millionaires 5.4 pct surtax

[toomuchtime_]

hmmmm--We live in an economy where the idea is to earn money but if you do really well at it you have to give it back ??? Makes sense to me--not.

It's all a matter of perspective. If you've done really well, one could argue you've benefited more from the structures of society, government, that set the conditions for your success and other government structures help you protect your wealth so shouldn't you pay more to keep those government structures in place?

To me the relevant questions are how much do you have to pay so that everyone feels he/she has a stake maintaining the society and at what point are taxes taking so much money away from investment in the private sector that everyone begins to suffer?

Exactly. The term "wealth redistribution" is bandied about as evil. I don't think the framers had in mind by "We The People" a divided society of haves and have-nots.

The founding father would certainly have considered the idea of wealth redistribution, especially the redistribution of their wealth, evil. There were few paupers at the Constitutional Convention. Not only did they envision a society that contained haves and have nots, but they envisioned one and the Constitution they wrote provided for one, that contained have nothings, slaves.

They American dream they envisioned provided for equality of opportunity, not equality of outcome, a meritocracy in which talent and industry would be rewarded with power and wealth. They considered poverty evidence of moral deficiency and not paying your debts a crime almost the equal of robbery. While they would nave acknowledged a moral obligation to provide charity to the needy, they would have been appalled by the idea that anyone had a right to demand it.

However, these were practical men of affairs and they understood that for them to prosper and to protect their wealth there must be police and courts and a general currency and treaties to protect trade and roads, etc., and to provide these necessities taxes must be levied in such a way that, to put it succinctly, will not cause another armed rebellion, and that meant, in most cases that those who had the most to protect paid the largest share of the cost of maintaining the government. On the other hand, if the founding fathers had been presented with Obama's health insurance plan, there would have been a second American Revolution.

 

[driveby]

Pray tell how people were supposed to know that housing prices would crash?

OMGNOWAY i didn't know either, please bail me out Obama !

So lets see....your blaming people for not knowing something you didn't know?

Alrighty then

You really do talk out of both sides of your face, i'm gonna splain' this to you slowly. I'll concede that fact that most americans, including me, didn't know it was gonna crash like this. But that is no excuse, i didn't know, yet i'm still in my home, making all mortgage payments on time because i did not overreach even though the lender, real estate agent, etc... wanted me to.....

 

[editec]

Class envy is so ugly sometimes.

It sure it.

But most of the filthy rich just can't help themselves.

It's just part of their selfish natures to hate the other classes whose labors make them so wealthy to begin with.

It's that famous biting the hands that feed you syndrome, I think.

 

[Douger]

I do not mind paying...............as long as the trailer trash will vote to better themselves......... which HAS never been the case/ EVER.
Too much flag waving with zero thinking.

 

[alan1]

Probably not. As I remember the story, the beans were actually magic. The loans? Severely lacking in magic.

The loans are what they are, if you can't afford it, don't sign your name on the dotted line. I "qualified" for much higher, but stayed within what i knew were my means. This "predatory lending" whining is the biggest cop out ever........

Pray tell how people were supposed to know that housing prices would crash?

Did you even read what he said?
Seriously, if I have a mortgage I can afford, it doesn't matter how much my house is worth, or if the value goes down. I CAN STILL AFFORD THE MORTGAGE PAYMENT REGARDLESS OF THE HOUSE VALUE.

 

[alan1]

OMGNOWAY i didn't know either, please bail me out Obama !

So lets see....your blaming people for not knowing something you didn't know?

Alrighty then

You really do talk out of both sides of your face, i'm gonna splain' this to you slowly. I'll concede that fact that most americans, including me, didn't know it was gonna crash like this. But that is no excuse, i didn't know, yet i'm still in my home, making all mortgage payments on time because i did not overreach even though the lender, real estate agent, etc... wanted me to.....

Nik likes to put false words into other people's posts.

 

[Chris]

I love how the right all parrot this talking point about how the rich create jobs.

Bullshit.

Most jobs are created by small businesses, not the rich.

The rich have been screwing the middle class since Reagan was elected, and you dummies are so brainwashed that you don't even know it.

