Since we know that trickledown economics is a GOP lie, why are republicans still opposed to taxing the very wealthy more?

[beautress]

Generally speaking, CEOs don't come up with too may of those brilliant ideas. It's done by committee.

You have every right to choose what you wish to do with your money. Don't want to patronize certain/any corporations fine.

We are back to being taxed fairly. If 99% of the earning is received by the top 20%, all taxes should be paid at the same rate. It's not. In fact, when you total all the taxes, the top 20% doesn't even contribute 50%.

The original us Constitution forbad taxes to make sure businesses could grow as more wage earners could be paid from their earnings. It doesn't make sense to reduce the number of wage earners when you bring in three million people over the border to earn wages when you are killing wage earning spots to punish those providing wage work opportunities such as entrance jobs to unskilled beginners who are developing new language skills and societal expectations in addition to work skills if jobs aren't there being eliminated to fund Democrat pet rock projects. /wah-wah trumpet playing wah wah wah wah wah.

 

[sartre play]

Hard to believe that the solution to taxing is to just pick a side & if your a Republican then Everything suggested by Democrats is false. Or if your a Democrat everything suggested by Republicans is false. Keeps one from having to look very hard or even think about it at all.

 

[Crepitus]

Link?

Summary of the Latest Federal Income Tax Data, Tax Year 2022

New IRS data shows the US federal income tax system continues to be progressive as high-income taxpayers pay the highest average income tax rates. Average tax rates for all income groups remain lower after the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA).

taxfoundation.org

Reported income isn't the same as wealth. The top 1% own as much wealth as the bottom 90%.

Warren: Top 0.1% own about as much as the bottom 90%

Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s plan to tax the wealthiest Americans has drawn immediate fire. Former Starbucks CEO Howard Schul

www.politifact.com

 

[Nostra]

Link?

Summary of the Latest Federal Income Tax Data, Tax Year 2022

New IRS data shows the US federal income tax system continues to be progressive as high-income taxpayers pay the highest average income tax rates. Average tax rates for all income groups remain lower after the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA).

taxfoundation.org

Reported income isn't the same as wealth. The top 1% own as much wealth as the bottom 90%.

Warren: Top 0.1% own about as much as the bottom 90%

Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s plan to tax the wealthiest Americans has drawn immediate fire. Former Starbucks CEO Howard Schul

www.politifact.com

So?

 

[Jim H - VA USA]

Link?

Summary of the Latest Federal Income Tax Data, Tax Year 2022

New IRS data shows the US federal income tax system continues to be progressive as high-income taxpayers pay the highest average income tax rates. Average tax rates for all income groups remain lower after the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA).

taxfoundation.org

Reported income isn't the same as wealth. The top 1% own as much wealth as the bottom 90%.

Warren: Top 0.1% own about as much as the bottom 90%

Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s plan to tax the wealthiest Americans has drawn immediate fire. Former Starbucks CEO Howard Schul

www.politifact.com

> Reported income isn't the same as wealth. The top 1% own as much wealth as the bottom 90%.

So what. I have worked hard my whole life, and paid taxes. As a result, I have accumulated wealth. Wealth is not income.

Taxing wealth is confiscation.

You see, if someone is a farmer, has a farm worth millions of dollars, but makes a profit of $100k per year, you would tax their farm? They would have to sell their farm in order to pay the taxes, and then their income would decrease.

Do you see how you have not thought about this brilliant idea that you heard somewhere and latched onto?

Why are you so self-entitled that you think it is just to confiscate others' wealth? What gives you a right to it? You seem to automatically assume that they earned it unfairly. Maybe they were simply smarter than you, luckier than you, or harder working than you.

Did you not learn about Communism in school when you were young? It's where the government owns everything, and the little people are all equally poor. Your taxing wealth idea fits quite well with that political system of wealth confiscation.

If you were wealthy, you would have a different opinion. But you are not, so you support communism. A better choice might be to get some skills and move up the ladder, or create a new business and become wealthy yourself. Many people do it with just hundreds of dollars and lots of hard work.

