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

[Ray From Cleveland]

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?

Solution to your problem: Don't get United Healthcare and don't shop at Wallmart.

 

[Jim H - VA USA]

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?

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

It destroyed my great health care insurance. My costs, out-of-pocket (OOP) limits, and deductibles (Ded) all increased dramatically.

As a result, my health care insurance is now very expensive, but just about worthless for a healthy person like me and my family (knock on wood). The only benefits have been the minor discounts, being able to keep my kids on until age 26 (mine's cheaper than theirs), and free wellness visits. Basically, my employer and I pay so much that we cover several other low income people compared to my expenses. I guess that's the way insurance is supposed to work, kind of, but it really got bad quickly when ACA was passed, as all health insurance providers dramatically raised prices and OOP/Ded limits.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

It destroyed my great health care insurance. My costs, out-of-pocket (OOP) limits, and deductibles (Ded) all increased dramatically.

As a result, my health care insurance is now very expensive, but just about worthless for a healthy person like me and my family (knock on wood). The only benefits have been the minor discounts, being able to keep my kids on until age 26 (mine's cheaper than theirs, and free wellness visits. Basically, my employer and I pay so much that we cover several other low income people compared to my expenses. I guess that's the way insurance is supposed to work, kind of, but it really got bad quickly when ACA was passed, as all health insurance providers dramatically raised prices and OOP/Ded limits.

I couldn't agree more. I had employer sponsored healthcare coverage all of my life, I lost it the day Commie Care started. My employers reason is costs went through the roof between that and us getting older.

Like your hospital you can keep your hospital? No you can't. I'm a patient and one of the most popular healthcare facilities in the country, the Cleveland Clinic. Not only do you not have options between insurers for the Clinic, you don't have one provider at all. The closest one is a company called Melina. They offer several plans, one for each department. I can't afford to buy six or seven healthcare plans, and even if I could, I don't have a crystal ball to know which department I will be needing in the future.

Who else could come up with such stupidity but a Democrat?

 

[Vrenn]

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."

Estate tax proposal from Bernie Sanders would mean big bills for America's wealthiest

Senate Budget Committee Chairman Bernie Sanders (I-VT) recently introduced an estate tax plan that specifically lists the wealthiest Americans.

www.yahoo.com

What is also a myth or outright lie is when Democrats tell the Middle Class that no one making under $(Fill in the number) will pay an increase in taxes. Invariably and necessarily, the Middle Class pays more in taxes. Case in point, Biden is getting rid of the 2017 tax cuts. Under Trump’s plan, the Middle Class kept more of a percentage of its take home pay than they did under Obama or will under Biden.

I went from Middle Class to lower Middle Class and yet I pay more taxes under Rump than before. Not much but a few dollars. When you add up over 100 millionof us, that few dollars adds up. Then take those few hundred millions and give them to the Uber Rich in tax breaks. That was the Rump Tax Break. He broke my taxes (which broke me) and broke the Uber Rich's taxes which paid for their new luxury toys and such.

 

[Vrenn]

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."

Estate tax proposal from Bernie Sanders would mean big bills for America's wealthiest

Senate Budget Committee Chairman Bernie Sanders (I-VT) recently introduced an estate tax plan that specifically lists the wealthiest Americans.

www.yahoo.com

I have never understood why some people who pay less income taxes than their neighbor, would demand that the neighbor pay more.

About half of Americans pay no federal income tax at all; the rest of us pay it for them.

The richest among us tend to pay the most taxes, generally about 27% for the top 1%. They pay so much more than most of us do. Personally, I am thankful and wish them even greater future success, but I do pay a tidy sum of taxes myself.

To answer your original query:
This wealthiest among us owe us squat. They can take their money and run after firing everyone.

But instead, they make more money by continuing to employ people who buy homes and other things, paying property, sales, social security and other taxes, while these employers are paying similar taxes themselves.

The wealthiest among us pay most of the taxes, and that pays for most of the operations of the government, including schools, roads, law and order, defense, energy, etc.

Demonizing the successful has to stop. We need to encourage success. Everyone would love to be successful. Everyone can be, if they strive to do so, every day.

It's simply a lie that half of workers do not pay taxes. ANY worker at least pays payroll taxes. In fact, 1/5 of a poor person's income goes to their taxes.

You're conveniently not acknowledging the EFFECTIVE taxes rich people pay. 2/3 of corporations do not pay any federal income taxes because of the taxe loopholes they take advantage of. The "official" tax rate is effectively meaningless.

