Should the United States go back to a top federal tax rate of 70%?

[Ambivalent1]

I don't care what the majority of Americans want in this particular case (though usually, I do).

Most Americans are not in the tax bracket in question - naturally they will be for raising the tax rate in a tax bracket they have nothing to do with.


The ONLY, truly fair tax is where every American (who is not poor - it is pointless to tax poor people) pays EXACTLY the same tax rate...including capital gains.

Raising taxes on anybody has an indirect effect on everybody.

If it's one thing I learned, it's that the rich guy never takes the hit. Come up with some tax scheme for companies, they simply increase the price of their products, freeze pay increases and benefits for their workers, move some or all operations overseas, and it's the little guy who always ends up paying or getting hurt.

Let's say you came across a small fortune: a small lottery winning, winning a huge lawsuit, being an heir of a wealthy relative. Now you have 200K to do with what you want. Would you risk that money in investments if government is going to take almost 3/4 of it if you make out? It's simply not worth the risk.

People investing money is what makes our world go round., Bring that to a halt and you do the same for our economy.

Tax policy is about what is best for the country as a whole, not the rich, or individuals in the middle class etc. In order for the nation and government to survive and thrive, tax revenue must be raised in the quantities that are needed for national defense and other government functions regardless of whether you think a certain rate is "fair" or penalizes success.

Which is why everybody should be paying income tax. However that's simply not the case. Almost half of our country doesn't pay one dime into income tax. And I don't care about payroll deductions since you get most of that back in social programs and it goes to operate local governments.

I understand that we need taxes to operate the federal government, but I also understand the waste of money by our federal government. I'll vote for the representative the gives me the most goodies as long as they send the bill to you. That's how we got 20 trillion in the hole.

If we raised the marginal rate to 70%, who would want to create wealth? It's simply not worth your time or money. Given the fact the top 10% of wage earners in this country pay over 70% of all collected income taxes and you think it's not fair, then what percentage should they be paying?

The top federal tax rate should be set at the rate that maximizes tax revenue collect without hurting economic growth. The United States has one of the lowest tax rates in the world based on the tax revenue it collects as a percentage of annual GDP. Top federal tax rates were also between 70% and 92% from 1945 to 1980.

So based on that evidence, the top federal tax rate can be increased without hurting economic growth and bring in much needed tax revenue to the government to balance the budget and defend the country.

Its not about what is "fair" for the individual, its about what is best for the country in terms of defending it and growing its economy. There is plenty of evidence from past history and other countries that the rich continue to work just as hard while being taxed at 70%. Plus much of their wealth at that level is based more on market conditions rather than their daily grind or ingenuity.

Of course Komrade, it's all about the "Collective".

 

[McRocket]

I don't care what the majority of Americans want in this particular case (though usually, I do).

Most Americans are not in the tax bracket in question - naturally they will be for raising the tax rate in a tax bracket they have nothing to do with.


The ONLY, truly fair tax is where every American (who is not poor - it is pointless to tax poor people) pays EXACTLY the same tax rate...including capital gains.

Raising taxes on anybody has an indirect effect on everybody.

If it's one thing I learned, it's that the rich guy never takes the hit. Come up with some tax scheme for companies, they simply increase the price of their products, freeze pay increases and benefits for their workers, move some or all operations overseas, and it's the little guy who always ends up paying or getting hurt.

Let's say you came across a small fortune: a small lottery winning, winning a huge lawsuit, being an heir of a wealthy relative. Now you have 200K to do with what you want. Would you risk that money in investments if government is going to take almost 3/4 of it if you make out? It's simply not worth the risk.

People investing money is what makes our world go round., Bring that to a halt and you do the same for our economy.

What are you talking about?

Where did I say anything about a 70% capital gains tax?

I am against the 70% tax...STRONGLY.


To be clear, I am talking about 0% tax up to the poverty line and a 20-30% tax on everyone else (including capital gains). With only two deductions - capital losses and charitable contributions.
That makes taxation 100% fair and makes doing one's taxes a 5 minute task.

And I am 100% against corporate taxation. All corporate taxes are passed on through either higher prices, lower wages/benefits and/or lower dividends to shareholders. The corporate tax rate should be 0%.
Corporations do not 'eat' corporate taxes.

And will the above reduce government income?

God...I hope so.

Government is far, FAR too big as it is - both in the military and social spending.
Some of both is necessary.
But the levels both are at are absolutely ridiculous.

 

[Flopper]

He said he had a lower tax rate than his secretary, which is easy to accomplish.

Which is not true but Progressives have nothing else.

Anyone with sufficient wealth can reduce their tax rate to zero with the right kind of investing, for example tax free municipal bonds exempt from AMT.

I don't know anything about how Buffet invests his wealth but I would guess, most of it is split between a charitable trust and a trust for his kids, neither of which he pays tax on. With 87 billion pledged to charity, 37 billion is being paid to the Gates Foundation, his charitable contributions will certainly exceed his taxable income.

 

[McRocket]

Workers work just as hard today as they did 20 years ago or 40 years ago, yet the CEO's are making 50 times what they did back in 1980. Why is that?

Because CEO's are more valuable to a company than workers. If companies could find the best CEO's to work for 100K a year, they would do it. But like actors and actresses, sports figures, musicians, they have an extreme talent very few other people have.

You and I both own widget companies. We both need a new CEO. One is willing to work for you for 5 mil a year. You don't want to pay that because your workers are earning very well. So I offer the CEO the 5 mil. Within a few years, I am able to sell widgets for much less than you, I take most of your customers, and you close up shop.

That's why they pay CEO's what they pay them, because if you don't want to pay them that money, your competitor just might.

Yet, overall economic growth has slowed over the last 20 years, yet these people at the top of these companies are still making absurd amounts of money, while the average worker has not seen any increase at all. Its one thing to make more money as a CEO when business is thriving, but that's not the case here. GDP growth is an anemic 1.9% on average since the year 2000. Back in the 1960s when you did not have these massive disparities between what the average worker made and what the CEO made, GDP growth was over 5% EVERY YEAR!