Finally, when talking about 1%-ers or 10%-ers, there is more than one way to describe them. You can use wealth if you want. Others use income. Normally, when discussing tax issues, most people use income, not wealth, because it makes sense since taxes are levied on income. That's why they are called "income taxes."

 

[Crepitus]

Link?

Summary of the Latest Federal Income Tax Data, Tax Year 2022

New IRS data shows the US federal income tax system continues to be progressive as high-income taxpayers pay the highest average income tax rates. Average tax rates for all income groups remain lower after the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA).

taxfoundation.org

Reported income isn't the same as wealth. The top 1% own as much wealth as the bottom 90%.

Warren: Top 0.1% own about as much as the bottom 90%

Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s plan to tax the wealthiest Americans has drawn immediate fire. Former Starbucks CEO Howard Schul

www.politifact.com

> Reported income isn't the same as wealth. The top 1% own as much wealth as the bottom 90%.

So what. I have worked hard my whole life, and paid taxes. As a result, I have accumulated wealth. Wealth is not income.

Taxing wealth is confiscation.

You see, if someone is a farmer, has a farm worth millions of dollars, but makes a profit of $100k per year, you would tax their farm? They would have to sell their farm in order to pay the taxes, and then their income would decrease.

Do you see how you have not thought about this brilliant idea that you heard somewhere and latched onto?

Why are you so self-entitled that you think it is just to confiscate others' wealth? What gives you a right to it? You seem to automatically assume that they earned it unfairly. Maybe they were simply smarter than you, luckier than you, or harder working than you.

Did you not learn about Communism in school when you were young? It's where the government owns everything, and the little people are all equally poor. Your taxing wealth idea fits quite well with that political system of wealth confiscation.

If you were wealthy, you would have a different opinion. But you are not, so you support communism. A better choice might be to get some skills and move up the ladder, or create a new business and become wealthy yourself. Many people do it with just hundreds of dollars and lots of hard work.

Finally, when talking about 1%-ers or 10%-ers, there is more than one way to describe them. You can use wealth if you want. Others use income. Normally, when discussing tax issues, most people use income, not wealth, because it makes sense since taxes are levied on income. That's why they are called "income taxes."

Your excuses aside, they have 90% of the wealth and should pay 90% of the taxes.

 

[Nostra]

Link?

Summary of the Latest Federal Income Tax Data, Tax Year 2022

New IRS data shows the US federal income tax system continues to be progressive as high-income taxpayers pay the highest average income tax rates. Average tax rates for all income groups remain lower after the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA).

taxfoundation.org

Reported income isn't the same as wealth. The top 1% own as much wealth as the bottom 90%.

Warren: Top 0.1% own about as much as the bottom 90%

Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s plan to tax the wealthiest Americans has drawn immediate fire. Former Starbucks CEO Howard Schul

www.politifact.com

> Reported income isn't the same as wealth. The top 1% own as much wealth as the bottom 90%.

So what. I have worked hard my whole life, and paid taxes. As a result, I have accumulated wealth. Wealth is not income.

Taxing wealth is confiscation.

You see, if someone is a farmer, has a farm worth millions of dollars, but makes a profit of $100k per year, you would tax their farm? They would have to sell their farm in order to pay the taxes, and then their income would decrease.

Do you see how you have not thought about this brilliant idea that you heard somewhere and latched onto?

Why are you so self-entitled that you think it is just to confiscate others' wealth? What gives you a right to it? You seem to automatically assume that they earned it unfairly. Maybe they were simply smarter than you, luckier than you, or harder working than you.

Did you not learn about Communism in school when you were young? It's where the government owns everything, and the little people are all equally poor. Your taxing wealth idea fits quite well with that political system of wealth confiscation.

If you were wealthy, you would have a different opinion. But you are not, so you support communism. A better choice might be to get some skills and move up the ladder, or create a new business and become wealthy yourself. Many people do it with just hundreds of dollars and lots of hard work.

