Time to crack down on them rich people

[Patrick2]

A comment on the remark that jobs are created by demand: besides the fact that simply isn't true as I showed with the cell phone example, jobs are created by all the things that come before the job: invention, technological advance, engineering, entrepreneurship, capital investment, plant construction, management, organization, tons of government issues, etc, and finally hiring workers. Few people can pull that together - they are highly paid.

 

[CitizenPained]

How many people do Paris Hilton or Angelina Jolie employ again??

 

[editec]

Oh those poor poor billionaires.

They are the whipping boys of the USA.

See their suffering?

They're crying all the way to the bank.

And those 200,000 a year folks - we'll loot them too! Why? cuz we need money, and stealing from rich people isn't really stealing, because, ah, er, uh - they're rich! Also, all moral laws are suspended when people have more than X number of dollars. Know what I mean?

No, I really don't.

IN fact if I were designing out tax policies, people making a mere $250k a year would end up paying a lower percentage of taxes than they currently are.

Billionaires would, of course, probably pay a slightly more since I would change capital gains taxes somewhat, close a LOT of loopholes, and and I would also increase the number of tax brackets to capture the difference (as but one example) between somebody making $250K, $2,500k, and $25,000K a year.

It is an affront to the concept of social justice to impose the same tax rates on people who have such enormous differences in income.

Were I designing the tax system, MOST of the USA's wealthiest classes would actually enjoy a tax rate DECREASE.

Certainly, under the editec tax system anybody making less than $1,000,000 a year would pay less taxes, not more taxes.

 

[Patrick2]

Oh those poor poor billionaires.

They are the whipping boys of the USA.

See their suffering?

They're crying all the way to the bank.

And those 200,000 a year folks - we'll loot them too! Why? cuz we need money, and stealing from rich people isn't really stealing, because, ah, er, uh - they're rich! Also, all moral laws are suspended when people have more than X number of dollars. Know what I mean?

No, I really don't.

IN fact if I were designing out tax policies, people making a mere $250k a year would end up paying a lower percentage of taxes than they currently are.

Billionaires would, of course, probably pay a slightly more since I would change capital gains taxes somewhat, close a LOT of loopholes, and and I would also increase the number of tax brackets to capture the difference (as but one example) between somebody making $250K, $2,500k, and $25,000K a year.

It is an affront to the concept of social justice to impose the same tax rates on people who have such enormous differences in income.

Were I designing the tax system, MOST of the USA's wealthiest classes would actually enjoy a tax rate DECREASE.

Certainly, under the editec tax system anybody making less than $1,000,000 a year would pay less taxes, not more taxes.

Lesseeee if I got this right - lower everyone's taxes, except "slighty" increase billionaires' taxes. Budget, national debt problems solved - hmmmmmmm

And exactly what is this "social justice" crapola (as opposed to just plain vanilla justice)?

Billlionaires use farrrrrrrrr less in social services, yet they should pay not only more in absolute terms, but a higher percentage?? How does "justice" have anything to do with it? It seems really what has to do with it is analogous to this: A famous bank robber, Willy Sutton, was purportedly asked why he robbed banks. Answer: "because that's where the money is." IOW, it doen't have to do with "social justice", but rather where's the money to pay for our limitless leftwing government greed, and let's get it.

 

[ShackledNation]

[irony]

Yaaaa yaaaaa yaaaaaaa - they pay nearly all the taxes, but so what? Just because they go to school longer, work harder, and are smarter, who says they should have more money than the average joe? And what do they ever do for us regular folks - besides give us jobs, provide capital for our society, and support our charities?

Jobs are created by a demand for products and services, not by those who profit from the demand. Without demand the employers would not exist.

The capital (taxes) that our society operates on derives from every citizen whose income is sufficient to qualify for assessment. The size of the assessment occurs in proportion to the size of the income. (I.e., Progressive taxation.)

While it might appear that the rich are more charitable than are "average Joes" the fact is the size of their individual contributions are impressive because they have much larger tax deductions.

So if I am on a deserted island and I demand a burger, it will magically appear? It is not simply about demand. That is the problem with current economic policy. Demand is useless without the ability of suppliers to create products that are demanded. I demand flying cars, but they aren't here.

Capital is not taxes. Capital goods include technology, machinery, and other resources used in the process of producing (rather than consuming) something. People demand consumer goods, which come into existence due to capital goods. On my island, if the technology and tools to create burgers (the capital) do not exist, no matter how much I demand one and am willing to pay an arm and a leg for one, I wont get one.

