Phil's a good guy. The problem with apologizing is that he cant control the spin. He handled it well yesterday at Torrey Pines though.
http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=8874763
The Pub
As I said before, I agree with what Phil said, but he has to understand how it sounds.... Golf is still considered somewhat elitists and most people have little sympathy for a wealthy guy complaining about taxes. Similar to a Ferarri owner complaing about the cost of tuneups...
Having said all that- politicians need to understand the practicality of their moves. I have no problem with a progressive tax (with higher wage earners paying a higher %) I think most people agree with that, but trying to "soak" one group tends to have the opposite effect. A perceived "fairer" tax code tends to have higher compliance and drives in more revenue. An "unfair" tax code drives higher payers to seek loopholes and havens and it actually lowers revenues. The UK discovered this during the 60's and 70's as tax the rich policies drove high paid performers(Mick Jagger, John Lennon etc...) out of the country and leaving no income to be taxed. Keep things reasonable and their is more in revenue to be had.
Having said all that- politicians need to understand the practicality of their moves. I have no problem with a progressive tax (with higher wage earners paying a higher %) I think most people agree with that, but trying to "soak" one group tends to have the opposite effect. A perceived "fairer" tax code tends to have higher compliance and drives in more revenue. An "unfair" tax code drives higher payers to seek loopholes and havens and it actually lowers revenues. The UK discovered this during the 60's and 70's as tax the rich policies drove high paid performers(Mick Jagger, John Lennon etc...) out of the country and leaving no income to be taxed. Keep things reasonable and their is more in revenue to be had.
-
jonriv - Posts: 4875
- Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 6:01 am
- Location: Connecticut
jonriv wrote:As I said before, I agree with what Phil said, but he has to understand how it sounds.... Golf is still considered somewhat elitists and most people have little sympathy for a wealthy guy complaining about taxes. Similar to a Ferarri owner complaing about the cost of tuneups...
Not even close to a reasonable comparison.
jonriv wrote:Having said all that- politicians need to understand the practicality of their moves.
Obama and the left are not concerned with that. Their agenda is far bigger. Socialism starts with the tax code. They wouldnt care if Phil moved to Costa Rica.
-
ontheblack - Posts: 2355
- Joined: Sun Aug 02, 2009 2:27 pm
ontheblack wrote:jonriv wrote:As I said before, I agree with what Phil said, but he has to understand how it sounds.... Golf is still considered somewhat elitists and most people have little sympathy for a wealthy guy complaining about taxes. Similar to a Ferarri owner complaing about the cost of tuneups...
Not even close to a reasonable comparison.jonriv wrote:Having said all that- politicians need to understand the practicality of their moves.
Obama and the left are not concerned with that. Their agenda is far bigger. Socialism starts with the tax code. They wouldnt care if Phil moved to Costa Rica.
They should care since you can't tax what is not there. This is also a case of a "state" tax.
The comparison is reasonable from the view of most people. The guy underwater on his MTG is not going to feel sympathy for the guy with the private jet(no matter how right he is) As I said, I agree with Phil- but he is in a no-win PR place in complaining
-
jonriv - Posts: 4875
- Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 6:01 am
- Location: Connecticut
To believe that Obama "should care" is missing the point completely. He has demonstrated time and again that he is not pragmatic in his approach to governing. He and the rest of the liberal elite are completely ideologicaly driven from their approach to universal health car to green energy to the use of courts to impose leftist values.
A pragmatic politicain who truley cares would understand that relying on a single tax base to raise revenues would drive that tax base away. If he truley cared, he wouldn't be pushing his agenda the way that he has.
A pragmatic politicain who truley cares would understand that relying on a single tax base to raise revenues would drive that tax base away. If he truley cared, he wouldn't be pushing his agenda the way that he has.