> It's simply a lie that half of workers do not pay taxes.

I said, "About half of Americans pay no federal income tax at all; the rest of us pay it for them."

Pay attention, and quit being so anxious to call people liars.

You want people who already pay way more taxes than you to pay even more. That does not seem fair to me.

Yes, it is simple economics that wealthy people must pay more in taxes. It’s not about what’s “fair”. It’s about what is realistic.

the wealthy already pay not just more taxs but the majority of taxs,,

If the top 20% owns 99% of the wealth and income, I would think that they should also be paying 99% of the taxes. They don't. But yes, they do pay the majority of the taxes at the federal and state level. But when you total up all the other taxes, they really don't pay the majority. You leave out the taxes that are not figured in on an annual or quarterly basis.

> If the top 20% owns 99% of the wealth and income, I would think that they should also be paying 99% of the taxes.

No. Wealth is acquired over a lifetime through hard work.

Not sure why you think you can confiscate other people's property they have already paid taxes on to acquire. Self-entitiled much?

LOL, tell that to Rump. Or almost any other inherited baby in history. Sorry, but it's almost impossible to get that rich these days through hard work. You get there by using other peoples efforts and ideas. Gates and his Partner started out doing hard work but didn't get their real fortune until Gates learned to "Barrow" other's efforts and call it his own. Even Henry Ford used other peoples blood, sweat and tears.

The ones that originated the Companies that later became Corporations did do the blood, sweat and tears but at some point, their blood, sweat and tears are assumed by others. They don't work over 300 times harder than they did before they aquired all that wealth.

> Sorry, but it's almost impossible to get that rich these days through hard work.

Completely false. This is only true for ignorant people, and those who would rather waste 10% of their money on things like cell phones, eating out, $7 Starbucks coffes, etc. instead of saving for retirement.

If one makes only $35k per year, gets 3% annual salary increases, saves 10% of income in the stock market and gets 8% returns, consistent with historical stock market returns....

After 40 years, one will have $1.26M in savings.

If one saved 15%, one will have $1.85M after 40 years.

Double these numbers for a person (or couple) making $70,000 per year.

And that is if everything goes as planned with none of lifes many surprises. What really happens to the 35K a year family is the many surprises that eats away those savings and investments. Now, the same won't be said about the 70K a year but you want to bet that the 35K person is better off financially than the 70K person?

 

[Vrenn]

Link?

Summary of the Latest Federal Income Tax Data, 2023 Update

The latest IRS data shows that the U.S. federal individual income tax continued to be progressive, borne primarily by the highest income earners.

taxfoundation.org

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

PolitiFact - 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 is the BS button on this thing. There needs to be one installed.

 

[progressive hunter]

Link?

Summary of the Latest Federal Income Tax Data, 2023 Update

The latest IRS data shows that the U.S. federal individual income tax continued to be progressive, borne primarily by the highest income earners.

taxfoundation.org

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

PolitiFact - 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 is the BS button on this thing. There needs to be one installed.

your comments would cause it to get worn out,,

 

[Jim H - VA USA]

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."

Estate tax proposal from Bernie Sanders would mean big bills for America's wealthiest

Senate Budget Committee Chairman Bernie Sanders (I-VT) recently introduced an estate tax plan that specifically lists the wealthiest Americans.

www.yahoo.com

What is also a myth or outright lie is when Democrats tell the Middle Class that no one making under $(Fill in the number) will pay an increase in taxes. Invariably and necessarily, the Middle Class pays more in taxes. Case in point, Biden is getting rid of the 2017 tax cuts. Under Trump’s plan, the Middle Class kept more of a percentage of its take home pay than they did under Obama or will under Biden.

I went from Middle Class to lower Middle Class and yet I pay more taxes under Rump than before. Not much but a few dollars. When you add up over 100 millionof us, that few dollars adds up. Then take those few hundred millions and give them to the Uber Rich in tax breaks. That was the Rump Tax Break. He broke my taxes (which broke me) and broke the Uber Rich's taxes which paid for their new luxury toys and such.

>I went from Middle Class to lower Middle Class and yet I pay more taxes under Rump than before. Not much but a few dollars. When you add up over 100 millionof us, that few dollars adds up. Then take those few hundred millions and give them to the Uber Rich in tax breaks. That was the Rump Tax Break. He broke my taxes (which broke me) and broke the Uber Rich's taxes which paid for their new luxury toys and such.
That makes no sense unless you are rich or have no idea how to fill out your taxes. Please explain, considering my comments below...

