Under Bush US's 400 richest doubled their wealth

[Skull Pilot]

At one point the top 26 hedge fund managers were averaging $877 million dollars a year in income.

All the while they were running a Ponzi scheme that robbed hard working Americans of their retirement savings.

These guys should be in prison.

so prosecute them for fraud. we have laws on the books for that very thing.

make your case against them and do it.

 

[Chris]

Skull, what the government should do is set up an organization to renegotiate these mortgages and prevent more forclosures. This is what was done in the 1930's and in the 1980's, and it worked well. Once the housing market is stablized, it will be easier to get things back to normal.

 

[Gun Clingin']

I got richer under W. But I'm not one of the richest or even close to rich actually.

 

[Old Rocks]

Skull, the very wealthy just had eight years of running the government and everything else. They robbed the system until it has now failed. The men and women that I am working with have lost much of their savings, and many stand to lose their homes should the company shut down. In the meantime, just as in the last Great Republican Depression, the very wealthy that created the mess, will merely see a few less zeros on their portfolio. Roosevelt save their asses last time. If things go down as hard as it looks like they will, there will be major changes in the system in the coming decade. Changes that will make my rhetoric look conservative.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Skull, what the government should do is set up an organization to renegotiate these mortgages and prevent more forclosures. This is what was done in the 1930's and in the 1980's, and it worked well. Once the housing market is stablized, it will be easier to get things back to normal.

hey foreclosures are a way for people who owe too much to wipe the slate clean and start over.

For god sake, let people walk away from mortgages where they are upside down and hope they learned their lessons and will now live within their means. Their credit can be rebuilt and maybe they can find a place to live that they can actually afford and save some money to eventually buy another house they can afford.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Skull, the very wealthy just had eight years of running the government and everything else. They robbed the system until it has now failed. The men and women that I am working with have lost much of their savings, and many stand to lose their homes should the company shut down. In the meantime, just as in the last Great Republican Depression, the very wealthy that created the mess, will merely see a few less zeros on their portfolio. Roosevelt save their asses last time. If things go down as hard as it looks like they will, there will be major changes in the system in the coming decade. Changes that will make my rhetoric look conservative.

that's just scapegoating and you know it.

you do realize that rich people's portfolios have lost value as well? And there are many arguments that say FDR made things worse.

And again are you so naive to think that the Dimocrats running things now are not beholden to those same evil rich people? Or are rich Dimocrats saints where rich Repudlicans are sinners?

Jesus Christ man both parties are growing the government, taking more from the people, wasting more and more every year and your telling me it's a few rich repudlicans in the last 8 years that are 100% responsible for people losing value in their savings.

You want people to be better off how about letting people, ALL people keep more of what they earn, stop charging taxes on interest, let people save their own money for retirement. Give people the chance to be responsible for themselves and get the fucking government out of our wallets and our lives.

 

[Red Dawn]

The concentration of wealth and power in the hands of a small minority is demonstrated throughout history to lead to plutocracy and the diminishment of democracy. In most cases, they led to failed nation states.

This is historical fact.

This is something the revolutionary founders were well aware of, and they found concentrations of wealth in the hands of a few to be abhorrant to the ideals of a republican democracy.

Hardly anyone begrudes someone working hard and becoming rich. That's not the issue. The issue is a system that is gamed to allow the concentration of wealth in an increasingly tiny portion of the population. That's antithetic to a healthy democracy. That's what Russia is: a plutocracy. That's the model, among many others, of a nation state where wealth has been overwhelminnly and disporportionately concentrated in the hands of a few thousand people.

Take a gander at Warren Buffet's article on wealth. He says he pays a lower tax rate than his secretary or cleaning lady. The tax code is set up to protect weatlh, and investment wealth is increasingly, since the Reagan years, taxed at lower rates than income generated from actually working and making a wage.

 

[Skull Pilot]

The concentration of wealth and power in the hands of a small minority is demonstrated throughout history to lead to plutocracy and the diminishment of democracy. In most cases, they led to failed nation states.

This is historical fact.

This is something the revolutionary founders were well aware of, and they found concentrations of wealth in the hands of a few to be abhorrant to the ideals of a republican democracy.

Hardly anyone begrudes someone working hard and becoming rich. That's not the issue. The issue is a system that is gamed to allow the concentration of wealth in an increasingly tiny portion of the population. That's antithetic to a healthy democracy. That's what Russia is: a plutocracy. That's the model, among many others, of a nation state where wealth has been overwhelminnly and disporportionately concentrated in the hands of a few thousand people.

Take a gander at Warren Buffet's article on wealth. He says he pays a lower tax rate than his secretary or cleaning lady. The tax code is set up to protect weatlh, and investment wealth is increasingly, since the Reagan years, taxed at lower rates than income generated from actually working and making a wage.