Every detail isn't known, but late last week Ways and Means Chairman Charlie Rangel disclosed that his draft bill would impose a "surtax" on individuals with adjusted gross income of more than $280,000 a year. This would hit job creators especially hard because more than six of every 10 who earn that much are small business owners, operators or investors, according to a 2007 Treasury study. That study also found that almost half of the income taxed at this highest rate is small business income from the more than 500,000 sole proprietorships and subchapter S corporations whose owners pay the individual rate.
Democrats want to impose "surtax" to finance health care - WSJ.com

Chris what part of this don't you understand? rich in this case=small business owner. You said so yourself, most new jobs are created by small business and almost 70% of them file taxes on their business on individual returns. So you don't think this tax on these so called rich will have some effect on employment by these business owners?

What part don't you understand???

We pay TWICE AS MUCH per capita as every other Western democracy for healthcare and our outcomes are only as good or in some cases worst.

What part of that don't you understand???

 

[Gunny]

I love how the right all parrot this talking point about how the rich create jobs.

Bullshit.

Most jobs are created by small businesses, not the rich.

The rich have been screwing the middle class since Reagan was elected, and you dummies are so brainwashed that you don't even know it.

Every detail isn't known, but late last week Ways and Means Chairman Charlie Rangel disclosed that his draft bill would impose a "surtax" on individuals with adjusted gross income of more than $280,000 a year. This would hit job creators especially hard because more than six of every 10 who earn that much are small business owners, operators or investors, according to a 2007 Treasury study. That study also found that almost half of the income taxed at this highest rate is small business income from the more than 500,000 sole proprietorships and subchapter S corporations whose owners pay the individual rate.
Democrats want to impose "surtax" to finance health care - WSJ.com

Chris what part of this don't you understand? rich in this case=small business owner. You said so yourself, most new jobs are created by small business and almost 70% of them file taxes on their business on individual returns. So you don't think this tax on these so called rich will have some effect on employment by these business owners?

What part don't you understand???

We pay TWICE AS MUCH per capita as every other Western democracy for healthcare and our outcomes are only as good or in some cases worst.

What part of that don't you understand???

Why you're a thief.

 

[Chris]

Every detail isn't known, but late last week Ways and Means Chairman Charlie Rangel disclosed that his draft bill would impose a "surtax" on individuals with adjusted gross income of more than $280,000 a year. This would hit job creators especially hard because more than six of every 10 who earn that much are small business owners, operators or investors, according to a 2007 Treasury study. That study also found that almost half of the income taxed at this highest rate is small business income from the more than 500,000 sole proprietorships and subchapter S corporations whose owners pay the individual rate.
Democrats want to impose "surtax" to finance health care - WSJ.com

Chris what part of this don't you understand? rich in this case=small business owner. You said so yourself, most new jobs are created by small business and almost 70% of them file taxes on their business on individual returns. So you don't think this tax on these so called rich will have some effect on employment by these business owners?

What part don't you understand???

We pay TWICE AS MUCH per capita as every other Western democracy for healthcare and our outcomes are only as good or in some cases worst.

What part of that don't you understand???

Why you're a thief.

Really Gunny, that is beneath you.

Personal insults are so useless.

 

[KittenKoder]

Another thread blaming those who earned their status for all the woes again? This is getting old.

 

[Chris]

Another thread blaming those who earned their status for all the woes again? This is getting old.

Earned their status?

Hardly.

Stole their status is more like it.

Stole it from hard working people.

 

[alan1]

Table 1: Distribution of net worth and financial wealth in the United States, 1983-2004
Total Net Worth
Top 1 percent Next 19 percent Bottom 80 percent
1983 33.8% 47.5% 18.7%
1989 37.4% 46.2% 16.5%
1992 37.2% 46.6% 16.2%
1995 38.5% 45.4% 16.1%
1998 38.1% 45.3% 16.6%
2001 33.4% 51.0% 15.6%
2004 34.3% 50.3% 15.3%

Financial Wealth
Top 1 percent Next 19 percent Bottom 80 percent
1983 42.9% 48.4% 8.7%
1989 46.9% 46.5% 6.6%
1992 45.6% 46.7% 7.7%
1995 47.2% 45.9% 7.0%
1998 47.3% 43.6% 9.1%
2001 39.7% 51.5% 8.7%
2004 42.2% 50.3% 7.5%

Who Rules America: Wealth, Income, and Power

As you can see from the above chart, the Reagan Revolution took wealth from the bottom 80% and gave it to the rich. Likewise with Bush Jr.