The system now is essentially a welfare program for the rich.

The reason it has slowed is 100% due to government/central bank meddling in the economy since 2001.

 

[caddo kid]

Only if it is "EARNED" income. Dividend and capital gains wont fall into the earned income part, and most people who make over $10 million get it through options again not getting taxed as earned income. So this is all smoke and mirrors but supposed to make the petulant impoverished welfare queens and queers feel like she is working for them....


My earned income is around 30 thousand dollars a year. I have dividends coming in around $440,000 a year I only am taxed about $22,000 on that dividend income and $6,000 on the earned income.....See the difference?

This is the unfairness of the tax code. Your real income is $470,000 a year. Years ago Wife sold her business and we had to pay that plus our incomes as earned income. What's the fucking difference is that rich men write the tax laws.

Tax everything at 10% is fair for all.

For years I have advocated a graduated/tiered tax. For example:

Your income is between $0 - $25K/your tax = $0

Your income is between $25+ - $50K/your tax = 5 %

you get the idea

Also: NO write offs, NO deductions, NO credits, NO bovine feces, NO nothing

Shame you are too stupid to not know how to make money, but punish those that work 80 hours a week and have degrees in higher education. I say, take away welfare, stop giving people money to sit on their liberal lazy asses, thus making them "WORK" so they can survive. This not only will reduce the national debt, but enable the new Republican Voters to rely on their God given skills, instead of being a victim of liberalism. Also we would no longer need a wall at our southern border because those that are coming here for our welfare programs will turn around, so another win for the US.

The War on Poverty has cost $22 trillion -- three times more than what the government has spent on all wars in American history. Federal and state governments spend $1 trillion in taxpayer dollars on America's 80 means-tested welfare programs annually.

The War on Poverty Has Cost $22 Trillion
www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=25288

You call me stupid? I paid off my mortgage within the past 12 months. That is saving me many hundreds in interest alone, every month. I paid off over $100 large. You are too stupid to know what that even means.

So, you believe the poorest folks in the nation, the ones that can least afford to pay an income tax, should pay an income tax?

That is your implication.

you do realize that a mortgage has not only a tax deduction but a lower interest rate payment than a signature loan. But if your mortgage is 4% while you have dividend stocks paying 7 -10% you have just wasted a lot of money. yes, you are a victim of liberalism who doesnt know how to make money...

So, you call folks that you don't even "stupid" & "victim" based on what; your arrogance?
So, you want to tax the poorest Americans & you're arrogant.
You must be a Republican.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I don't care what the majority of Americans want in this particular case (though usually, I do).

Most Americans are not in the tax bracket in question - naturally they will be for raising the tax rate in a tax bracket they have nothing to do with.


The ONLY, truly fair tax is where every American (who is not poor - it is pointless to tax poor people) pays EXACTLY the same tax rate...including capital gains.

Raising taxes on anybody has an indirect effect on everybody.

If it's one thing I learned, it's that the rich guy never takes the hit. Come up with some tax scheme for companies, they simply increase the price of their products, freeze pay increases and benefits for their workers, move some or all operations overseas, and it's the little guy who always ends up paying or getting hurt.

Let's say you came across a small fortune: a small lottery winning, winning a huge lawsuit, being an heir of a wealthy relative. Now you have 200K to do with what you want. Would you risk that money in investments if government is going to take almost 3/4 of it if you make out? It's simply not worth the risk.

People investing money is what makes our world go round., Bring that to a halt and you do the same for our economy.

What are you talking about?

Where did I say anything about a 70% capital gains tax?

I am against the 70% tax...STRONGLY.


To be clear, I am talking about 0% tax up to the poverty line and a 20-30% tax on everyone else (including capital gains). With only two deductions - capital losses and charitable contributions.
That makes taxation 100% fair and makes doing one's taxes a 5 minute task.

And I am 100% against corporate taxation. All corporate taxes are passed on through either higher prices, lower wages/benefits and/or lower dividends to shareholders. The corporate tax rate should be 0%.
Corporations do not 'eat' corporate taxes.

And will the above reduce government income?

God...I hope so.

Government is far, FAR too big as it is - both in the military and social spending.
Some of both is necessary.
But the levels both are at are absolutely ridiculous.

Well the title of the thread is 70% taxation, that's why I brought it up.

Your suggestion is that we continue to have everybody else support those with lower income or no income at all. Why not everybody pay? I suggest a consumption tax. We have it here in my county. It's 8 cents on every dollar spent on anything outside of food.

The next question is how as a landlord am I supposed to continue renting my apartments if I'm not allowed any deductions? The only way to keep that business would be to double everybody's rent. Could you afford to pay twice as much for rent? Neither can my tenants.

After all, I deduct what I pay for utilities for those apartments, what I pay for insurance, what I pay for property taxes, what I pay for all the repairs or improvements, mortgage interest rates. By the time taxes are due, I have over a hundred deductions not including medical. Over 200 including medical.

Then after that, you want me to pay 20 to 30% on anything over $12,140 which is the poverty line for a single person.

I couldn't afford to keep the business, and I plan on using it to supplement my Social Security when I retire.

 

[caddo kid]

I don't care what the majority of Americans want in this particular case (though usually, I do).

Most Americans are not in the tax bracket in question - naturally they will be for raising the tax rate in a tax bracket they have nothing to do with.


The ONLY, truly fair tax is where every American (who is not poor - it is pointless to tax poor people) pays EXACTLY the same tax rate...including capital gains.

Raising taxes on anybody has an indirect effect on everybody.

If it's one thing I learned, it's that the rich guy never takes the hit. Come up with some tax scheme for companies, they simply increase the price of their products, freeze pay increases and benefits for their workers, move some or all operations overseas, and it's the little guy who always ends up paying or getting hurt.

