Zone1 Tax the Rich! Make them Pay their Fair Share!

[Concerned American]

Oh, I think I hit a nerve.

That's a weak attempt at avoiding the answer to the question that you prompted. How about answering the question instead of deflecting?

How many millions do your parents have to give you to make that happen?

Unlike you parasites, some of us actually worked careers an EARNED our successes. Sucks to be you.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Every family is important and should not suffer but the big question is what do we want this country to look like. Do we want dynasties and nobility or a country where everyone has an equal opportunity to succeed or fail?

I want my family to get my money.

I want the government to spend less money.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

So you can't read a graph?


How about THIS



From Bush's President's Working Group on Financial Markets October 2008

"The Presidents Working Group's March policy statement acknowledged that turmoil in financial markets clearly was triggered by a dramatic weakening of underwriting standards for U.S. subprime mortgages, beginning in late 2004 and extending into 2007."




CLINTON HUH?




View attachment 1242446

So you can't read a graph?

You can't understand what 50% means?

 

[Frankeneinstein]

• Immobile Assets: While individuals can leave, much of their wealth, such as property and companies, remains behind and subject to local taxes.
• Counter-arguments: Some studies suggest that the rate of departure is often lower than anticipated, with many wealthy individuals preferring to stay despite higher taxes.

‘Wealth taxes will cause the rich to flee’: 12 wealth tax myths debunked​

‘Wealth taxes will cause the rich to flee’: 12 wealth tax myths debunked - Tax Justice UK

Wealth taxes have huge popular support: 78% of people in the UK support higher taxes on those who own assets worth over £10 million. When it comes to convincing politicians, however, the issue of wealth taxes can become more contentious. We asked our readers to send a message to their MP...

taxjustice.uk

Just read the first one and that was enough to tell me that it is has nothing to do with why the rich won't flee [certainly not 12 reasons], in fact it does nothing at all to address the issue of fleeing, it was just a non starter with an intentional euro-socialist myopic view of why taxes should be raised on the rich instead of lowered on the folks who they claim are being hurt by a tax myth..here it is

1. Don’t the richest already pay the most in tax?​

Often the very rich will be paying more pound for pound in tax than less well off people, but their tax rate (IE the percentage of their income they pay) will be much lower. For example the top 1% of earners contribute a third of all tax income received by the Treasury pound for pound. However the bottom 10% of earners have an effective tax rate of 44%, which is more than twice as high as those in the top 0.01% (21%). We believe this is unfair. A billionaire should never pay a lower percentage of income tax than the secretary or cleaner in their office.

in admitting the earners should not be paying 44% to the wealthy's 21% is in fact exposing that taxes are the problem not the solution, why not instead of increasing the rate of the wealthy they offer to just cut the rate of taxes for the earners back to 21%, even the earners would find that to be more palatable...perhaps writing to the mp's for that would then set things straight and make every one outside of the elites happy...the article/findings is/are the myth here

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The bottom line: the average delinquency rate for all loans originated for Wall Street securitization—prime, subprime, or subprime-like—is 26.8 percent. By way of comparison, Fannie and Freddie loans originated over the same period have defaulted at a rate of only 5.9 percent.

The delinquency rate is perhaps the best gauge of which mortgage products caused the housing and financial crises. That’s why former Federal Housing Finance Agency Director James Lockhart says objectively that Wall Street securitization was primarily responsible for the mortgage delinquencies we have experienced to date.


Despite accounting for only 13 percent of all outstanding mortgages, Wall Street securitization was responsible for 42 percent of all serious delinquencies. Conversely,


Fannie and Freddie, which accounted for 57 percent of outstanding mortgages, were responsible for only 22 percent of all serious delinquencies.



OVER HALF OF ALL MORTGAGES, BUT ONLY RESPONSIBLE FOR ONLY 22% OF SERIOUS delinquencies?


LOL



KEEP UP YOUR BS CUPCAKE



SO DID GREECE, CHINA IRELAND, SPAIN, RUSSIA HAVE GSE'S THAT FORCED THEM TO BUY MBS'S?



WORLD WIDE CREDIT BUBBLE AND BUST, ONE DUBYA CHEERED ON IN THE US, AS HE GUTTED REGULAORS!

Cause and Effect

David Min examines the allegations of the Securities and Exchange Commission’s lawsuit against Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

www.americanprogress.org

By way of comparison, Fannie and Freddie loans originated over the same period

Fannie and Freddie don't originate loans, moron.

How much subprime paper did Fannie, Freddie and the FHA hold by 2008?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Don't forget, Dubya changed Clinton's rule that low quality WOULD NOT COUNT, IN 2004 CUPCAKE




HUD (2000, CLINTON) restricted Freddie and Fannie, saying it would not credit them for loans they purchased that had abusively high costs or that were granted without regard to the borrower's ability to repay. Freddie and Fannie adopted policies not to buy some high-cost loans.



....But by 2004 (DUBYA), when HUD next revised the goals, Freddie and Fannie's purchases of subprime-backed securities had risen tenfold. Foreclosure rates also were rising.