Capital is accumulated through savings, not spending. Savings are invested into capital production processes. Government spending redistributes what could be saved into spending money, slowing down capital formation and economic growth. Because capital is so valuable to an economy, those who are best at organizing it become rich. Rich people invest their money into projects that increase capital and thus increase the production of consumer goods. Taxing them more and more will not help anything and will only slow down production. Government is not efficient at organizing capital, yet higher taxes give government more money which should be used to create capital (thus allowing for more consumer goods). Higher taxes is never the solution, especially during a recession in which the entire capital structure is being reorganized because of misallocations of it during the boom period (i.e. too much put into housing).

 

[Patrick2]

[irony]

Yaaaa yaaaaa yaaaaaaa - they pay nearly all the taxes, but so what? Just because they go to school longer, work harder, and are smarter, who says they should have more money than the average joe? And what do they ever do for us regular folks - besides give us jobs, provide capital for our society, and support our charities? The government should GET some of their money, and give it to us. Why? Well, because we exist. Here's the way I look at it - if you force a bank to hand over their money, it's robbery. But if the GOVERNMENT does it, it's perfectly OK, because then it's LEGAL. Funny, lots of things are like that - Madoff is going to jail for a zillion years because of running a ponzi scheme, but the government has been running a vastly bigger one for decades - social security - and just like Madoff's scheme, the last ones to put anything in are the ones to get ripped off. Isn't it amazing how all kinds of monstrous shit becomes "OK" when the government does it? It's a friggin miracle! So let's help ourselves to some of that LEGALLY gotten money from rich folks. Hell, it's like manna from heaven!!

[/irony]

It has nothing to do with going up to rich people and saying "you have too much money....give it to poor people"
It has to do with looking at the current policies and procedures that have enabled the wealthy to accumulate a larger and larger share of available wealth and asking " Do we need to keep giving them this advantage?"

How are they getting an "advantage" when they pay all the taxes? For the wealthy, it has to do with entrepreneurship, inventiveness, risk-taking, work, intelligence, and vision. The leftwingers who go after the money have the simple motivations of envy and endless greed to get the money to pay off their constituencise - the unproductive, so they can retain political power.

 

[ABikerSailor]

Most of the uber rich only pay taxes at about the rate of 18 to 20 percent. Why? Because they make almost all their money from capital gains, and that loophole is how they pay less than those currently serving in the military.

If you're in the military, you pay taxes at the rate of 28 percent for federal, and if your state charges income taxes on military personnel, you pay an additional 4 percent for a total of 32 percent. I was a Personnnelman for 20 years, which is how I know this.

Still think it's right for the uber rich to pay only half of what the rest of the country does?

 

[Spoonman]

Most of the uber rich only pay taxes at about the rate of 18 to 20 percent. Why? Because they make almost all their money from capital gains, and that loophole is how they pay less than those currently serving in the military.

If you're in the military, you pay taxes at the rate of 28 percent for federal, and if your state charges income taxes on military personnel, you pay an additional 4 percent for a total of 32 percent. I was a Personnnelman for 20 years, which is how I know this.

Still think it's right for the uber rich to pay only half of what the rest of the country does?

you were a personnelman in the military? you've never mentioned that before

 

[rightwinger]

[irony]

Yaaaa yaaaaa yaaaaaaa - they pay nearly all the taxes, but so what? Just because they go to school longer, work harder, and are smarter, who says they should have more money than the average joe? And what do they ever do for us regular folks - besides give us jobs, provide capital for our society, and support our charities? The government should GET some of their money, and give it to us. Why? Well, because we exist. Here's the way I look at it - if you force a bank to hand over their money, it's robbery. But if the GOVERNMENT does it, it's perfectly OK, because then it's LEGAL. Funny, lots of things are like that - Madoff is going to jail for a zillion years because of running a ponzi scheme, but the government has been running a vastly bigger one for decades - social security - and just like Madoff's scheme, the last ones to put anything in are the ones to get ripped off. Isn't it amazing how all kinds of monstrous shit becomes "OK" when the government does it? It's a friggin miracle! So let's help ourselves to some of that LEGALLY gotten money from rich folks. Hell, it's like manna from heaven!!

[/irony]

It has nothing to do with going up to rich people and saying "you have too much money....give it to poor people"
It has to do with looking at the current policies and procedures that have enabled the wealthy to accumulate a larger and larger share of available wealth and asking " Do we need to keep giving them this advantage?"

How are they getting an "advantage" when they pay all the taxes? For the wealthy, it has to do with entrepreneurship, inventiveness, risk-taking, work, intelligence, and vision. The leftwingers who go after the money have the simple motivations of envy and endless greed to get the money to pay off their constituencise - the unproductive, so they can retain political power.

