Tax the Rich? Tax the Millionaires!

[georgephillip]

Millionaires grow with the stock market.

Last year the number of millionaire households in the US increased by 600,000.

Also in 2010 the US added 5,000,000 Americans to the national food stamp program.

With the stock market soaring over 100 percent from March 2009 lows, the richest 1% of the US population now controls 42% of all financial wealth.

Don't expect to hear/read these numbers in the corporate press.

The financial scam of...

Um. Don't you know the difference between Income and Net Worth?

A net worth of $1 Million is not that much, and for most people, the largest share of it is the equity in their homes, with the second largest bit being their 401Ks.

Indeed. I know someone with several million dollars net worth and an income of $60k/yr

Does that "several million dollars net worth" include primary real estate?

"This is an interesting chart.

"The number of U.S. millionaires is back near its 2007 peak.

"At the same time we have an underemployment rate near 20 percent according to Gallup and 45,000,000 Americans on food assistance.

"You will also notice that the above chart excludes the primary residence for the household.

"Why is that?

"Well most middle class Americans derive their household wealth from real estate, and not the stock market.

"The real estate market continues to be crushed and prices continue to move lower:..."

 

[georgephillip]

Millionaires grow with the stock market.

Last year the number of millionaire households in the US increased by 600,000.

Also in 2010 the US added 5,000,000 Americans to the national food stamp program.

With the stock market soaring over 100 percent from March 2009 lows, the richest 1% of the US population now controls 42% of all financial wealth.

Don't expect to hear/read these numbers in the corporate press.

The financial scam of...

Um. Don't you know the difference between Income and Net Worth?

A net worth of $1 Million is not that much, and for most people, the largest share of it is the equity in their homes, with the second largest bit being their 401Ks.

Now, now, how dare you tell the truth! We can't have that! Jump on the democrat band wagon! Hate your neighbor, if he dares make more than you! Hate anyone, who has achieved more than you! They....they...they're RICH, and we can't have that! Someone has a bigger house, tax it away from him! Someone has a nicer car? Tax it away from him! That's the democrat spirit, tax and covet, tax and envy, tax and HATE! Damn them anyway, those nasty rich people; oh, I know they aren't really plutocrats, most of them, just upper middle class, but still they make more than I do! They COULDN'T have worked for it, they COULDN'T have earned it.....I know, they stole it from ME! Tax them! Tax them to death, I say! Evil republicans! How dare they let those people keep what they earned! Why the very idea! Besides, Where are we to get the money for more social programs and more entitlements to buy more democrat votes with? We know how to spend their money better than they do anyway! Envy is good! Jealousy is good! Covetousness is the good! Hate is good (it gets us votes, remember?)

Look, there's one now, a local entrepreneur; damn him and his kind, for being more successful than me! Tax him! Why, he should be grateful; back during the French Revolution, we Jacobins and our mobs would have had his head! We'll let him live, so long as he's made to live like the poor; see how fair and generous we democrats are?

Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders and Illinois Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky are proposing surcharges on all incomes over one million dollars per year.

Is that too Jacobinian for you?

"Schakowsky's bill creates a new tax bracket at 45% for those making $1 to $10 million a year, and 49% for those who make above $10 million. 'I certainly don't see it as a counter to the real and specific debate on the Bush tax cuts,' she said.

"'The fact is, Republicans don't want to do anything to take away tax breaks from the richest Americans, and we want to stimulate that debate.'"

Why should the rich continue to enjoy tax breaks while millions of Americans lose their jobs and houses to pay for Republican entitlements?

 

[The Gadfly]

You all realize that you cannot possibly 'tax the millionaires' enough to make any real difference in the deficit - right?

There aren't enough of them, and they, as a group, don't make enough money.

10,000 Americans have a median annual income of $50,000,000 with an average of $350,000,000 in assets which represents an increase of 550% since 1978.

"...(t)he 10,000 paid just $112Bn in taxes last year – that’s just over 20% of their income, while the rest of the country, of course, paid a much higher percentage of their income to make up for the shortfall.