Finally, when talking about 1%-ers or 10%-ers, there is more than one way to describe them. You can use wealth if you want. Others use income. Normally, when discussing tax issues, most people use income, not wealth, because it makes sense since taxes are levied on income. That's why they are called "income taxes."

Your excuses aside, they have 90% of the wealth and should pay 90% of the taxes.

Why? They paid taxes on their wealth while they were accumulating it.

 

[Nostra]

Link?

Summary of the Latest Federal Income Tax Data, Tax Year 2022

New IRS data shows the US federal income tax system continues to be progressive as high-income taxpayers pay the highest average income tax rates. Average tax rates for all income groups remain lower after the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA).

taxfoundation.org

Reported income isn't the same as wealth. The top 1% own as much wealth as the bottom 90%.

Warren: Top 0.1% own about as much as the bottom 90%

Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s plan to tax the wealthiest Americans has drawn immediate fire. Former Starbucks CEO Howard Schul

www.politifact.com

> Reported income isn't the same as wealth. The top 1% own as much wealth as the bottom 90%.

So what. I have worked hard my whole life, and paid taxes. As a result, I have accumulated wealth. Wealth is not income.

Taxing wealth is confiscation.

You see, if someone is a farmer, has a farm worth millions of dollars, but makes a profit of $100k per year, you would tax their farm? They would have to sell their farm in order to pay the taxes, and then their income would decrease.

Do you see how you have not thought about this brilliant idea that you heard somewhere and latched onto?

Why are you so self-entitled that you think it is just to confiscate others' wealth? What gives you a right to it? You seem to automatically assume that they earned it unfairly. Maybe they were simply smarter than you, luckier than you, or harder working than you.

Did you not learn about Communism in school when you were young? It's where the government owns everything, and the little people are all equally poor. Your taxing wealth idea fits quite well with that political system of wealth confiscation.

If you were wealthy, you would have a different opinion. But you are not, so you support communism. A better choice might be to get some skills and move up the ladder, or create a new business and become wealthy yourself. Many people do it with just hundreds of dollars and lots of hard work.

Finally, when talking about 1%-ers or 10%-ers, there is more than one way to describe them. You can use wealth if you want. Others use income. Normally, when discussing tax issues, most people use income, not wealth, because it makes sense since taxes are levied on income. That's why they are called "income taxes."

Your excuses aside, they have 90% of the wealth and should pay 90% of the taxes.

How about the bottom 50% of taxpayers. Shouldn't they be paying 50% of the taxes?

Currently almost 50% pay zero income taxes. Fair?

 

[beautress]

Hard to believe that the solution to taxing is to just pick a side & if your a Republican then Everything suggested by Democrats is false. Or if your a Democrat everything suggested by Republicans is false. Keeps one from having to look very hard or even think about it at all.

Who filed

Hard to believe that the solution to taxing is to just pick a side & if your a Republican then Everything suggested by Democrats is false. Or if your a Democrat everything suggested by Republicans is false. Keeps one from having to look very hard or even think about it at all.

Look, pal. Commies do not play fair. And they haven't quite succeeded in erasing all history. We still have volumes that tell a story of the communist Bolsheviks murdering their Czar, his Czarina, and their 11 children including infants in arms. 25 to 30 years later, during and after WWII, Stalin hid 20 to 100 million murders of Russians in the motherland and its satellite territories of people hostile to their slavery inflicted by communism in the Union of Soviet Socialists' Republic. Some of the Allied leaders knew of it and gave Stalin a very cold reception at their leadership meetings. Stalin countered by claiming the Allies Victory to his corrupt credit, just like Biden taking credit for Trump's covid vaccines given safely before the Democrat Party illegally counted fake votes after hours 3 a.m. on voting night to the tune of about 10,000,000 votes that were machined in after the polls closed Nov. 3-4, 2020. Biden was a loser, but cheaters had illegal votes hidden to make the largest steal of election votes in American history.

 

[Jets]

Hard to believe that the solution to taxing is to just pick a side & if your a Republican then Everything suggested by Democrats is false. Or if your a Democrat everything suggested by Republicans is false. Keeps one from having to look very hard or even think about it at all.