What makes an earned wage more important than a dividend that a dividend should be taxed at a higher rate?

Is it because you perceive that a guy who works 40 hours a week adds more to the economy than a guy with a multimillion dollar investment portfolio?

Or does the multimillion dollar investment portfolio create more return economically when that money is used by banks and companies to build a hospital, to produce a product that changes people's lives for the better?

Whose production did more for the economy as a whole, the assembly line worker of the idle rich guy who invests his money?

 

[auditor0007]

Skull, what the government should do is set up an organization to renegotiate these mortgages and prevent more forclosures. This is what was done in the 1930's and in the 1980's, and it worked well. Once the housing market is stablized, it will be easier to get things back to normal.

One of the biggest problems with the housing market that no one seems to address is the simple fact that there are too many homes on the market and not enough people to buy them. If everyone has a place to live and there are still too many homes, then there is a problem with too much supply.

Yes, I understand that there are some people who can't get a mortgage at the current time, who under normal circumstances probably would. Unfortunately, many of these home mortgages are being walked away from because they were investment properties. I don't see this housing problem changing in a significant way for at least ten years. Foreclosures will eventually lessen substantially, but there will still be too many homes available.

 

[RodISHI]

Bloomberg.com: U.S.


Are you begining to get it?



Capital gains made up 63 percent of the richest 400 Americans’ adjusted gross income in 2006, or a combined $66.1 billion, according to the data. In all, the 400 wealthiest Americans reported a combined $105.3 billion of adjusted gross income in 2006, the most recent year for which the IRS has data.

“The big explosion in income for this group is clearly on the capital gains side, although there are also sharp increases in dividend and interest income,” said Dean Baker, co-director of the Center for Economic Policy and Research in Washington.

You mean the repeal Clinton signed:

Billionaire Sanford I. Weill, who according to Louis Uchitelle made "Citigroup into the most powerful financial institution since the House of Morgan a century ago," has what I call the Wall of Me leading to his office, which he has decorated with tributes to him, including a dozen framed magazine covers. A major trophy is the pen Bill Clinton used to sign the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act, a move which allowed Weill to create Citigroup. Fittingly, Citigroup is a major contributor to guess which current Democratic Presidential candidate


When Bill Clinton gave that pen to Sanford Weill, it symbolized the ending of the twentieth century Democratic Party that had created the New Deal. Although the 1999 law did not repeal all of the banking Act of 1933, retaining the FDIC, it did once again allow banks to enter the securities business, becoming what some term "whole banks."

Do you get it yet?

 

[auditor0007]

The concentration of wealth and power in the hands of a small minority is demonstrated throughout history to lead to plutocracy and the diminishment of democracy. In most cases, they led to failed nation states.

This is historical fact.

This is something the revolutionary founders were well aware of, and they found concentrations of wealth in the hands of a few to be abhorrant to the ideals of a republican democracy.

Hardly anyone begrudes someone working hard and becoming rich. That's not the issue. The issue is a system that is gamed to allow the concentration of wealth in an increasingly tiny portion of the population. That's antithetic to a healthy democracy. That's what Russia is: a plutocracy. That's the model, among many others, of a nation state where wealth has been overwhelminnly and disporportionately concentrated in the hands of a few thousand people.

Take a gander at Warren Buffet's article on wealth. He says he pays a lower tax rate than his secretary or cleaning lady. The tax code is set up to protect weatlh, and investment wealth is increasingly, since the Reagan years, taxed at lower rates than income generated from actually working and making a wage.

That is why we should have a flat tax across the board on all income regardless how it is earned.

 

[Jon]

This is nothing but pure jealousy.

I was going to make a long post, but this pretty much sums it up perfectly. The rich get richer because they work at it, the poor stay poor because they sit on their ass bitching about the rich. Get off your lazy fucking ass people and go make some money.

 

[RodISHI]

At one point the top 26 hedge fund managers were averaging $877 million dollars a year in income.

All the while they were running a Ponzi scheme that robbed hard working Americans of their retirement savings.

These guys should be in prison.

so prosecute them for fraud. we have laws on the books for that very thing.

make your case against them and do it.

Right a person who worked their entire lives working or building a small business is expected to all the sudden become a top prosecutor and defend themselves all at the same time.

 

[RodISHI]

This is nothing but pure jealousy.

I was going to make a long post, but this pretty much sums it up perfectly. The rich get richer because they work at it, the poor stay poor because they sit on their ass bitching about the rich. Get off your lazy fucking ass people and go make some money.

I am not into personal insults much jsanders but here goes, you are a real piece of shit for a human being.

