Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Higher Taxes may force Phil Mickelson into Retirement


  • Please log in to reply
105 replies to this topic

#91 mmmbeans

mmmbeans

    FBI SURVEILLANCE VAN

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,998 posts

Posted 24 January 2013 - 11:55 AM

rich people are
"evil"
"out of touch"
"cheap"
"mean"

poor people are
"lazy"
"fatter"
"stupid"
"annoying"

#92 SZ James

SZ James

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,079 posts

Posted 24 January 2013 - 11:58 AM

tiger woods is

"a jerk"
"asian"
"a lousy tipper"
"dead"


To this day I still have a 50 dollar bill that Tiger left at a restaurant for 'the next group of people that sits here' which happened to be my fam.

Posted Image

#93 mmmbeans

mmmbeans

    FBI SURVEILLANCE VAN

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,998 posts

Posted 24 January 2013 - 11:59 AM

To this day I still have a 50 dollar bill that Tiger left at a restaurant for 'the next group of people that sits here' which happened to be my fam.

Posted Image


TIL: Black people reverse tip.

#94 LongTriad

LongTriad

    Missunderstood

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,607 posts
  • LocationStokeridge

Posted 24 January 2013 - 12:01 PM

He's nice to his fans

When you type "Phil Mickelson is..."

you can choose from... A douche
A jerk
A phony
A scumbag
Etc.

I'd probably start there but since you're his fangirl you probably don't want your fantasy crushed

Typical golfer.

#95 Happy Panther

Happy Panther

    Now even funnier.

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,513 posts

Posted 24 January 2013 - 12:02 PM

I never get tired of hearing rich people cry about money. It's my favorite kind of news. Much better than actual poor people who work their asses off crying about money.


Crying about taxes is different than crying about money.

When you hear an NBA player talk about needing to feed their family, that is a rich person crying about money..

#96 Darth Biscuit

Darth Biscuit

    Dark Lord

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 31,486 posts
  • LocationWilmington, NC

Posted 24 January 2013 - 12:11 PM

Typical golfer.


I see that just like Sheikh Zula, you didn't actually bother to do the search either...

#97 g5jamz

g5jamz

    Is back

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,716 posts

Posted 24 January 2013 - 12:13 PM

Why should Phil have to apologize for what he said...

#98 mmmbeans

mmmbeans

    FBI SURVEILLANCE VAN

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,998 posts

Posted 24 January 2013 - 12:15 PM

Why should Phil have to apologize for what he said...


he doesn't.

#99 g5jamz

g5jamz

    Is back

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,716 posts

Posted 24 January 2013 - 12:25 PM

Certainly felt pressure from people to...

I hope NC ditches the state income tax too

#100 mmmbeans

mmmbeans

    FBI SURVEILLANCE VAN

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,998 posts

Posted 24 January 2013 - 12:27 PM

Certainly felt pressure from people to...

I hope NC ditches the state income tax too


sorry that's the free market. when you get paid millions upon millions of dollars because people like watching you put a ball in a hole... your public image is important.

#101 LongTriad

LongTriad

    Missunderstood

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,607 posts
  • LocationStokeridge

Posted 24 January 2013 - 09:49 PM

Taxes are already, disgustingly high. It is not like we live in Canada where they provide health care in exchange for a 40% tax rate. Our version of universal health care: You have to buy health insurance of get penalized.

#102 FugginPoo

FugginPoo

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,741 posts

Posted 28 January 2013 - 03:27 PM

Mickleson is only making 26 cents on every dollar he earns
..........

Defending Phil Mickelson

Brian S. Wesbury – Chief Economist
Bob Stein, CFA – Senior Economist
Date: 1/28/2013

Top golfer Phil Mickelson became a social-media whipping boy last week for saying high taxes were forcing him to consider “drastic changes,” in his life. We suppose these could include moving away from California, or possibly quitting golf.

Liberal bloggers had a field day, with some sarcastically saying we should all chip in to help the poor guy out with his burdens. But this criticism masks the facts.

