Should The Rich Be Required To Pay Higher Taxes In the US?

[Boss]

dude, our capitalists should pay the finest tax rates money can pay.

They do. Our corporate tax rate is 40%... the highest in the world.

did you miss the one about a company ceo taking a pay cut but giving his employees a pay raise to the company minimum of $70k?

I didn't miss it. Such a sad story. Took the poor guy all of 3 months to fail.

The Sad Saga of the $70,000 Minimum Salary Company

Clearly, the entrepreneur acted impulsively, didn’t think things through, and, ultimately, he and his employees may pay a steep price for it. There are some very good reasons why none of you should even think about trying this sort of move at your own company today, tomorrow, or ever.

For one thing, it incentivizes the wrong employee behavior. Price lost some of his best people over his move and I can see why. An entry-level new hire who just clocks in and out is suddenly making almost as much as a veteran supervisor who busted her hump for years only to be rewarded with a miniscule raise.

Leveling the playing field all at once as he did breeds resentment and virtually eliminates the merits of meritocracy. You simply can’t raise the minimum salary that high without it having a negative ripple effect throughout the organization. You just can’t.

 

[danielpalos]

dude, our capitalists should pay the finest tax rates money can pay.

They do. Our corporate tax rate is 40%... the highest in the world.

did you miss the one about a company ceo taking a pay cut but giving his employees a pay raise to the company minimum of $70k?

I didn't miss it. Such a sad story. Took the poor guy all of 3 months to fail.

The Sad Saga of the $70,000 Minimum Salary Company

Clearly, the entrepreneur acted impulsively, didn’t think things through, and, ultimately, he and his employees may pay a steep price for it. There are some very good reasons why none of you should even think about trying this sort of move at your own company today, tomorrow, or ever.

For one thing, it incentivizes the wrong employee behavior. Price lost some of his best people over his move and I can see why. An entry-level new hire who just clocks in and out is suddenly making almost as much as a veteran supervisor who busted her hump for years only to be rewarded with a miniscule raise.

Leveling the playing field all at once as he did breeds resentment and virtually eliminates the merits of meritocracy. You simply can’t raise the minimum salary that high without it having a negative ripple effect throughout the organization. You just can’t.

How did Henry Ford justify doing something similar in the early 1900s?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

dude, our capitalists should pay the finest tax rates money can pay.

They do. Our corporate tax rate is 40%... the highest in the world.

did you miss the one about a company ceo taking a pay cut but giving his employees a pay raise to the company minimum of $70k?

I didn't miss it. Such a sad story. Took the poor guy all of 3 months to fail.

The Sad Saga of the $70,000 Minimum Salary Company

Clearly, the entrepreneur acted impulsively, didn’t think things through, and, ultimately, he and his employees may pay a steep price for it. There are some very good reasons why none of you should even think about trying this sort of move at your own company today, tomorrow, or ever.

For one thing, it incentivizes the wrong employee behavior. Price lost some of his best people over his move and I can see why. An entry-level new hire who just clocks in and out is suddenly making almost as much as a veteran supervisor who busted her hump for years only to be rewarded with a miniscule raise.

Leveling the playing field all at once as he did breeds resentment and virtually eliminates the merits of meritocracy. You simply can’t raise the minimum salary that high without it having a negative ripple effect throughout the organization. You just can’t.

How did Henry Ford justify doing something similar in the early 1900s?

High turnover was very expensive, hiking salaries cut turnover and boosted productivity.

 

[Boss]

How did Henry Ford justify doing something similar in the early 1900s?

I don't know but the time to argue vociferously in favor of the CEOs plan seems to be over now. This is what is wrong with Socialists... they can never admit when their ideas fail.

Go read the article I posted and stop arguing this was a good idea... it FAILED!

 

[Dad2three]

So, what's your number? You do realize, don't you, that you perfectly illustrate my point? You're yelling that they need to pay more. Okay, how much more? What figure would satisfy your envy?

