Wealthy Americans and Taxes

[antagon]

what's wealthy? i pay a lot of taxes and i go through hoops to hack my liability down. i am glad that i don't make or keep all of my money in the US. i feel i contribute more than average to my local economy... but i don't feel wealthy... not by the yachts and pina coladas standards that i had when i was a kid. while i 'dodge' taxes with my evil write-offs and demonic tax havens and all that shit, if everyone paid taxes like me we wouldn't have a deficit like we do.

it's all good that society has different amounts of risk, ingenuity and effort being put out by different individuals. if everyone had a yacht with pina colada makin mamas on it, what would be the point? i just think that when it comes to talking shit about taxes, folks who earn above the average are the ones with the shit to sling, and all the folks who get tax refunds in may should duck.

wealth itself, I am fascinated by at times, and other times I am simply bored by it.

For the whole of my life I have had very little interest in acquiring it, even when opportunities for the road to significant wealth was before me.

I would like some wealth at times, but wealth can be a ball and chain: like marriage.

I truly march to the tune of my own drum.

I have been around wealth and have walked away unimpressed by wealth itself, but impressed how a few handle it. I have been told and believe that very few handle it the way I am speaking of it.

think how many families have broken up, over wealth. how many people have murdered family over wealth. wealth can and does bring out the worst in many who pursue it. look at many of the comments here about wealth.

that's actually poetic how you put that, man.

i like baby-ballin. i think that if you like to do things without having to ask some bastard for permission, having dough is the way to go.

i can see how cheese can cause people problems, but by and large i think most families and relationships are crushed under the absence of wealth.

tax time is the one biggest pain that money has ever caused me, but ya got to pay your dues.

 

[Oddball]

what's wealthy? i pay a lot of taxes and i go through hoops to hack my liability down. i am glad that i don't make or keep all of my money in the US. i feel i contribute more than average to my local economy... but i don't feel wealthy... not by the yachts and pina coladas standards that i had when i was a kid. while i 'dodge' taxes with my evil write-offs and demonic tax havens and all that shit, if everyone paid taxes like me we wouldn't have a deficit like we do.

Nonsense.

Deficits are a product of too much spending, not too little shaking down of the rustics.

 

[antagon]

'too much' implies a relative condition. relative to current spending, my statement stands. maybe your one-way road is nonsense.

 

[Oddball]

"Too much" as in spending money that you not only don't have, but cannot ever hope to have.

You don't spend and you don't go deeper into the hole, no matter how much you're taking in.

 

[antagon]

that only makes sense to you because you believe your government will be viable 'if you dont spend'.

in the real world, there is a balance to strike between expenditure and receipts. ever heard that before about budgets? "balance"?

 

[Oddball]

Right...And that balance is seriously over-weighted on the spending side.

Why should the District of Criminals get any more money when they already so poorly mismanage the jillions they already get?

 

[boedicca]

that only makes sense to you because you believe your government will be viable 'if you dont spend'.

in the real world, there is a balance to strike between expenditure and receipts. ever heard that before about budgets? "balance"?

This is only valid in the world of accurate accounting. As our government has a record of playing "off budget" games and other nonsense which makes the budget meaningless when it comes to consuming massive quantities of taxpayer money. It is so out of control that the only solution is to starve the beast.

I'm reminded of a children's story about a goldfish that was overfed to the point where he wouldn't fit in a swimming pool. The family stop feeding him. He shrank. And then he was able to be put back into his proper fishbowl.

It's time to stop overfeeding the Government Goldfish.

The term is extra-apt in that most of our government really is made up of goldfish who stare open mouthed at shiny things.

 

[georgephillip]

Since the corporate-activist majority of SCOTUS tells us corporations are also citizens, it's worth asking if they are paying their "fair share?"

If it's true corporations paid $ 300Bn in taxes on $ 6Tn in income (5%), would taxing these fish at the same rate Buffett claims to pay truly wipe out our deficit?

If corporations paid taxes at a rate of 5% of GDP in 1946 and they currently pay at about a 1% of GDP level, there would seem to be revenue increasing options available also.

America is 234 Years Old Today

 

[antagon]

'starving the beast' is a joke to me. it basically means that instead of tax, the government should pillage social security, then draft up trillions more in t-bills and slang those too.

budgets need to be balanced. it is as simple as that. the starve the beast mantra of the reaganomic era we are in has only resulted in the above. where some are under the delusion that the government will reduce year on year spending despite that only happening after the cessation of war, i say that the biggest contributor to our debt has been tax cut conservatism - a playschool version of what is needed in public finance and monetary policy which allows politicians the time to age and die before the consequences of their fiscal irresponsibility has to be dealt with.

we will have to confront this situation over the next decade, and it will involve tax, austerity and inflation combined. if these three are each approached with some ingenuity, we'll make it out the other end the better for it. what is certain, though, is that the age of pander-conservatism has run its course and the returns have dried up in spectacular fashion.

