Zone1 What is Wrong with Inequality?

[MarathonMike]

Actually I think the best you can have is where the rich pay their fair share, or more.

We should be encouraging small businesses, not giving huge tax breaks to large multinationals.

The EU had a thing where it said "every company has to pay the same tax as every other company" Google or someone went to Ireland and got a tax break, the EU slapped Ireland down and said "no, they pay the same as everyone else".

In the US the rich buy success at the expense of small business owners. In the US it's hard to make it, because the rich are screwing you over. No wonder the rich wanted Brexit.

"Fair share"? Come on now we've been playing that game for decades. Who decides what is "fair"? I'm all for giving breaks to small business owners. Tax breaks for large conglomerates can be a good thing or a bad thing it a case by case thing.

 

[Yarddog]

Do you not use your wealth to enrich yourself? If you say no, I call BS. That is called capitalism. Very few people are born wealthy. It is something you earn with ambition and perseverance.

Precisely!. For example, the founder of Paul MItchel hair products , the self made multimillionaire tried to sell and create his brand while being homeless and living out of his car.
He used whatever wealth he had I'm sure to enrich himself and there's no reason he should have stopped trying even after he made it.
What many on the left dont seem to grasp is that most people who are self made, do so because they had a vision for themselves and secondly did not give up even after they failed once, twice or even three times.
Sadly everyone who is born into the world doesnt have a vision of what they want to do or create but thats ok. The world would not function if every single person was an entrenprenure and destined to be wealthy and just because everyone isnt DOES NOT mean that those who are should be villified as the left loves to do.

 

[Crepitus]

Equality requires a brutal oppressive ultra-authoritarian government.

Welcome to the tRump *administration.

 

[Crepitus]

Then there are people like Chuck Schumer who never worked a real job in his life, straight out of law school and into politics since '74.

Net worth, 81 million....He "persevered" in much the same way Pelosi and other rich politicians did while decrying the wealthy who earned it.

Don't forget tRump, most of who's fortune was based on the name his father left him.

Until he started selling political access and cheap watches of course.

 

[frigidweirdo]

"Fair share"? Come on now we've been playing that game for decades. Who decides what is "fair"? I'm all for giving breaks to small business owners. Tax breaks for large conglomerates can be a good thing or a bad thing it a case by case thing.

Yeah, who decides what is "fair"?

It's difficult.

However I'll tell you what's not fair.

Walmart bribing the government to get a situation where they can pay their employees a wage that is so low, they can get government funding. Come off it, they should be paying a proper wage. The government should not be giving money to workers because their company are assholes.

What's not fair is a company going around the country saying "how much of a tax break will you give me for coming to your city/state?"

These 19 Fortune 100 Companies Paid Next to Nothing—or Nothing at All—in Taxes in 2021

Analysis shows that during a year of high corporate profits, many of the biggest corporations in America either paid minimal or no federal income taxes.

www.americanprogress.org

"These 19 Fortune 100 Companies Paid Next to Nothing—or Nothing at All—in Taxes in 2021"

Four companies were paying MINUS federal taxes.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

The wealthy already give back. They support massive charities. They build hospitals, establish research centers and found university chairs.

What they cannot do is support the poor. The more help the poor get, the more poor there are. The United States has the wealthiest poor on the planet. The poor have cars, at least one television set, they live with both air conditioning and heating. Normally, the poor in this country are clinically obese. Poverty being relative, the San Francisco Bay Area has as many poor, if not more poor, than the projects in Chicago. The difference is, the San Francisco poor make over $100,000 a year and scrape by on food stamps.

To the largest extent, the poor cannot be helped into moving beyond their poverty. They have a mind set that keeps them poor. Give them a windfall, no matter how large. Within a year, they will be just as poor as they ever were. This has been proven with lottery winner after lottery winner. The only beneficiaries of lottery winnings are already wealthy people on whom the winner wastes the money.

 

[AZrailwhale]

Actually I think the best you can have is where the rich pay their fair share, or more.

We should be encouraging small businesses, not giving huge tax breaks to large multinationals.

The EU had a thing where it said "every company has to pay the same tax as every other company" Google or someone went to Ireland and got a tax break, the EU slapped Ireland down and said "no, they pay the same as everyone else".

In the US the rich buy success at the expense of small business owners. In the US it's hard to make it, because the rich are screwing you over. No wonder the rich wanted Brexit.

As many people have asked, I will ask as well. What is the Rich’s “fair share”? Be specific.

 

[Yarddog]

Speaking of personal wealth as measured in economic Net Worth, there is absolutely no question that "inequality" is increasing beyond any precedent in a free country. The people at the bottom, so to speak, have less than nothing; their Net Worth is below zero, while the wealthiest of us - mainly entrepreneurs and investors - accumulate more and more wealth.

It is axiomatic on the Left that "inequality" is bad. They obviously feel that increasing "inequality" is self-evidently evil, and must be fought. They base whole political campaigns on promises to fight inequality.