"Warren Buffett, the third richest man in the world (behind Gates and Slim) paid 17.7% tax and made a point of checking and found out his employees paid an average of 32.9%.

"God bless Buffett becuase he made this point in a speech that was given to 400 of the 10,000, who were gathered at a Hillary Clinton fund raiser in 2007.

"It got a little attention at the time but then was swept under the rug – as if that didn’t matter. But it DOES MATTER and it matters a lot – the life of this country depends on it!

"If this were just a case of 10,000 people not paying $100Bn in taxes, maybe we could move on and forget it but it’s not.

"US corporations, who are (according to to the Supreme Court) also citizens of this country, paid just $300Bn in taxes last year on $6 TRILLION in income (5%). That’s right, if US corporations simply paid the same amount of tax as Mr. Buffett – that would, by itself, be enough to wipe out our deficit..."

Do you think another $100 billion in revenue every year would make any real difference in the deficit?

Mr. Buffett knows as well as I do , that he pays such a low rate because of the way his finances are arranged; much of his income is not wages, but long-term capital gains, and tax-advantaged or tax-free interest on investments. Should he choose to do so, Mr. Buffett can easily rearrange his income so as to make more of it taxable. Of course, he has not done that, and I doubt he has any intention of doing so. In any even, if Mr. Buffett needs to pay more, (to soothe a guilty conscience for having too much?) he is free to do so. That he would rather ask government to make others do so, rather than lead by example, gives Mr. Buffett's pontifications on the subject the credibility they deserve-NONE! I have the following advice for Mr. Buffett: REAL LEADERS lead from the front; wannabe's stand back and tell others what to do...from the rear. Put your money where your mouth is, Warren, or SHUT UP!

 

[skookerasbil]

Paul Hogarth: Tax the Rich? Tax the Millionaires!

While President Obama capitulates to right-wing Republicans by extending tax cuts for the wealthy, some Democrats in Congress are pushing what is not only good policy -- but smarter politics. Bernie Sanders in the Senate and Jan Schakowsky in the House have sponsored legislation to raise taxes on millionaires -- rather than restoring the Clinton tax brackets for those making over $250,000. One Capitol Hill newspaper noted this deviates from where the White House currently stands, as it specifically targets the very rich. Moreover, it puts Republicans in a far more awkward position -- as they are left defending tax cuts for millionaires. There is a huge difference between rich people making $250,000 a year and those making $2 million a year, and the high upper-income tax brackets we saw in the 1930's and 1940's were likewise similarly targeted. Even in anti-tax states like California, voters have approved tax increases for millionaires -- which makes this legislation one of the most hopeful things to come out of Washington lately.

Do that shit, do that shit, do that shit, teah do that shit, lol.

No seriously, rightwingers can't defend millionaires against this when the majority of Americans, especially the middle class, are proportionally bearing a bigger brunt.

How many class warfare threads is this dumbass going to make???

Somehow, k00ks like this dummy missed the election this past November........the one where the far left assholes were squarely kicked in the balls. In other words.........................................




NOBODY CARES S0N!!!



Only dummies think hammering the rich with taxes is a good idea...........the idiot governor of New York tried in a couple of years back resulting in a significant shortfall in revenue to Albany.

 

[georgephillip]

Millionaires grow with the stock market.

Last year the number of millionaire households in the US increased by 600,000.

Also in 2010 the US added 5,000,000 Americans to the national food stamp program.

With the stock market soaring over 100 percent from March 2009 lows, the richest 1% of the US population now controls 42% of all financial wealth.

Don't expect to hear/read these numbers in the corporate press.

The financial scam of...

What would you do about the situation if you were able? Take away the wealthy peoples' property and give it to the poor? Be truthful.

I would initiate federal and state level investigations into securities and control fraud in Wall Street investment banks. Hundreds of bankers were prosecuted after the S&L looting in the 80s, and today's crimes are orders of magnitude greater.

So far Obama has not filed a single charge against anyone on Wall Street except Bernie Madoff who made the mistake of stealing from rich people.

