The Gaming Den

Laugh:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2y32-jLvfTg

Cry:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7zkrJG4XUeo

Shrapnel wrote: Mike's Hard Lemonade

Well that was... different.

That commercial was pretty cool, if strange as hell. Also, Mike's Hard Lemonade is fucking good, by the way. But never drink the blueberry lemonade. Ugh.

I don't actually like lemonade, hard or soft. But I love creepy commercials that make puppy's cry. Seriously, I first saw this in a restaurant, and there was a lady with a little dog with her. When the commercial came on, the puppy freaked like a bitch when the headless deer came on. It made my year.

Australia is awesome.
That is all

Prak_Anima wrote:Australia is awesome.
That is all

We need to import Australia's FCC.

That was done at 6:30am, so I don't quite blame them...

Pinhole Glasses!

Normally, I consider myself part of the anti-pinhole conspiracy. Mostly on the grounds that I prefer forms of vision correction that allow you to use your entire retina, preserve your peripheral vision, and don't block out 95% of the incoming light.

But in a way it's kind of beautiful in its Darwinian simplicity: if you're enough of a dumbass that you think that the best way to improve your visual acuity is to squint through a tiny hole - you deserve to be hit by a bus.

-Username17

Now I'm going to be looking through my pinhole-hand and running into buses all day. Thanks a lot.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Abyc6yUC ... h_response
Yes, it really DOES go with anything . .
Also . . untill i found this, i had no idea there was an anime like that . .

Stahlseele wrote:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Abyc6yUC ... h_response
Yes, it really DOES go with anything . .
Also . . untill i found this, i had no idea there was an anime like that . .

I liked the 9/11 and Hiroshima ones better.

i only missed the SONIC BOOM when he dropped his log.

How guards work in D&D:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LqktZhj7 ... ature=plcp

Battlefield 3, NES edition
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7c1PBufdfcE

Lawrence Lessig interviews Jack Abramoff
Abramoff explaining whats wrong with lobbying

I remember years ago when I watched this for the first time. I was a huge fan of the show, and I liked this character.

I laughed, because he totally schooled the other guys in the room.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8nzeJrXFttg

In 2001, it may have been accurate that the top 1% pay for 22% of the country. Some estimate it may be as high as 35 or even 40% now.

According to an article in the New York Post, the evil 1% paid 43% of the city's income taxes.

I believe in a progressive tax system, but holy shit.

npc310 wrote: According to an article in the New York Post, the evil 1% paid 43% of the city's income taxes.

You realize that most taxes aren't income taxes, right? Income taxes are something that falls on people who have very high incomes. Payroll taxes are taxes that people pay when their incomes are small.

The rich pay more of the capital gains taxes and less of the sales taxes. Quoting the percentage of the rich people taxes paid for by rich people is at best ignorant and almost certainly deliberately deceptive. Want to get bothered by what percentage of estate taxes are not paid for by poor people?

-Username17

npc310 wrote:I remember years ago when I watched this for the first time. I was a huge fan of the show, and I liked this character.

I laughed, because he totally schooled the other guys in the room.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8nzeJrXFttg

In 2001, it may have been accurate that the top 1% pay for 22% of the country. Some estimate it may be as high as 35 or even 40% now.

According to an article in the New York Post, the evil 1% paid 43% of the city's income taxes.

I believe in a progressive tax system, but holy shit.

Yes, the people who have almost all the money have to pay almost all the taxes. If you've got a model where the bottom 50% who control less than 1% of the country's wealth can be taxed enough to make a tax system where everyone pays the exact same amount, I'd be interested to see this thing because basic math says that even taxing the bottom 50% at 100% wouldn't work.

This argument isn't set up properly. He may pay 27 times the national average in taxes, but is actually paying a smaller percentage of his wealth than the average person. The lie in his argument is comparing absolute amount of taxes vs. percentage of income that is being taxed, so it's not actually an argument against progressive taxes and is instead an argument against being taxed on a percentage of his wealth. In essence, he wants to be taxed at a few percent of his wealth so that his tax bill is the same as someone making $50K a year.

Second, there is a big difference between "schooling someone" and "the writers didn't have the other characters speak." Fast-talk does not mean that you have a coherent argument.

Since I'm actually smart enough to follow that stream of words and unpack them in real-time, it actually made me less sympathetic to his argument. He looks selfish and entitled.

I certainly agree that the distinction between income taxes and payroll taxes is an important one, and also it is pretty thin. The terms are often used interchangeably. Rather, income tax is often used to encompass both.

The term Payroll Tax is used more often than not to describe the tax that an employer pays for employing someone. This is not paid by the employee Depending on the state where the tax is assessed, sometimes it is related to the employees salary, and sometimes not.

There are also taxes for Social Security, Medicare, unemployment taxes, etc... all of which are related to one of the following: salary, paychecks, income, or payroll. Some are paid by the business, some are paid by the employee, and some are paid by both. These are often collectively referred to as income taxes.

In the context of the video, and the character shredding the idiots in the room, I believe he is referring to income taxes. I also believe that income taxes include both the money withheld from every paycheck (box #2 on a W-2, and often called payroll taxes), and that which is due to the IRS on April 15th.

I disagree that income taxes fall only on people with very high incomes. I don't have a very high income, but I pay income taxes. In fact, this past year was the first time that I had to write a check in April (actually I did my shit in March) since 2002.

You are making my argument for me when you say:

FrankTrollman wrote:Income taxes are something that falls on people who have very high incomes.

My (and Sam Seaborn's) point is that people with very high incomes (the top 1%) pay a grossly disproportionately high percentage of income taxes.

npc310 wrote:
My (and Sam Seaborn's) point is that people with very high incomes (the top 1%) pay a grossly disproportionately high percentage of income taxes.

No, he's arguing that the people with a disproportionate amount of this country's wealth shouldn't be paying a proportionate amount of taxes.

It'd be proportionate to own 23% of the wealth and pay 23% of the taxes, but he's not arguing that. He's arguing for a flat tax where there is a guy making $50K a year who pays $10K in taxes and there is a guy making $500K who is also paying $10K.

The clip is actually supposed to make him come off as an entitled asshole.