, infant mortality, health,
prosperity, free time, (lack of) social unrest, education, etc. all seem
to be better than the lower-taxed U.S.

On the other hand, we have a guy you played golf with 30 years ago.

Hmm. Which to believe?

--
- Frank Krygowski

On Sun, 13 Nov 2016 17:35:11 -0500, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

A couple nights ago I turned on the late night Jimmy Kimmel show (a very
rare event, BTW). Someone was interviewing a Portland protester on
camera. He said something like "I just thought it was the least I could
do to come out here and protest the election."
Interviewer: "So did you vote?"
Protester: "Well, no, I wasn't registered."

Chuckle. When I hear that comment I usually say something like
"...then you're not entitled to an opinion".
The usual retort is stunned silence while they digest the
implications.


--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

grate, now we journey toward entitlement from the thought police what's next ?


http://www.wunderground.com/history/...eqdb.wmo=06180

On Tuesday, November 15, 2016 at 12:23:44 PM UTC-5, DATAKOLL MARINE RESEARCH wrote:
grate, now we journey toward entitlement from the thought police what's next ?


http://www.wunderground.com/history/...eqdb.wmo=06180

goo.gl/mYdW0b

On Tue, 15 Nov 2016 12:08:53 -0500, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 11/15/2016 6:50 AM, John B Slocomb wrote:
On Mon, 14 Nov 2016 12:14:21 -0800 (PST), Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On Monday, November 14, 2016 at 6:27:39 AM UTC-5, John B Slocomb wrote:
On Sun, 13 Nov 2016 22:50:11 -0500, Frank Krygowski wrote:

I don't mind paying a reasonable amount of tax. It's the price we pay
for civilization.

The word "reasonable" is not very definitive. I would assume that a
Dane who, I read, paid 62.3% in income tax in 2006 and now pays only
55.8% probably feels that his rate is quite "reasonable".
(http://www.tradingeconomics.com/denm...ncome-tax-rate)

One can only speculate whether you would too :-)

I suppose I'd have to live there a while to form an opinion. But IIRC the
Danes are frequently rated to be among the world's most content citizens.

Here's a link that quickly googled up:
http://www.usnews.com/news/best-coun...rates-of-taxes

- Frank Krygowski

Yup. I've read those sort of warm fuzzy feeling sort of articles and I
also used to play golf with the Bangkok Representative for SAS which
includes Danish crew members. They were so unhappy with the tax rates
that they were paying that the Pilot's Union no longer lobbied for
higher wages.

The discussion was initiated by my questioning a news article I had
read about a Dane having to pay something like 110% of his salary in
taxes... it was actually true although there were extenuating
conditions.

And Frank, that was 30 years, or more, ago.

OK, as I see it, here are the contradictory data:

On one hand, there are repeated surveys that claim Danes are the world's
happiest people. That's just asking questions, of course, and polls
obviously (obviously!) can be wrong.

But IIRC there are also plenty of objective data confirming that life in
Denmark is pretty darned good - longevity, infant mortality, health,
prosperity, free time, (lack of) social unrest, education, etc. all seem
to be better than the lower-taxed U.S.


Without going into details, as I am sure you are aware of them, the
U.S. essentially has the highest cost medical system but not the best
medical system in the world. Will increasing taxes cure the poor
medical treatment?

The U.S. has the highest prison population in the world, will
increasing taxes solve that?

Singapore has a far, far lower rate than the U.S. when discussing drug
problems. I suspect, perhaps, the lowest in the world.
Will increasing the U.S. tax rate decrease the drug problem in the
U.S.?

On the other hand, we have a guy you played golf with 30 years ago.

Hmm. Which to believe?

I think if I were discussing the feelings toward taxes of the highly
paid airline pilots I would listen to the SAS Rep.

You are equating high taxes with all kinds of good things because it
sounds nice. But it isn't a tit for tat equation.... and I suspect
that you know that.

John B Slocomb considered Tue, 15 Nov 2016
18:50:19 +0700 the perfect time to write:

On Tue, 15 Nov 2016 03:32:05 +0000, Phil Lee
wrote:

John B Slocomb considered Mon, 14 Nov 2016
18:27:33 +0700 the perfect time to write:

On Sun, 13 Nov 2016 22:50:11 -0500, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 11/13/2016 7:21 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 11/13/2016 5:19 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Sunday, November 13, 2016 at 2:35:15 PM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 11/13/2016 5:10 PM, DougC wrote:
On 11/12/2016 2:41 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Saturday, November 12, 2016 at 3:31:24 AM UTC-8, DATAKOLL MARINE
RESEARCH wrote:
http://www.kgw.com/mb/news/local/tru...ight/351192552



We're totally a Trump town! Those people are so super-excited that
they took to the streets!

Really, though, it's like preaching to the choir in the Peoples
Democratic Republic of Portland, and the protesters are just
****ing-off the choir. I don't get it. And then you have the
"anarchists" who are doing the property damage -- just to do property
damage. It's the Clockwork Orange crowd. They're the people who get
us on national news.