Envy huh? lol

Weird how the "job creators" pre Reaganomics loved our nation enough to pay enough of a tax "burden' that we not only built the best infrastructure in the world, but had almost no debt, THEN we decided this Punishing" the "job creators" was somehow not only unfair, but held our economy back? lol

AGAIN, LETS GO BACK TO THE TAX RATES WHERE THE TOP 1/10TH OF 1% OF US PAID 50%-70% (EFFECTIVE) FROM 1932-1980?

Okay, so, since that won't do anything to the Obama deficit, what, beyond spite, will be accomplished by doing so? And what will you do when they avoid paying a lot of taxes and are still rich? Demand more?

Top 1% are taxed at 23% EFFECTIVE rates. Go to 46% and the deficit IS wiped out Bubs

AND still leaves them VASTLY wealthy. Weird right Bubs?


AGI ($ millions)

Top 1% income $1,976,738 (trillion)


Summary of Latest Federal Income Tax Data

I cant remember the exact figures.......but I once calculated out that if the top 20% paid something like 5% more...........and if we remained revenue neutral,...........then the bottom 80% would have to pay NOTHING.

but of course I guess I'm and old school conservative in some ways cause I think deficits and debt matter and I would want that paid down rather than continue to grow.

Well yes, that would be on income taxes, not all federal taxes

Bottom 80% of US own less than 11% of ALL US wealth



What gets me is the "rights" rant against the bottom 50% of US who went from almost 18% of the entire pie in 1980 to 11% today, a drop of almost $5,000 PER family. The bottom HALF OF US make as much income as JUST the top 1/10th of 1% of US, yet the bottom half of US average less than $15,000 PER family

But I agree with you,I prefer not to run large deficits or create the debt that can be traced back to Reagan/Dubya's policies, like cutting federal revenues AS they ramped up spending. If we just decided to go with the Buffett rule (min 30% fed tax on $1,000,000+ incomes), it cuts the deficits by almost 25%


Summary of Latest Federal Income Tax Data

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

So, what's your number? You do realize, don't you, that you perfectly illustrate my point? You're yelling that they need to pay more. Okay, how much more? What figure would satisfy your envy?

Envy huh? lol

Weird how the "job creators" pre Reaganomics loved our nation enough to pay enough of a tax "burden' that we not only built the best infrastructure in the world, but had almost no debt, THEN we decided this Punishing" the "job creators" was somehow not only unfair, but held our economy back? lol

AGAIN, LETS GO BACK TO THE TAX RATES WHERE THE TOP 1/10TH OF 1% OF US PAID 50%-70% (EFFECTIVE) FROM 1932-1980?

Okay, so, since that won't do anything to the Obama deficit, what, beyond spite, will be accomplished by doing so? And what will you do when they avoid paying a lot of taxes and are still rich? Demand more?

Top 1% are taxed at 23% EFFECTIVE rates. Go to 46% and the deficit IS wiped out Bubs

AND still leaves them VASTLY wealthy. Weird right Bubs?


AGI ($ millions)

Top 1% income $1,976,738 (trillion)


Summary of Latest Federal Income Tax Data

I cant remember the exact figures.......but I once calculated out that if the top 20% paid something like 5% more...........and if we remained revenue neutral,...........then the bottom 80% would have to pay NOTHING.

but of course I guess I'm and old school conservative in some ways cause I think deficits and debt matter and I would want that paid down rather than continue to grow.

Well yes, that would be on income taxes, not all federal taxes

Bottom 80% of US own less than 11% of ALL US wealth



What gets me is the "rights" rant against the bottom 50% of US who went from almost 18% of the entire pie in 1980 to 11% today, a drop of almost $5,000 PER family. The bottom HALF OF US make as much income as JUST the top 1/10th of 1% of US, yet the bottom half of US average less than $15,000 PER family

But I agree with you,I prefer not to run large deficits or create the debt that can be traced back to Reagan/Dubya's policies, like cutting federal revenues AS they ramped up spending. If we just decided to go with the Buffett rule (min 30% fed tax on $1,000,000+ incomes), it cuts the deficits by almost 25%


Summary of Latest Federal Income Tax Data

What gets me is the "rights" rant against the bottom 50% of US who went from almost 18% of the entire pie in 1980 to 11% today, a drop of almost $5,000 PER family.