Of course. It’s easier to pontificate when one is led around by partisan blinders...

 

[Jim H - VA USA]

Thanks, freyasman , this is quite relevant here in this thread...

 

[Oldestyle]

The problem with far left liberals like Bernie and Billy is that they seem to believe there is only a finite amount of wealth in existence...so that if a rich person has it...they must have stolen it from a poor person! That's not the case.

It's not the case. The poor willingly give those rich people their money.

This transfer of wealth is correct. We on the bottom transfer our wealth to the top for products and services they offer. Nearly every American transfers their wealth to the top several times a week.

Next week, most of us will pay our cell phone bill, our cable or satellite bill that supplies us with this wonderful internet, a car loan, a credit card loan. We may buy a new video game or video game system. We may stop at McDonald's or other like places several times next week. We will purchase gasoline for our vehicles. One way or another, we will transfer our money to the top, and that includes liberals.

The solution to this wealth transfer problem for liberals is for them to stop giving their money to the wealthy. The Amish and Quakers don't.

With all due respect, Ray...you left out one very crucial part of the equation in your poor people giving their wealth to the wealthy scenario! People that own companies that produce products or services have to buy the raw materials to make the products or provide the service. The majority of that money they spend on that goes to pay the wages of the employees that produce those raw materials. Then the owner has to pay the wages of his own employees and that's done BEFORE they can take a profit! So when you say that it's the poor transferring wealth to the wealthy...that's somewhat true...but what's really happening is that their purchases pay the wages of other not so wealthy people with a small amount going to the owners of companies as profits.

Bottom line is this, Kiddies! If you remove the profit incentive from opening or expanding businesses then those with capital will not risk that capital by investing it. I'm sorry but in order for poorer people to have jobs...you're going to have to let someone with capital make money.

 

[BrokeLoser]

The wealth disparity in the US is the widest in the world. We KNOW corporate subsidies and tax breaks do not benefit the middle class or poor on any significant level. It's simply a myth they would choose to invest the extra money into lower level work forces. Why pay the fast food worker more if republican policy allows the fat cats to just keep the money they save from tax loopholes or meat subsidies? No point in that for them. There is no incentive.


"Under this legislation," the proposal noted above a list of billionaires in America, "the families of all 657 billionaires in America who have a combined net worth of over $4.26 trillion would owe up to $2.7 trillion in estate taxes."

Personal Finance Home Page - Yahoo Finance

At Yahoo Finance, you get free stock quotes, up-to-date news, portfolio management resources, international market data, social interaction and mortgage rates that help you manage your financial life.

www.yahoo.com

Since we know that trickledown economics is a GOP lie, why are republicans still opposed to taxing the very wealthy more?
There is no full-proof methodology.
Until bottom feeding degenerates like yourself start creating jobs and hiring people we’re far better off following the trickle- down model.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Reported income isn't the same as wealth. The top 1% own as much wealth as the bottom 90%.

So what difference does that make? What is your suggestion, that we now start taxing not only on earned income and investment profits, but wealth as well?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Your excuses aside, they have 90% of the wealth and should pay 90% of the taxes.

If you tax the rich at 0%, the federal government collects 0 dollars. If you tax the rich at 100%, the federal government would still collect 0 dollars because who would be stupid enough to create wealth?

If all the welfare and poor people moved to another country tomorrow, they would not be missed. In fact, our country would be a better place. If all the wealthy decided to move to another country, our country would collapse.

 

[sartre play]

Here is an example of why I cant defend BIG Big business. United Health care profit for 2020 was 67 BILLION. A 16+INCREASE over 2019.
They just raised the cost to customers five percent monthly. that's with 900 thousand new enrollees. Medium employee pay is 54 THOUSAND a year. The old CEO & the new ones pay for the year OVER 50 MILLION dollars. Want to check out Wall Mart?

 

[MisterBeale]

Here is an example of why I cant defend BIG Big business. United Health care profit for 2020 was 67 BILLION. A 16+INCREASE over 2019.
They just raised the cost to customers five percent monthly. that's with 900 thousand new enrollees. Medium employee pay is 54 THOUSAND a year. The old CEO & the new ones pay for the year OVER 50 MILLION dollars. Want to check out Wall Mart?

