Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : A US National Health Care System? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Brumar89 who wrote (9455)	9/14/2009 8:58:28 AM
From: Lane3	1 Recommendation Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 42652

We don't know enough to know whether he's a net contributor. You are correct. I am taking him as he presents himself. I never assume anyone is a liar until and unless I have evidence beyond a reasonable doubt. It looks like you believe his assertion that he retired at 51 simply because he so posted. Thus it's reasonable to believe that he pays taxes on the same basis. Besides, if he was able to retire at 51, he must be pretty well off. People retiring that early typically ensure a extra cushion given that they could live for another 51 years and there's a lot of risk of running out of money over so many years. So I think that the preponderance of evidence is that he pays more than minimal taxes.