Democrat presidential candidate, Bernie Sanders, has no problem with taking 90% of your income

[Little-Acorn]

This is another reason for the progressive taxation. Some have such love for money that they will never stop working. If they stop working at a certain level and then back off and enjoy life, it will leave opportunity for others.

And we have here, a rare unguarded admission from a leftist fanatic that the entire leftist agenda is designed to discourage people from working.

It has accomplished that, in droves. One of their rare "successes".

 

[PratchettFan]

There is only so much money to be had. Some don't seem to mind having a few at the top having more than billions of people.

And there is no reason they should. If you see a tax rate as a wealth re-distribution system then you are as deluded as those who think any tax is theft.

 

[g5000]

A 90% tax bracket is simply a government-imposed Maximum Wage Law.

If you make any money over a certain limit they set, they take virtually all of it.

Not much point in working harder.

As though those at that tax bracket work.

If they are going to be taxed at 90 percent, they won't.

The 90 percent tax bracket was one of the things that made Ronald Reagan a conservative. He once spoke about how he would work during the year making movies but then would stop working once he hit the 90 percent tax bracket.

That's what taxes on production do.

That is not why Reagan would stop

He would stop because he stopped getting offers

The Tax That Turned Ronald Reagan Right

At his Hollywood height, actor Ronnie Reagan was making $400,000 per picture. With the top federal tax rate over 90 percent, Reagan used to tell his White House chief of staff Donald Regan, he always chose to “loaf” around rather than make more than two pictures a year.

“Why should I have done a third picture, even if it was Gone with the Wind?” Regan remembers Reagan asking. “What good would it have done me?”

 

[hipeter924]

Why? It is either that or vote for Tin Foil hats that think the government is coming to get them. Though I am registered Green, and not Democrat, as if there is any chance to vote for a third party - I take it.

You can always vote for the Communist Party.

Why? You are the founding member of the GOP branch, handing out free money to corporations.

Handing out money to corporations isn't communism, numskull. Furthermore, that's a Democrat specialty. Just consider the record of Hillary Clinton and the Clinton Foundation. Hillary sold her ass to corporations and foreign governments.

Why? It is either that or vote for Tin Foil hats that think the government is coming to get them. Though I am registered Green, and not Democrat, as if there is any chance to vote for a third party - I take it.

You can always vote for the Communist Party.

Why? You are the founding member of the GOP branch, handing out free money to corporations.

Handing out money to corporations isn't communism, numskull. Furthermore, that's a Democrat specialty. Just consider the record of Hillary Clinton and the Clinton Foundation. Hillary sold her ass to corporations and foreign governments.

Sure it is, ever read a Ayn Rand novel, or something by Milton Friedman? Government support, even with the best of intentions is interference in the market - interference being anti-capitalist through distortions of the market. It is as anti-free market as the welfare state, child labor laws, high taxation, and the minimum wage.

It isn't communism, dumbass.

Whatever you say Comrade, Monsanto and the Defense contractors want their cut this week. The birds have bird flu, they need another 100 million dollar handout, they welcome having more of your tax dollars.

 

[jasonnfree]

The same moral

A 90% tax bracket is simply a government-imposed Maximum Wage Law.

If you make any money over a certain limit they set, they take virtually all of it.

Not much point in working harder.

As though those at that tax bracket work.

If they are going to be taxed at 90 percent, they won't.

The 90 percent tax bracket was one of the things that made Ronald Reagan a conservative. He once spoke about how he would work during the year making movies but then would stop working once he hit the 90 percent tax bracket.

That's what taxes on production do.

That is not why Reagan would stop

He would stop because he stopped getting offers

And your proof of this claim is?

The same moral authority to make our military go to war in the middle east to protect the oil companies interests in the middle east.
The same moral interest that allows certain protected oligarchs that live in the USA and claim the Caimans as their residence.

 

[g5000]

There is only so much money to be had. Some don't seem to mind having a few at the top having more than billions of people.

Please answer my questions.

How is a gopher on a movie set going to make some gains if the actors and directors aren't working? How are the special effects workers going to make some gains if no movie is being made? How are the hundreds of other workers going to make some gains if no movie is being made?

 

[jasonnfree]

A 90% tax bracket is simply a government-imposed Maximum Wage Law.

If you make any money over a certain limit they set, they take virtually all of it.

Not much point in working harder.

As though those at that tax bracket work.

If they are going to be taxed at 90 percent, they won't.

The 90 percent tax bracket was one of the things that made Ronald Reagan a conservative. He once spoke about how he would work during the year making movies but then would stop working once he hit the 90 percent tax bracket.