It's difficult to keep up when tens of millions of illegals are competing for low-skilled jobs.

 

[David_42]

Envy huh? lol

Weird how the "job creators" pre Reaganomics loved our nation enough to pay enough of a tax "burden' that we not only built the best infrastructure in the world, but had almost no debt, THEN we decided this Punishing" the "job creators" was somehow not only unfair, but held our economy back? lol

AGAIN, LETS GO BACK TO THE TAX RATES WHERE THE TOP 1/10TH OF 1% OF US PAID 50%-70% (EFFECTIVE) FROM 1932-1980?

Okay, so, since that won't do anything to the Obama deficit, what, beyond spite, will be accomplished by doing so? And what will you do when they avoid paying a lot of taxes and are still rich? Demand more?

Top 1% are taxed at 23% EFFECTIVE rates. Go to 46% and the deficit IS wiped out Bubs

AND still leaves them VASTLY wealthy. Weird right Bubs?


AGI ($ millions)

Top 1% income $1,976,738 (trillion)


Summary of Latest Federal Income Tax Data

I cant remember the exact figures.......but I once calculated out that if the top 20% paid something like 5% more...........and if we remained revenue neutral,...........then the bottom 80% would have to pay NOTHING.

but of course I guess I'm and old school conservative in some ways cause I think deficits and debt matter and I would want that paid down rather than continue to grow.

Well yes, that would be on income taxes, not all federal taxes

Bottom 80% of US own less than 11% of ALL US wealth



What gets me is the "rights" rant against the bottom 50% of US who went from almost 18% of the entire pie in 1980 to 11% today, a drop of almost $5,000 PER family. The bottom HALF OF US make as much income as JUST the top 1/10th of 1% of US, yet the bottom half of US average less than $15,000 PER family

But I agree with you,I prefer not to run large deficits or create the debt that can be traced back to Reagan/Dubya's policies, like cutting federal revenues AS they ramped up spending. If we just decided to go with the Buffett rule (min 30% fed tax on $1,000,000+ incomes), it cuts the deficits by almost 25%


Summary of Latest Federal Income Tax Data

What gets me is the "rights" rant against the bottom 50% of US who went from almost 18% of the entire pie in 1980 to 11% today, a drop of almost $5,000 PER family.

It's difficult to keep up when tens of millions of illegals are competing for low-skilled jobs.

Hey, dipshit, the studies don't show illegal immigrants having a noticeable effect on the jobs you rant about. Trickle down voodoo has failed us all.

 

[Dad2three]

Getting your crews to get their fitness certificate? Lol! Still paying your employees twice the rate of every other company and selling for less than your competitors and raking in a higher profit margin? Lol!

A Certificate of Fitness (their name for it) is required by my insurance company prior to any and all sub-contractors entering the work site. It includes business licenses, permits, insurance, surety bonds, and workers status.

I pay my employees twice the rate because the profit is so high. I spread the wealth, not pocket it.

I make a higher profit than my competitors because I'm smarter than they are. Plus, I fix what they screw up at three times or more of the contract rate.

You're so full of shit your eyes are brown. Anyone who paid his workers twice the going rate would go bankrupt. How can you pay them twice the market rate if your company doesn't earn twice the market rate?

did you miss the one about a company ceo taking a pay cut but giving his employees a pay raise to the company minimum of $70k?

Did you miss the story where is sorry he did that, it has created lots of issues within the company and some of his best people have left. You the company where the owner still owes his brother some money and isn't able to pay up. The company where employees are now not motivated to work harder. The company where the people with a low skill set are not living up to expectations? That company?

Yes you set up the right wing memes, devoid of honesty or the ENTIRE story. Shocking how the right HATES that there might be a way to have a fairer economy right Bubs?