Since it's impossible for me to imagine any Democrat OR Republican taking on Wall Street, I would encourage a national debate on the wisdom of FLUSHING hundreds of Republican AND Democrat incumbents from DC in November of 2012.

Starting in the White House.

 

[Political Junky]

GE paid no corporate tax. They filed a 24,000 page tax return.
Do you suppose they are audited?

 

[georgephillip]

You all realize that you cannot possibly 'tax the millionaires' enough to make any real difference in the deficit - right?

There aren't enough of them, and they, as a group, don't make enough money.

10,000 Americans have a median annual income of $50,000,000 with an average of $350,000,000 in assets which represents an increase of 550% since 1978.

"...(t)he 10,000 paid just $112Bn in taxes last year – that’s just over 20% of their income, while the rest of the country, of course, paid a much higher percentage of their income to make up for the shortfall.

"Warren Buffett, the third richest man in the world (behind Gates and Slim) paid 17.7% tax and made a point of checking and found out his employees paid an average of 32.9%.

"God bless Buffett becuase he made this point in a speech that was given to 400 of the 10,000, who were gathered at a Hillary Clinton fund raiser in 2007.

"It got a little attention at the time but then was swept under the rug – as if that didn’t matter. But it DOES MATTER and it matters a lot – the life of this country depends on it!

"If this were just a case of 10,000 people not paying $100Bn in taxes, maybe we could move on and forget it but it’s not.

"US corporations, who are (according to to the Supreme Court) also citizens of this country, paid just $300Bn in taxes last year on $6 TRILLION in income (5%). That’s right, if US corporations simply paid the same amount of tax as Mr. Buffett – that would, by itself, be enough to wipe out our deficit..."

Do you think another $100 billion in revenue every year would make any real difference in the deficit?

Why doesn't Mr. Buffett volunteer to pay more??... there is no need for government to FORCE him to do so... until the loud moth motherfucker puts his money where his mouth is in terms of taxation, I pay him no mind

Do you agree?

"In December, Obama threw progressives under a bus -- when he caved to the Senate GOP minority on Bush tax cuts, while admitting at the same time that the American public did not want to see these tax cuts renewed.

Paul Hogarth: Tax the Rich? Tax the Millionaires!

 

[georgephillip]

GE paid no corporate tax. They filed a 24,000 page tax return.
Do you suppose they are audited?

"Take GE, for example.

"GE has $36Bn in sales and paid $431M in taxes (15% of net profits) in 2009. They also paid out $9Bn in dividends and over $24Bn in 2008 and 2007 and in 2007 they bought back their own stock but, in those three years, they paid -(NEGATIVE) $900M in taxes!

"Are you feeling victimized yet? Does GE use our infrastructure? Do they use our public airwaves? Are they protected by our police? Is our army out there fighting and dying to protect them? Do they take money from our government? Do we educate their employees? This is the INSANITY of the US tax system."

Phil's Stock World

 

[georgephillip]

Paul Hogarth: Tax the Rich? Tax the Millionaires!

While President Obama capitulates to right-wing Republicans by extending tax cuts for the wealthy, some Democrats in Congress are pushing what is not only good policy -- but smarter politics. Bernie Sanders in the Senate and Jan Schakowsky in the House have sponsored legislation to raise taxes on millionaires -- rather than restoring the Clinton tax brackets for those making over $250,000. One Capitol Hill newspaper noted this deviates from where the White House currently stands, as it specifically targets the very rich. Moreover, it puts Republicans in a far more awkward position -- as they are left defending tax cuts for millionaires. There is a huge difference between rich people making $250,000 a year and those making $2 million a year, and the high upper-income tax brackets we saw in the 1930's and 1940's were likewise similarly targeted. Even in anti-tax states like California, voters have approved tax increases for millionaires -- which makes this legislation one of the most hopeful things to come out of Washington lately.

Do that shit, do that shit, do that shit, teah do that shit, lol.

No seriously, rightwingers can't defend millionaires against this when the majority of Americans, especially the middle class, are proportionally bearing a bigger brunt.

How many class warfare threads is this dumbass going to make???

