Can't wait until the NCAA doesn't let a kid walk-on to the football team because UM isn't charging him tuition...
Why? It's not an impermissible benefit if it's a university initiative available to any student who meets the qualification.
But it's the NCAA... SEC will complain that Harbaugh did this to get around scholarship limits.
It doesn't have to make sense, its the NCAA.
That's not how this works, man. The NCAA cannot legislate against a walk-on receiving need based aid, it's plainly within the realm of accessibility for any student so it's fine. Other states in the south also have similar programs, check out Georgia's HOPE Scholarship. This won't move the needle with the NCAA.
It was a half-sarcastic comment trying to make a joke about the NCAA...
Truth is a dial, sarcasm a switch. You didn't halve anything, and did just fine on both accounts.
You can't have some grace; either you have it or you don't
Methinks thy sarcasm meter hast broken
Very nice move by the university. Now I'd just love to see what % of current enrollees this applies to. Great PR, but if I'm Dean of Admissions I'd just take an extra out-of-state kid for every two kids this applies to and I've maintained the status quo. But I'm a grinch haha.
That is what they do, but more like one OOS kid for everyone this applies to.
That's great, but inevitably it will suck for the person whose parents make 70K. Also, how about the people making 100K with 3 kids in college? Some sort of gradient would be more beneficial, but that's hard to set.
Do laughing, playing kids that run across your lawn piss you off too?
So there isn't an ounce of unfairness if you make say, $64,999 vs $65,001? A difference of $2 could in theory affect whether you get a free ride or not.
Income and tax brackets work the same way, $1 under or $1 over, oh well. Oh you were in the 28% bracket last year? Well welcome to 33%.
Yeah that's not true at all.
I've found that most people have no idea what graduated taxes means.
We are also not very good at statistical analysis of global temperature or Arctic sea ice data; linear living it is.
To be fair, global average temperature is a TERRIBLE metric to use to explain information about the climate to the general public. Climate scientists understand that a 2 degree change is a big deal and a 4 degree change catastrophic. The general public knows that the temperature might change outside by 4 degrees in just the time it takes them to drive to work in the morning.
What's equally scary to me is that I don't remember learning (at least as part of formal schooling) about the basics of the exponential formulas that underly, say, interest rates until at least high school analysis class -- a course which was only taken by, I'm guessing here, maybe 25% of the students? Certainly fewer than 50% -- and that's at a very well-to-do suburban high school. And now 15+ years later, probably 90+% of those students now have mortgages and 401ks?
Point is, it's not surprising when people have a hard time making sense of things they've never really learned about in the first place.
I took s Logic class at U of M and it was a really good foundational learning class. How many time do you hear x caused y because they happened to occur at the same time? Same thing with economics, that should be a class everyone should have to take in high school.
So in your example, this is new initiative is analagous to paying 0% vs 33%.
I'm just saying there are cut-offs for things. $1 here or a $1 there and things move and change.
You're sinking fast. Better to just admit you're wrong.
Pull out, pull out! YOU'RE IN TOO DEEP!!!
Marginal tax rates do not equal effective tax rates. The tax brackets are based on marginal income.
Yes, in your example, by going $1 above, you are going to pay 33% instead of 28% but only for that $1; it does not change the tax rate applied to the income you earned prior to moving up to the 33% tax bracket. Yes, your overall effective tax rate will increase, but it will not increase by 5% of your taxable income. In fact, if you only make $1 extra, your effective tax rate will barely change at all.
Tax Table for Individuals
Tax Rate Income Range
10% 0 - $9,325
15% $9,326 - $37,950
25% $37,951 - $91,900
28% $91,901 - $191,650
Example 1: Let's say that you are an individual whose taxable income (all income minus deductions, credits, etc.) is $91,900. Your marginal tax rate is 25%. Your effective tax rate is approximately 20.3632%.
Income from 0 - $9,325 = $9,325 of income ---> taxed at 10% = $932.50
Income from $9,325 - $37,950 = $28,625 of income ---> taxed at 15% = $4,293.75
Income from $37,950 - $91,900 = $53,950 of income ---> taxed at 25% = $13,487.50
Total Taxes paid is $932.50 + $4,293.75 + $13,487.50 = $18,713.75
Total income of $91,900
Effective Tax Rate = $18,713.75 / $91,900 = approximately 20.3632%
Example 2: Let's you say make an extra $1 so that your taxable income is now $91,901. You have jumped a tax bracket, so your marginal tax rate is now 28%. Your effective tax rate is now 20.3635%. It barely made a difference (0.0003%).
Income from 0 - $9,325 = $9,325 of income ---> taxed at 10% = $932.50
Income from $9,325 - $37,950 = $28,625 of income ---> taxed at 15% = $4,293.75
Income from $37,950 - $91,900 = $53,950 of income ---> taxed at 25% = $13,487.50
Income from $91,900 - $91,901 = $1 of income ---> taxed at 28% = $0.28
Total Taxes paid is $932.50 + $4,293.75 + $13,487.50 + $0.28 = $18,714.03
Total income of $91,901
Effective Tax Rate = $18,714.03 / $91,900 = approximately 20.3635%
This idea that you get drastically screwed because you made an extra dollar which caused you to jump a bracket is just a ridiculous view that unfortunately a lot of people share.
should have been a diary (that no one would read).
The concept is very simple. If education costs "x" and the university decides that fewer people will pay for "x" - then the cost to those paying for "x" will increase. I'm not advocating either way - but this is a fact.
Go Blue!
That's not at all how the tax brackets work. When you move to a higher tax bracket only the money made over that number is taxed at the higher rate. In your theoretical situation the person in the higher tax bracket would only be charged 33% on the $1 they made in that bracket while the income they made up to that amount would be in the lower rates.
This is not how income tax brackets work.
I'm no tax guru, but doesn't just your income above that tax bracket get taxed at that rate?
If families are smart, they'll invest extra in 401k or do whatever to artificially lower their income below the $65k. Really would make more sense to have a gradient....
That's not how income tax brackets work, I'm afraid. If you go into the "higher bracket" because you made $1 more than the old bracket upper end you were in last year, you get taxed at the higher rate only on your income over that threshold. So in your example, you'd get taxed at the 33% rate on just the $1 you made above the old bracket, and at 28% on the rest of your income.
Extending that to the valid critique - in my opinion - of the person complaining above, how about a person making $85,000 a year pay something, but less than the family making $125,000, who in turn pays less than the family making $200,000, and so forth...
The more you know!
yep, not true... you pay taxes in each bracket as you move up income levels.
Find a way to get creative on your taxes that year. If you're really that close, donate some stuff, write it off, and drop below $65k. Or put some money in an IRA or something.
Kramer: It's a write off for them.
Jerry: How is it a write off?
Kramer: They just write it off.
Jerry: Write it off of what?
Kramer: They just write it off!
Jerry: You don't even know what a write off is, do you?
Kramer: No. Do you?
Jerry: No I don't!!
This is the best graduated tax-related sports blog message board thread I've ever seen.