Sam Groth: "I make no money on tour"
- Thread starter jdubbs
- Start date
- Status
r2473
G.O.A.T.
Its a nice story to believe. But make no mistake, the rich pay a large and quite disproportionate share of the overall tax burden.
And rightly so by the way
One of the funniest proposals to look at is the "flat tax". The rich would love that. So would the poor. But oddly enough, the middle class are convinced they want it. Lucky there are others to save them from themselves.
And rightly so by the way
One of the funniest proposals to look at is the "flat tax". The rich would love that. So would the poor. But oddly enough, the middle class are convinced they want it. Lucky there are others to save them from themselves.
Last edited:
ChanceEncounter
Professional
And why should Romney pay a lot of taxes when he's not working a job that pays income? He pays the same capital gains rate as everyone else. The reason capital gains is so low is that it's income that had already been taxed previously. Raising it just discourages the middle class from investing.
But yeah, that tinfoil hat seems like an interesting accessory.
r2473
G.O.A.T.
I don't think its as easy or straightforward as you make it sound, but tax havens are certainly a problem
http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2012/07/22/tax-justice-network-wealth-held-in-tax-havens-skyrockets/
But the "taxes paid" data I posted is still valid. What is skewed is how much wealth the top 1% or 5% have (their AGI). Its clearly more than is reported in the official figures.
http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2012/07/22/tax-justice-network-wealth-held-in-tax-havens-skyrockets/
But the "taxes paid" data I posted is still valid. What is skewed is how much wealth the top 1% or 5% have (their AGI). Its clearly more than is reported in the official figures.
r2473
G.O.A.T.
And something else I often forget to mention is this (because I assume people already realize this, but I guess most don't):
The US government is basically always trying to collect a certain amount of tax revenue to finance their expenses (we'll ignore the deficit and debt for now).
So the tax haven thing is sort of funny because it is "built into" the tax system in a way. We aren't really "losing" 22 billion or whatever in tax revenue, because if there were no tax havens (or loopholes or whatever), the tax code and rates would simply change. I mean, look at what happens when we have a "surplus". They "cut taxes".
Now you might say that without the tax havens, the rich would pay more and the poor less. Hard to say. Look at the breakdown as it stands now. The rich pay quite a large portion of the overall tax burden.
The IRS isn't really as stupid as you think they are. They've been playing this game for a long time.
There are a million ways to slice and dice this data, but percentage of the overall tax burden paid is a nice way to look at it.
What the tax havens do is effect individuals, but not aggregate numbers. Those are what are actually "engineered" by the IRS. Even though enforcing tax law on individuals is what makes all the headlines. And this is why Romney won't release his tax returns. Of course he tax plans, so some years it will look like he's screwing the system over. The (liberal?) press will run with any story they can along these lines to make Romney look bad (as they should, that's their job). So its much easier for him to not release the returns and deal with the flack for that.
But that shouldn't cloud the overall tax picture. That is all just "bluster" and headline material. It really doesn't make a bit of difference in the big picture.
As for the growing income disparity......that's a whole different topic.
The US government is basically always trying to collect a certain amount of tax revenue to finance their expenses (we'll ignore the deficit and debt for now).
So the tax haven thing is sort of funny because it is "built into" the tax system in a way. We aren't really "losing" 22 billion or whatever in tax revenue, because if there were no tax havens (or loopholes or whatever), the tax code and rates would simply change. I mean, look at what happens when we have a "surplus". They "cut taxes".
Now you might say that without the tax havens, the rich would pay more and the poor less. Hard to say. Look at the breakdown as it stands now. The rich pay quite a large portion of the overall tax burden.
The IRS isn't really as stupid as you think they are. They've been playing this game for a long time.
There are a million ways to slice and dice this data, but percentage of the overall tax burden paid is a nice way to look at it.
What the tax havens do is effect individuals, but not aggregate numbers. Those are what are actually "engineered" by the IRS. Even though enforcing tax law on individuals is what makes all the headlines. And this is why Romney won't release his tax returns. Of course he tax plans, so some years it will look like he's screwing the system over. The (liberal?) press will run with any story they can along these lines to make Romney look bad (as they should, that's their job). So its much easier for him to not release the returns and deal with the flack for that.
