OT: Patterson Worse than Brandon?

Submitted by FauxMo on

Apparently, UT is charging members of the Texas Tech marching band $100 per ticket to enter the stadium and play this year at their game. This really, really felt like something Brandon would have done too. Could Patterson actually be more "douchebag money grab CEO" than Brandon???

(Can't get the link to the article to embed, but the information is all over the Googles and the Facespaces)

BlockM

September 10th, 2015 at 1:57 PM ^

I'm 27 years old, with an MSE from U-M, and I didn't understand marginal tax rates until earlier this year. No idea how it took so long, but I explained it to at least 5 or 6 friends and it was news to them as well. Tax write-offs are thrown around so often I always just assumed it would actually save someone money somehow.

Hail-Storm

September 10th, 2015 at 3:30 PM ^

but probably not if you are making Brandon Money. There are tax brackets that can screw you over if you are the bottom of one of them. For example, one of the tax brackets is around $75,000 for a family, which, if you are over, jumps your tax bracket from 25% to 28% (I don't know what it actually is and am too lazy to look it up). This would mean That you make more money if your family pulls in $74,999 compared to $75,001. In fact, in this scenario, you don't start making more money until you earn greater than $78,125 dollars. This means if you are at $74,999, you take a pay cut on any raise up until $78,125. 

I'm sure there is some funny rich person math where you can take advantage of tax breaks by making large donations, but I haven't researched it, because I don't need to unfortunetaly. 

pescadero

September 10th, 2015 at 4:14 PM ^

For example, one of the tax brackets is around $75,000 for a family, which, if you are over, jumps your tax bracket from 25% to 28% (I don't know what it actually is and am too lazy to look it up). This would mean That you make more money if your family pulls in $74,999 compared to $75,001.

 

Absolutely and completely false.

 

Do people REALLY not understand marginal tax rates?

 

You only pay the increased percentage on the money IN THE BRACKET.

 

If you pay 25% at 74,999 and 28% at 75,001 - that means if you make 75,001 you pay:

 

25% of $74,999 + 28% of $2

 

With marginal tax rates it is never possible for your income to increase and you make less after tax income. Completely impossible.

 

 

VectorVictor05

September 10th, 2015 at 4:17 PM ^

Honestly not trying to be a dick, but this is so wrong it, and it makes me sad people actually think this.  Tax rates for individuals in the US are progressive but they are MARGINAL tax rates.  If a bracket cut-off is $90k, you're taxed at 25% on your first $90k of income and 28% on every dollar you make over $90k.  If you got a $5 raise, you wouldn't then pay tax at 28% on the whole $90,005 of income.  I dislike the IRS just as much as the next guy, but they're not that mean.

Really rich people (or corporations) just make sooo much money that the top marginal rate is basically what they pay on everything because the piddly amount they pay on their first $X of income is so small compared to the rest.

Rupertus

September 10th, 2015 at 10:54 AM ^

I'm sure as a businessman that enters his consideration at some point, but let's not forget that the hospital saved Brandon's prematurely born twins a long time ago. I wouldn't criticize Brandon for his generous support of the hospital when we have so many other reasons to criticize him.

EGD

September 10th, 2015 at 11:54 AM ^

I have good friends who also had seriously premature twins whose lives were saved by the UM natal intensive care unit. They know and appreciate Brandon from his commitment to the center, which ranges from his major financial donations to appearing there dressed as Santa at Xmas. I am one of the few people who was anti-Dave Brandon from day one, but out of respect for his contributions to the NICU I have tried very hard to refrain from personal attacks on the man.

ijohnb

September 10th, 2015 at 10:54 AM ^

at this point I think it can be said - at least we're not Texas.  Things have gone downhill very quickly there.  Gonna get ugly in Austin.

In reply to by ijohnb

East German Judge

September 10th, 2015 at 11:23 AM ^

Agreed, and the football team is still in shambles.  It is just amazing that being in a state that has that much football talent, they can't get their act together, yet.  If Charlie Strong does not right the ship soon, they may be replacing both their AD and HC soon!

ijohnb

September 10th, 2015 at 11:42 AM ^

of get the feeling that Texas, as a team, is stricken with the same sense of entitlement that I think you could find at Michigan for a long time.  With the Longhorn network and all the discussion of Texas football, I think their players may think they have already arrived simply by being there.  I don't think it is impossibly that you may see Saban head down there at some point.  He really has nothing left to prove at Alabama and I could see Texas going 8, 9, 10 million per for him.

In reply to by ijohnb

1464

September 10th, 2015 at 12:35 PM ^

If you continue reading this thread, charging the visiting team's band is pretty common practice.  I think this is one of those times where we are looking for something to protest.  Patterson is a complete powerdouche, but not for this.

In reply to by ijohnb

1464

September 10th, 2015 at 12:35 PM ^

If you continue reading this thread, charging the visiting team's band is pretty common practice.  I think this is one of those times where we are looking for something to protest.  Patterson is a complete powerdouche, but not for this.

swalburn

September 10th, 2015 at 10:47 AM ^

I was going to post this as well.  I can't believe someone at Texas hasn't had a talk with this guy.  Patterson needs to find a different job.  This makes them look terrible.

BlueCube

September 10th, 2015 at 10:49 AM ^

Link

John U Bacon said at Rackham that some schools are using his book as a "what not to do guide". He said he thinks Texas is using it as a cookbook.

I don't remember the situation exactly but I think there was a team being honored at a Michigan game and immediately after the ceremony, they were escorted out of the stadium, so yes this could have been something Brandon would do.

Don

September 10th, 2015 at 2:41 PM ^

What do you mean by "team?" A Michigan team, like the 1996 men's swimming team? If that's the case, holy hell.

My view is that David Brandon is a normal human being—complicated, conflicted, inconsistent, rigid, biased, welcoming, greedy, generous, friendly, prickish, asshole, nice guy—and all of these characteristics show themselves in different situations depending on who's involved. He's not a monster or maniac who was bent on destroying the Michigan athletic department. He was just extremely ill-suited for the job here, and Mary Sue Coleman deserves much of the blame for essentially forcing him on the University against the explicit recommendations of the search committee she formed.

In other words, don't ascribe to malevolence that which can be easily explained by incompetence. Looking at the totality of what the athletic director at Michigan is responsible for, Brandon was not competent.

Based on what I've previously read about Patterson, I think he's even worse than Brandon, but that's Texas for you: everything's bigger in the Lone Star state, including the assholes.

CompleteLunacy

September 10th, 2015 at 3:07 PM ^

But it's not just incompetence either, in my opinion. It's somewhere in between...Brandon did what Brandon thought was best regardless of what or who it helped or harmed. Some of the moves Brandon made it's hard to believe he didn't know what he was doing...I think many times he knew exactly what he was doing, he just grossly underestimated how upset it would make his "customers".