Somehow, k00ks like this dummy missed the election this past November........the one where the far left assholes were squarely kicked in the balls. In other words.........................................




NOBODY CARES S0N!!!



Only dummies think hammering the rich with taxes is a good idea...........the idiot governor of New York tried in a couple of years back resulting in a significant shortfall in revenue to Albany.

Did you miss this?

"The number of millionaire households jumped to 8.4 million in 2010 increasing by 600,000 last year. Now to contrast this rise in millionaires in 2010 we added 5,000,000 Americans to the national food stamp program.

"The income inequality gap is only getting more pronounced here. A rising sea is not lifting all ships because many of the reasons for wealth building (i.e., corporations cutting costs to boost profits) directly impacts the working and middle class who own very little in stock.

"Yet the stock market going up over 100 percent from the March 2009 lows has helped the top 1 percent that control 42 percent of all financial wealth."

If you don't care yet?

You will.

The financial scam of the century

 

[Salishan]

-

While President Obama capitulates to right-wing Republicans by extending tax cuts for the wealthy, some Democrats in Congress are pushing what is not only good policy -- but smarter politics. Bernie Sanders in the Senate and Jan Schakowsky in the House have sponsored legislation to raise taxes on millionaires -- rather than restoring the Clinton tax brackets for those making over $250,000. One Capitol Hill newspaper noted this deviates from where the White House currently stands, as it specifically targets the very rich. Moreover, it puts Republicans in a far more awkward position -- as they are left defending tax cuts for millionaires. There is a huge difference between rich people making $250,000 a year and those making $2 million a year, and the high upper-income tax brackets we saw in the 1930's and 1940's were likewise similarly targeted. Even in anti-tax states like California, voters have approved tax increases for millionaires -- which makes this legislation one of the most hopeful things to come out of Washington lately.

So...back in the 1930's and 1940's when we taxed millionaires much higher rates all of the problems were solved? Everyone was good to go?

How about if we taxed millionaires 95% today...would it fund all of our current budget obligations and pay down the defecit? That is, assuming that taxing millionaires 80 or 90 or 95% that they would still invest the same amount of money into the markets and purchase items that help provide jobs.

 

[The T]

-

While President Obama capitulates to right-wing Republicans by extending tax cuts for the wealthy, some Democrats in Congress are pushing what is not only good policy -- but smarter politics. Bernie Sanders in the Senate and Jan Schakowsky in the House have sponsored legislation to raise taxes on millionaires -- rather than restoring the Clinton tax brackets for those making over $250,000. One Capitol Hill newspaper noted this deviates from where the White House currently stands, as it specifically targets the very rich. Moreover, it puts Republicans in a far more awkward position -- as they are left defending tax cuts for millionaires. There is a huge difference between rich people making $250,000 a year and those making $2 million a year, and the high upper-income tax brackets we saw in the 1930's and 1940's were likewise similarly targeted. Even in anti-tax states like California, voters have approved tax increases for millionaires -- which makes this legislation one of the most hopeful things to come out of Washington lately.

So...back in the 1930's and 1940's when we taxed millionaires much higher rates all of the problems were solved? Everyone was good to go?

How about if we taxed millionaires 95% today...would it fund all of our current budget obligations and pay down the defecit? That is, assuming that taxing millionaires 80 or 90 or 95% that they would still invest the same amount of money into the markets and purchase items that help provide jobs.

Indeed. But the reality of SPENDING still has to sink in...

 

[Salishan]

-

While President Obama capitulates to right-wing Republicans by extending tax cuts for the wealthy, some Democrats in Congress are pushing what is not only good policy -- but smarter politics. Bernie Sanders in the Senate and Jan Schakowsky in the House have sponsored legislation to raise taxes on millionaires -- rather than restoring the Clinton tax brackets for those making over $250,000. One Capitol Hill newspaper noted this deviates from where the White House currently stands, as it specifically targets the very rich. Moreover, it puts Republicans in a far more awkward position -- as they are left defending tax cuts for millionaires. There is a huge difference between rich people making $250,000 a year and those making $2 million a year, and the high upper-income tax brackets we saw in the 1930's and 1940's were likewise similarly targeted. Even in anti-tax states like California, voters have approved tax increases for millionaires -- which makes this legislation one of the most hopeful things to come out of Washington lately.