The tax is on income, not wealth. Those are two entirely different things.
Some how, I get the feeling you want to impose not only an income tax, but a wealth tax also.

 

[Navy1960]

Every detail isn't known, but late last week Ways and Means Chairman Charlie Rangel disclosed that his draft bill would impose a "surtax" on individuals with adjusted gross income of more than $280,000 a year. This would hit job creators especially hard because more than six of every 10 who earn that much are small business owners, operators or investors, according to a 2007 Treasury study. That study also found that almost half of the income taxed at this highest rate is small business income from the more than 500,000 sole proprietorships and subchapter S corporations whose owners pay the individual rate.
Democrats want to impose "surtax" to finance health care - WSJ.com

Chris what part of this don't you understand? rich in this case=small business owner. You said so yourself, most new jobs are created by small business and almost 70% of them file taxes on their business on individual returns. So you don't think this tax on these so called rich will have some effect on employment by these business owners?

What part don't you understand???

We pay TWICE AS MUCH per capita as every other Western democracy for healthcare and our outcomes are only as good or in some cases worst.

What part of that don't you understand???

Why you're a thief.

Of course we pay twice as much per capita however solving that does not mean punishing those that create jobs in this counry and those that work in small business . As for assertions on quality those figures comming from the WHO are meaningless especially when those figures also include, muders , death by accudents, etc. as part of overall health quality. So you assertions that the rich must pay for the mistakes of mismanagement often times looking the other way when problems need to be solved are nothing but campagin slogans that will eventually lead this nation to a path where it will find itself among those nations that produce nothing, consume everything, and expect everything at the same time. So if this is the nation you wish to have then please be my guest and continue to advocate for these causes that will achieve your goal of making this the 3rd world nation that you wish it to be.

 

[Chris]

What part don't you understand???

We pay TWICE AS MUCH per capita as every other Western democracy for healthcare and our outcomes are only as good or in some cases worst.

What part of that don't you understand???

Why you're a thief.

Of course we pay twice as much per capita however solving that does not mean punishing those that create jobs in this counry and those that work in small business . As for assertions on quality those figures comming from the WHO are meaningless especially when those figures also include, muders , death by accudents, etc. as part of overall health quality. So you assertions that the rich must pay for the mistakes of mismanagement often times looking the other way when problems need to be solved are nothing but campagin slogans that will eventually lead this nation to a path where it will find itself among those nations that produce nothing, consume everything, and expect everything at the same time. So if this is the nation you wish to have then please be my guest and continue to advocate for these causes that will achieve your goal of making this the 3rd world nation that you wish it to be.

The rich do not "create jobs."

Having a good healthcare system creates jobs by keeping workers healthy and alive.

How can you work a job if you are dying of cancer?

You do realize that protecting the rich under the guise of job creation is THE REPUBLICAN TALKING POINT right now. It is also totally bogus.

When taxes on the rich were much higher in the early 1960's, we had less unemployment than we do now. The gap between rich and poor was smaller then as well. Inequitable distrbution of wealth is very bad for America.

 

[alan1]

What part don't you understand???

We pay TWICE AS MUCH per capita as every other Western democracy for healthcare and our outcomes are only as good or in some cases worst.

What part of that don't you understand???

I suppose that in your fantasy world, the price of health care in the US will magically drop as soon as the government gets even more involved.

 

[Chris]

What part don't you understand???

We pay TWICE AS MUCH per capita as every other Western democracy for healthcare and our outcomes are only as good or in some cases worst.

What part of that don't you understand???

I suppose that in your fantasy world, the price of health care in the US will magically drop as soon as the government gets even more involved.

No, the price will drop when we adopt a single payer system, which this is not.

And there is no "magic" about it. A single payer system is more efficient and more fair. That is why every other Western democracy uses one. That is also why they pay HALF per capita what we pay for healthcare.

 

[alan1]

What part don't you understand???