But that shouldn't cloud the overall tax picture. That is all just "bluster" and headline material. It really doesn't make a bit of difference in the big picture.
As for the growing income disparity......that's a whole different topic.
Last edited:
Setmatch45
Rookie
Wow are the responses I am reading real? You all must be joking? Lets compare - what does the 250th best MLB player make? 5million dollars or so? NBA about the same NFL a bit different he can get cut at any time but still 200k? NHL maybe about the same? Golf? other sports?????
Now lets take a look at the great sales people to respond. I would think but don't pretend to know but maybe 2000 players have a world ranking? This guy is 256? damm good out of 2000 or the millions of people that play the sport or we can add in d1 college players and call it what 10000 guys 250 is damm good. Now I read one where some genius was talking about the 195 sales reps in his office selling pharm products and that not everyone made 100k. How about every pharm sales guy in the country may be more than 10000 but more than 1000 making more than 100k. So why not this guy? He works hard he deserves it. I feel that in any field if you are the 250th best in all the world you deserve a living. Teaching pro's in a lot of cases make more than 100k this guy would bagel teaching pro's but he can't get a living out of it.
This is a problem that tennis needs to fix. We can't have only 70 or 80 guy's out there we need people like this.
I meant no disrespect to the people that posted on this I just want you to put this in the proper prespective.
I also know some posters may be younger - go ask your parents if they would be proud of you if you were the 250th best in the world at anything let alone a hard grind of the pro tennis tour.
Now lets take a look at the great sales people to respond. I would think but don't pretend to know but maybe 2000 players have a world ranking? This guy is 256? damm good out of 2000 or the millions of people that play the sport or we can add in d1 college players and call it what 10000 guys 250 is damm good. Now I read one where some genius was talking about the 195 sales reps in his office selling pharm products and that not everyone made 100k. How about every pharm sales guy in the country may be more than 10000 but more than 1000 making more than 100k. So why not this guy? He works hard he deserves it. I feel that in any field if you are the 250th best in all the world you deserve a living. Teaching pro's in a lot of cases make more than 100k this guy would bagel teaching pro's but he can't get a living out of it.
This is a problem that tennis needs to fix. We can't have only 70 or 80 guy's out there we need people like this.
I meant no disrespect to the people that posted on this I just want you to put this in the proper prespective.
I also know some posters may be younger - go ask your parents if they would be proud of you if you were the 250th best in the world at anything let alone a hard grind of the pro tennis tour.
I totally agree.
It's absurd to think the 250th best tennis player in the world should not be making any salary at all after he pays his expenses.
The prize money needs to undergo a redistribution cutting the money from the last few rounds of GS (for example) and distributing it downward to the earlier rounds, so that guys like Sam Groth can make a decent living as a pro tennis player.
If they cut the prize money from the semifinals and finals in half and distributed it down to the earlier rounds, I doubt it would hurt the last 4 guys in a GS that much because those last 4 guys also get lots of endorsement money.
BreakPoint
Bionic Poster
What are you talking about? Did you even read his quote? The analysis is of actual PAID taxes and tax rates.
Just like you were wrong about taxpayers not making any money from the bailouts, you're wrong about how much taxes the top 5% of earners pay, too.
Looks like the liberal media machine has people like you fooled.
BreakPoint
Bionic Poster
Exactly! Romney is currently unemployed and has been for some time, and if he loses the election, he'll remain unemployed. Why should an unemployed person pay a higher tax rate than someone who is gainfully employed and earning a healthy salary?
The capital gains tax rate applies to everyone, not just the top 1%.
BreakPoint
Bionic Poster
Good for him.
If you prefer to pay more taxes, feel free to write a check to the IRS anytime.
BreakPoint
Bionic Poster
cork_screw
Hall of Fame
Hey little boy. Move out of your folks place, and see how easy it is getting by on only 20k a year. I think that is about poverty line. If you told any girl you made 30k, i'm sure she wouldn't stick around too long.
Fugazi
Professional
The worst in his industry would be ranked about 1000th in the world. And I'm pretty sure that this guy would still be much better at what he's doing than you...
Wuppy
Professional
Typical features for the middle class are conservatism, self-righteousness, admiration for the upper class - and a thwarted political consciousness. In short, they ape the values of the upper class but will never reach the upper class.