Seattle company copes with backlash on $70,000 minimum wage

 

[David_42]

Undocumented Immigrants Taking Jobs From US Citizens? Most Americans Believe Immigration Is Bad For Economy

 

[Maryland Patriot]

So, what's your number? You do realize, don't you, that you perfectly illustrate my point? You're yelling that they need to pay more. Okay, how much more? What figure would satisfy your envy?

Envy huh? lol

Weird how the "job creators" pre Reaganomics loved our nation enough to pay enough of a tax "burden' that we not only built the best infrastructure in the world, but had almost no debt, THEN we decided this Punishing" the "job creators" was somehow not only unfair, but held our economy back? lol

AGAIN, LETS GO BACK TO THE TAX RATES WHERE THE TOP 1/10TH OF 1% OF US PAID 50%-70% (EFFECTIVE) FROM 1932-1980?

Okay, so, since that won't do anything to the Obama deficit, what, beyond spite, will be accomplished by doing so? And what will you do when they avoid paying a lot of taxes and are still rich? Demand more?

Top 1% are taxed at 23% EFFECTIVE rates. Go to 46% and the deficit IS wiped out Bubs

AND still leaves them VASTLY wealthy. Weird right Bubs?


AGI ($ millions)

Top 1% income $1,976,738 (trillion)


Summary of Latest Federal Income Tax Data

I cant remember the exact figures.......but I once calculated out that if the top 20% paid something like 5% more...........and if we remained revenue neutral,...........then the bottom 80% would have to pay NOTHING.

but of course I guess I'm and old school conservative in some ways cause I think deficits and debt matter and I would want that paid down rather than continue to grow.

Well yes, that would be on income taxes, not all federal taxes

Bottom 80% of US own less than 11% of ALL US wealth



What gets me is the "rights" rant against the bottom 50% of US who went from almost 18% of the entire pie in 1980 to 11% today, a drop of almost $5,000 PER family. The bottom HALF OF US make as much income as JUST the top 1/10th of 1% of US, yet the bottom half of US average less than $15,000 PER family

But I agree with you,I prefer not to run large deficits or create the debt that can be traced back to Reagan/Dubya's policies, like cutting federal revenues AS they ramped up spending. If we just decided to go with the Buffett rule (min 30% fed tax on $1,000,000+ incomes), it cuts the deficits by almost 25%


Summary of Latest Federal Income Tax Data

did you read the link you supplied? It really does not back up what you are trying to pretend is reality.
"In 2012, 136.1 million taxpayers reported earning $9.04 trillion in adjusted gross income and paid $1.1 trillion in income taxes.

• All income groups increased their income and taxes paid over the previous year.

• The top 1 percent of taxpayers earned their largest share of income since 2007 at 21.9 percent of total AGI and paid their largest share of the income tax burden since the same year at 38.1 percent of total income taxes.

• In 2012, the top 50 percent of all taxpayers (68 million filers) paid 97.2 percent of all income taxes while the bottom 50 percent paid the remaining 2.8 percent.

• The top 1 percent (1.3 million filers) paid a greater share of income taxes (38.1 percent) than the bottom 90 percent (122.4 million filers) combined (29.8 percent).

• The top 1 percent of taxpayers paid a higher effective income tax rate than any other group at 22.8 percent, which is nearly 7 times higher than taxpayers in the bottom 50 percent (3.28 percent)."
  
  On the bright side, I left my job on Friday to take a year off to complete my next degree. (continuing education is how I earn more money, not by blackmailing a business owner) and, even with the reduction in income, I still get to stay in the 5% bracket. I think I will buy a new boat, gives me a mortgage deduction that almost will have those other taxpayers making the monthly payment.

 

[Dad2three]

because the business model didn't hold or due to "class envy"?

Because it was a stupid idea.

nothing but diversion? why was it stupid.

So you believe it is a good decision? Why?

i am not claiming any subjective value of morals, one way or the other.

it is merely anecdotal evidence that supports the contention of some on the left, that there is a lot of room to work with regarding more efficient income distribution via public policy schemes.

But it is failing, it isn't a good idea if it fails.