We pay TWICE AS MUCH per capita as every other Western democracy for healthcare and our outcomes are only as good or in some cases worst.

What part of that don't you understand???

I suppose that in your fantasy world, the price of health care in the US will magically drop as soon as the government gets even more involved.

No, the price will drop when we adopt a single payer system, which this is not.

And there is no "magic" about it. A single payer system is more efficient and more fair. That is why every other Western democracy uses one. That is also why they pay HALF per capita what we pay for healthcare.

Fair for whom? Efficient for whom?

You gonna just ignore the post about wealth vs income?

 

[Navy1960]

Why you're a thief.

Of course we pay twice as much per capita however solving that does not mean punishing those that create jobs in this counry and those that work in small business . As for assertions on quality those figures comming from the WHO are meaningless especially when those figures also include, muders , death by accudents, etc. as part of overall health quality. So you assertions that the rich must pay for the mistakes of mismanagement often times looking the other way when problems need to be solved are nothing but campagin slogans that will eventually lead this nation to a path where it will find itself among those nations that produce nothing, consume everything, and expect everything at the same time. So if this is the nation you wish to have then please be my guest and continue to advocate for these causes that will achieve your goal of making this the 3rd world nation that you wish it to be.

The rich do not "create jobs."

Having a good healthcare system creates jobs by keeping workers healthy and alive.

How can you work a job if you are dying of cancer?

You do realize that protecting the rich under the guise of job creation is THE REPUBLICAN TALKING POINT right now. It is also totally bogus.

When taxes on the rich were much higher in the early 1960's, we had less unemployment than we do now. The gap between rich and poor was smaller then as well. Inequitable distrbution of wealth is very bad for America.

I suppose the difference between you and I Chris is that I don't consider someone that owns a small busniess, employs people and struggles daily to pay bills a rich person. However I can see in the new liberal level playing field where someone who actually works hard and gets a little success would be considered rich when compared next to those who expect their just due at the expense of those that were willing to go out and work for it. I personally don't consider anyone that makes 300K rich by any stretch of the imagination. I'm sure you do , but when you walk into the local subway or starbucks you may want to look at the rich owner and call them that and see what kind of laugh it generates. I also might suggest Chris that if you wish healthcare for all that you start with yourself, the real issue here is that too many liberals are more concerned with socially engineering the welfare of others rather than themselves. Thank you for your concern, but no thank you, I would rather leave a country to my children that has a real chance at competing in the comming years than one that is indebted to the rest of world all in the name of socially norming everyone. If you would like an idea of how this will all play out let me give an example, go out open a credit card with a limit of 5000 dollars , max it out to pay for your healthcare, then open another credit card to pay for one you opened before and max it out. Then wait for the bill to come and hope you still can afford the healthcare after you paid both the credit card bills, that is of course unless you are advocating bankruptcy!!

 

[jeffrockit]

Yeah, instead lets make the people who don't make any give it back

If the ones not making any weren't trying to live like they are making big money, we wouldn't be in this mess.

Actually a lot of the mortgages that went under were people who were making decent/good money. Besides that many of them weren't trying to live like they are making big money, the banks were pressuring them to get huge loans saying that they could easily make money on the houses.

And the banks were pressured by who? Ever hear of the Community Reinvestment Act? As usual, it comes back to our great government/politicians.

 

[jeffrockit]

A five percent tax increase on top of the income tax increases going into effect next year is unprecedented. But they will continue to gauge the rich until no one wants to produce anymore. I am starting to believe that Obama is deliberately destroying capitalism and is succeeding.The rich will always be an easy target because they are such a small minority. How much is fair? 50 percent 60 percent 99 percent.

When you rob Peter to pay Paul, you will always get the support of Paul.

That particular proposed tax increase will never happen.

If Obama were trying to destroy capitalism, he would have nationalized the banks, nationalized the auto industry, gone whole hog for a universal health care plan by nationalizing the medical industry. Instead, HIS proposal is to keep private insurers alive, just keep them honest with some competition. And THAT is the only health care initiative that stands a chance of passing--not any universal CARE as proposed by the House yesterday.

And you think the private insurers are going to be able to compete with the government. They won't, and all that will be left is Gov. run healthcare.