Ever hear of The Golden Rule?

He who has the gold....makes the rules

Look at our tax codes. Thousand pages written by the rich for the rich. How much of the tax code is written to provide exemptions for the middle class? Not much.
Add in capital gains exclusions, subsidies, tax exemptions, investment write offs......all done to spur the economy and create jobs

When all of this investment in our rich only goes to make them richer and has no other benefit to the overall health of our economy...why do we continue to do it?

 

[Flopper]

[irony]

Yaaaa yaaaaa yaaaaaaa - they pay nearly all the taxes, but so what? Just because they go to school longer, work harder, and are smarter, who says they should have more money than the average joe? And what do they ever do for us regular folks - besides give us jobs, provide capital for our society, and support our charities?

Jobs are created by a demand for products and services, not by those who profit from the demand. Without demand the employers would not exist.
The capital (taxes) that our society operates on derives from every citizen whose income is sufficient to qualify for assessment. The size of the assessment occurs in proportion to the size of the income. (I.e., Progressive taxation.)

While it might appear that the rich are more charitable than are "average Joes" the fact is the size of their individual contributions are impressive because they have much larger tax deductions.

Just commenting on the bold part of your post. Sure, demand is a primary ingredient to growth, it is our biggest issue right now that is holding the economy back. BUT - it's not enough, capital is needed if you're going to start up a new company to meet that demand, or expand an existing business or increase your inventory and workforce. It's not that the economy won't grow at all if you raise taxes on the rich and on capital gains, but that the growth will not be as robust. It disincentivizes investment here from American and foreign investors, and instead makes other countries look more inviting.

For me, that's really the whole deal. It's just not a wise course of action at this time, maybe a couple of years down the road if the economy picks up and employment gets better would be a better time. Like when Clinton raised taxes in '93 and it didn't matter. I think it would matter a lot in 2011.

I don't think our current problem is a lack of capital. Businesses are sitting on about 1.9 trillion dollars. They would certainly invest in the US if they saw the demand was there but it isn't. As a result it appears investments are going abroad where there is more demand. It's too pretty a day to get into an argument of what comes first the chicken or the egg, supply or demand. IMHO, American business just needs some stimulus to get the ball rolling. That could come with a good settlement of the debt crisis, a few good job reports, or just about any good news. It just takes a spark to start the fire.

 

[Patrick2]

It has nothing to do with going up to rich people and saying "you have too much money....give it to poor people"
It has to do with looking at the current policies and procedures that have enabled the wealthy to accumulate a larger and larger share of available wealth and asking " Do we need to keep giving them this advantage?"

How are they getting an "advantage" when they pay all the taxes? For the wealthy, it has to do with entrepreneurship, inventiveness, risk-taking, work, intelligence, and vision. The leftwingers who go after the money have the simple motivations of envy and endless greed to get the money to pay off their constituencise - the unproductive, so they can retain political power.

Ever hear of The Golden Rule?

He who has the gold....makes the rules

Look at our tax codes. Thousand pages written by the rich for the rich.

And yet they still pay almost all the taxes.

How much of the tax code is written to provide exemptions for the middle class? Not much.

The biggest one for most middleclass is the mortgage deduction, and now leftwingers are talking about taking that away.

Add in capital gains exclusions, subsidies, tax exemptions, investment write offs......all done to spur the economy and create jobs

When all of this investment in our rich only goes to make them richer and has no other benefit to the overall health of our economy...why do we continue to do it?

You're just ignorant of economics. The reason the leftwing can get away with misleading people is because the benefits of low taxation are not readily discernable to a simpleminded view of things. There are few things the rich can do with acquired capital:
invest it or lend it. Both create jobs for people who don't know they even exist, but benefit from their actions.

The problem with leftwingers is they have this old bogus marxist idea - that anything that harms rich people must help the non-rich, and vice-versa.

 

[rightwinger]

How are they getting an "advantage" when they pay all the taxes? For the wealthy, it has to do with entrepreneurship, inventiveness, risk-taking, work, intelligence, and vision. The leftwingers who go after the money have the simple motivations of envy and endless greed to get the money to pay off their constituencise - the unproductive, so they can retain political power.

Ever hear of The Golden Rule?

He who has the gold....makes the rules

Look at our tax codes. Thousand pages written by the rich for the rich.

And yet they still pay almost all the taxes.

How much of the tax code is written to provide exemptions for the middle class? Not much.

The biggest one for most middleclass is the mortgage deduction, and now leftwingers are talking about taking that away.

