Mark Cuban just became the 2nd most hated rich guy in the USA!

Discussion in 'Blazers OT Forum' started by SlyPokerDog, Aug 30, 2011.

  1. Natebishop3

    Natebishop3 Don't tread on me!

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2008
    Messages:
    94,017
    Likes Received:
    57,158
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    Because I threw out a random number of what I thought would be more indicative of "rich" in America than the billions of dollars that Mark Cuban has.
     
  2. huevonkiller

    huevonkiller Change (Deftones)

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2006
    Messages:
    25,798
    Likes Received:
    90
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Occupation:
    Student.
    Location:
    Miami, Florida
    I've read so much about the atrocities in Africa, it is just a little sickening how entitled this country is. Also I'm Hispanic so I know what poverty is really like.

    We have it real good and need to stop asking for so much more.
     
  3. EL PRESIDENTE

    EL PRESIDENTE Username Retired in Honor of Lanny.

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2010
    Messages:
    50,346
    Likes Received:
    22,532
    Trophy Points:
    113
    the world isn't fair. there will always be the haves and the have-nots. no matter what you do, its going to be like this. so might as well get yours.
     
  4. huevonkiller

    huevonkiller Change (Deftones)

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2006
    Messages:
    25,798
    Likes Received:
    90
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Occupation:
    Student.
    Location:
    Miami, Florida
    Oh yeah I am with you for the most part.

    I wasn't trying to attack just the rich, I think the lower and middle class is even more ignorant in these matters. They are just fine compared to the rest of the world.
     
  5. maxiep

    maxiep RIP Dr. Jack

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2008
    Messages:
    28,303
    Likes Received:
    5,884
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Merchant Banker
    Location:
    Denver, CO & Lake Oswego, OR
    Thanks for the advice. I do need to work on my snarkiness; there's no excuse for it.

    BTW, I got this message.
     
  6. maxiep

    maxiep RIP Dr. Jack

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2008
    Messages:
    28,303
    Likes Received:
    5,884
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Merchant Banker
    Location:
    Denver, CO & Lake Oswego, OR
    I'd add if you work in finance, a more formal--and more expensive--form of dress is required.
     
  7. maxiep

    maxiep RIP Dr. Jack

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2008
    Messages:
    28,303
    Likes Received:
    5,884
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Merchant Banker
    Location:
    Denver, CO & Lake Oswego, OR
    Here is your root post. The idea that you think someone who makes $100K is "rich" is laughable. That's the point I've been trying to make. And when you begin to account for geography, your point is even sillier.
     
  8. MrJayremmie

    MrJayremmie Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2008
    Messages:
    3,438
    Likes Received:
    27
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    I'm sorry dude, you are just not getting it. I'm not going to attack you and call you any names and I honestly think this is more of a bait attempt than any lack of intelligence.

    My position is plainly stated, you are purposely misrepresenting it. There is no point to even continue. Its almost like arguing with a child.
    What the fuck is a Libertarian board, lol.
     
  9. maxiep

    maxiep RIP Dr. Jack

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2008
    Messages:
    28,303
    Likes Received:
    5,884
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Merchant Banker
    Location:
    Denver, CO & Lake Oswego, OR
    LOL at the idea of you stating a point, makes it reality.
     
  10. Natebishop3

    Natebishop3 Don't tread on me!

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2008
    Messages:
    94,017
    Likes Received:
    57,158
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    It's over twice the salary of the average American, so yes... I would call that rich. You're quibbling over the semantics of the word, not the point behind it. You haven't been making any point. You have only been fixating on the fact that 100k doesn't go very far in New York, but that doesn't hold any water because New York is probably one of, if not the, most expensive cities in the world.

    You have no grasp on reality whatsoever. "200k isn't very much because it doesn't go far in New York City..." :rofl: You're ridiculous.
     
  11. huevonkiller

    huevonkiller Change (Deftones)

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2006
    Messages:
    25,798
    Likes Received:
    90
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Occupation:
    Student.
    Location:
    Miami, Florida
    Yes Mrsname, Government can raise taxes. We all know this.

    You've provided zero mathematical arguments aside from: taxes pay for federal programs.

    Your position is clearly stated: "I'm contradicting myself". "I don't know what marginal tax rates are", "Blah blah blah a stimulus helps, tax hikes help, but then don't help.... Blah blah. " etc.

    This is not a statistical defense, go back to school or something. Until you make an objective and statistical defense your opinion has zero value. We are in this position because Congress has zero background (hyperbole but mostly true) in economics, and you lack a statistical understanding as well.