That's what taxes on production do.

That is not why Reagan would stop

He would stop because he stopped getting offers

The Tax That Turned Ronald Reagan Right

At his Hollywood height, actor Ronnie Reagan was making $400,000 per picture. With the top federal tax rate over 90 percent, Reagan used to tell his White House chief of staff Donald Regan, he always chose to “loaf” around rather than make more than two pictures a year.

“Why should I have done a third picture, even if it was Gone with the Wind?” Regan remembers Reagan asking. “What good would it have done me?”

Reagan turned right and the middle class has lost ground ever since his presidency, although california suffered prior to that.

 

[jasonnfree]

There is only so much money to be had. Some don't seem to mind having a few at the top having more than billions of people.

Please answer my questions.

How is a gopher on a movie set going to make some gains if the actors and directors aren't working? How are the special effects workers going to make some gains if no movie is being made? How are the hundreds of other workers going to make some gains if no movie is being made?

What happens when an actor dies. Do the movie companies fire directors and gophers? No, another actor takes his place, and there's always an overabundance of actors I'm told.

 

[g5000]

There is natural concentration of wealth and there is an unnatural concentration of wealth. Thomas Jefferson and James Madison used to correspond about what to do about the unnatural concentration of wealth. And one of Jefferson's solutions was to propose a progressive tax. But not to the extent of choking production to death/.

Getting rich from building a better mousetrap or making Hollywood movies is a natural concentration of wealth, and there is nothing wrong with that.

Taxing the rich more to mitigate the unnatural concentration of wealth is the simpleton's means of treating the symptoms instead of the disease.

The unnatural concentration of wealth, the tilting of the playing field, is being accomplished through government legislation. So the obvious cure is to fix or delete the legislation which is tilting the field.

If your house was being robbed on a regular basis, and the police were providing protection to the thieves, how retarded would you have to be to say, "To solve this problem, we need to tax everyone who lives in a bigger house than me more"?

You'd have to be as retarded as Bernie Sanders.

 

[bripat9643]

A 90% tax bracket is simply a government-imposed Maximum Wage Law.

If you make any money over a certain limit they set, they take virtually all of it.

Not much point in working harder.

Furthermore, what gives government the moral authority to take 100% of your income?

The same moral authority as the government's right to draft you and me into the army.

The government has no such moral authority. The 13th amendment made slavery illegal.

 

[g5000]

There is only so much money to be had. Some don't seem to mind having a few at the top having more than billions of people.

Please answer my questions.

How is a gopher on a movie set going to make some gains if the actors and directors aren't working? How are the special effects workers going to make some gains if no movie is being made? How are the hundreds of other workers going to make some gains if no movie is being made?

What happens when an actor dies. Do the movie companies fire directors and gophers? No, another actor takes his place, and there's always an overabundance of actors I'm told.

A producer of wealth should only be replaced by a superior business model that has defeated them on the field of competition, not induced to stop producing so lesser business models can "succeed".

 

[jasonnfree]

There is natural concentration of wealth and there is an unnatural concentration of wealth. Thomas Jefferson and James Madison used to correspond about what to do about the unnatural concentration of wealth. And one of Jefferson's solutions was to propose a progressive tax. But not to the extent of choking production to death/.

Getting rich from building a better mousetrap or making Hollywood movies is a natural concentration of wealth, and there is nothing wrong with that.

Taxing the rich more to mitigate the unnatural concentration of wealth is the simpleton's means of treating the symptoms instead of the disease.

The unnatural concentration of wealth, the tilting of the playing field, is being accomplished through government legislation. So the obvious cure is to fix or delete the legislation which is tilting the field.

If your house was being robbed on a regular basis, and the police were providing protection to the thieves, how retarded would you have to be to say, "To solve this problem, we need to tax everyone who lives in a bigger house than me more"?

You'd have to be as retarded as Bernie Sanders.

I should be so lucky as to be as smart as Sanders who, at 73, is for more lucid and knowledgeable than Reagan was at any age.

 

[g5000]

There is natural concentration of wealth and there is an unnatural concentration of wealth. Thomas Jefferson and James Madison used to correspond about what to do about the unnatural concentration of wealth. And one of Jefferson's solutions was to propose a progressive tax. But not to the extent of choking production to death/.

Getting rich from building a better mousetrap or making Hollywood movies is a natural concentration of wealth, and there is nothing wrong with that.

Taxing the rich more to mitigate the unnatural concentration of wealth is the simpleton's means of treating the symptoms instead of the disease.