Let's say you came across a small fortune: a small lottery winning, winning a huge lawsuit, being an heir of a wealthy relative. Now you have 200K to do with what you want. Would you risk that money in investments if government is going to take almost 3/4 of it if you make out? It's simply not worth the risk.

People investing money is what makes our world go round., Bring that to a halt and you do the same for our economy.

What are you talking about?

Where did I say anything about a 70% capital gains tax?

I am against the 70% tax...STRONGLY.


To be clear, I am talking about 0% tax up to the poverty line and a 20-30% tax on everyone else (including capital gains). With only two deductions - capital losses and charitable contributions.
That makes taxation 100% fair and makes doing one's taxes a 5 minute task.

And I am 100% against corporate taxation. All corporate taxes are passed on through either higher prices, lower wages/benefits and/or lower dividends to shareholders. The corporate tax rate should be 0%.
Corporations do not 'eat' corporate taxes.

And will the above reduce government income?

God...I hope so.

Government is far, FAR too big as it is - both in the military and social spending.
Some of both is necessary.
But the levels both are at are absolutely ridiculous.

Well the title of the thread is 70% taxation, that's why I brought it up.

Your suggestion is that we continue to have everybody else support those with lower income or no income at all. Why not everybody pay? I suggest a consumption tax. We have it here in my county. It's 8 cents on every dollar spent on anything outside of food.

The next question is how as a landlord am I supposed to continue renting my apartments if I'm not allowed any deductions? The only way to keep that business would be to double everybody's rent. Could you afford to pay twice as much for rent? Neither can my tenants.

After all, I deduct what I pay for utilities for those apartments, what I pay for insurance, what I pay for property taxes, what I pay for all the repairs or improvements, mortgage interest rates. By the time taxes are due, I have over a hundred deductions not including medical. Over 200 including medical.

Then after that, you want me to pay 20 to 30% on anything over $12,140 which is the poverty line for a single person.

I couldn't afford to keep the business, and I plan on using it to supplement my Social Security when I retire.

You are recommending an 8% consumption tax, in a consumer driven economy? LOL

Good luck.

 

[Oldstyle]

how is it moral for any government to confiscate 70% of your INCOME? Remember, income is not even "profit."

Well, where does your income come from? If you are a U.S. citizen living in the United States, it comes from the U.S. MARKET. Your income is based essentially on your market value. How much your house is worth is based on the MARKET. You were lucky to be born into the United States and its market. You are lucky to be able to take advantage of that market. The U.S. market was built long before you were born. It was protected, built, and grown by generations that came before you. In order for that market to continue, it needs a stable government that is able to protect it and maintain order. The government needs revenue to do that and the only way it can get that revenue is through taxes.

For some reason you seem to believe that Big Government is needed to "protect" free markets in the US. I'm not quite sure what you base that belief on.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Workers work just as hard today as they did 20 years ago or 40 years ago, yet the CEO's are making 50 times what they did back in 1980. Why is that?

Because CEO's are more valuable to a company than workers. If companies could find the best CEO's to work for 100K a year, they would do it. But like actors and actresses, sports figures, musicians, they have an extreme talent very few other people have.

You and I both own widget companies. We both need a new CEO. One is willing to work for you for 5 mil a year. You don't want to pay that because your workers are earning very well. So I offer the CEO the 5 mil. Within a few years, I am able to sell widgets for much less than you, I take most of your customers, and you close up shop.

That's why they pay CEO's what they pay them, because if you don't want to pay them that money, your competitor just might.

Yet, overall economic growth has slowed over the last 20 years, yet these people at the top of these companies are still making absurd amounts of money, while the average worker has not seen any increase at all. Its one thing to make more money as a CEO when business is thriving, but that's not the case here. GDP growth is an anemic 1.9% on average since the year 2000. Back in the 1960s when you did not have these massive disparities between what the average worker made and what the CEO made, GDP growth was over 5% EVERY YEAR!

The system now is essentially a welfare program for the rich.

No. Welfare is when you give something to somebody that they didn't have before. Welfare is not taking less of something that somebody earned.

The point you missed is this: CEO's are paid because of their rare talent and record. Workers can be found virtually anywhere. What are you worth as an employee? The answer is simple. You are only worth as much as your employer can pay somebody else to do your job on the same quality level. That's what you are worth.

So if employers can find an equal CEO willing to work for less money than the current CEO they have, they will do exactly that. The problem however is that these people are not like floor sweepers which is a job anybody can do. CEO's do a job very few of us can do. From there, it's a supply and demand industry just like it is for any other worker in America.

That's why workers pay increased much less than CEO pay.

 

[McRocket]

I don't care what the majority of Americans want in this particular case (though usually, I do).

Most Americans are not in the tax bracket in question - naturally they will be for raising the tax rate in a tax bracket they have nothing to do with.


The ONLY, truly fair tax is where every American (who is not poor - it is pointless to tax poor people) pays EXACTLY the same tax rate...including capital gains.

Raising taxes on anybody has an indirect effect on everybody.

If it's one thing I learned, it's that the rich guy never takes the hit. Come up with some tax scheme for companies, they simply increase the price of their products, freeze pay increases and benefits for their workers, move some or all operations overseas, and it's the little guy who always ends up paying or getting hurt.

Let's say you came across a small fortune: a small lottery winning, winning a huge lawsuit, being an heir of a wealthy relative. Now you have 200K to do with what you want. Would you risk that money in investments if government is going to take almost 3/4 of it if you make out? It's simply not worth the risk.

People investing money is what makes our world go round., Bring that to a halt and you do the same for our economy.

What are you talking about?

Where did I say anything about a 70% capital gains tax?

I am against the 70% tax...STRONGLY.


To be clear, I am talking about 0% tax up to the poverty line and a 20-30% tax on everyone else (including capital gains). With only two deductions - capital losses and charitable contributions.
That makes taxation 100% fair and makes doing one's taxes a 5 minute task.

And I am 100% against corporate taxation. All corporate taxes are passed on through either higher prices, lower wages/benefits and/or lower dividends to shareholders. The corporate tax rate should be 0%.
Corporations do not 'eat' corporate taxes.