Even if Mickelson retired from playing golf, he would earn enough from ads, appearances, and maybe golf-course design to put him in the top tax bracket. He would pay 39.6% in federal income tax and 13.3% in state taxes to California. Factoring-in the deductibility of state income taxes (as well as the “Pease” phase-out of those deductions), his combined tax rate is 49%. Medicare taxes push his marginal rate to 52%. So, the government takes more than half of what he earns. If we add sales taxes on consumption, the total moves to 55%.
But it gets worse. Mickelson already has enough wealth to satisfy him and his wife for the rest of their lives. So, in effect, he’s really just working for his kids. But his estate, which is grown using after-tax dollars (just 48% of income) will get taxed at a 40% rate when he dies. After this death tax, his children will be able to consume only 29 cents for every $1 their dad earned, 26 cents if we include California sales taxes.

No one is arguing his kids are headed for the poorhouse. But knowing how little extra spending he can generate from extra work, Mickelson and other high earners would be crazy not to consider “drastic changes.” When golfers, business executives, brain surgeons and many others retire early because of high tax rates, we all end up losing. We pay more for what they produce and the government gets less revenue.

Free citizens have choices, like where to live and whether to work. When the government breaks the basic link between how much government costs and the benefits it provides to taxpayers, it is the government that should come under scrutiny, not the citizens that consider making changes to avoid the cost.

French actor Gerard Depardieu recently fled France’s confiscatory tax hikes, taking up Russian citizenship and heading for Belgium, instead. The only way to stop this migration is for politicians to make “drastic changes” in the size, scope and cost of government. Until then, individuals, like Mickelson, will react to protect themselves.

#103 thatlookseasy

thatlookseasy

    Death to pennies

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,735 posts

Posted 28 January 2013 - 04:15 PM

Mickleson is only making 26 cents on every dollar he earns
..........

Defending Phil Mickelson

Brian S. Wesbury – Chief Economist
Bob Stein, CFA – Senior Economist
Date: 1/28/2013

Top golfer Phil Mickelson became a social-media whipping boy last week for saying high taxes were forcing him to consider “drastic changes,” in his life. We suppose these could include moving away from California, or possibly quitting golf.

Liberal bloggers had a field day, with some sarcastically saying we should all chip in to help the poor guy out with his burdens. But this criticism masks the facts.

Even if Mickelson retired from playing golf, he would earn enough from ads, appearances, and maybe golf-course design to put him in the top tax bracket. He would pay 39.6% in federal income tax and 13.3% in state taxes to California. Factoring-in the deductibility of state income taxes (as well as the “Pease” phase-out of those deductions), his combined tax rate is 49%. Medicare taxes push his marginal rate to 52%. So, the government takes more than half of what he earns. If we add sales taxes on consumption, the total moves to 55%.
But it gets worse. Mickelson already has enough wealth to satisfy him and his wife for the rest of their lives. So, in effect, he’s really just working for his kids. But his estate, which is grown using after-tax dollars (just 48% of income) will get taxed at a 40% rate when he dies. After this death tax, his children will be able to consume only 29 cents for every $1 their dad earned, 26 cents if we include California sales taxes.

No one is arguing his kids are headed for the poorhouse. But knowing how little extra spending he can generate from extra work, Mickelson and other high earners would be crazy not to consider “drastic changes.” When golfers, business executives, brain surgeons and many others retire early because of high tax rates, we all end up losing. We pay more for what they produce and the government gets less revenue.

Free citizens have choices, like where to live and whether to work. When the government breaks the basic link between how much government costs and the benefits it provides to taxpayers, it is the government that should come under scrutiny, not the citizens that consider making changes to avoid the cost.

French actor Gerard Depardieu recently fled France’s confiscatory tax hikes, taking up Russian citizenship and heading for Belgium, instead. The only way to stop this migration is for politicians to make “drastic changes” in the size, scope and cost of government. Until then, individuals, like Mickelson, will react to protect themselves.


So is that first line a true/ false question? I'm going with false

#104 FugginPoo

FugginPoo

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,741 posts

Posted 28 January 2013 - 04:23 PM

True. See federal plus State Income Tax plus CA sales taxes plus Death Tax

#105 thatlookseasy

thatlookseasy

    Death to pennies

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,735 posts

Posted 28 January 2013 - 04:35 PM

True. See federal plus State Income Tax plus CA sales taxes plus Death Tax


Did you even read what you pasted? Thats the hypothetical tax rate his kids would pay if Phil was a dick and didnt give his kids any money until after he dies.

aka not his tax rate


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com - IP Content Design by Joshua Tree / TitansReport.