So...back in the 1930's and 1940's when we taxed millionaires much higher rates all of the problems were solved? Everyone was good to go?

How about if we taxed millionaires 95% today...would it fund all of our current budget obligations and pay down the defecit? That is, assuming that taxing millionaires 80 or 90 or 95% that they would still invest the same amount of money into the markets and purchase items that help provide jobs.

Indeed. But the reality of SPENDING still has to sink in...

Understood. There will need to be massive changes to entitlement spending if we are to come close to balancing the budget.

 

[The Infidel]

Paul Hogarth: Tax the Rich? Tax the Millionaires!

While President Obama capitulates to right-wing Republicans by extending tax cuts for the wealthy, some Democrats in Congress are pushing what is not only good policy -- but smarter politics. Bernie Sanders in the Senate and Jan Schakowsky in the House have sponsored legislation to raise taxes on millionaires -- rather than restoring the Clinton tax brackets for those making over $250,000. One Capitol Hill newspaper noted this deviates from where the White House currently stands, as it specifically targets the very rich. Moreover, it puts Republicans in a far more awkward position -- as they are left defending tax cuts for millionaires. There is a huge difference between rich people making $250,000 a year and those making $2 million a year, and the high upper-income tax brackets we saw in the 1930's and 1940's were likewise similarly targeted. Even in anti-tax states like California, voters have approved tax increases for millionaires -- which makes this legislation one of the most hopeful things to come out of Washington lately.

Do that shit, do that shit, do that shit, teah do that shit, lol.

No seriously, rightwingers can't defend millionaires against this when the majority of Americans, especially the middle class, are proportionally bearing a bigger brunt.

Hypocrites.... all of ya'll...!

Go talk to YOUR president (I have dis-owned the bastard)


Report: General Electric Paid No Federal Taxes Last Year : The Two-Way : NPR

 

[The T]

-






So...back in the 1930's and 1940's when we taxed millionaires much higher rates all of the problems were solved? Everyone was good to go?

How about if we taxed millionaires 95% today...would it fund all of our current budget obligations and pay down the defecit? That is, assuming that taxing millionaires 80 or 90 or 95% that they would still invest the same amount of money into the markets and purchase items that help provide jobs.

Indeed. But the reality of SPENDING still has to sink in...

Understood. There will need to be massive changes to entitlement spending if we are to come close to balancing the budget.

And it will require people to go to work...but that won't happen until the Gubmint gets the hell outta the way of the private sector, and those that refuse to work cease using the treasury as their paycheck.

 

[The T]

Paul Hogarth: Tax the Rich? Tax the Millionaires!






Do that shit, do that shit, do that shit, teah do that shit, lol.

No seriously, rightwingers can't defend millionaires against this when the majority of Americans, especially the middle class, are proportionally bearing a bigger brunt.

How many class warfare threads is this dumbass going to make???

Somehow, k00ks like this dummy missed the election this past November........the one where the far left assholes were squarely kicked in the balls. In other words.........................................




NOBODY CARES S0N!!!



Only dummies think hammering the rich with taxes is a good idea...........the idiot governor of New York tried in a couple of years back resulting in a significant shortfall in revenue to Albany.

Did you miss this?

"The number of millionaire households jumped to 8.4 million in 2010 increasing by 600,000 last year. Now to contrast this rise in millionaires in 2010 we added 5,000,000 Americans to the national food stamp program.

"The income inequality gap is only getting more pronounced here. A rising sea is not lifting all ships because many of the reasons for wealth building (i.e., corporations cutting costs to boost profits) directly impacts the working and middle class who own very little in stock.

"Yet the stock market going up over 100 percent from the March 2009 lows has helped the top 1 percent that control 42 percent of all financial wealth."

If you don't care yet?

You will.

The financial scam of the century

And SO WHAT...