-- Jay Beattie

I am laughing sensibly,,, Portland protesters is serious business:
"You'll take my nose ring when you pry it from my cold dead nostril.
Also is the Starbucks guy here yet? Im kinda thirsty"

A couple nights ago I turned on the late night Jimmy Kimmel show (a very
rare event, BTW). Someone was interviewing a Portland protester on
camera. He said something like "I just thought it was the least I could
do to come out here and protest the election."

Interviewer: "So did you vote?"

Protester: "Well, no, I wasn't registered."

Which is interesting since we have motor-voter registration. If you
have a driver's license or ID car, you're registered to vote unless
you opt out. It's hard not to be registered, so the guy might have
been from out of state or under age. This is also an example of the
conservative bias of the media -- always interviewing the guy who
isn't registered.

A lot of the protesters were pretty ordinary people. OTOH, even
ordinary people shouldn't be blocking traffic. After getting my
property tax bill, I wanted to protest by blocking traffic -- using my
body . . . under a bus. I've got some suggestions for things to
protest, but they don't resonate much with the Bohemian set.

-- Jay Beattie.


"conservative bias of the media"

! !

There's bias both ways. Depends on which media outlet you look at.

Fully agreed about property taxes though

I don't mind paying a reasonable amount of tax. It's the price we pay
for civilization.

The word "reasonable" is not very definitive. I would assume that a
Dane who, I read, paid 62.3% in income tax in 2006 and now pays only
55.8% probably feels that his rate is quite "reasonable".
(http://www.tradingeconomics.com/denm...ncome-tax-rate)

"The benchmark we use refers to the Top Marginal Tax Rate for
individuals."

The UK rate they give on that site is 45%, which is the rate which
NOBODY pays, just as NOBODY pays the 55.8% rate in Denmark.

Those rates are what is paid on the income surplus over the highest
taxable earnings threshold. In both countries, the minimum income tax
rate is zero - below a certain income level, you don't pay tax at all
(there's not much point in taking money away with one hand to pay it
back as welfare with the other). Between those extremes, income tax
is banded, and you only pay a higher rate on the income in excess of
the start of that band, after the zero, and each lower tax band are
fully utilised.
And of course, there are some things for which one can claim tax
exemption, which also get deducted from what is included in "taxable
income"

One can only speculate whether you would too :-)

One can only speculate as the purpose of the site you linked to, as
the data it gives is of no practical value to anyone, and can at best
be described as misleading, and if not for the hidden explanatory note
(which just about gets them off the hook) outright lying, although I'm
not sure who is supposed to benefit from those misdirections. Clearly
there is some agenda hidden in producing such a misleading set of
figures.

Re U.K. Taxes? Remember when Margaret initiated the new tax and the
cries of joy that were heard throughout the land?

Do you mean the hated poll tax, which provoked rioting until it was
re-worked into something that took at least a little account of
people's ability to pay it? In it's initial form, that could
genuinely tax people more than their income!
Maybe you are mistaken about the timing of the "cries of joy"?
The week following her much overdue (by about 34 years) death, "Ding
Dong, the witch is dead" charted for the only time in the UK, and
there were street parties held - and again on the occasion of her
funeral.
She is the most reviled Prime Minister in Brtish history (although
David Cameron seems to have tried to take that title, he never
actually succeeded). Thatcher's legacy is that it is wildly
improbably that Theresa May will ever be trusted by the British Public
to lead the country, and the Tories will be in opposition the first
time she has to face the polls - the experiment of having a female
prime minister being far to strongly remembered for many to want to
repeat it. Of course, they (the tories) are fiddling the system for
all they are worth, shifting constituency boundaries and forcing the
poorer people out of marginal ones (an illegal process known as
"gerrymandering", so it's possible that they may manage to steal
another election as they stole the last (they still haven't been held
to account over the national expenses scandal that got them in that
time).
Sadly, we are now a country occupied by an unfriendly power, and just
as in 1930s Germany, they are taking all the steps possible to hold on
to power indefinitely.

no, Rump/GOP economics are proven dissolute, self destructive, and worth less. Rump's initial plan, he lies frequently chronically tracking the BS is difficult,
places the country in extreme difficulty in 10 years.

Rump's election was by voters who cannot think in these areas. The election in no way supports the alleged economic system.

On Wed, 16 Nov 2016 02:15:24 +0000, Phil Lee
wrote:

John B Slocomb considered Tue, 15 Nov 2016
18:50:19 +0700 the perfect time to write:

On Tue, 15 Nov 2016 03:32:05 +0000, Phil Lee
wrote:

John B Slocomb considered Mon, 14 Nov 2016
18:27:33 +0700 the perfect time to write:

On Sun, 13 Nov 2016 22:50:11 -0500, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 11/13/2016 7:21 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 11/13/2016 5:19 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Sunday, November 13, 2016 at 2:35:15 PM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 11/13/2016 5:10 PM, DougC wrote:
On 11/12/2016 2:41 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Saturday, November 12, 2016 at 3:31:24 AM UTC-8, DATAKOLL MARINE
RESEARCH wrote:
http://www.kgw.com/mb/news/local/tru...ight/351192552



We're totally a Trump town! Those people are so super-excited that
they took to the streets!