    Libertarian board means we don't like to micromanage. This is counter to the Democrat ideology and other pussies.

    Freedom bruh, read a little Locke or something. He's not my favorite politician but his books are widely accessible.
     
    Last edited: Sep 2, 2011
  12. maxiep

    maxiep RIP Dr. Jack

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2008
    Messages:
    28,303
    Likes Received:
    5,884
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Merchant Banker
    Location:
    Denver, CO & Lake Oswego, OR
    Thanks for your opinion. It's an interesting one. I'll just make this comment: Try living on $100K in Portland, OR with a family of four and tell me how "rich" you feel.
     
  13. huevonkiller

    huevonkiller Change (Deftones)

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2006
    Messages:
    25,798
    Likes Received:
    90
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Occupation:
    Student.
    Location:
    Miami, Florida
    Maxie I think you understand politics pretty well, but why have kids if you can't afford them? Just have one, or adopt, etc.

    Unless your wife had quadruplets, or some other extreme scenario.
     
  14. maxiep

    maxiep RIP Dr. Jack

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2008
    Messages:
    28,303
    Likes Received:
    5,884
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Merchant Banker
    Location:
    Denver, CO & Lake Oswego, OR
    The point is that $100K makes you "rich" according to Natebishop3, so what's so unusual about having two kids? It shouldn't matter how many kids you have, being "rich" means you can easily afford them.
     
  15. huevonkiller

    huevonkiller Change (Deftones)

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2006
    Messages:
    25,798
    Likes Received:
    90
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Occupation:
    Student.
    Location:
    Miami, Florida
    Putting yourself in a tough situation is different. No one told you to have that many kids, or any at all.

    Also I think you're quite rich actually. I would think that's a compliment.
     
  16. Natebishop3

    Natebishop3 Don't tread on me!

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2008
    Messages:
    94,017
    Likes Received:
    57,158
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    To more than 50% of America, 100k a year for even a combined household would definitely be considered "rich" and I think you're being insensitive to that demographic. Just because you can't buy your new BMW or eat out at fancy restaurants doesn't make you poor. My family lived comfortably on my dad's 50k a year income, in SW Portland, with three kids, so yeah..... it can be done. Once again you're quibbling over the definition of "rich" and I think you're looking like a real asshole in the process.
     
  17. maxiep

    maxiep RIP Dr. Jack

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2008
    Messages:
    28,303
    Likes Received:
    5,884
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Merchant Banker
    Location:
    Denver, CO & Lake Oswego, OR
    Gee, thanks for your swell opinion on my behavior, Nate. Am I debating that living comfortably in SW Portland on $100K a year can't be done? Of course not. But are you really going to make the argument that making $100K makes you "rich"? Equating the two is frankly bizarre.

    Again, my point is that simply defining "rich" by income--which you posited--is foolish. You haven't provided any evidence to contradict my point. You just keep namecalling and changing the debate. I get the game; too bad you don't play it well.

    Your turn.
     
  18. Natebishop3

    Natebishop3 Don't tread on me!

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2008
    Messages:
    94,017
    Likes Received:
    57,158
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    Your point is moot because this thread is about Cuban's opinion on taxing the "rich". Taxing the "rich" is based on income. Income is exactly what I've been supporting throughout this thread.

    Your turn.
     
  19. barfo

    barfo triggered obsessive commie pinko boomer maniac Staff Member Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2008
    Messages:
    34,357
    Likes Received:
    25,394
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Blazer OT board
    Well, no one asked me but...

    maxiep is right that the definition of rich should take into account the cost of living
    natebishop3 is right that the definition of rich shouldn't be "has more money than maxiep".

    I'd add that income is probably not the best definition - after all a billionaire who keeps all his money in the mattress is still rich, even if he has no income. [Edit: I note Nate's point in the prior post about the subject of the thread being income tax. A good point.]

    There obviously is no objective definition of rich, and obviously different people have different perceptions of what rich means. Therefore this argument will not end. Carry on...

    barfo
     
  20. Natebishop3

    Natebishop3 Don't tread on me!

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2008
    Messages:
    94,017
    Likes Received:
    57,158
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    And if we really wanted to start mucking up the waters, we can begin arguing that someone with a family of four could think themselves rich because they have four wonderful kids, all money aside. My point since the beginning is that someone making 100k a year, looking at the entire United States and not one or two cities, is proven to be in the top 15% of income. That would most likely fall under the federal governments definition of "rich" if they were to implement harsher taxes on the so called "rich".
     

Share This Page