And will the above reduce government income?

God...I hope so.

Government is far, FAR too big as it is - both in the military and social spending.
Some of both is necessary.
But the levels both are at are absolutely ridiculous.

Well the title of the thread is 70% taxation, that's why I brought it up.

Your suggestion is that we continue to have everybody else support those with lower income or no income at all. Why not everybody pay? I suggest a consumption tax. We have it here in my county. It's 8 cents on every dollar spent on anything outside of food.

I am 100% against consumption taxes...too many taxes as it is. And it hurts the economy as there will inevitably be people who cannot afford/buy an item if there are additional taxes on top of it. Plus, it is too easy for businesses to get around.
I lived for years in Canada and they have a 'GST' tax (a consumption tax). And people got around that constantly. It's called 'cash' with 'no/phony receipts'.

The next question is how as a landlord am I supposed to continue renting my apartments if I'm not allowed any deductions? The only way to keep that business would be to double everybody's rent. Could you afford to pay twice as much for rent? Neither can my tenants.

After all, I deduct what I pay for utilities for those apartments, what I pay for insurance, what I pay for property taxes, what I pay for all the repairs or improvements, mortgage interest rates. By the time taxes are due, I have over a hundred deductions not including medical. Over 200 including medical.

Then after that, you want me to pay 20 to 30% on anything over $12,140 which is the poverty line for a single person.

I couldn't afford to keep the business, and I plan on using it to supplement my Social Security when I retire.

And I have been a landlord many times. I would not have had to raise taxes more than 20% at most if I could not have included any deductions. Tenants paid their own utilities and I rarely needed to repair the properties...because I did not buy dumps. I bought new/newer properties with new/newer appliances/HVAC equipment that needed little/nothing in the way of repairs/improvements.

And I am not going to waste one second more on your 'situation'...I DON'T MUCH CARE WHAT IT IS.

It's simple, the free market will work it out...supply-and-demand. If you have to raise your rent because you cannot deduct expenses - then everyone else will as well. And your relative level of competitiveness will remain the same.
Supply and demand will work everything out.

Besides, if you are for free enterprise - then you should be for the least possible amount of government intrusion into the private sector...including tax deductions.

No doubt you do not agree...so be it.

Good day.

 

[Flopper]

Workers work just as hard today as they did 20 years ago or 40 years ago, yet the CEO's are making 50 times what they did back in 1980. Why is that?

Once in the position, they pretty much get to set their own pay.
Because CEO's are more valuable to a company than workers. If companies could find the best CEO's to work for 100K a year, they would do it. But like actors and actresses, sports figures, musicians, they have an extreme talent very few other people have.

You and I both own widget companies. We both need a new CEO. One is willing to work for you for 5 mil a year. You don't want to pay that because your workers are earning very well. So I offer the CEO the 5 mil. Within a few years, I am able to sell widgets for much less than you, I take most of your customers, and you close up shop.

That's why they pay CEO's what they pay them, because if you don't want to pay them that money, your competitor just might.

Yet, overall economic growth has slowed over the last 20 years, yet these people at the top of these companies are still making absurd amounts of money, while the average worker has not seen any increase at all. Its one thing to make more money as a CEO when business is thriving, but that's not the case here. GDP growth is an anemic 1.9% on average since the year 2000. Back in the 1960s when you did not have these massive disparities between what the average worker made and what the CEO made, GDP growth was over 5% EVERY YEAR!

The system now is essentially a welfare program for the rich.

No. Welfare is when you give something to somebody that they didn't have before. Welfare is not taking less of something that somebody earned.

The point you missed is this: CEO's are paid because of their rare talent and record. Workers can be found virtually anywhere. What are you worth as an employee? The answer is simple. You are only worth as much as your employer can pay somebody else to do your job on the same quality level. That's what you are worth.

So if employers can find an equal CEO willing to work for less money than the current CEO they have, they will do exactly that. The problem however is that these people are not like floor sweepers which is a job anybody can do. CEO's do a job very few of us can do. From there, it's a supply and demand industry just like it is for any other worker in America.

That's why workers pay increased much less than CEO pay.

That' the story line. In reality, CEOs are like kings. They aren't elected to their position, they are appointed. Usually after several years of grueling political warfare, back-stabbing colleagues and gerrymandering the organization. Once in the position, they pretty much get to set their own pay.

Who can change the pay? The board of directors of course, but who makes up most boards? Largely still CEOs (and former CEOs). It doesn't do any board member's reputation any good with his peers to try and cut CEO pay. You certainly don't want your objection to "Joe's" pay coming up when its time to set your pay.

The people most directly effected is not the public but the shareholders. However, thanks to corporation law in states like Delaware where so many big corporations incorporate, shareholders that are not on the board have little if any input.

So don't think for a moment that hiring CEO's is anything like hiring other employees. There is of course exceptions, usually in smaller businesses where the CEO actually understands the business and often has been active in managing the business.

CEO's in our largest corporation often have no experience in managing the business. They manage the books, know little about products, or the people that create them. They are money people.
Why CEOs Make So Much Money

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

This is the unfairness of the tax code. Your real income is $470,000 a year. Years ago Wife sold her business and we had to pay that plus our incomes as earned income. What's the fucking difference is that rich men write the tax laws.

Tax everything at 10% is fair for all.

For years I have advocated a graduated/tiered tax. For example:

Your income is between $0 - $25K/your tax = $0

Your income is between $25+ - $50K/your tax = 5 %

you get the idea

Also: NO write offs, NO deductions, NO credits, NO bovine feces, NO nothing

Shame you are too stupid to not know how to make money, but punish those that work 80 hours a week and have degrees in higher education. I say, take away welfare, stop giving people money to sit on their liberal lazy asses, thus making them "WORK" so they can survive. This not only will reduce the national debt, but enable the new Republican Voters to rely on their God given skills, instead of being a victim of liberalism. Also we would no longer need a wall at our southern border because those that are coming here for our welfare programs will turn around, so another win for the US.