Really, though, it's like preaching to the choir in the Peoples
Democratic Republic of Portland, and the protesters are just
****ing-off the choir. I don't get it. And then you have the
"anarchists" who are doing the property damage -- just to do property
damage. It's the Clockwork Orange crowd. They're the people who get
us on national news.

-- Jay Beattie

I am laughing sensibly,,, Portland protesters is serious business:
"You'll take my nose ring when you pry it from my cold dead nostril.
Also is the Starbucks guy here yet? Im kinda thirsty"

A couple nights ago I turned on the late night Jimmy Kimmel show (a very
rare event, BTW). Someone was interviewing a Portland protester on
camera. He said something like "I just thought it was the least I could
do to come out here and protest the election."

Interviewer: "So did you vote?"

Protester: "Well, no, I wasn't registered."

Which is interesting since we have motor-voter registration. If you
have a driver's license or ID car, you're registered to vote unless
you opt out. It's hard not to be registered, so the guy might have
been from out of state or under age. This is also an example of the
conservative bias of the media -- always interviewing the guy who
isn't registered.

A lot of the protesters were pretty ordinary people. OTOH, even
ordinary people shouldn't be blocking traffic. After getting my
property tax bill, I wanted to protest by blocking traffic -- using my
body . . . under a bus. I've got some suggestions for things to
protest, but they don't resonate much with the Bohemian set.

-- Jay Beattie.


"conservative bias of the media"

! !

There's bias both ways. Depends on which media outlet you look at.

Fully agreed about property taxes though

I don't mind paying a reasonable amount of tax. It's the price we pay
for civilization.

The word "reasonable" is not very definitive. I would assume that a
Dane who, I read, paid 62.3% in income tax in 2006 and now pays only
55.8% probably feels that his rate is quite "reasonable".
(http://www.tradingeconomics.com/denm...ncome-tax-rate)

"The benchmark we use refers to the Top Marginal Tax Rate for
individuals."

The UK rate they give on that site is 45%, which is the rate which
NOBODY pays, just as NOBODY pays the 55.8% rate in Denmark.

Those rates are what is paid on the income surplus over the highest
taxable earnings threshold. In both countries, the minimum income tax
rate is zero - below a certain income level, you don't pay tax at all
(there's not much point in taking money away with one hand to pay it
back as welfare with the other). Between those extremes, income tax
is banded, and you only pay a higher rate on the income in excess of
the start of that band, after the zero, and each lower tax band are
fully utilised.
And of course, there are some things for which one can claim tax
exemption, which also get deducted from what is included in "taxable
income"

One can only speculate whether you would too :-)

One can only speculate as the purpose of the site you linked to, as
the data it gives is of no practical value to anyone, and can at best
be described as misleading, and if not for the hidden explanatory note
(which just about gets them off the hook) outright lying, although I'm
not sure who is supposed to benefit from those misdirections. Clearly
there is some agenda hidden in producing such a misleading set of
figures.

Re U.K. Taxes? Remember when Margaret initiated the new tax and the
cries of joy that were heard throughout the land?

Do you mean the hated poll tax, which provoked rioting until it was
re-worked into something that took at least a little account of
people's ability to pay it? In it's initial form, that could
genuinely tax people more than their income!

My only real exposure to Maggie's tax was our Comptroller. A British
chap who was extremely careful to stay outside the U.K. for sufficient
days so as to not pay any income taxes. Then along came Maggie and
suddenly he was going to be taxed, what he said, was some outlandish
amount because he owned a house just outside London.

Maybe you are mistaken about the timing of the "cries of joy"?

An attempt at a bit of subtitle humor :-)

The week following her much overdue (by about 34 years) death, "Ding
Dong, the witch is dead" charted for the only time in the UK, and
there were street parties held - and again on the occasion of her
funeral.
She is the most reviled Prime Minister in Brtish history (although
David Cameron seems to have tried to take that title, he never
actually succeeded). Thatcher's legacy is that it is wildly
improbably that Theresa May will ever be trusted by the British Public
to lead the country, and the Tories will be in opposition the first
time she has to face the polls - the experiment of having a female
prime minister being far to strongly remembered for many to want to
repeat it. Of course, they (the tories) are fiddling the system for
all they are worth, shifting constituency boundaries and forcing the
poorer people out of marginal ones (an illegal process known as
"gerrymandering", so it's possible that they may manage to steal
another election as they stole the last (they still haven't been held
to account over the national expenses scandal that got them in that
time).

Good Lord, the return of gerrymandering. The rotten borough. A fine
old English institution. The term became popular in the 18th century
so apparently it has historical provenance - sort of like Robin Hood
and the rob the rich and give to the poor scheme :-)

Sadly, we are now a country occupied by an unfriendly power, and just
as in 1930s Germany, they are taking all the steps possible to hold on
to power indefinitely.