. . . and I am sure you probably supported the ACA, didn't you?

 

[Nostra]

Link?

Summary of the Latest Federal Income Tax Data, Tax Year 2022

New IRS data shows the US federal income tax system continues to be progressive as high-income taxpayers pay the highest average income tax rates. Average tax rates for all income groups remain lower after the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA).

taxfoundation.org

Reported income isn't the same as wealth. The top 1% own as much wealth as the bottom 90%.

Warren: Top 0.1% own about as much as the bottom 90%

Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s plan to tax the wealthiest Americans has drawn immediate fire. Former Starbucks CEO Howard Schul

www.politifact.com

> Reported income isn't the same as wealth. The top 1% own as much wealth as the bottom 90%.

So what. I have worked hard my whole life, and paid taxes. As a result, I have accumulated wealth. Wealth is not income.

Taxing wealth is confiscation.

You see, if someone is a farmer, has a farm worth millions of dollars, but makes a profit of $100k per year, you would tax their farm? They would have to sell their farm in order to pay the taxes, and then their income would decrease.

Do you see how you have not thought about this brilliant idea that you heard somewhere and latched onto?

Why are you so self-entitled that you think it is just to confiscate others' wealth? What gives you a right to it? You seem to automatically assume that they earned it unfairly. Maybe they were simply smarter than you, luckier than you, or harder working than you.

Did you not learn about Communism in school when you were young? It's where the government owns everything, and the little people are all equally poor. Your taxing wealth idea fits quite well with that political system of wealth confiscation.

If you were wealthy, you would have a different opinion. But you are not, so you support communism. A better choice might be to get some skills and move up the ladder, or create a new business and become wealthy yourself. Many people do it with just hundreds of dollars and lots of hard work.

Finally, when talking about 1%-ers or 10%-ers, there is more than one way to describe them. You can use wealth if you want. Others use income. Normally, when discussing tax issues, most people use income, not wealth, because it makes sense since taxes are levied on income. That's why they are called "income taxes."

Your excuses aside, they have 90% of the wealth and should pay 90% of the taxes.

How about the bottom 50% of taxpayers. Shouldn't they be paying 50% of the taxes?

Currently almost 50% pay zero income taxes. Fair?

Where did Crepitus run off to?

 

[Utilitarian]

The wealth disparity in the US is the widest in the world. We KNOW corporate subsidies and tax breaks do not benefit the middle class or poor on any significant level. It's simply a myth they would choose to invest the extra money into lower level work forces. Why pay the fast food worker more if republican policy allows the fat cats to just keep the money they save from tax loopholes or meat subsidies? No point in that for them. There is no incentive.


"Under this legislation," the proposal noted above a list of billionaires in America, "the families of all 657 billionaires in America who have a combined net worth of over $4.26 trillion would owe up to $2.7 trillion in estate taxes."

Personal Finance Home Page - Yahoo Finance

At Yahoo Finance, you get free stock quotes, up-to-date news, portfolio management resources, international market data, social interaction and mortgage rates that help you manage your financial life.

www.yahoo.com

Wealth disparity is not the widest in the US. Not even close. It's higher than a lot of the OECD, but plenty of the world overall has more disparity.

Also, disparity is not a clear indicator of poverty. There are countries with high standards of living with high disparity and some with low. There are poor countries of each as well.

Economic mobility is what people should focus on. America is fairly good at this, but it could be improved through various measures, although heavy estate taxes aren't one of them.

I agree that government shouldn't subsidize corporations or engage in any corporate welfare, but increasing taxation isn't the answer either. It should be about getting government less involved in general. Don't subsidize or penalize wealth.

What fast food workers make is directly related to what it costs to automate the job. Raise the cost enough, and the job is simply automated (or an illegal is hired).

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Where did @Crepitus run off to?

I don't know about where he lives, but it's global warming here. I'm working out in the yard and enjoying it.