US Income Inequality: Top !% Take Home 24% of US Income

[The Rabbi]

Interesting exchange between O'Reilly and Juan Williams last night as they discussed who the President is--is he a socialist????--and what socialism actually is.

In a nutshell, socialism is government owning or controlling the means of production, and in Marxist socialism is also the 'redistribution of wealth' philosophy. In Marx's '1875 Critique of the Gotha Program', he coined the phrase: "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs".

The socialist minded among us believe the rich should be taxed more and forced to provide more because they don't 'need all that wealth' and the little guys 'needs' it. And they see the government as the vehicle to take from the rich and provide to the 'poor'.

What they leave out of that equation, however, is Marx's philosophy that everybody would contribute as much as they were able. Somehow that part always gets swallowed up in a socialist system though just as soon as folks figure out they don't have to put in much effort in order to have as much as those who do. And then the system begins breaking down so everybody has less except those in power who can take whatever they want.

I prefer the American system.

I do to

The American system has had a "socialist" progressive tax for over 75 years

Which kind of system requires someone living in poverty to contribute the same in taxes as someone who is mega wealthy?

A flat tax doesn't make someone living in poverty pay the same as a billionaire.

Details, details.....

 

[boedicca]

They always hate in when one brings up Reality.

 

[Foxfyre]

Interesting exchange between O'Reilly and Juan Williams last night as they discussed who the President is--is he a socialist????--and what socialism actually is.

In a nutshell, socialism is government owning or controlling the means of production, and in Marxist socialism is also the 'redistribution of wealth' philosophy. In Marx's '1875 Critique of the Gotha Program', he coined the phrase: "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs".

The socialist minded among us believe the rich should be taxed more and forced to provide more because they don't 'need all that wealth' and the little guys 'needs' it. And they see the government as the vehicle to take from the rich and provide to the 'poor'.

What they leave out of that equation, however, is Marx's philosophy that everybody would contribute as much as they were able. Somehow that part always gets swallowed up in a socialist system though just as soon as folks figure out they don't have to put in much effort in order to have as much as those who do. And then the system begins breaking down so everybody has less except those in power who can take whatever they want.

I prefer the American system.

I do to

The American system has had a "socialist" progressive tax for over 75 years

Which kind of system requires someone living in poverty to contribute the same in taxes as someone who is mega wealthy?

A flat tax doesn't make someone living in poverty pay the same as a billionaire.

A flat tax would be the best thing we ever did for ourselves if we could just get it through a corrupt Congress.

1) It would naturally limit the amount of money the government would have to spend, and if they wanted more they would have to initiate policy and regulation to encourage us all to be more prosperous.

2) It would allow us all to calculate our tax burden well in advance and plan accordingly. This would free up business and commerce to do their thing far more efficiently and with far more confidence than they can now.

3) It would give all Americans, and not just the 50% more affluent, a stake in the process and more incentive to elect the best people to office instead of the ones who are willing to keep bribing the people and buying votes.

4) By not punishing success, it would encourage prosperity in new and interesting ways.

 

[rightwinger]

Interesting exchange between O'Reilly and Juan Williams last night as they discussed who the President is--is he a socialist????--and what socialism actually is.

In a nutshell, socialism is government owning or controlling the means of production, and in Marxist socialism is also the 'redistribution of wealth' philosophy. In Marx's '1875 Critique of the Gotha Program', he coined the phrase: "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs".

The socialist minded among us believe the rich should be taxed more and forced to provide more because they don't 'need all that wealth' and the little guys 'needs' it. And they see the government as the vehicle to take from the rich and provide to the 'poor'.

What they leave out of that equation, however, is Marx's philosophy that everybody would contribute as much as they were able. Somehow that part always gets swallowed up in a socialist system though just as soon as folks figure out they don't have to put in much effort in order to have as much as those who do. And then the system begins breaking down so everybody has less except those in power who can take whatever they want.

I prefer the American system.

I do to

The American system has had a "socialist" progressive tax for over 75 years

Which kind of system requires someone living in poverty to contribute the same in taxes as someone who is mega wealthy?