That year, President Bush's HUD ratcheted up the main affordable-housing goal over the next four years, from 50 percent to 56 percent. John C. Weicher, then an assistant HUD secretary, said the institutions lagged behind even the private market and "must do more."

https://archive.ph/ZhfIA#selection-543.0-549.264

Don't forget, Dubya changed Clinton's rule that low quality WOULD NOT COUNT, IN 2004

Don't forget, all subprime mortgages are low quality.

....But by 2004 (DUBYA), when HUD next revised the goals, Freddie and Fannie's purchases of subprime-backed securities had risen tenfold. Foreclosure rates also were rising.

Ummmm......going from Clinton's 50% in 2000 to 52% in 2005 doesn't look like evidence for your tenfold claim.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

You mean the GSE's loans that performed 450%-600% better than those in the private markets? Yeah, the Dubya/GOP policy, like the GOP great depression, really hurt the US after 6 years of BUSHANOMICS

Wow, your libtard math is weaker than the usual libtard math.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The Real Heroes of the 1998 Budget Surplus: Clinton and His Economy​

....Take President Clinton’s 1993 budget bill—officially known as the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993. OBRA, which mainly raised taxes on wealthy people but also raised the gas tax, extended limits on discretionary spending and cut back on some mandatory spending, was signed into law on August 10, 1993.

His 1993 tax bill was so awesome that the Dems lost 8 Senate seats and 54 House seats in 1994.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

• Immobile Assets: While individuals can leave, much of their wealth, such as property and companies, remains behind and subject to local taxes.
• Counter-arguments: Some studies suggest that the rate of departure is often lower than anticipated, with many wealthy individuals preferring to stay despite higher taxes.

‘Wealth taxes will cause the rich to flee’: 12 wealth tax myths debunked​

‘Wealth taxes will cause the rich to flee’: 12 wealth tax myths debunked - Tax Justice UK

Wealth taxes have huge popular support: 78% of people in the UK support higher taxes on those who own assets worth over £10 million. When it comes to convincing politicians, however, the issue of wealth taxes can become more contentious. We asked our readers to send a message to their MP...

taxjustice.uk

However the bottom 10% of earners have an effective tax rate of 44%, which is more than twice as high as those in the top 0.01% (21%). We believe this is unfair. A billionaire should never pay a lower percentage of income tax than the secretary or cleaner in their office.

44%? Wow!
How do the poor manage to pay 44% (in the UK)?

 

[Woodznutz]

How many millions do your parents have to give you to make that happen?

Parents should give their kids their walking papers the day they graduate from high school.

 

[alang1216]

That's a weak attempt at avoiding the answer to the question that you prompted. How about answering the question instead of deflecting?

My personal story is my own and not to be shared with the internet, so... None of your business. Besides, I could make up anything and you'd never know the truth.

Unlike you parasites, some of us actually worked careers an EARNED our successes. Sucks to be you.

I worked and earned my success and now my kids work and earn their own successes. Great to me.

 

[alang1216]

I want the government to spend less money.

I've never understood that statement, it always sounds incomplete: "I want the government to spend less money on..."

 

[alang1216]

Parents should give their kids their walking papers the day they graduate from high school.

They'll always be my kids and I'll do what I can for them (we babysat for their kids last night), but they are not getting my billions, they'll have to settle for a few million.

 

[Woodznutz]

They'll always be my kids and I'll do what I can for them (we babysat for their kids last night), but they are not getting my billions, they'll have to settle for a few million.

My kids will only inherit a million each.

 

[Woodznutz]

My kids will only inherit a million each.

I got a late start building wealth.

 

[Concerned American]

I got a late start building wealth.

I'm not leaving anything---I'm going to spend it all.

 

[JonKoch]

I can speak to Obamacare, which attempted to ensconce poor health as normal in America and a desirable part of the economy (the medical/pharma industry thanks him).

If you mean Obamacares got 20+ million more people on health insurance for the private markets, instead of UHC that EVERY other industrialized nation has, true.

WHEN ARE YOU GOING TO SUPPORT UHC?

 

[JonKoch]

Regarding "starving the Beast" that's the responsibility of the citizenry, not the GOP. The need for some of these revenues must be curtailed before they are reduced or cut from the budget. If the need continues to grow the revenues must be collected to provide for them. For example the need for funding Medicare, Medicaid, Obamacare, NIH, HSS, CDC, and others is a direct response to the poor health of Americans. It's the people that cause the massive spending on these programs. And because people refuse to care for their health these costs, and taxes (or gov't debt), will only rise.

LMAOROG. Right, NOT an aging population. Just poor health. Not type 1 diabetes like my son got at 15 and 120 pounds, he's had it for 25+ years, his couldn't get insurance prior to OBAMACARES

 

[JonKoch]

How does assigning blame to either party solve these problems.

Blame? Sorry CREDIT is what I am showing, I can point to DIRECT POLICY DECISIONS BY THE GOP over the past 45 years that show those policies they enacted, generally opposed by the democratic party by wide margins, caused over 75% of the current US debt of $39 trillion

 

[JonKoch]

Mac-7



Create a crisis stesl power it aint rocket science. Leave a broken mess. Rinse repeat.

Yep, Ronnie, Dubya and Cheeto have done it