The War on Poverty has cost $22 trillion -- three times more than what the government has spent on all wars in American history. Federal and state governments spend $1 trillion in taxpayer dollars on America's 80 means-tested welfare programs annually.

The War on Poverty Has Cost $22 Trillion
www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=25288

You call me stupid? I paid off my mortgage within the past 12 months. That is saving me many hundreds in interest alone, every month. I paid off over $100 large. You are too stupid to know what that even means.

So, you believe the poorest folks in the nation, the ones that can least afford to pay an income tax, should pay an income tax?

That is your implication.

you do realize that a mortgage has not only a tax deduction but a lower interest rate payment than a signature loan. But if your mortgage is 4% while you have dividend stocks paying 7 -10% you have just wasted a lot of money. yes, you are a victim of liberalism who doesnt know how to make money...

So, you call folks that you don't even "stupid" & "victim" based on what; your arrogance?
So, you want to tax the poorest Americans & you're arrogant.
You must be a Republican.

No, not my arrogance, but by their actions to vote for the very people who keep them poor. When you are retarded enough to vote for people who want to hike up your taxes, cause your energy prices to necessarily skyrocket, make food harder to buy, you just are a stupid, mindnumbed idiot, who goose steps to the liberal beat. Then when those liberal elites talk about punishing those who didnt stay a victim of liberalism, you guys are out there cheering them on, not for making your lives better, but for making everyone else like you poor and miserable. Liberalism is all about misery and poverty, when they get everyone to achieve that , they have finally made it FAIR...

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

Workers work just as hard today as they did 20 years ago or 40 years ago, yet the CEO's are making 50 times what they did back in 1980. Why is that?

Once in the position, they pretty much get to set their own pay.
Because CEO's are more valuable to a company than workers. If companies could find the best CEO's to work for 100K a year, they would do it. But like actors and actresses, sports figures, musicians, they have an extreme talent very few other people have.

You and I both own widget companies. We both need a new CEO. One is willing to work for you for 5 mil a year. You don't want to pay that because your workers are earning very well. So I offer the CEO the 5 mil. Within a few years, I am able to sell widgets for much less than you, I take most of your customers, and you close up shop.

That's why they pay CEO's what they pay them, because if you don't want to pay them that money, your competitor just might.

Yet, overall economic growth has slowed over the last 20 years, yet these people at the top of these companies are still making absurd amounts of money, while the average worker has not seen any increase at all. Its one thing to make more money as a CEO when business is thriving, but that's not the case here. GDP growth is an anemic 1.9% on average since the year 2000. Back in the 1960s when you did not have these massive disparities between what the average worker made and what the CEO made, GDP growth was over 5% EVERY YEAR!

The system now is essentially a welfare program for the rich.

No. Welfare is when you give something to somebody that they didn't have before. Welfare is not taking less of something that somebody earned.

The point you missed is this: CEO's are paid because of their rare talent and record. Workers can be found virtually anywhere. What are you worth as an employee? The answer is simple. You are only worth as much as your employer can pay somebody else to do your job on the same quality level. That's what you are worth.

So if employers can find an equal CEO willing to work for less money than the current CEO they have, they will do exactly that. The problem however is that these people are not like floor sweepers which is a job anybody can do. CEO's do a job very few of us can do. From there, it's a supply and demand industry just like it is for any other worker in America.

That's why workers pay increased much less than CEO pay.

That' the story line. In reality, CEOs are like kings. They aren't elected to their position, they are appointed. Usually after several years of grueling political warfare, back-stabbing colleagues and gerrymandering the organization. Once in the position, they pretty much get to set their own pay.

Who can change the pay? The board of directors of course, but who makes up most boards? Largely still CEOs (and former CEOs). It doesn't do any board member's reputation any good with his peers to try and cut CEO pay. You certainly don't want your objection to "Joe's" pay coming up when its time to set your pay.

The people most directly effected is not the public but the shareholders. However, thanks to corporation law in states like Delaware where so many big corporations incorporate, shareholders that are not on the board have little if any input.

So don't think for a moment that hiring CEO's is anything like hiring other employees. There is of course exceptions, usually in smaller businesses where the CEO actually understands the business and often has been active in managing the business.

CEO's in our largest corporation often have no experience in managing the business. They manage the books, know little about products, or the people that create them. They are money people.
Why CEOs Make So Much Money

You are so full of shit. It is the board members who set the CEO's pay, for if the CEO doesnt perform he gets canned, if he produces then he gets paid well. Why is it CEO's are bad guys who have to run a company employing possibly 10's of 1000s of people, yet a movie star(liberal) or pro Athlete, can make the same or even more, and you dont say a fucking word about them? Because you brain dead asshole liberals, only do what your liberal elites tell you to do. Just cant get more stupid than a liberal...

 

[caddo kid]

For years I have advocated a graduated/tiered tax. For example:

Your income is between $0 - $25K/your tax = $0

Your income is between $25+ - $50K/your tax = 5 %

you get the idea

Also: NO write offs, NO deductions, NO credits, NO bovine feces, NO nothing

Shame you are too stupid to not know how to make money, but punish those that work 80 hours a week and have degrees in higher education. I say, take away welfare, stop giving people money to sit on their liberal lazy asses, thus making them "WORK" so they can survive. This not only will reduce the national debt, but enable the new Republican Voters to rely on their God given skills, instead of being a victim of liberalism. Also we would no longer need a wall at our southern border because those that are coming here for our welfare programs will turn around, so another win for the US.

The War on Poverty has cost $22 trillion -- three times more than what the government has spent on all wars in American history. Federal and state governments spend $1 trillion in taxpayer dollars on America's 80 means-tested welfare programs annually.

The War on Poverty Has Cost $22 Trillion
www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=25288

You call me stupid? I paid off my mortgage within the past 12 months. That is saving me many hundreds in interest alone, every month. I paid off over $100 large. You are too stupid to know what that even means.