 

[xsited1]

Capital gains made up 63 percent of the richest 400 Americans’ adjusted gross income in 2006, or a combined $66.1 billion, according to the data. In all, the 400 wealthiest Americans reported a combined $105.3 billion of adjusted gross income in 2006, the most recent year for which the IRS has data.

“The big explosion in income for this group is clearly on the capital gains side, although there are also sharp increases in dividend and interest income,” said Dean Baker, co-director of the Center for Economic Policy and Research in Washington.

And then the Democrats took control of Congress and everything went to hell...

 

[sitarro]

Bloomberg.com: U.S.


Are you begining to get it?



Capital gains made up 63 percent of the richest 400 Americans’ adjusted gross income in 2006, or a combined $66.1 billion, according to the data. In all, the 400 wealthiest Americans reported a combined $105.3 billion of adjusted gross income in 2006, the most recent year for which the IRS has data.

“The big explosion in income for this group is clearly on the capital gains side, although there are also sharp increases in dividend and interest income,” said Dean Baker, co-director of the Center for Economic Policy and Research in Washington.

How convenient for your pathetic argument that you left out that tax revenue from the same 400 rose to levels not seen since the last year of Clinton's reign.

"The 17.2 percent tax rate in 2006 was the lowest since the IRS began tracking the 400 largest taxpayers in 1992, although the richest 400 Americans paid more tax on an inflation-adjusted basis than any year since 2000."

 

[alan1]

10% of the people control 96% of the wealth in America.

This is the Republican Valhalla.

Warren Buffet and Bill Gates.

 

[Amanda]

This is nothing but pure jealousy.

I was going to make a long post, but this pretty much sums it up perfectly. The rich get richer because they work at it, the poor stay poor because they sit on their ass bitching about the rich. Get off your lazy fucking ass people and go make some money.

I wanted to add to this a little. I work in a call center that supports a company that is in the financial industry. Occasionally we have bankers come in and they have classes where they learn more about our products and services. Sometimes these are fairly low level people like me, but sometimes they are pretty high up, it depends on the FI in question. Anyway, because I'm pretty knowledgeable I often get to sit with them and answer the questions they have. So, why do I mention all this?

I didn't grow up around anyone that could be considered rich, not even close. I used to have some of the same attitudes about them not working hard for their money, but I've had my mind changed by interacting with them. I am truly amazed how hard some of these people work, and the higher up they are the harder they work. You wouldn't believe the long hours they put in, and no one tells them to do it, and they don't bitch about doing it, they are simply driven. I think this makes Jsanders point very well... they aren't lazy and they don't make excuses, they just work their asses off.

 

[Care4all]

The concentration of wealth and power in the hands of a small minority is demonstrated throughout history to lead to plutocracy and the diminishment of democracy. In most cases, they led to failed nation states.

This is historical fact.

This is something the revolutionary founders were well aware of, and they found concentrations of wealth in the hands of a few to be abhorrant to the ideals of a republican democracy.

Hardly anyone begrudes someone working hard and becoming rich. That's not the issue. The issue is a system that is gamed to allow the concentration of wealth in an increasingly tiny portion of the population. That's antithetic to a healthy democracy. That's what Russia is: a plutocracy. That's the model, among many others, of a nation state where wealth has been overwhelminnly and disporportionately concentrated in the hands of a few thousand people.

Take a gander at Warren Buffet's article on wealth. He says he pays a lower tax rate than his secretary or cleaning lady. The tax code is set up to protect weatlh, and investment wealth is increasingly, since the Reagan years, taxed at lower rates than income generated from actually working and making a wage.

What makes an earned wage more important than a dividend that a dividend should be taxed at a higher rate?

Is it because you perceive that a guy who works 40 hours a week adds more to the economy than a guy with a multimillion dollar investment portfolio?

Or does the multimillion dollar investment portfolio create more return economically when that money is used by banks and companies to build a hospital, to produce a product that changes people's lives for the better?

Whose production did more for the economy as a whole, the assembly line worker of the idle rich guy who invests his money?

How about dividend and capital gains income being taxed at the SAME income tax rate as the rest of us have to pay instead of LESS? Why do you see it fair for these incomes to pay less in income tax as a percentage than Buffet's Secretary has to pay as a percentage of her income?

 

[Care4all]

10% of the people control 96% of the wealth in America.

This is the Republican Valhalla.

Warren Buffet and Bill Gates.

yes, but both of them agree to be taxed more....they both believe in the inheritance tax and both believe they should be taxed upon death....they both are giving away BILLIONS to charity as well...

Buffet is the one complaining that he pays less as a percentage in taxes than his secretary and that is fundamentally wrong.