Add in capital gains exclusions, subsidies, tax exemptions, investment write offs......all done to spur the economy and create jobs

When all of this investment in our rich only goes to make them richer and has no other benefit to the overall health of our economy...why do we continue to do it?

You're just ignorant of economics. The reason the leftwing can get away with misleading people is because the benefits of low taxation are not readily discernable to a simpleminded view of things. There are few things the rich can do with acquired capital:
invest it or lend it. Both create jobs for people who don't know they even exist, but benefit from their actions.

The problem with leftwingers is they have this old bogus marxist idea - that anything that harms rich people must help the non-rich, and vice-versa.

The rich pay an overwhelming percentage of taxes because they control an overwhelming percentage of the wealth. The math is not hard

We have heard that supply side, trickle down, economic benefits of low taxes since Reagan

Guess what? It didn't work. It resulted in $14 trillion in debt, and did nothing more than add additional wealth to the richest Americans while lowering the standard of living for the working class

We have seen the economics. It is not working. Time to stop economic policies that help the rich without helping the overall economy

 

[rightwinger]

JFK made the famous statement ...

A rising tide lifts all boats

Since Reagan, the economic picture is...

A rising tide only lifts the yachts

 

[MikeK]

So if I am on a deserted island and I demand a burger, it will magically appear?

If you are on a deserted island and you demand a burger it would mean you are delirious.

But if there are others on your island, and if one of them has a cow, and another can bake a bun, provided you can pay enough for a burger to justify killing the cow, and presuming those others are interested in having some of your money, rest assured your demand would be met.

But without your demand, which includes your ability to pay, there would be no movement.

It is not simply about demand. That is the problem with current economic policy. Demand is useless without the ability of suppliers to create products that are demanded. I demand flying cars, but they aren't here.

You may also rest assured that if there were sufficient demand (which includes ability to pay) for flying cars they would be available.

As it is a fellow in Norway or Sweden (I saw it on Discovery Channel) has built a sleek little car with folding wings and tail and a propeller that does take off and fly. How much are you willing to pay him for it?

Capital is not taxes. Capital goods include technology, machinery, and other resources used in the process of producing (rather than consuming) something. People demand consumer goods, which come into existence due to capital goods. On my island, if the technology and tools to create burgers (the capital) do not exist, no matter how much I demand one and am willing to pay an arm and a leg for one, I wont get one.

The point that escapes your attention is demand for the materials needed to produce burgers.

Capital is accumulated through savings, not spending. Savings are invested into capital production processes. Government spending redistributes what could be saved into spending money, slowing down capital formation and economic growth. Because capital is so valuable to an economy, those who are best at organizing it become rich. Rich people invest their money into projects that increase capital and thus increase the production of consumer goods. Taxing them more and more will not help anything and will only slow down production. Government is not efficient at organizing capital, yet higher taxes give government more money which should be used to create capital (thus allowing for more consumer goods). Higher taxes is never the solution, especially during a recession in which the entire capital structure is being reorganized because of misallocations of it during the boom period (i.e. too much put into housing).

FDR's New Deal proved your theory is wrong.

FDR imposed a progressive tax on the rich with a maximum rate of 91 percent! The resulting revenue became the capital with which he financed the CCC (Civilian Conservation Corps) and other federal make-work programs which provided useful employment for millions of Americans made destitute by the Great Depression. This had the effect of reviving the economy and giving rise to many thriving new industries needed to supply the demands of millions of newly employed workers.

FDR's use of taxes as capital, priming the pump as it were, initiated the most prosperous and productive decades in our history, the late 40s to the early 80s, the era when the American Middle Class came into being.

Then came Ronald Reagan and supply-side economics. And here we are.

 

[Patrick2]

Ever hear of The Golden Rule?

He who has the gold....makes the rules

Look at our tax codes. Thousand pages written by the rich for the rich.

And yet they still pay almost all the taxes.



The biggest one for most middleclass is the mortgage deduction, and now leftwingers are talking about taking that away.

Add in capital gains exclusions, subsidies, tax exemptions, investment write offs......all done to spur the economy and create jobs

When all of this investment in our rich only goes to make them richer and has no other benefit to the overall health of our economy...why do we continue to do it?

You're just ignorant of economics. The reason the leftwing can get away with misleading people is because the benefits of low taxation are not readily discernable to a simpleminded view of things. There are few things the rich can do with acquired capital:
invest it or lend it. Both create jobs for people who don't know they even exist, but benefit from their actions.

The problem with leftwingers is they have this old bogus marxist idea - that anything that harms rich people must help the non-rich, and vice-versa.