The illusions of upward mobility of the middle class and the upper working class must be utterly crushed before these social strata will become radicalized.
This is beginning to happen now. It could take a generation or more.
The illusions of upward mobility of the middle class and the upper working class must be utterly crushed before these social strata will become radicalized.
This is beginning to happen now. It could take a generation or more.
NonP
Legend
This isn't a good analogy. Those sports you mentioned are all team sports with a much higher number of active pro athletes. 250th in tennis would be comparable to 2000-2500th in soccer or baseball, more like borderline minor leaguers. I'm not sure if those guys do have it much easier than a Ti Chen or Peter Gojowczyk (current Nos. 250 & 251 respectively).
And if you insist on "fair" pay for the men and women based on the revenues they generate you can't really feel so sorry for the journeymen, who should've known what they were getting themselves into when they chose tennis over other safter career options. After all, everyone knows tennis is a rich guy's sport.
This is not to say that the status quo is necessarily ideal. What really hurts the lower-ranked players is that tennis has gotten so used to the "each round gets double what the previous round gets" plan that its prize monies are very heavy at the top compared to golf, even when you take the latter's bigger treasury into account. That might have made sense back in the old days when the pro tours were struggling to earn big endorsements, but not now. Of course it's hard to break such inertia of tradition in a sport that has remained remarkably unchanged for the most part in its long history.
Bartelby
Bionic Poster
The other thing you've forgotten is that the renumeration of the upper echelons has escalated out of all proportion to that of the average wage earner.
Bartelby
Bionic Poster
Sorry, just read the income disparity remark but its not about how smart the IRS is as much as the laws and the politics that hinder its job.
Tax planning is fine, but that's not the reason he won't release them.
Tax planning is fine, but that's not the reason he won't release them.
Last edited:
Bartelby
Bionic Poster
I read it correctly.
My remark was to do with the numerous ways governmental policy allows the big end of town to escape the income tax system, due to the control it exercises over government through money, so it's you who can't read as it was clear.
My remark was to do with the numerous ways governmental policy allows the big end of town to escape the income tax system, due to the control it exercises over government through money, so it's you who can't read as it was clear.
Last edited:
Bartelby
Bionic Poster
Bartelby
Bionic Poster
Get rich and let the suckers pay!
So you're anti-american, in effect.
Who pays for the guns for soldiers if one has your attitude?
So you're anti-american, in effect.
Who pays for the guns for soldiers if one has your attitude?
Last edited:
The attitude that journeymen "should've known what they were getting themselves into" is one that would ultimately kill tennis as a sport. Why should anyone take the risk then? Go for a different sport, don't pick up a racquet, no-one participates because there's no money to help you up and if you're minutely worse than you thought you were going to be, you will make no money.
Much better to talk about how this situation can be changed in order to encourage as wide a talent pool as possible to be, potentially, a part of professional tennis. How brilliant it would be if there were so many talented players, receiving the funds they needed to maximise their potential, that in any given non-GS week there could be two, three, four tournaments that were all packed to the brim with exciting players and characters. The raising of the profile of lower ranked players would definitely bring in lots more money in the long run, if standards were generally higher you'd also see greater attendance and more demand. The way to do this is for the ATP to take a hit giving more prize money in lower-attended events using profits from the big tournies. It would help to grow the game.
Imagine if there were players as extraordinary as Tsonga or Ferrer (great unique talents, if not once in a lifetime players) all the way down to 300? There'd be demand to have players separated into leagues or something until the Grand Slams, allowing for enormous hype when players from each league finally clashed. It would be a world where qualifying would be a big TV event, because some big names wouldn't even make the tourny. That would be TERRIFIC. That's the dream.
TennisLovaLova
Hall of Fame
Just read a Michael Moore interview saying people should get ready to call Romney M President because all the money he managed to raise for his campaign
Bartelby
Bionic Poster
okdude1992
Hall of Fame
the bottom line is that the the big organizations are talking a hugely unfair cut of the profits. what is ridiculous to me is that people keep making this argument about cutting top players salaries, vs whether the lower guys even deserve it.
that is moronic. the greedy *** ITF (slams) should have to pay at least 25-30% out to the players. the top guys can keep their high paying salaries, maybe even more. the leftover can be distributed to lower ranked players.