NIce try.....It's bullshit.
The person in poverty doesn't pay taxes. So cut the bullshit. And even those that do pay, their burden is a mere blip on the tax radar when compared to what the highest earners pay.
Here I am going to drive you nutso...I am from NJ, where most everyone is fiscally conservative about THEIR money and free spending with everyone else's.
A flat tax. Everyone pays 15% of their gross income above $40k per year.
No deductions, No exemptions. Get rid of the IRS and ave bazillions of dollars in compensation for IRS workers. Let them find a job in the private sector.

The billionaires will love you....the middle class will pick up the slack

 

[rikules]

And they have the freedom to succeed, just as they have the freedom to fail.... just as every other citizen does.... a free society should not be about punishing success nor for padding failure...

It's class warfare that breeds the envy and jealousy we see from those who make more $$$... and if they would put as much effort into forming their own success as they do about complaining about the success of others, they might be a little better off

"It's class warfare that breeds the envy and jealousy we see from those who make more $$$... and if they would put as much effort into forming their own success as they do about complaining about the success of others, they might be a little better off"


a rather simplistic way of looking at it.

the way capitalism actually works in America is a lot more like a board game (think LIFE/monopoly/musical chairs/jobs)

a board game in which one person (or a small group of people) makes all the rules

rules that they themselves don't need to ever follow


the game begins....

with 10 players

the MAN/OWNER/CEO has to decide how to distribute all the money...

so he gives 95% of all money to himself....
and then he divides the rest amongst the remaining 9 players

everyone goes around the board 1 time....

as they play the other 9 players (according to the RULES) MUST
A. DO ALL THE REAL WORK
B. pay MAN/OWNER/CEO rent/mortgage/bills

at the end of 1 turn the MAN decides that he could have even MORE money (sans work)
if he lets 1 player go

so that guy must eat out of garbage cans while the remaining 8 players, thankful they have jobs, continue to do ALL THE REAL WORK and continue to pay THE MAN (who does no work at all) taxes/rents/mortgages/bills

on the next turn one of the remaining players shows great skill at putting a basketball into a net so the MAN decides to give him (you call this work?) MILLIONS of dollars to play games

at the end of this turn the MAN realizes that giving millions to 1 guy to play basketball is eating into his billion dollar fortune and he can not afford to actually buy italy unless he finds a way to get that money back (what a liberal crime it would be to deny this man the money to buy italy!)

so he raises rates on the actual workers and fires a few more just so he can have even MORE money for doing absolutely nothing....

at the end of the game the MAN has ALMOST all of the money EXCEPT for the millions he is willing to give the basketball player...

while everyone else eats out of garbage cans...

until eating the garbage of billionaires becomes a crime..

then they go live in the woods...

which is also illegal because the man OWNS the woods and killing the kings deer is a crime.....

the moral: you liberal socialists should just shut the hell up

 

[The Rabbi]

I do to

The American system has had a "socialist" progressive tax for over 75 years

Which kind of system requires someone living in poverty to contribute the same in taxes as someone who is mega wealthy?

NIce try.....It's bullshit.
The person in poverty doesn't pay taxes. So cut the bullshit. And even those that do pay, their burden is a mere blip on the tax radar when compared to what the highest earners pay.
Here I am going to drive you nutso...I am from NJ, where most everyone is fiscally conservative about THEIR money and free spending with everyone else's.
A flat tax. Everyone pays 15% of their gross income above $40k per year.
No deductions, No exemptions. Get rid of the IRS and ave bazillions of dollars in compensation for IRS workers. Let them find a job in the private sector.

The billionaires will love you....the middle class will pick up the slack

Actually high income earners will pay more under the plan. And there is no slack since everyone pays the same. But don't let facts get in the way of your delusions. Again.

 

[rightwinger]

NIce try.....It's bullshit.
The person in poverty doesn't pay taxes. So cut the bullshit. And even those that do pay, their burden is a mere blip on the tax radar when compared to what the highest earners pay.
Here I am going to drive you nutso...I am from NJ, where most everyone is fiscally conservative about THEIR money and free spending with everyone else's.
A flat tax. Everyone pays 15% of their gross income above $40k per year.
No deductions, No exemptions. Get rid of the IRS and ave bazillions of dollars in compensation for IRS workers. Let them find a job in the private sector.