Failing? Oh right ANYTHING not small enough to fit on a bumper sticker for CONserevatives is bound to "fail" grow a fukkn brain dummy

Like ALL policies in a workplace, there are adjustments, and yes a TWO moronic right wingers left. AND? 120+ EMPLOYEES! lol'

http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/seattle-company-copes-with-backlash-on-70000-minimum-wage/

 

[danielpalos]

How did Henry Ford justify doing something similar in the early 1900s?

I don't know but the time to argue vociferously in favor of the CEOs plan seems to be over now. This is what is wrong with Socialists... they can never admit when their ideas fail.

Go read the article I posted and stop arguing this was a good idea... it FAILED!

what failure; the firm is still operational under the same management, unlike Hostess.

 

[Maryland Patriot]

Okay, so, since that won't do anything to the Obama deficit, what, beyond spite, will be accomplished by doing so? And what will you do when they avoid paying a lot of taxes and are still rich? Demand more?

Top 1% are taxed at 23% EFFECTIVE rates. Go to 46% and the deficit IS wiped out Bubs

AND still leaves them VASTLY wealthy. Weird right Bubs?


AGI ($ millions)

Top 1% income $1,976,738 (trillion)


Summary of Latest Federal Income Tax Data

I cant remember the exact figures.......but I once calculated out that if the top 20% paid something like 5% more...........and if we remained revenue neutral,...........then the bottom 80% would have to pay NOTHING.

but of course I guess I'm and old school conservative in some ways cause I think deficits and debt matter and I would want that paid down rather than continue to grow.

Well yes, that would be on income taxes, not all federal taxes

Bottom 80% of US own less than 11% of ALL US wealth



What gets me is the "rights" rant against the bottom 50% of US who went from almost 18% of the entire pie in 1980 to 11% today, a drop of almost $5,000 PER family. The bottom HALF OF US make as much income as JUST the top 1/10th of 1% of US, yet the bottom half of US average less than $15,000 PER family

But I agree with you,I prefer not to run large deficits or create the debt that can be traced back to Reagan/Dubya's policies, like cutting federal revenues AS they ramped up spending. If we just decided to go with the Buffett rule (min 30% fed tax on $1,000,000+ incomes), it cuts the deficits by almost 25%


Summary of Latest Federal Income Tax Data

What gets me is the "rights" rant against the bottom 50% of US who went from almost 18% of the entire pie in 1980 to 11% today, a drop of almost $5,000 PER family.

It's difficult to keep up when tens of millions of illegals are competing for low-skilled jobs.

Hey, dipshit, the studies don't show illegal immigrants having a noticeable effect on the jobs you rant about. Trickle down voodoo has failed us all.

your guy Clinton had 8 years to correct that, why didn't he? because it worked to a point that his economy was good. Why didn't the democrat congress try to change it again starting two years before bammy took office? because they realized that it was keeping the recession from going to a full blown depression.
Why hasn't bammy tried to change it in the 7 years he has been pretending to be president? because its still working and without it his increase in the debt would even be worse.
Take responsibility. Your guys allowed it. over 16 years of democrat leadership since Ronald Regan and not once has change been attempted. Because it WORKED.

 

[David_42]

Top 1% are taxed at 23% EFFECTIVE rates. Go to 46% and the deficit IS wiped out Bubs

AND still leaves them VASTLY wealthy. Weird right Bubs?


AGI ($ millions)

Top 1% income $1,976,738 (trillion)


Summary of Latest Federal Income Tax Data

I cant remember the exact figures.......but I once calculated out that if the top 20% paid something like 5% more...........and if we remained revenue neutral,...........then the bottom 80% would have to pay NOTHING.

but of course I guess I'm and old school conservative in some ways cause I think deficits and debt matter and I would want that paid down rather than continue to grow.