So, you believe the poorest folks in the nation, the ones that can least afford to pay an income tax, should pay an income tax?

That is your implication.

you do realize that a mortgage has not only a tax deduction but a lower interest rate payment than a signature loan. But if your mortgage is 4% while you have dividend stocks paying 7 -10% you have just wasted a lot of money. yes, you are a victim of liberalism who doesnt know how to make money...

So, you call folks that you don't even "stupid" & "victim" based on what; your arrogance?
So, you want to tax the poorest Americans & you're arrogant.
You must be a Republican.

No, not my arrogance, but by their actions to vote for the very people who keep them poor. When you are retarded enough to vote for people who want to hike up your taxes, cause your energy prices to necessarily skyrocket, make food harder to buy, you just are a stupid, mindnumbed idiot, who goose steps to the liberal beat. Then when those liberal elites talk about punishing those who didnt stay a victim of liberalism, you guys are out there cheering them on, not for making your lives better, but for making everyone else like you poor and miserable. Liberalism is all about misery and poverty, when they get everyone to achieve that , they have finally made it FAIR...

So, you make all of the above assumptions, apply them to me, again, someone you have never met, and you are not arrogant?

How in Hell could I (or anyone else) pay off a mortgage of over $100 large & be poor, as you claim?

You are either the most arrogant member here, replete with your barrel full of assumptions about someone you know nothing about, or you are the reincarnation of Miss Cleo, or maybe both.
You remind me of one of these born again Christians that comes across as better than anyone else; funny how you hate poor people.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

Shame you are too stupid to not know how to make money, but punish those that work 80 hours a week and have degrees in higher education. I say, take away welfare, stop giving people money to sit on their liberal lazy asses, thus making them "WORK" so they can survive. This not only will reduce the national debt, but enable the new Republican Voters to rely on their God given skills, instead of being a victim of liberalism. Also we would no longer need a wall at our southern border because those that are coming here for our welfare programs will turn around, so another win for the US.

You call me stupid? I paid off my mortgage within the past 12 months. That is saving me many hundreds in interest alone, every month. I paid off over $100 large. You are too stupid to know what that even means.

So, you believe the poorest folks in the nation, the ones that can least afford to pay an income tax, should pay an income tax?

That is your implication.

you do realize that a mortgage has not only a tax deduction but a lower interest rate payment than a signature loan. But if your mortgage is 4% while you have dividend stocks paying 7 -10% you have just wasted a lot of money. yes, you are a victim of liberalism who doesnt know how to make money...

So, you call folks that you don't even "stupid" & "victim" based on what; your arrogance?
So, you want to tax the poorest Americans & you're arrogant.
You must be a Republican.

No, not my arrogance, but by their actions to vote for the very people who keep them poor. When you are retarded enough to vote for people who want to hike up your taxes, cause your energy prices to necessarily skyrocket, make food harder to buy, you just are a stupid, mindnumbed idiot, who goose steps to the liberal beat. Then when those liberal elites talk about punishing those who didnt stay a victim of liberalism, you guys are out there cheering them on, not for making your lives better, but for making everyone else like you poor and miserable. Liberalism is all about misery and poverty, when they get everyone to achieve that , they have finally made it FAIR...

So, you make all of the above assumptions, apply them to me, again, someone you have never met, and you are not arrogant?

How in Hell could I (or anyone else) pay off a mortgage of over $100 large & be poor, as you claim?

You are either the most arrogant member here, replete with your barrel full of assumptions about someone you know nothing about, or you are the reincarnation of Miss Cleo, or maybe both.
You remind me of one of these born again Christians that comes across as better than anyone else; funny how you hate poor people.

I dont make assumptions at all, I have facts. Many of my friends, a lot of them black, before they met me, had no clue how to invest in the stock market, let alone start their own business. Today, most, but not all, have done very well for themselves, because like me, instead of bitching and moaning how unfair life is, they took their God given gifts and are now quite wealthy. It all starts with attitude, if you are a victim of someone, you will never be able to make something of yourself, but if you move on and up, the sky is the limit in this once again great country. Stay poor, stay miserable, dont listen, keep sticking your head up your butt, you will never make it here. My suggestion, move to Cuba, see what Socialism truly is like. You might like it.....

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

Shame you are too stupid to not know how to make money, but punish those that work 80 hours a week and have degrees in higher education. I say, take away welfare, stop giving people money to sit on their liberal lazy asses, thus making them "WORK" so they can survive. This not only will reduce the national debt, but enable the new Republican Voters to rely on their God given skills, instead of being a victim of liberalism. Also we would no longer need a wall at our southern border because those that are coming here for our welfare programs will turn around, so another win for the US.

You call me stupid? I paid off my mortgage within the past 12 months. That is saving me many hundreds in interest alone, every month. I paid off over $100 large. You are too stupid to know what that even means.

So, you believe the poorest folks in the nation, the ones that can least afford to pay an income tax, should pay an income tax?

That is your implication.

you do realize that a mortgage has not only a tax deduction but a lower interest rate payment than a signature loan. But if your mortgage is 4% while you have dividend stocks paying 7 -10% you have just wasted a lot of money. yes, you are a victim of liberalism who doesnt know how to make money...

So, you call folks that you don't even "stupid" & "victim" based on what; your arrogance?
So, you want to tax the poorest Americans & you're arrogant.
You must be a Republican.

No, not my arrogance, but by their actions to vote for the very people who keep them poor. When you are retarded enough to vote for people who want to hike up your taxes, cause your energy prices to necessarily skyrocket, make food harder to buy, you just are a stupid, mindnumbed idiot, who goose steps to the liberal beat. Then when those liberal elites talk about punishing those who didnt stay a victim of liberalism, you guys are out there cheering them on, not for making your lives better, but for making everyone else like you poor and miserable. Liberalism is all about misery and poverty, when they get everyone to achieve that , they have finally made it FAIR...

So, you make all of the above assumptions, apply them to me, again, someone you have never met, and you are not arrogant?