The billionaires will love you....the middle class will pick up the slack

Actually high income earners will pay more under the plan. And there is no slack since everyone pays the same. But don't let facts get in the way of your delusions. Again.

Do tell....Rabbi

How are people who used to pay 36% on the majority of their income and now paying only 15% end up paying more?

Who is going to make up for the loss in revenue?

Let me guess

 

[The Rabbi]

The billionaires will love you....the middle class will pick up the slack

Actually high income earners will pay more under the plan. And there is no slack since everyone pays the same. But don't let facts get in the way of your delusions. Again.

Do tell....Rabbi

How are people who used to pay 36% on the majority of their income and now paying only 15% end up paying more?

Who is going to make up for the loss in revenue?

Let me guess

Who takes most advantage of tax deductions? Don't strain yourself figuring it out.

 

[rightwinger]

Actually high income earners will pay more under the plan. And there is no slack since everyone pays the same. But don't let facts get in the way of your delusions. Again.

Do tell....Rabbi

How are people who used to pay 36% on the majority of their income and now paying only 15% end up paying more?

Who is going to make up for the loss in revenue?

Let me guess

Who takes most advantage of tax deductions? Don't strain yourself figuring it out.

Pollyanna

You really believe , they will not find a way to hide their income?

 

[B. Kidd]

How can our current level of concentrated wealth be good?
The last time we reached this level of wealth concentration was in the late '20's just before the Great Depression.
And yes, the accumulation of this level of concentrated wealth has resulted in a zero-sum game.

That's an opinion ...Not based in fact.
Well now...Since you opened the door. What is your solution?...Really...You libs are great at pontificating about what you consider"obscene wealth", but you are incapable or unwillling to say what it is really on your minds as to how to reduce this so-called "wealth gap"...W Why don't you simply admit that you want government to "take it from them". From each according to his abilities to each according to his needs, correct?
Quite frankly, this wealth thing is all about getting votes for democrats anyway.
No one talked about wealth gaps or any of that nonsense when the democrats controlled both houses of Congress.
This is much ado about nothing. The ones screaming about this issue are simply looking for a handout.

For starters, I'm not a lib.
We are stuck between the rock of higher taxation and the hard place of monetary expansion.
I have no solutions and neither do our top economists.
All that I'm pointing out is that today's concentration of wealth is a historical bad omen.

 

[The Rabbi]

Do tell....Rabbi

How are people who used to pay 36% on the majority of their income and now paying only 15% end up paying more?

Who is going to make up for the loss in revenue?

Let me guess

Who takes most advantage of tax deductions? Don't strain yourself figuring it out.

Pollyanna

You really believe , they will not find a way to hide their income?

With lower rates there won't be much incentive to.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Let's see.

Wealth and power bequeathed from generation to generation.

Now why does that seem so damned familiar?

80% of millionaires are self made.

http://www.nytimes.com/books/first/s/stanley-millionaire.html

Based on what? This "book"?

You're free at any time to show it's wrong. I'm not stopping you.

 

[The Rabbi]

80% of millionaires are self made.

http://www.nytimes.com/books/first/s/stanley-millionaire.html

Based on what? This "book"?

You're free at any time to show it's wrong. I'm not stopping you.

But but....Kennedy! And Rockefeller! And BOOOSH!
See, you're wrong!

 

[thereisnospoon]

I do to

The American system has had a "socialist" progressive tax for over 75 years

Which kind of system requires someone living in poverty to contribute the same in taxes as someone who is mega wealthy?

NIce try.....It's bullshit.
The person in poverty doesn't pay taxes. So cut the bullshit. And even those that do pay, their burden is a mere blip on the tax radar when compared to what the highest earners pay.
Here I am going to drive you nutso...I am from NJ, where most everyone is fiscally conservative about THEIR money and free spending with everyone else's.
A flat tax. Everyone pays 15% of their gross income above $40k per year.
No deductions, No exemptions. Get rid of the IRS and ave bazillions of dollars in compensation for IRS workers. Let them find a job in the private sector.

The billionaires will love you....the middle class will pick up the slack

You conclude with a non-sequitur..Brilliant.

 

[thereisnospoon]

The billionaires will love you....the middle class will pick up the slack

Actually high income earners will pay more under the plan. And there is no slack since everyone pays the same. But don't let facts get in the way of your delusions. Again.