Everyone got a tax break under Trump, except rich people who can't deducts as much state and local income tax as they used to in Democrat states and localities with high tax rates.

Trump doubled the standard deduction to $24k per couple, and lowered every tax bracket.

Yes, he limited deductions for rich people like you (apparently, hahahahaha).

 

[Jim H - VA USA]

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."

Estate tax proposal from Bernie Sanders would mean big bills for America's wealthiest

Senate Budget Committee Chairman Bernie Sanders (I-VT) recently introduced an estate tax plan that specifically lists the wealthiest Americans.

www.yahoo.com

I have never understood why some people who pay less income taxes than their neighbor, would demand that the neighbor pay more.

About half of Americans pay no federal income tax at all; the rest of us pay it for them.

The richest among us tend to pay the most taxes, generally about 27% for the top 1%. They pay so much more than most of us do. Personally, I am thankful and wish them even greater future success, but I do pay a tidy sum of taxes myself.

To answer your original query:
This wealthiest among us owe us squat. They can take their money and run after firing everyone.

But instead, they make more money by continuing to employ people who buy homes and other things, paying property, sales, social security and other taxes, while these employers are paying similar taxes themselves.

The wealthiest among us pay most of the taxes, and that pays for most of the operations of the government, including schools, roads, law and order, defense, energy, etc.

Demonizing the successful has to stop. We need to encourage success. Everyone would love to be successful. Everyone can be, if they strive to do so, every day.

It's simply a lie that half of workers do not pay taxes. ANY worker at least pays payroll taxes. In fact, 1/5 of a poor person's income goes to their taxes.

You're conveniently not acknowledging the EFFECTIVE taxes rich people pay. 2/3 of corporations do not pay any federal income taxes because of the taxe loopholes they take advantage of. The "official" tax rate is effectively meaningless.

> It's simply a lie that half of workers do not pay taxes.

I said, "About half of Americans pay no federal income tax at all; the rest of us pay it for them."

Pay attention, and quit being so anxious to call people liars.

You want people who already pay way more taxes than you to pay even more. That does not seem fair to me.

Yes, it is simple economics that wealthy people must pay more in taxes. It’s not about what’s “fair”. It’s about what is realistic.

the wealthy already pay not just more taxs but the majority of taxs,,

If the top 20% owns 99% of the wealth and income, I would think that they should also be paying 99% of the taxes. They don't. But yes, they do pay the majority of the taxes at the federal and state level. But when you total up all the other taxes, they really don't pay the majority. You leave out the taxes that are not figured in on an annual or quarterly basis.

> If the top 20% owns 99% of the wealth and income, I would think that they should also be paying 99% of the taxes.

No. Wealth is acquired over a lifetime through hard work.

Not sure why you think you can confiscate other people's property they have already paid taxes on to acquire. Self-entitiled much?

LOL, tell that to Rump. Or almost any other inherited baby in history. Sorry, but it's almost impossible to get that rich these days through hard work. You get there by using other peoples efforts and ideas. Gates and his Partner started out doing hard work but didn't get their real fortune until Gates learned to "Barrow" other's efforts and call it his own. Even Henry Ford used other peoples blood, sweat and tears.

The ones that originated the Companies that later became Corporations did do the blood, sweat and tears but at some point, their blood, sweat and tears are assumed by others. They don't work over 300 times harder than they did before they aquired all that wealth.

> Sorry, but it's almost impossible to get that rich these days through hard work.

Completely false. This is only true for ignorant people, and those who would rather waste 10% of their money on things like cell phones, eating out, $7 Starbucks coffes, etc. instead of saving for retirement.

If one makes only $35k per year, gets 3% annual salary increases, saves 10% of income in the stock market and gets 8% returns, consistent with historical stock market returns....

After 40 years, one will have $1.26M in savings.

If one saved 15%, one will have $1.85M after 40 years.

Double these numbers for a person (or couple) making $70,000 per year.

And that is if everything goes as planned with none of lifes many surprises. What really happens to the 35K a year family is the many surprises that eats away those savings and investments. Now, the same won't be said about the 70K a year but you want to bet that the 35K person is better off financially than the 70K person?

> you want to bet that the 35K person is better off financially than the 70K person?

Yeah, I would bet that is not the case, for sure. How much you want to bet?

 

[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?