In all other sports, minor league players still make enough to support themselves. some even get big deals and signing bonuses. in tennis, the challenger players at least should make a decent salary. this could really help the depth of our sport. If it wasn't so damn hard to simply get by as a pro, more talented athletes might actually play tennis.
that is moronic. the greedy *** ITF (slams) should have to pay at least 25-30% out to the players. the top guys can keep their high paying salaries, maybe even more. the leftover can be distributed to lower ranked players.
In all other sports, minor league players still make enough to support themselves. some even get big deals and signing bonuses. in tennis, the challenger players at least should make a decent salary. this could really help the depth of our sport. If it wasn't so damn hard to simply get by as a pro, more talented athletes might actually play tennis.
BreakPoint
Bionic Poster
What part of "the top 5% PAID more in taxes in both absolute amounts and percentage-wise, and they also PAID much higher tax rates than the other 95%" do you no understand? You're talking about the difference between the rates they are supposed to pay and the rates they actually paid. Well, they ACTUALLY paid a lot more in taxes and much higher tax rates than everyone else!
BreakPoint
Bionic Poster
Yet, he's not raising taxes on anyone while Obama is trying his hardest to raise taxes. So if you want Americans to pay more taxes, you should vote for Obama.
Oh, and Romney gets the same tax breaks as any other American. The 15% capital gains tax applies to all Americans, not just to Romney.
BreakPoint
Bionic Poster
Huh? What "suckers"? The rich already pay a heck of a lot more in taxes than everyone else. 50% of Americans don't even pay any income tax at all - that's ZERO! So people paying ZERO taxes are the "suckers"? Sounds to me like it's the rich who are the suckers paying more than their fair share of taxes while half of Americans pay nothing.
If you want to pay the same tax rate as Romney, all you have to do is to quit your job and become unemployed like he is. But Romney will still pay millions more in taxes every year than you will. So who's paying for those guns and soldiers again?
BreakPoint
Bionic Poster
Yes, if Romney is elected, we'll all be able to keep more of our own money and probably have more opportunities to make more of it, too.
Bartelby
Bionic Poster
I've disputed none of this.
Why would I dispute the fact that the top 5% paid more in taxes or that they paid higher tax rates than the 95%?
You simply do not understand my point however much I explain it.
Why would I dispute the fact that the top 5% paid more in taxes or that they paid higher tax rates than the 95%?
You simply do not understand my point however much I explain it.
Bartelby
Bionic Poster
In other words, you admit that Obama has not raised taxes.
Ro-money is not in power and in no position to do anything.
Ro-money sends his money overseas, so how does this apply to all Americans?
Ro-money is not in power and in no position to do anything.
Ro-money sends his money overseas, so how does this apply to all Americans?
Bartelby
Bionic Poster
You know next to nothing about Romney's tax situation as he won't release it, so why make assumptions about things you can't know?
You don't want to pay for the military and Romney doesn't, I get it. Let the suckers pay!
You don't want to pay for the military and Romney doesn't, I get it. Let the suckers pay!
Bartelby
Bionic Poster
And that's what Bush said as he ran up the Republican budget deficit, as will Ro-money.
BreakPoint
Bionic Poster
Um....
How are the "headline rates and the paid rates always different" when they are not?
And how is the "progressive effect neutralized" when the rich still actually paid much higher tax rates and the bottom 50% actually paid zero percent tax rate?
BreakPoint
Bionic Poster
Not for a lack of trying but the Republican congress won't let him. Obama has vowed to let the Bush tax cuts expire thereby raising taxes on everyone if he doesn't get his way.
What does sending money overseas have to do with your U.S. tax rate? And any American is free to send their money overseas.
BreakPoint
Bionic Poster
Those "suckers' being the rich Americans who pay the great majority of this country's taxes.
As I said before, I couldn't care less about Romney's tax situation. Unlike you, I don't judge people by their tax returns. To hire him as our President, I want to see his resume, not his tax returns!
Bartelby
Bionic Poster
1. You simply refuse to understand my points made in posts 301,305 and 320. r2473 was talking exclusively about income tax, I wasn't.