Well yes, that would be on income taxes, not all federal taxes

Bottom 80% of US own less than 11% of ALL US wealth



What gets me is the "rights" rant against the bottom 50% of US who went from almost 18% of the entire pie in 1980 to 11% today, a drop of almost $5,000 PER family. The bottom HALF OF US make as much income as JUST the top 1/10th of 1% of US, yet the bottom half of US average less than $15,000 PER family

But I agree with you,I prefer not to run large deficits or create the debt that can be traced back to Reagan/Dubya's policies, like cutting federal revenues AS they ramped up spending. If we just decided to go with the Buffett rule (min 30% fed tax on $1,000,000+ incomes), it cuts the deficits by almost 25%


Summary of Latest Federal Income Tax Data

What gets me is the "rights" rant against the bottom 50% of US who went from almost 18% of the entire pie in 1980 to 11% today, a drop of almost $5,000 PER family.

It's difficult to keep up when tens of millions of illegals are competing for low-skilled jobs.

Hey, dipshit, the studies don't show illegal immigrants having a noticeable effect on the jobs you rant about. Trickle down voodoo has failed us all.

your guy Clinton had 8 years to correct that, why didn't he? because it worked to a point that his economy was good. Why didn't the democrat congress try to change it again starting two years before bammy took office? because they realized that it was keeping the recession from going to a full blown depression.
Why hasn't bammy tried to change it in the 7 years he has been pretending to be president? because its still working and without it his increase in the debt would even be worse.
Take responsibility. Your guys allowed it. over 16 years of democrat leadership since Ronald Regan and not once has change been attempted. Because it WORKED.

Clinton failed, Obama has tried but republicans are set on never changing or raising taxes.. It worked???? LOOOOOOOL. Explains the growing income inequality, stagnant wages..

 

[Dad2three]

dude, our capitalists should pay the finest tax rates money can pay.

They do. Our corporate tax rate is 40%... the highest in the world.

did you miss the one about a company ceo taking a pay cut but giving his employees a pay raise to the company minimum of $70k?

I didn't miss it. Such a sad story. Took the poor guy all of 3 months to fail.

The Sad Saga of the $70,000 Minimum Salary Company

Clearly, the entrepreneur acted impulsively, didn’t think things through, and, ultimately, he and his employees may pay a steep price for it. There are some very good reasons why none of you should even think about trying this sort of move at your own company today, tomorrow, or ever.

For one thing, it incentivizes the wrong employee behavior. Price lost some of his best people over his move and I can see why. An entry-level new hire who just clocks in and out is suddenly making almost as much as a veteran supervisor who busted her hump for years only to be rewarded with a miniscule raise.

Leveling the playing field all at once as he did breeds resentment and virtually eliminates the merits of meritocracy. You simply can’t raise the minimum salary that high without it having a negative ripple effect throughout the organization. You just can’t.

lol, Without FALSE PREMISE, distortions and LIES what would you right wingers EVER have Bubs?


Warren Buffett: ‘It Is A Myth’ That U.S. Corporate Taxes Are High


The interesting thing about the corporate rate is that corporate profits, as a percentage of GDP last year were the highest or just about the highest in the last 50 years. They were ten and a fraction percent of GDP. That’s higher than we’ve seen in 50 years. The corporate taxes as a percentage of GDP were 1.2 percent, $180 billion. That’s just about the lowest we’ve seen. So our corporate tax rate last year, effectively, in terms of taxes paid for the United States, was around 12 percent, which is well below those existing in most of the industrialized countries around the world. So it is a myth that American corporations are paying 35 percent or anything like it…Corporate taxes are not strangling American competitiveness.

Warren Buffett: ‘It Is A Myth’ That U.S. Corporate Taxes Are High


GAO: U.S. corporations pay average effective tax rate of 12.6%

Large, profitable U.S. corporations paid an average effective federal tax rate of 12.6% in 2010, the Government Accountability Office said Monday. The federal corporate tax rate stands at 35%, and jumps to 39.2% when state rates are taken into account



WEIRD HOW SOOOOOOO many right wingers came out and started attacking a guy for wanting to pay his employees a MIN LIVING WAGE. No he's not failing, AND it takes a lil bit more than the usual right wing BS and bumper sticker mentality to get threw the ACTUAL story versus cherry picked and distorted tales from the right wing echo chamber Bubs

When other entrepreneurs suggested stock options or profit-sharing would have been a better approach, he said that’s the way capitalism works: Everyone tries to invent the best mousetrap. “I came up with the best solution I could.”