 

[Salishan]

Indeed. But the reality of SPENDING still has to sink in...

Understood. There will need to be massive changes to entitlement spending if we are to come close to balancing the budget.

And it will require people to go to work...but that won't happen until the Gubmint gets the hell outta the way of the private sector, and those that refuse to work cease using the treasury as their paycheck.

To work is to be punished. Income taxes, FICA and Medicare taxes from my paycheck. And then my employer gets taxed payrol and more FICA just for employing me. I am lower middle class and the government gets a hefty chunk in my name whether its directly from me or from my employer. Once I start adding up the numbers and percentages it makes me numb. What if I could stuff all that money away in a savings account that I wasn't allowed to touch until I was 60 something instead of giving it to the government? Its crazy. And that's just from little me. And yet I still manage to live within my means. I carry on despite government, not because of government.

 

[georgephillip]

Paul Hogarth: Tax the Rich? Tax the Millionaires!

While President Obama capitulates to right-wing Republicans by extending tax cuts for the wealthy, some Democrats in Congress are pushing what is not only good policy -- but smarter politics. Bernie Sanders in the Senate and Jan Schakowsky in the House have sponsored legislation to raise taxes on millionaires -- rather than restoring the Clinton tax brackets for those making over $250,000. One Capitol Hill newspaper noted this deviates from where the White House currently stands, as it specifically targets the very rich. Moreover, it puts Republicans in a far more awkward position -- as they are left defending tax cuts for millionaires. There is a huge difference between rich people making $250,000 a year and those making $2 million a year, and the high upper-income tax brackets we saw in the 1930's and 1940's were likewise similarly targeted. Even in anti-tax states like California, voters have approved tax increases for millionaires -- which makes this legislation one of the most hopeful things to come out of Washington lately.

Do that shit, do that shit, do that shit, teah do that shit, lol.

No seriously, rightwingers can't defend millionaires against this when the majority of Americans, especially the middle class, are proportionally bearing a bigger brunt.

Hypocrites.... all of ya'll...!

Go talk to YOUR president (I have dis-owned the bastard)


Report: General Electric Paid No Federal Taxes Last Year : The Two-Way : NPR

While GE was bringing good things to life in Japan it shared its "integrity in relations to tax obligations" with numerous other US corporate parasites:

"General Electric made $10.3 billion in 2009, but received a $1.1 billion tax rebate.

"- Forbes said about Bank of America in 2010: 'How did they not pay any taxes on $4.4 billion in income?'

"- Oil giant Exxon made a $45 billion profit in 2009, but paid no taxes in the United States.

"- Citigroup had 4 quarters of billion-dollar profits in 2010, but paid no taxes.

"- Wells Fargo made $12 billion but purchased Wachovia Bank to claim a $19 billion tax credit.

"- Hewlett Packard's U.S. income tax rate was 4.3% in 2008 and 2.3% in 2009.

"- Verizon's 10.5% tax rate, according to Forbes, is due to its partnership with Vodafone, the primary target in UK Uncut's protests against tax evaders.

"- Chevron's tax rate was 1% in 2008.

"- Boeing, which just won a $30 billion contract to build 179 airborne tankers, got $124 million back from the taxpayers in 2010."

The rich are the problem.
FLUSHING Republicans AND Democrats from DC is the solution.

 

[georgephillip]

-

While President Obama capitulates to right-wing Republicans by extending tax cuts for the wealthy, some Democrats in Congress are pushing what is not only good policy -- but smarter politics. Bernie Sanders in the Senate and Jan Schakowsky in the House have sponsored legislation to raise taxes on millionaires -- rather than restoring the Clinton tax brackets for those making over $250,000. One Capitol Hill newspaper noted this deviates from where the White House currently stands, as it specifically targets the very rich. Moreover, it puts Republicans in a far more awkward position -- as they are left defending tax cuts for millionaires. There is a huge difference between rich people making $250,000 a year and those making $2 million a year, and the high upper-income tax brackets we saw in the 1930's and 1940's were likewise similarly targeted. Even in anti-tax states like California, voters have approved tax increases for millionaires -- which makes this legislation one of the most hopeful things to come out of Washington lately.