-
Sid Barrett - Posts: 170
- Joined: Sat Jul 30, 2011 6:37 am
Not missing the point(should and do are two different arguements)
Strictly adhering to dogma(despite what the facts and reality are) are dumb right or left. I tend to take a pragmatic look at things. The ultimate goal (in my eyes) is to lower the defecit and to keep the govt between 18-20% of GDP(its historical levels) You get there by reducing expenditures(but by cutting correctly), streamling govt and by increasing revenues. IMO the best way to increase revenues is through overall growth and some simplication of the tax code. Sometimes lowering tax rates increase revenue in that category(ie capital gains) I agree that sticking to an adgenda of targeting on group can be counter productive.
Strictly adhering to dogma(despite what the facts and reality are) are dumb right or left. I tend to take a pragmatic look at things. The ultimate goal (in my eyes) is to lower the defecit and to keep the govt between 18-20% of GDP(its historical levels) You get there by reducing expenditures(but by cutting correctly), streamling govt and by increasing revenues. IMO the best way to increase revenues is through overall growth and some simplication of the tax code. Sometimes lowering tax rates increase revenue in that category(ie capital gains) I agree that sticking to an adgenda of targeting on group can be counter productive.
-
jonriv - Posts: 4875
- Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 6:01 am
- Location: Connecticut
jonriv wrote:ontheblack wrote:jonriv wrote:As I said before, I agree with what Phil said, but he has to understand how it sounds.... Golf is still considered somewhat elitists and most people have little sympathy for a wealthy guy complaining about taxes. Similar to a Ferarri owner complaing about the cost of tuneups...
Not even close to a reasonable comparison.jonriv wrote:Having said all that- politicians need to understand the practicality of their moves.
Obama and the left are not concerned with that. Their agenda is far bigger. Socialism starts with the tax code. They wouldnt care if Phil moved to Costa Rica.
They should care since you can't tax what is not there. This is also a case of a "state" tax.
The comparison is reasonable from the view of most people. The guy underwater on his MTG is not going to feel sympathy for the guy with the private jet(no matter how right he is) As I said, I agree with Phil- but he is in a no-win PR place in complaining
At one point or another, half of San Diego was underwater. They dont all begrudge Phil or Tiger their millions. Now Philip Rivers on the other hand...
-
ontheblack - Posts: 2355
- Joined: Sun Aug 02, 2009 2:27 pm
I don't think they begrudge him, but I am pretty sure they don't feel sorry for him either. As I said, I agree with what he said-just that PR wise it probably was not the way to go.
-
jonriv - Posts: 4875
- Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 6:01 am
- Location: Connecticut
Why do you think this about whether people feel sorry for him or not? More than 40% of Americans who voted likely have an issue with raising taxes period. Many of them are looking at Phil sympathetically.
Now if Oprah bitched about her taxes...
Now if Oprah bitched about her taxes...
-
ontheblack - Posts: 2355
- Joined: Sun Aug 02, 2009 2:27 pm
Because most people are concerned about "their" taxes being raised(much in the way people want cuts-except for programs "they" like. )
Most people don't have sympathy for someone like Phil because they wish they had such problems- sad, but true...
My guess is that Phil probably has no problem paying a higher percentage due to his income level, just does not like the idea of being raked through the coals. I think Phil is a nice guy who said something out of frustration that I am sure he wants to take back.
I wish politicians will learn about unintended consequences of what I believe are mostly well intended plans that wind up hurting the people they mean to help. I really wish both sides of the aisle would stop the bickering and name calling and actually work at fixing the country. Both sides have something to offer, if only they can figure out how to compremise
Most people don't have sympathy for someone like Phil because they wish they had such problems- sad, but true...
My guess is that Phil probably has no problem paying a higher percentage due to his income level, just does not like the idea of being raked through the coals. I think Phil is a nice guy who said something out of frustration that I am sure he wants to take back.
I wish politicians will learn about unintended consequences of what I believe are mostly well intended plans that wind up hurting the people they mean to help. I really wish both sides of the aisle would stop the bickering and name calling and actually work at fixing the country. Both sides have something to offer, if only they can figure out how to compremise
-
jonriv - Posts: 4875
- Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 6:01 am
- Location: Connecticut
24 posts
• Page 2 of 3 • 1, 2, 3
Main Menu
User Menu
Login