The publicity surrounding the wage policy has generated benefits. Three months before the announcement, the firm had been adding 200 clients a month. In June, 350 signed up.



That new business won’t start paying off for 12 to 18 months, however...





...."For now, Price has undoubtedly made an immediate difference in the lives of many of his employees. José Garcia, 30, who supervises an equipment team, was able to afford to move into the city and replace the worn tires on his car. Ortiz, who was briefly homeless as a child, can now visit her family in Burlington. Vt. Cody Boorman, 22, who handles operations out of his Eastern Washington home, said he and his wife finally felt financially secure enough to start a family.

There have been other ripples. Mario Zahariev, who runs Pop’s Pizza & Pasta, switched to Gravity after seeing Price on the news. When he learned his monthly processing fees would drop to $900 from $1,700, Zahariev decided: “I was not going to keep the difference for myself.” He used the savings to raise the salaries of his eight employees.


GAO: U.S. corporations pay average effective tax rate of 12.6%

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Okay, so, since that won't do anything to the Obama deficit, what, beyond spite, will be accomplished by doing so? And what will you do when they avoid paying a lot of taxes and are still rich? Demand more?

Top 1% are taxed at 23% EFFECTIVE rates. Go to 46% and the deficit IS wiped out Bubs

AND still leaves them VASTLY wealthy. Weird right Bubs?


AGI ($ millions)

Top 1% income $1,976,738 (trillion)


Summary of Latest Federal Income Tax Data

I cant remember the exact figures.......but I once calculated out that if the top 20% paid something like 5% more...........and if we remained revenue neutral,...........then the bottom 80% would have to pay NOTHING.

but of course I guess I'm and old school conservative in some ways cause I think deficits and debt matter and I would want that paid down rather than continue to grow.

Well yes, that would be on income taxes, not all federal taxes

Bottom 80% of US own less than 11% of ALL US wealth



What gets me is the "rights" rant against the bottom 50% of US who went from almost 18% of the entire pie in 1980 to 11% today, a drop of almost $5,000 PER family. The bottom HALF OF US make as much income as JUST the top 1/10th of 1% of US, yet the bottom half of US average less than $15,000 PER family

But I agree with you,I prefer not to run large deficits or create the debt that can be traced back to Reagan/Dubya's policies, like cutting federal revenues AS they ramped up spending. If we just decided to go with the Buffett rule (min 30% fed tax on $1,000,000+ incomes), it cuts the deficits by almost 25%


Summary of Latest Federal Income Tax Data

What gets me is the "rights" rant against the bottom 50% of US who went from almost 18% of the entire pie in 1980 to 11% today, a drop of almost $5,000 PER family.

It's difficult to keep up when tens of millions of illegals are competing for low-skilled jobs.

Hey, dipshit, the studies don't show illegal immigrants having a noticeable effect on the jobs you rant about. Trickle down voodoo has failed us all.

Hey, dipshit, the studies don't show illegal immigrants having a noticeable effect on the jobs you rant about.

Millions of illegals haven't greatly increased the black unemployment rate? Seriously?

Trickle down voodoo has failed us all.

Let's import more poor people, that'll help.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Undocumented Immigrants Taking Jobs From US Citizens? Most Americans Believe Immigration Is Bad For Economy

Uncontrolled illegal immigration of low-skilled workers is bad for the economy.
Expensive too.

 

[Dad2three]

How did Henry Ford justify doing something similar in the early 1900s?

I don't know but the time to argue vociferously in favor of the CEOs plan seems to be over now. This is what is wrong with Socialists... they can never admit when their ideas fail.

Go read the article I posted and stop arguing this was a good idea... it FAILED!