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

Mr B, what has the ACA have to do with the conversation? But I will reply, I thought it was a big_________ mess. I did think they would take the foundation of it and start working on cleaning it up so it actually might benefit the general population. silly me.

 

[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?

Solution to your problem: Don't get United Healthcare and don't shop at Wallmart.

That doesn't even come close to a solution.

 

[Nostra]

Link?

Summary of the Latest Federal Income Tax Data, 2023 Update

The latest IRS data shows that the U.S. federal individual income tax continued to be progressive, borne primarily by the highest income earners.

taxfoundation.org

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

PolitiFact - 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 is the BS button on this thing. There needs to be one installed.

Be specific. What is "BS" about my post.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I went from Middle Class to lower Middle Class and yet I pay more taxes under Rump than before. Not much but a few dollars. When you add up over 100 millionof us, that few dollars adds up. Then take those few hundred millions and give them to the Uber Rich in tax breaks. That was the Rump Tax Break. He broke my taxes (which broke me) and broke the Uber Rich's taxes which paid for their new luxury toys and such.

I have no idea how you paid more. I got more net pay while working and a better tax return when I filed. I didn't have to pay those idiotic Commie Care fines anymore either. I admit I have a CPA that specializes in taxes do my returns, and those people know all the new tax policies as soon as they come out.

 

[Soupnazi630]

No one has ever produced any evidence that wealth disparity harms anyone.

Evidence:
View attachment 473002

Move on to the next stupid statement please.

That is not evidence that wealth disparity harms a soul. You failed to even touch my statement proving your inferiority

Now put up or shut up you are a failure and proven a total fool

 

[Crepitus]

Link?

Summary of the Latest Federal Income Tax Data, 2023 Update

The latest IRS data shows that the U.S. federal individual income tax continued to be progressive, borne primarily by the highest income earners.

taxfoundation.org

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

PolitiFact - 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 is the BS button on this thing. There needs to be one installed.

I agree completely.

 

[Crepitus]

Link?

Summary of the Latest Federal Income Tax Data, 2023 Update

The latest IRS data shows that the U.S. federal individual income tax continued to be progressive, borne primarily by the highest income earners.

taxfoundation.org

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

PolitiFact - 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 is the BS button on this thing. There needs to be one installed.

your comments would cause it to get worn out,,

Nope. We don't have it anymore because yours already did.

 

[progressive hunter]

Link?

Summary of the Latest Federal Income Tax Data, 2023 Update

The latest IRS data shows that the U.S. federal individual income tax continued to be progressive, borne primarily by the highest income earners.

taxfoundation.org

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

PolitiFact - 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 is the BS button on this thing. There needs to be one installed.

your comments would cause it to get worn out,,

Nope. We don't have it anymore because yours already did.

OH MY GOD!!

THAT WAS SO FUNNY!!

 

[Crepitus]

Link?

Summary of the Latest Federal Income Tax Data, 2023 Update

The latest IRS data shows that the U.S. federal individual income tax continued to be progressive, borne primarily by the highest income earners.

taxfoundation.org

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

PolitiFact - 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 is the BS button on this thing. There needs to be one installed.

your comments would cause it to get worn out,,

Nope. We don't have it anymore because yours already did.

OH MY GOD!!

THAT WAS SO FUNNY!!

Really? I wasn't joking, you know.

 

[Viktor]

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."

Estate tax proposal from Bernie Sanders would mean big bills for America's wealthiest

Senate Budget Committee Chairman Bernie Sanders (I-VT) recently introduced an estate tax plan that specifically lists the wealthiest Americans.

www.yahoo.com

What is also a myth or outright lie is when Democrats tell the Middle Class that no one making under $(Fill in the number) will pay an increase in taxes. Invariably and necessarily, the Middle Class pays more in taxes. Case in point, Biden is getting rid of the 2017 tax cuts. Under Trump’s plan, the Middle Class kept more of a percentage of its take home pay than they did under Obama or will under Biden.

Biden, Harris and Sanders keep assuring us that there will be no tax increase for people making less than $400,000. Biden and Sanders have been in Congress for 30 years and they never even tried to put that in the tax law. It's a big Con.

 

[Nostra]

Link?

Summary of the Latest Federal Income Tax Data, 2023 Update

The latest IRS data shows that the U.S. federal individual income tax continued to be progressive, borne primarily by the highest income earners.

taxfoundation.org

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

PolitiFact - 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 is the BS button on this thing. There needs to be one installed.

I agree completely.

so you don't like your "logic" being turned around on you, huh?

Dimwinger morons never do.