The unnatural concentration of wealth, the tilting of the playing field, is being accomplished through government legislation. So the obvious cure is to fix or delete the legislation which is tilting the field.

If your house was being robbed on a regular basis, and the police were providing protection to the thieves, how retarded would you have to be to say, "To solve this problem, we need to tax everyone who lives in a bigger house than me more"?

You'd have to be as retarded as Bernie Sanders.

I should be so lucky as to be as smart as Sanders who, at 73, is for more lucid and knowledgeable than Reagan was at any age.

Reagan made it all the way to the White House.

Sanders won't even come close, except as a guest at a state dinner.

 

[jasonnfree]

There is only so much money to be had. Some don't seem to mind having a few at the top having more than billions of people.

Please answer my questions.

How is a gopher on a movie set going to make some gains if the actors and directors aren't working? How are the special effects workers going to make some gains if no movie is being made? How are the hundreds of other workers going to make some gains if no movie is being made?

What happens when an actor dies. Do the movie companies fire directors and gophers? No, another actor takes his place, and there's always an overabundance of actors I'm told.

A producer of wealth should only be replaced by a superior business model that has defeated them on the field of competition, not induced to stop producing so lesser business models can "succeed".

This may hold true for certain small or medium businesses. I was talking more about the higher lever like large corporations. Usually only on cable company is allowed to provide service to an area for example. And do you still think actors in the reagan class are irreplaceable to the point of movie companies going bankrupt.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

Talk about inequality. The government has it all while you're at their mercy under his ideas.

Bernie Sanders A 90 tax rate sounds fine to me Hot Air

And this is Hillary's main competitor?

 

[g5000]

This may hold true for certain small or medium businesses. I was talking more about the higher lever like large corporations. Usually only on cable company is allowed to provide service to an area for example.

You just gave a perfect example of the playing field being tilted legislatively!

Cure the disease, not the symptom.

 

[jasonnfree]

There is natural concentration of wealth and there is an unnatural concentration of wealth. Thomas Jefferson and James Madison used to correspond about what to do about the unnatural concentration of wealth. And one of Jefferson's solutions was to propose a progressive tax. But not to the extent of choking production to death/.

Getting rich from building a better mousetrap or making Hollywood movies is a natural concentration of wealth, and there is nothing wrong with that.

Taxing the rich more to mitigate the unnatural concentration of wealth is the simpleton's means of treating the symptoms instead of the disease.

The unnatural concentration of wealth, the tilting of the playing field, is being accomplished through government legislation. So the obvious cure is to fix or delete the legislation which is tilting the field.

If your house was being robbed on a regular basis, and the police were providing protection to the thieves, how retarded would you have to be to say, "To solve this problem, we need to tax everyone who lives in a bigger house than me more"?

You'd have to be as retarded as Bernie Sanders.

I should be so lucky as to be as smart as Sanders who, at 73, is for more lucid and knowledgeable than Reagan was at any age.

Reagan made it all the way to the White House.

Sanders won't even come close, except as a guest at a state dinner.

Now you know Reagan made it to the top with the help of very wealthy backers who wanted to get wealthier I hope? Bernie's a man of the people, whom no billionaires will back I think.

 

[Little-Acorn]

I should be so lucky as to be as smart as Sanders

You got that part right, at least.

Sanders, though as confused and deluded as any leftist fanatic, is nonetheless smarter (or at least more articulate) than you.

He is a perfect example of the kind of mindset Reagan referred to in his famous statement, "It's not that liberals are ignorant. It's just that they know so much that isn't so."

 

[jasonnfree]

Just moved my truck before the street sweeper came. I avoided a $75 fine which could go into the hundreds if I forget to pay it. This is what our cities have come to. Making money to survive by going after the little guy for whatever they can get. We don't have the tax base any more from a growing middle class. Thanks Reagan.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Of course no one ever paid 92%. But I shouldn't have to explain how the tax system works or how that might impact economics, you understanding it so well. It is a good thing you don't need an argument, since you don't have one.

I have explained probably 20 times on this forum over the years why we had a thriving economy in the 1950s despite those absurdly high income tax rates. I'm not going over it again, especially for an economic illiterate like yourself whom my words will simply enter in one ear and go out the other. If you had even a basic understanding of how an economy functions, which you don't, you would have never brought up that example in the first place. As I said earlier, people who try to use the 1950s as a justification for astronomical tax rates leading to economic prosperity are only advertising their ignorance to the world and you are apparently quite proud of that.

And that's all I have to say about that, Forest, so you don't need to waste your time responding because I will neither read it nor respond back to you again on this topic.