2. You simply interpret any difference as progressive. I don't.
2. You simply interpret any difference as progressive. I don't.
BreakPoint
Bionic Poster
Huh? Since when did GW Bush raise taxes? He cut taxes! Get your facts straight!
Obama has already tripled the budget deficit that Bush had. 4 more years of that spending and this country will be in such a deep hole that we'll never get out of it.
Bartelby
Bionic Poster
Under Ryan, the Ro-money budget deficit will soar and everyone who has looked at his numbers acknowledge this.
Bartelby
Bionic Poster
Bartelby
Bionic Poster
BreakPoint
Bionic Poster
Um...you replied to him about progressive income tax. What other tax is progressive? Sales tax? Do the rich pay a higher sales tax rate than everyone else living in the same state?
Progressive = escalating rates. That's exactly what's happening. The rich actually paid a much higher tax rate than the other 95%.
In what cases are the headline rates always different than the paid rates?
Just admit it. You were pwned!
BreakPoint
Bionic Poster
OK, this is the end of this conversation because it's obvious you have no clue what you are talking about.
Ryan's claim to fame is his plan to drastically reduce the budget deficit. So drastic in fact that he wants to get rid of Medicare as we know it, which is his biggest liability to the voters.
Oh, and BTW (from the left-wing liberal media): http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_...s-increased-more-under-obama-than-under-bush/
Oh, and I highly recommend you take off your rose-colored glasses.
FrisbeeFool
Rookie
Romney worked in private equity. Most of the money he earned in a given year wasn't coming from a salary or a wage rate. The money he earned was taxed similar to capital gains. Capital gains are not taxed at the same rates as salary. This means someone who is earning money in this way is paying a lesser percentage than someone who's entire income comes from salary or a wage rate.
This is why someone like Mitt Romney or Warren buffet actually pays a smaller percentage of their earnings than their secretary. That's right, Warren Buffet's secretary pays a higher percentage of her yearly earnings back to the government than Warren buffet does of his
Last edited:
Bartelby
Bionic Poster
I'm not interested in talking to a juvenile, to be sure, but if you think cbs is leftist then you're delusional as well as intellectually inadequate.
How can you compare a budget deficit accrued during a boom with a budget deficit caused by massive revenue failure caused by near depression?
Moreover, from what I've read the trend in the rate of increase has gone down under Obama and that's all you can ask.
The right wing financial media think Ryan's programme is a fraud, not just the real left.
Lower taxes plus higher military spending minus medicare still makes for a burgeoning public deficit.
Your great mathematical blunders held you up to general ridicule enough.
How can you compare a budget deficit accrued during a boom with a budget deficit caused by massive revenue failure caused by near depression?
Moreover, from what I've read the trend in the rate of increase has gone down under Obama and that's all you can ask.
The right wing financial media think Ryan's programme is a fraud, not just the real left.
Lower taxes plus higher military spending minus medicare still makes for a burgeoning public deficit.
Your great mathematical blunders held you up to general ridicule enough.
BreakPoint
Bionic Poster
Bartelby
Bionic Poster
That's the point I was making and that I refused to either repeat or spell out because I wanted you make this point for me.
You kept doggedly talking solely about income tax so don't congratulate yourself for something you didn't do.
You kept doggedly talking solely about income tax so don't congratulate yourself for something you didn't do.
Last edited:
NonP
Legend
Um, you misunderstood me. The attitude wasn't mine, but rather a rhetorical point to highlight a possible inconsistency in the argument about equal pay.
There are better ways to distribute cash, but taking it away from the biggest names and events isn't one of them. The fact of the matter is that it's the top players that make or break the sport, and tennis is already at a disadvantage compared to the big (mostly team) sports in terms of salary/prize money. The last thing you wanna do is to reduce the payout at the big events and thereby diminish the sport's profile in the public eye. You want potential players to get excited about the sport, and lower prize money at the majors (which, BTW, are all that most casual fans know about) just ain't gonna fly.
In short the real problem is distribution of money among the players, not between the tournaments.
The baseball minor leaguers earn $850 max per month in their 1st season. The veterans can make up to $2,150/month--still hardly enough if you've got a family to feed. IIRC their basketball counterparts don't fare all that better. And it's doubtful these guys get any significant endorsement (they are, after all, minor leaguers).
- Status