Do tell....Rabbi

How are people who used to pay 36% on the majority of their income and now paying only 15% end up paying more?

Who is going to make up for the loss in revenue?

Let me guess

Not lost revenue. More revenue. Simple. More money in the hands of the private sector means more productivity,more consumerism, more jobs. That equals more revenue for the government. And sadly, more money for them to spend on useless shit.
Remember this. I know it is difficult for you. It's OUR money.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

That qualifies the US as a third world nation.

U.S. Income Inequality: Top 1 Percent Take Home 24 Percent Of U.S. Income

The New York Times:

The richest 1 percent of Americans now take home almost 24 percent of income, up from almost 9 percent in 1976. As Timothy Noah of Slate noted in an excellent series on inequality, the United States now arguably has a more unequal distribution of wealth than traditional banana republics like Nicaragua, Venezuela and Guyana.

Read the whole story: The New York Times

What do you propose to remedy this? Should we put all the wealth in the hands of the government the way Venezuela is doing, making everyone poor, or should we simply start handing out checks to equalize everyone's income?

 

[rightwinger]

That qualifies the US as a third world nation.

U.S. Income Inequality: Top 1 Percent Take Home 24 Percent Of U.S. Income

The New York Times:

The richest 1 percent of Americans now take home almost 24 percent of income, up from almost 9 percent in 1976. As Timothy Noah of Slate noted in an excellent series on inequality, the United States now arguably has a more unequal distribution of wealth than traditional banana republics like Nicaragua, Venezuela and Guyana.

Read the whole story: The New York Times

What do you propose to remedy this? Should we put all the wealth in the hands of the government the way Venezuela is doing, making everyone poor, or should we simply start handing out checks to equalize everyone's income?

We can start by revoking unwarranted tax breaks that did nothing to help the country except add $2trillion to our debt

 

[Foxfyre]

That qualifies the US as a third world nation.

U.S. Income Inequality: Top 1 Percent Take Home 24 Percent Of U.S. Income

The New York Times:

The richest 1 percent of Americans now take home almost 24 percent of income, up from almost 9 percent in 1976. As Timothy Noah of Slate noted in an excellent series on inequality, the United States now arguably has a more unequal distribution of wealth than traditional banana republics like Nicaragua, Venezuela and Guyana.

Read the whole story: The New York Times

What do you propose to remedy this? Should we put all the wealth in the hands of the government the way Venezuela is doing, making everyone poor, or should we simply start handing out checks to equalize everyone's income?

We can start by revoking unwarranted tax breaks that did nothing to help the country except add $2trillion to our debt

The empirical evidence would suggest that those tax breaks were bringing down the deficit and ultimately, had that trend continued, would have started cutting down the debt.

How about we go with the entirely warranted theory that spending $2 trillion that we didn't have added $2 trillion to the debt?

 

[Jeremy]

What do you propose to remedy this? Should we put all the wealth in the hands of the government the way Venezuela is doing, making everyone poor, or should we simply start handing out checks to equalize everyone's income?

We can start by revoking unwarranted tax breaks that did nothing to help the country except add $2trillion to our debt

The empirical evidence would suggest that those tax breaks were bringing down the deficit and ultimately, had that trend continued, would have started cutting down the debt.

How about we go with the entirely warranted theory that spending $2 trillion that we didn't have added $2 trillion to the debt?

That's waaaaay to complicated of a theory.

 

[The Rabbi]

That qualifies the US as a third world nation.

U.S. Income Inequality: Top 1 Percent Take Home 24 Percent Of U.S. Income

The New York Times:

The richest 1 percent of Americans now take home almost 24 percent of income, up from almost 9 percent in 1976. As Timothy Noah of Slate noted in an excellent series on inequality, the United States now arguably has a more unequal distribution of wealth than traditional banana republics like Nicaragua, Venezuela and Guyana.

Read the whole story: The New York Times

What do you propose to remedy this? Should we put all the wealth in the hands of the government the way Venezuela is doing, making everyone poor, or should we simply start handing out checks to equalize everyone's income?

We can start by revoking unwarranted tax breaks that did nothing to help the country except add $2trillion to our debt

Could you define "unwarranted tax breaks" in a way that doesn't make me think you're a Stalinist?