So...back in the 1930's and 1940's when we taxed millionaires much higher rates all of the problems were solved? Everyone was good to go?

How about if we taxed millionaires 95% today...would it fund all of our current budget obligations and pay down the defecit? That is, assuming that taxing millionaires 80 or 90 or 95% that they would still invest the same amount of money into the markets and purchase items that help provide jobs.

Why not start with this?

"Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders and Illinois Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky admit they wanted Bush tax cuts for those making over $250,000 to expire. But having lost that battle in December, they are proposing a 'surcharge' for incomes of over one million dollars.

"Schakowsky's bill creates a new tax bracket at 45% for those making $1 to $10 million a year, and 49% for those who make above $10 million. 'I certainly don't see it as a counter to the real and specific debate on the Bush tax cuts,' she said. 'The fact is, Republicans don't want to do anything to take away tax breaks from the richest Americans, and we want to stimulate that debate.'"

In the last two years as millions of working Americans have lost their jobs and homes the richest 1% of Americans have increased their share of national wealth by nearly two percent.

Do you think they are through taking yet?

 

[georgephillip]

-

While President Obama capitulates to right-wing Republicans by extending tax cuts for the wealthy, some Democrats in Congress are pushing what is not only good policy -- but smarter politics. Bernie Sanders in the Senate and Jan Schakowsky in the House have sponsored legislation to raise taxes on millionaires -- rather than restoring the Clinton tax brackets for those making over $250,000. One Capitol Hill newspaper noted this deviates from where the White House currently stands, as it specifically targets the very rich. Moreover, it puts Republicans in a far more awkward position -- as they are left defending tax cuts for millionaires. There is a huge difference between rich people making $250,000 a year and those making $2 million a year, and the high upper-income tax brackets we saw in the 1930's and 1940's were likewise similarly targeted. Even in anti-tax states like California, voters have approved tax increases for millionaires -- which makes this legislation one of the most hopeful things to come out of Washington lately.

So...back in the 1930's and 1940's when we taxed millionaires much higher rates all of the problems were solved? Everyone was good to go?

How about if we taxed millionaires 95% today...would it fund all of our current budget obligations and pay down the defecit? That is, assuming that taxing millionaires 80 or 90 or 95% that they would still invest the same amount of money into the markets and purchase items that help provide jobs.

Indeed. But the reality of SPENDING still has to sink in...

Want to Cut the Deficit?

"According to Merrill Lynch Global Wealth Management and Capgemini Consulting, there were about 3 million high net worth individuals and ultra high net wealth individuals in the US in 2009, those with investable assets, excluding primary residences and consumables, of from $1 million to $30 million.

"Calculations by the Institute for Health and Socio-Economic Policy, research arm of National Nurses United, shows that a one-time wealth surcharge of 14% on those assets would more than pay for the $1.6 trillion budget deficit projection for 2011.

What's your plan?

Continue "choosing" between Democrat OR Republican?

 

[georgephillip]

-






So...back in the 1930's and 1940's when we taxed millionaires much higher rates all of the problems were solved? Everyone was good to go?

How about if we taxed millionaires 95% today...would it fund all of our current budget obligations and pay down the defecit? That is, assuming that taxing millionaires 80 or 90 or 95% that they would still invest the same amount of money into the markets and purchase items that help provide jobs.

Indeed. But the reality of SPENDING still has to sink in...

Understood. There will need to be massive changes to entitlement spending if we are to come close to balancing the budget.

Chuck should stream National Nurses United on his Super Nintendo:

"Calculations by the Institute for Health and Socio-Economic Policy, research arm of National Nurses United, shows that a one-time wealth surcharge of 14% on those assets (ultra-high net worth individuals) would more than pay for the $1.6 trillion budget deficit projection for 2011.

"Or, it would support about 33.8 million households at the national real median income level for 2008, pay for a year’s worth of AIDS medication for about 142 million patients, or create 34 million jobs at $50,000 per year."

Want to Cut the Deficit?...