How in Hell could I (or anyone else) pay off a mortgage of over $100 large & be poor, as you claim?

You are either the most arrogant member here, replete with your barrel full of assumptions about someone you know nothing about, or you are the reincarnation of Miss Cleo, or maybe both.
You remind me of one of these born again Christians that comes across as better than anyone else; funny how you hate poor people.

Oh yea, I have a mortgage of over $1,000,000(at 4.15%), yet I have $440,000 dividend income per year. So I pay $5,000 a month or $60,000 a year, but have more than enough to pay it off, but wont, because my dividends pay 6-10% per year... You dont realize this but this is how RICH people make it, not be a middle class person who just has enough to live off of...

5 Ways Rich People Use Credit -- The Motley Fool

According to a recent survey by Bank of America's U.S. Trust, wealthy Americans aren't afraid to borrow money. In fact, half of "very wealthy" households with more than $10 million in investable assets have more than 10% of their balance sheets in borrowed money.

However, while this group seems to be very willing to take on seven-figure debt loads, there are only certain things they are willing to borrow money for. Basically, if borrowing money creates an opportunity, it then becomes worth it.

 

[caddo kid]

You call me stupid? I paid off my mortgage within the past 12 months. That is saving me many hundreds in interest alone, every month. I paid off over $100 large. You are too stupid to know what that even means.

So, you believe the poorest folks in the nation, the ones that can least afford to pay an income tax, should pay an income tax?

That is your implication.

you do realize that a mortgage has not only a tax deduction but a lower interest rate payment than a signature loan. But if your mortgage is 4% while you have dividend stocks paying 7 -10% you have just wasted a lot of money. yes, you are a victim of liberalism who doesnt know how to make money...

So, you call folks that you don't even "stupid" & "victim" based on what; your arrogance?
So, you want to tax the poorest Americans & you're arrogant.
You must be a Republican.

No, not my arrogance, but by their actions to vote for the very people who keep them poor. When you are retarded enough to vote for people who want to hike up your taxes, cause your energy prices to necessarily skyrocket, make food harder to buy, you just are a stupid, mindnumbed idiot, who goose steps to the liberal beat. Then when those liberal elites talk about punishing those who didnt stay a victim of liberalism, you guys are out there cheering them on, not for making your lives better, but for making everyone else like you poor and miserable. Liberalism is all about misery and poverty, when they get everyone to achieve that , they have finally made it FAIR...

So, you make all of the above assumptions, apply them to me, again, someone you have never met, and you are not arrogant?

How in Hell could I (or anyone else) pay off a mortgage of over $100 large & be poor, as you claim?

You are either the most arrogant member here, replete with your barrel full of assumptions about someone you know nothing about, or you are the reincarnation of Miss Cleo, or maybe both.
You remind me of one of these born again Christians that comes across as better than anyone else; funny how you hate poor people.

Oh yea, I have a mortgage of over $1,000,000(at 4.15%), yet I have $440,000 dividend income per year. So I pay $5,000 a month or $60,000 a year, but have more than enough to pay it off, but wont, because my dividends pay 6-10% per year... You dont realize this but this is how RICH people make it, not be a middle class person who just has enough to live off of...

5 Ways Rich People Use Credit -- The Motley Fool

According to a recent survey by Bank of America's U.S. Trust, wealthy Americans aren't afraid to borrow money. In fact, half of "very wealthy" households with more than $10 million in investable assets have more than 10% of their balance sheets in borrowed money.

However, while this group seems to be very willing to take on seven-figure debt loads, there are only certain things they are willing to borrow money for. Basically, if borrowing money creates an opportunity, it then becomes worth it.

I don't realize that? Still making assumptions. Your arrogance has no boundaries.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

You call me stupid? I paid off my mortgage within the past 12 months. That is saving me many hundreds in interest alone, every month. I paid off over $100 large. You are too stupid to know what that even means.

So, you believe the poorest folks in the nation, the ones that can least afford to pay an income tax, should pay an income tax?

That is your implication.

you do realize that a mortgage has not only a tax deduction but a lower interest rate payment than a signature loan. But if your mortgage is 4% while you have dividend stocks paying 7 -10% you have just wasted a lot of money. yes, you are a victim of liberalism who doesnt know how to make money...

So, you call folks that you don't even "stupid" & "victim" based on what; your arrogance?
So, you want to tax the poorest Americans & you're arrogant.
You must be a Republican.

No, not my arrogance, but by their actions to vote for the very people who keep them poor. When you are retarded enough to vote for people who want to hike up your taxes, cause your energy prices to necessarily skyrocket, make food harder to buy, you just are a stupid, mindnumbed idiot, who goose steps to the liberal beat. Then when those liberal elites talk about punishing those who didnt stay a victim of liberalism, you guys are out there cheering them on, not for making your lives better, but for making everyone else like you poor and miserable. Liberalism is all about misery and poverty, when they get everyone to achieve that , they have finally made it FAIR...

So, you make all of the above assumptions, apply them to me, again, someone you have never met, and you are not arrogant?

How in Hell could I (or anyone else) pay off a mortgage of over $100 large & be poor, as you claim?

You are either the most arrogant member here, replete with your barrel full of assumptions about someone you know nothing about, or you are the reincarnation of Miss Cleo, or maybe both.
You remind me of one of these born again Christians that comes across as better than anyone else; funny how you hate poor people.

I dont make assumptions at all, I have facts. Many of my friends, a lot of them black, before they met me, had no clue how to invest in the stock market, let alone start their own business. Today, most, but not all, have done very well for themselves, because like me, instead of bitching and moaning how unfair life is, they took their God given gifts and are now quite wealthy. It all starts with attitude, if you are a victim of someone, you will never be able to make something of yourself, but if you move on and up, the sky is the limit in this once again great country. Stay poor, stay miserable, dont listen, keep sticking your head up your butt, you will never make it here. My suggestion, move to Cuba, see what Socialism truly is like. You might like it.....