The rich pay an overwhelming percentage of taxes because they control an overwhelming percentage of the wealth. The math is not hard

Yessssss ....... and there's some kind of problem there???

We have heard that supply side, trickle down, economic benefits of low taxes since Reagan

We've heard the "loot the rich" mantra since Karl Marx.

Guess what? It didn't work. It resulted in $14 trillion in debt,

Noooooooo....... it's the liberal/left ponzi schemes like social security and medicare that didn't work. Reagan's policies created a huge uptick in national wealth, but not one that could ever keep up with endless leftwing/RINO government greed.

 

[Flopper]

There are few things the rich can do with acquired capital:
invest it or lend it. Both create jobs for people who don't know they even exist, but benefit from their actions.

They can lend to state and local governments and draw tax free income which does little or nothing to create jobs, or invest in treasury bonds and help grow the federal government, or they can invest in hedge funds and profit off our economic problems, or they can buy gold or precious metals which does nothing for the economy, or invest in collectibles to spruce the mansion, or invest abroad and provide capital for our competitors. Putting more money in the hands of the wealthy is no guarantee that it will end up expanding the US economy. Just like businesses, the wealthy have to be believe investing in the American economy is the best bang for buck, otherwise the money goes elsewhere.

 

[Patrick2]

There are few things the rich can do with acquired capital:
invest it or lend it. Both create jobs for people who don't know they even exist, but benefit from their actions.

They can lend to state and local governments and draw tax free income which does little or nothing to create jobs, or invest in treasury bonds and help grow the federal government,

That is either something that produces what libs call a legitimate "social good", or it represents profligate government spending, in which case the culprit is the government, not rich people. The cure to that as I'm sure you know is not to loot rich people so they don't have money to buy the bonds, but rather curtail government borrowing.

or they can invest in hedge funds and profit off our economic problems,

Hedge funds don't cause economic problems, they are merely a market trading mechanism, and incidentally LOST a lot of money in the recent downturn.

or they can buy gold or precious metals which does nothing for the economy

When do they buy gold? When somebody ELSE has ALREADY screwed up the economy. Their gold purchases are an effect, not a cause, of a bad economy.

Just like businesses, the wealthy have to be believe investing in the American economy is the best bang for buck, otherwise the money goes elsewhere.

That's exactly what they SHOULD do. If they don't, the ROOT cause is with somebody else.

 

[Flopper]

There are few things the rich can do with acquired capital:
invest it or lend it. Both create jobs for people who don't know they even exist, but benefit from their actions.

They can lend to state and local governments and draw tax free income which does little or nothing to create jobs, or invest in treasury bonds and help grow the federal government,

That is either something that produces what libs call a legitimate "social good", or it represents profligate government spending, in which case the culprit is the government, not rich people. The cure to that as I'm sure you know is not to loot rich people so they don't have money to buy the bonds, but rather curtail government borrowing.



Hedge funds don't cause economic problems, they are merely a market trading mechanism, and incidentally LOST a lot of money in the recent downturn.

or they can buy gold or precious metals which does nothing for the economy

When do they buy gold? When somebody ELSE has ALREADY screwed up the economy. Their gold purchases are an effect, not a cause, of a bad economy.

Just like businesses, the wealthy have to be believe investing in the American economy is the best bang for buck, otherwise the money goes elsewhere.

That's exactly what they SHOULD do. If they don't, the ROOT cause is with somebody else.

Whether you curtail government spending or not, there will always be government financing. Unless we start paying off the national debt which will probably never happen, we will continue to need to refinance the debt. Treasury bonds and tax-free municipal bonds have and probably always will be a favorite investment of the wealthy. Neither are big job creators.

I didn’t say hedge funds caused the problem. They just allow the wealthy to make money as the economy contracts.

No, I’m not arguing that purchasing gold causes economy problems. I’m just saying buying gold and precious metals do not help expand the economy and create jobs. I think we were discussing how the wealthy uses wealth to create jobs and grow the economy. Buying gold is certainly not one of them.

Tax cuts for the wealthy can provide capital for business expansion but not necessarily. For the wealthy, there are a multitude of ways they can use a tax cuts that do not grow jobs and the economy. By changing the tax code we could make investments that create American jobs more attractive and discourage foreign investments for both individuals and businesses.

 

[spectrumc01]

If the rich pay the majority of taxes where does 26% of my weekly pay check go?

 

[rightwinger]

If the rich pay the majority of taxes where does 26% of my weekly pay check go?

What you make a year is pennies compared to the millions the truly wealthy make.