 

[boedicca]

The Government has already pillaged Social Security.

They've spend the money and stuffed the lockbox with IOUs to be paid by future taxpayers.

The budget process is a joke without proper GAAP accounting.

 

[georgephillip]

'starving the beast' is a joke to me. it basically means that instead of tax, the government should pillage social security, then draft up trillions more in t-bills and slang those too.

budgets need to be balanced. it is as simple as that. the starve the beast mantra of the reaganomic era we are in has only resulted in the above. where some are under the delusion that the government will reduce year on year spending despite that only happening after the cessation of war, i say that the biggest contributor to our debt has been tax cut conservatism - a playschool version of what is needed in public finance and monetary policy which allows politicians the time to age and die before the consequences of their fiscal irresponsibility has to be dealt with.

we will have to confront this situation over the next decade, and it will involve tax, austerity and inflation combined. if these three are each approached with some ingenuity, we'll make it out the other end the better for it. what is certain, though, is that the age of pander-conservatism has run its course and the returns have dried up in spectacular fashion.

What if that age of "pander-conservatism" received a new lease on life last January with the Citizens United case? Based on corporate and union donations in this month's Minnesota primary players like Target and Best Buy aren't too concerned with alienating customers by blatantly taking sides in elections.

Corporate donations often go overwhelmingly to candidates who've never doubted Reaganomics or the virtue of "starving the beast."

Since Big Labor pulls many of the same strings in the Democratic party as the US Chamber of Commerce pulls among Republican puppets, maybe it's time to recognize any meaningful change won't happen by "choosing" between the two major parties.

 

[antagon]

'starving the beast' is a joke to me. it basically means that instead of tax, the government should pillage social security, then draft up trillions more in t-bills and slang those too.

budgets need to be balanced. it is as simple as that. the starve the beast mantra of the reaganomic era we are in has only resulted in the above. where some are under the delusion that the government will reduce year on year spending despite that only happening after the cessation of war, i say that the biggest contributor to our debt has been tax cut conservatism - a playschool version of what is needed in public finance and monetary policy which allows politicians the time to age and die before the consequences of their fiscal irresponsibility has to be dealt with.

we will have to confront this situation over the next decade, and it will involve tax, austerity and inflation combined. if these three are each approached with some ingenuity, we'll make it out the other end the better for it. what is certain, though, is that the age of pander-conservatism has run its course and the returns have dried up in spectacular fashion.

What if that age of "pander-conservatism" received a new lease on life last January with the Citizens United case? Based on corporate and union donations in this month's Minnesota primary players like Target and Best Buy aren't too concerned with alienating customers by blatantly taking sides in elections.

Corporate donations often go overwhelmingly to candidates who've never doubted Reaganomics or the virtue of "starving the beast."

Since Big Labor pulls many of the same strings in the Democratic party as the US Chamber of Commerce pulls among Republican puppets, maybe it's time to recognize any meaningful change won't happen by "choosing" between the two major parties.

the big labor/big biz cliche is 35 years old. i contend that the battlefield has changed. democrats have realized that unions dont have the control that they used to have over the voting habits of their members. union workers fit the demography of republican voters, and have merged closer to neutral. campaign reforms have made politics decidedly more populist.

big businesses aren't sure if the prefer a svelte tax suite or a fat corporate welfare suite. big retailers graze off demand-side economics and already have ways of not paying taxes.

brave new world.

 

[georgephillip]

'starving the beast' is a joke to me. it basically means that instead of tax, the government should pillage social security, then draft up trillions more in t-bills and slang those too.

budgets need to be balanced. it is as simple as that. the starve the beast mantra of the reaganomic era we are in has only resulted in the above. where some are under the delusion that the government will reduce year on year spending despite that only happening after the cessation of war, i say that the biggest contributor to our debt has been tax cut conservatism - a playschool version of what is needed in public finance and monetary policy which allows politicians the time to age and die before the consequences of their fiscal irresponsibility has to be dealt with.

we will have to confront this situation over the next decade, and it will involve tax, austerity and inflation combined. if these three are each approached with some ingenuity, we'll make it out the other end the better for it. what is certain, though, is that the age of pander-conservatism has run its course and the returns have dried up in spectacular fashion.

What if that age of "pander-conservatism" received a new lease on life last January with the Citizens United case? Based on corporate and union donations in this month's Minnesota primary players like Target and Best Buy aren't too concerned with alienating customers by blatantly taking sides in elections.

Corporate donations often go overwhelmingly to candidates who've never doubted Reaganomics or the virtue of "starving the beast."

Since Big Labor pulls many of the same strings in the Democratic party as the US Chamber of Commerce pulls among Republican puppets, maybe it's time to recognize any meaningful change won't happen by "choosing" between the two major parties.

the big labor/big biz cliche is 35 years old. i contend that the battlefield has changed. democrats have realized that unions dont have the control that they used to have over the voting habits of their members. union workers fit the demography of republican voters, and have merged closer to neutral. campaign reforms have made politics decidedly more populist.

big businesses aren't sure if the prefer a svelte tax suite or a fat corporate welfare suite. big retailers graze off demand-side economics and already have ways of not paying taxes.

brave new world.