Exactly. If you go to the library and ask the librarian where they keep the books written by successful excuse makers, she'd probably ask you to leave. There is no such thing as a successful excuse maker.

 

[caddo kid]

You call me stupid? I paid off my mortgage within the past 12 months. That is saving me many hundreds in interest alone, every month. I paid off over $100 large. You are too stupid to know what that even means.

So, you believe the poorest folks in the nation, the ones that can least afford to pay an income tax, should pay an income tax?

That is your implication.

you do realize that a mortgage has not only a tax deduction but a lower interest rate payment than a signature loan. But if your mortgage is 4% while you have dividend stocks paying 7 -10% you have just wasted a lot of money. yes, you are a victim of liberalism who doesnt know how to make money...

So, you call folks that you don't even "stupid" & "victim" based on what; your arrogance?
So, you want to tax the poorest Americans & you're arrogant.
You must be a Republican.

No, not my arrogance, but by their actions to vote for the very people who keep them poor. When you are retarded enough to vote for people who want to hike up your taxes, cause your energy prices to necessarily skyrocket, make food harder to buy, you just are a stupid, mindnumbed idiot, who goose steps to the liberal beat. Then when those liberal elites talk about punishing those who didnt stay a victim of liberalism, you guys are out there cheering them on, not for making your lives better, but for making everyone else like you poor and miserable. Liberalism is all about misery and poverty, when they get everyone to achieve that , they have finally made it FAIR...

So, you make all of the above assumptions, apply them to me, again, someone you have never met, and you are not arrogant?

How in Hell could I (or anyone else) pay off a mortgage of over $100 large & be poor, as you claim?

You are either the most arrogant member here, replete with your barrel full of assumptions about someone you know nothing about, or you are the reincarnation of Miss Cleo, or maybe both.
You remind me of one of these born again Christians that comes across as better than anyone else; funny how you hate poor people.

I dont make assumptions at all, I have facts. Many of my friends, a lot of them black, before they met me, had no clue how to invest in the stock market, let alone start their own business. Today, most, but not all, have done very well for themselves, because like me, instead of bitching and moaning how unfair life is, they took their God given gifts and are now quite wealthy. It all starts with attitude, if you are a victim of someone, you will never be able to make something of yourself, but if you move on and up, the sky is the limit in this once again great country. Stay poor, stay miserable, dont listen, keep sticking your head up your butt, you will never make it here. My suggestion, move to Cuba, see what Socialism truly is like. You might like it.....

Stay poor? Never said I was poor.
Stay miserable? Never said I was miserable.
Sticking my head up my butt? Nope.
Why would I move to Cuba?

Your arrogance continues to demonstrate your contempt of those you have never met.

You really have superiority issues; you act like you are better than everyone else.

Are you a serial killer?

Oh; I got it. You are just a Republican.

And by the way: the thread is about TAXES ............. it aint about Uncle Henry's 101 Ways to Wealth Outside of Cuba.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

you do realize that a mortgage has not only a tax deduction but a lower interest rate payment than a signature loan. But if your mortgage is 4% while you have dividend stocks paying 7 -10% you have just wasted a lot of money. yes, you are a victim of liberalism who doesnt know how to make money...

So, you call folks that you don't even "stupid" & "victim" based on what; your arrogance?
So, you want to tax the poorest Americans & you're arrogant.
You must be a Republican.

No, not my arrogance, but by their actions to vote for the very people who keep them poor. When you are retarded enough to vote for people who want to hike up your taxes, cause your energy prices to necessarily skyrocket, make food harder to buy, you just are a stupid, mindnumbed idiot, who goose steps to the liberal beat. Then when those liberal elites talk about punishing those who didnt stay a victim of liberalism, you guys are out there cheering them on, not for making your lives better, but for making everyone else like you poor and miserable. Liberalism is all about misery and poverty, when they get everyone to achieve that , they have finally made it FAIR...

So, you make all of the above assumptions, apply them to me, again, someone you have never met, and you are not arrogant?

How in Hell could I (or anyone else) pay off a mortgage of over $100 large & be poor, as you claim?

You are either the most arrogant member here, replete with your barrel full of assumptions about someone you know nothing about, or you are the reincarnation of Miss Cleo, or maybe both.
You remind me of one of these born again Christians that comes across as better than anyone else; funny how you hate poor people.

I dont make assumptions at all, I have facts. Many of my friends, a lot of them black, before they met me, had no clue how to invest in the stock market, let alone start their own business. Today, most, but not all, have done very well for themselves, because like me, instead of bitching and moaning how unfair life is, they took their God given gifts and are now quite wealthy. It all starts with attitude, if you are a victim of someone, you will never be able to make something of yourself, but if you move on and up, the sky is the limit in this once again great country. Stay poor, stay miserable, dont listen, keep sticking your head up your butt, you will never make it here. My suggestion, move to Cuba, see what Socialism truly is like. You might like it.....

Stay poor? Never said I was poor.
Stay miserable? Never said I was miserable.
Sticking my head up my butt? Nope.
Why would I move to Cuba?

Your arrogance continues to demonstrate your contempt of those you have never met.

You really have superiority issues; you act like you are better than everyone else.

Are you a serial killer?

Oh; I got it. You are just a Republican.

And by the way: the thread is about TAXES ............. it aint about Uncle Henry's 101 Ways to Wealth Outside of Cuba.

Well, if I wasn't better than everyone else, then I would be a dirt poor miserable liberal like you. When you are a "winner" you can have great success. Did you know that a professional athlete considers themselves winners, not losers like you? A liberal Movie Star doesnt stew how much of a loser they are, they go out and make millions of dollars because they arent dirt poor miserable wretches, just hypocrite liberals, who say they love the poor and wasn't FAIRNESS, then close their gates to their walled in Mansions and only live amongst themselves...Again, you sure talk like a poor, miserable wretch, because of your envy of others who have more, I consider it a game, where I will one day be able to take on George Soros and bankrupt the mother fucker, like he has done to other countries. You can watch..