ONLY in right wing world could losing 2 right wing employees OUT OF OVER 120+ , INCREASING BIZ BY 75% BE CONSIDERED "FAILING"

Seattle company copes with backlash on $70,000 minimum wage

 

[Dad2three]

Envy huh? lol

Weird how the "job creators" pre Reaganomics loved our nation enough to pay enough of a tax "burden' that we not only built the best infrastructure in the world, but had almost no debt, THEN we decided this Punishing" the "job creators" was somehow not only unfair, but held our economy back? lol

AGAIN, LETS GO BACK TO THE TAX RATES WHERE THE TOP 1/10TH OF 1% OF US PAID 50%-70% (EFFECTIVE) FROM 1932-1980?

Okay, so, since that won't do anything to the Obama deficit, what, beyond spite, will be accomplished by doing so? And what will you do when they avoid paying a lot of taxes and are still rich? Demand more?

Top 1% are taxed at 23% EFFECTIVE rates. Go to 46% and the deficit IS wiped out Bubs

AND still leaves them VASTLY wealthy. Weird right Bubs?


AGI ($ millions)

Top 1% income $1,976,738 (trillion)


Summary of Latest Federal Income Tax Data

I cant remember the exact figures.......but I once calculated out that if the top 20% paid something like 5% more...........and if we remained revenue neutral,...........then the bottom 80% would have to pay NOTHING.

but of course I guess I'm and old school conservative in some ways cause I think deficits and debt matter and I would want that paid down rather than continue to grow.

Well yes, that would be on income taxes, not all federal taxes

Bottom 80% of US own less than 11% of ALL US wealth



What gets me is the "rights" rant against the bottom 50% of US who went from almost 18% of the entire pie in 1980 to 11% today, a drop of almost $5,000 PER family. The bottom HALF OF US make as much income as JUST the top 1/10th of 1% of US, yet the bottom half of US average less than $15,000 PER family

But I agree with you,I prefer not to run large deficits or create the debt that can be traced back to Reagan/Dubya's policies, like cutting federal revenues AS they ramped up spending. If we just decided to go with the Buffett rule (min 30% fed tax on $1,000,000+ incomes), it cuts the deficits by almost 25%


Summary of Latest Federal Income Tax Data

did you read the link you supplied? It really does not back up what you are trying to pretend is reality.
"In 2012, 136.1 million taxpayers reported earning $9.04 trillion in adjusted gross income and paid $1.1 trillion in income taxes.

• All income groups increased their income and taxes paid over the previous year.

• The top 1 percent of taxpayers earned their largest share of income since 2007 at 21.9 percent of total AGI and paid their largest share of the income tax burden since the same year at 38.1 percent of total income taxes.

• In 2012, the top 50 percent of all taxpayers (68 million filers) paid 97.2 percent of all income taxes while the bottom 50 percent paid the remaining 2.8 percent.

• The top 1 percent (1.3 million filers) paid a greater share of income taxes (38.1 percent) than the bottom 90 percent (122.4 million filers) combined (29.8 percent).

• The top 1 percent of taxpayers paid a higher effective income tax rate than any other group at 22.8 percent, which is nearly 7 times higher than taxpayers in the bottom 50 percent (3.28 percent)."
  
  On the bright side, I left my job on Friday to take a year off to complete my next degree. (continuing education is how I earn more money, not by blackmailing a business owner) and, even with the reduction in income, I still get to stay in the 5% bracket. I think I will buy a new boat, gives me a mortgage deduction that almost will have those other taxpayers making the monthly payment.

So instead of ACTUALLY taking ANY of my points and TRYING to refute them you bring up BS that is cherry picked to lead to the conclusion that taxes are to much on the top 1% who have seen their share of income more than triple the past thirty five years AS the tax burden (OVERALL TAX BURDEN, NOT JUST INCOME TAXES) HAS DIPPED BY NEARLY 40% ON THAT SHARE OF INCOME??? lol

 

[David_42]

Undocumented Immigrants Taking Jobs From US Citizens? Most Americans Believe Immigration Is Bad For Economy

Uncontrolled illegal immigration of low-skilled workers is bad for the economy.
Expensive too.

Sorry, you'll need to back up your claim.
Immigration helps American workers: The definitive argument
Show a correlation.