It's probably worthwhile to look at what else has changed during the last 35 years. Manufacturing was 18% of GDP, and now it's 11%.

"The decline of 39% is due to jobs offshoring."

"Think about that. Wall Street and shareholders and executives of transnational corporations have made billions by moving 39% of US manufacturing offshore to boost the GDP and employment of foreign countries, such as China, while impoverishing their former American work force."

More from Paul Craig Roberts:

"We now have an all-time high of Americans on food stamps, 40.8 million people, about 14% of the population. By next year the government estimates that food stamp dependency will rise to 43 million Americans.

"So last week Congress cut food stamp benefits.
Let them eat cake"

Brave Dead World?

 

[georgephillip]

The Government has already pillaged Social Security.

They've spend the money and stuffed the lockbox with IOUs to be paid by future taxpayers.

The budget process is a joke without proper GAAP accounting.

"It is impossible to get any truth out of the US government about anything. If private companies used US government accounting, the executives would be prosecuted, convicted, and incarcerated.

"'Our government' is committed to fighting wars to enrich the military/security complex and Israel's territorial expansion at the expense of cuts in Social Security and Medicare."

Deceptive Economic Statistics

 

[Oddball]

'starving the beast' is a joke to me. it basically means that instead of tax, the government should pillage social security, then draft up trillions more in t-bills and slang those too.

Too late...Already been happening for decades now....Yet, the beast is as bloated as ever.

we will have to confront this situation over the next decade, and it will involve tax, austerity and inflation combined. if these three are each approached with some ingenuity, we'll make it out the other end the better for it. what is certain, though, is that the age of pander-conservatism has run its course and the returns have dried up in spectacular fashion.

The only way the situation will be confronted is in the wake of a currency collapse...There are absolutely no political cajones, in either wing of the demopiblicratican duopoly, for the situation to shake out any other way.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Right...And that balance is seriously over-weighted on the spending side.

Why should the District of Criminals get any more money when they already so poorly mismanage the jillions they already get?

why should anyone take you seriously if you keep using sophomoric terms when discussing serious topics?

 

[Rozman]

Since the corporate-activist majority of SCOTUS tells us corporations are also citizens, it's worth asking if they are paying their "fair share?"

If it's true corporations paid $ 300Bn in taxes on $ 6Tn in income (5%), would taxing these fish at the same rate Buffett claims to pay truly wipe out our deficit?

If corporations paid taxes at a rate of 5% of GDP in 1946 and they currently pay at about a 1% of GDP level, there would seem to be revenue increasing options available also.

America is 234 Years Old Today

If it's true corporations paid $ 300Bn in taxes on $ 6Tn in income (5%), would taxing these fish at the same rate Buffett claims to pay truly wipe out our deficit?

How about we stop spending money we don't have?.....How about we try that?

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

How about we stop spending money we don't have?.....How about we try that?

are you really this dumb?

 

[Rozman]

If thinking spending within a person's means or the government not spending recklessly makes me a stupid
person? Well I want to be the king of the idiots....

 

[California Girl]

what's wealthy? i pay a lot of taxes and i go through hoops to hack my liability down. i am glad that i don't make or keep all of my money in the US. i feel i contribute more than average to my local economy... but i don't feel wealthy... not by the yachts and pina coladas standards that i had when i was a kid. while i 'dodge' taxes with my evil write-offs and demonic tax havens and all that shit, if everyone paid taxes like me we wouldn't have a deficit like we do.

it's all good that society has different amounts of risk, ingenuity and effort being put out by different individuals. if everyone had a yacht with pina colada makin mamas on it, what would be the point? i just think that when it comes to talking shit about taxes, folks who earn above the average are the ones with the shit to sling, and all the folks who get tax refunds in may should duck.

wealth itself, I am fascinated by at times, and other times I am simply bored by it.

For the whole of my life I have had very little interest in acquiring it, even when opportunities for the road to significant wealth was before me.

I would like some wealth at times, but wealth can be a ball and chain: like marriage.

I truly march to the tune of my own drum.

I have been around wealth and have walked away unimpressed by wealth itself, but impressed how a few handle it. I have been told and believe that very few handle it the way I am speaking of it.

think how many families have broken up, over wealth. how many people have murdered family over wealth. wealth can and does bring out the worst in many who pursue it. look at many of the comments here about wealth.

So, basically, you're broke and jealous of those who have more than you. Roger that.

You would like to be wealthy but lack the necessary drive and intellect to achieve and keep it. Roger that.

You used to have wealthy friends but they figured out what a sponger you were and told you to fuck off. Roger that.

Wealth does not 'break up families' or 'murder' or anything else. That is greed.

Moron.