define definition.
Oh, LAME! Pshhh.
A definition is a concise explanation of the meaning of a term. Typically definitions avoid use of terms that are etymologically similar to the term whose meaning is being circmscribed, when possible.
I stayed up all night studying for a damn test this morning only to come in to find out she had changed the test day! WTH!!! Not only do these socialist teach a whole huge pile of useless crap, but now they want us paying attention to them while they teaching this crap to figure out when the crap is due?!
My inexperienced ast. general manager (more so the assistant to the general manager) wrote me up last night for something really trivial. Either my GM will see the write up and throw it out, or I need to finally find out what car he drives…
So in other words, you don’t have the backbone to actually respond to my post? Or are you just trying to troll me?
Define “troll.”
Yeah, I don’t think you really want me to provide my definition of “troll”. So whether you are trying to troll me or not, you’re clearly being dishonest.
I’ll further go out on a limb and suggest that maybe you expected me to rethink my style of argument after you criticized it. Since I not only haven’t done that, but have also rebuffed your criticism, you seem to have gotten upset. While you’re hiding behind a mask of not taking me seriously anymore, I think your point with that is to see if now I’ll do what you want. Trust me, I won’t. But hey, it’s up to you if you want to still have a hard-on for me.
I will not proceed with this discussion unless you first define “troll.” Unless you submit to doing this, I will no longer converse with you on this thread.
Yeah, I don’t believe you. And I stand by what I said.
I’m sure this one’s a pet peeve of many of us. So I propose a drinking game to get some fun out of it! Take a drink every time someone claims to be “helping the economy” by buying something.
Had to mentally /facepalm when a colleague used that today to justify buying a new Prada handbag.
So apparently Portugal is set to raise taxes by 30%. And cutting the welfare state is on the table.
Portugal debates future of welfare state
“There appears to be an enormous divergence between what the Portuguese believe the state should deliver and the amount of taxes they are prepared to pay,” he told parliament recently.
Taxes have already risen substantially. The 2013 budget, the toughest in living memory, includes income tax increases of about 30 per cent. Mr Gaspar described the tax rises as “enormous” . Designed to keep Lisbon on track with its €78bn bailout programme, they are the latest in a series of austerity measures that have pushed Portugal into its deepest recession in 40 years, with record unemployment reaching close to 16 per cent.
The prime minister, said António Arnaut, a member of the opposition Socialists and a founder of the national health service, is bent on a “neoliberal project to destroy the welfare state”…
So are the taxes now 30%? Or are they what they were plus 30%? Or plus 30% of the tax rate?
Knowing that personal income tax was around 50% in Portugal, I may assume it’s not the first variant. But are they 80% now or just 65%?
Well, that article’s paywalling me now :\ From what I read it seemed to me they were raising the rates by 30% on top of what it was. It seemed ambiguous as to whether the idea was taxes going up by 30% (as a multiplier), or whether they were adding 30% to the existing % rate.
In practical terms, I think it means 30% as a multiplier. I can hardly imagine any politician getting away with adding 30% to the current % rate.
I also remember seeing somewhere the taxes were to be raised by “enormous 4%”. If these 4% are 30% of the previous rate, the previous rate must be around 13%.
However, the Eurostat’s report (with the official Politburo Eurocommission sign) says Portugal’s taxes on personal income were ~50%. I am confused. Any people here having first-hand knowledge of Portugal’s taxes?
Here’s another article on the same thing.
The government is aiming to increase income tax revenue by 30 percent next year while enacting spending cuts worth (EURO)2.7 billion.
Seems to indicate how the 30% figure is being used, on revenue derived from taxes.
This is rich:
Outside Parliament, protesters jeered and whistled and chanted “Thieves!” Portugal has witnessed two general strikes this year and almost daily street protests, though there has been little violence.
Lol, finally someone’s getting it 
Though, I’m afraid he may mean not taxation, but the austerity portion of the plan!
As for total tax rates in Portugal:
The tax increases are especially hard on Portugal’s middle class. Due to the changes, someone earning (EURO)41,000 a year, for example, will pay 45 percent income tax from Jan. 1 compared with 35.5 percent now.
Most workers fall into the (EURO)7,000-(EURO)20,000 annual income bracket. Those people will pay 28.5 percent income tax, up from 24.5 percent.
Previously, the top rate of tax of 46.5 percent was for workers or married couples who together earned over (EURO)153,300 a year. That top rate will be lowered to cover single or joint earnings above (EURO)80,000, which will be taxed at a rate of 48 percent. That income will also be subject to a special “social solidarity” tax of 2.5 percent. Also, there will be a 3.5 percent surcharge tax on everyone’s earnings in 2013.
My English class today:
“It’s a dog eat dog world.”
“It’s a zero-sum game.”
“Rich get richer,poor get poorer.”
“Machines are putting people out of work.”
Also, according to my history textbook, if you support strict property rights, you support slavery.
“Write drunk; edit sober.” ― Ernest Hemingway
I’m beggining to appreciate this.