What's wrong with inequality? Imagine an entrepreneur who invents a new gadget that millions of people quickly decide that they are willing to pay substantial amounts of money to have, and that entrepreneur is able to accumulate a King's Ransom on the profits from those gadgets.

So what? Why is that a bad thing? Is anyone else made poorer or more wretched by the entrepreneur's accumulation of wealth? Assume he pays millions and millions in all manner of taxes, complying with every relevant tax law.

YEP. the way of nature is inequality... from the microscopic up to the macro. If there was not inequality there would not be life itself. Water molecuels have an uneven number of electrons and this are unstable, forming a natural solvent which breaks things down, thus supplying nutrients to other creatures, which they themselves are unequal thus creating competition and advancement... we need to somehow bring our left leaning brothers to this level of understanding!

 

[Concerned American]

Yeah, who decides what is "fair"?

It's difficult.

However I'll tell you what's not fair.

Walmart bribing the government to get a situation where they can pay their employees a wage that is so low, they can get government funding. Come off it, they should be paying a proper wage. The government should not be giving money to workers because their company are assholes.

What's not fair is a company going around the country saying "how much of a tax break will you give me for coming to your city/state?"

These 19 Fortune 100 Companies Paid Next to Nothing—or Nothing at All—in Taxes in 2021

Analysis shows that during a year of high corporate profits, many of the biggest corporations in America either paid minimal or no federal income taxes.

www.americanprogress.org

"These 19 Fortune 100 Companies Paid Next to Nothing—or Nothing at All—in Taxes in 2021"

Four companies were paying MINUS federal taxes.

Walmart in our small town pays $20/hr plus benefits.

 

[Yarddog]

Don't forget tRump, most of who's fortune was based on the name his father left him.

Until he started selling political access and cheap watches of course.

Blah blah blah.... do you have any idea of how many people were left fortunes and then blew all of it?
Theres probably a lot more who have squandered it all then those who were left something and then made more out of it. You cant bring up the Trump name without bringing up the Kennedy name if you want to go on about selling political access.

 

[frigidweirdo]

As many people have asked, I will ask as well. What is the Rich’s “fair share”? Be specific.

Okay, let's be specific.

A company uses many resources that are provided for by the government.

They make use of A) the military. The military not only keeps the US safe, leading to an optimal business environment, it also goes to wars to lower the price of oil.

So, how much should a large company pay towards the military?

The Federal Budget in Fiscal Year 2024: An Infographic | Congressional Budget Office

The federal deficit in 2024 was $1.8 trillion, equal to 6.4 percent of gross domestic product.

www.cbo.gov

2.9% of federal spending goes on defense.

How much more does a large multinational benefit from defense, than say a small business or a worker? It's impossible to say.

5% goes on social security. Social security is something that people pay into the government in order to get something out at a later date. Some people get more than they pay in, the country looks after people who are sick.

Every company that operates in the US, employs US workers, who need social security. It's basically a part of what you pay for in order to have workers in the US. You earn money from working, some goes from your income, other from what you buy.

Sales tax is a tax on the poor, and income tax is a tax more on the rich.

If you benefit from workers, you should be paying a lot for that. Just as you pay a lot for wages.

For me, a fair tax is one that increases. Say for example the first $10,000 you earn, nobody pays any tax on that. Then from there to $30,000 it's at 10%. Then from there to $70,000 you pay 30%, then from there you pay 40%. The actual numbers are not important, the idea is important that you pay tax when you benefit. You benefit, when you earn.

Also, what is fair is that this is about what you earn, and not on your profit, as this just leads to companies paying accountants to fiddle the books.

 

[AZrailwhale]

Okay, let's be specific.

A company uses many resources that are provided for by the government.

They make use of A) the military. The military not only keeps the US safe, leading to an optimal business environment, it also goes to wars to lower the price of oil.

So, how much should a large company pay towards the military?

The Federal Budget in Fiscal Year 2024: An Infographic | Congressional Budget Office

The federal deficit in 2024 was $1.8 trillion, equal to 6.4 percent of gross domestic product.

www.cbo.gov

2.9% of federal spending goes on defense.

How much more does a large multinational benefit from defense, than say a small business or a worker? It's impossible to say.

5% goes on social security. Social security is something that people pay into the government in order to get something out at a later date. Some people get more than they pay in, the country looks after people who are sick.

Every company that operates in the US, employs US workers, who need social security. It's basically a part of what you pay for in order to have workers in the US. You earn money from working, some goes from your income, other from what you buy.

Sales tax is a tax on the poor, and income tax is a tax more on the rich.

If you benefit from workers, you should be paying a lot for that. Just as you pay a lot for wages.

For me, a fair tax is one that increases. Say for example the first $10,000 you earn, nobody pays any tax on that. Then from there to $30,000 it's at 10%. Then from there to $70,000 you pay 30%, then from there you pay 40%. The actual numbers are not important, the idea is important that you pay tax when you benefit. You benefit, when you earn.

Also, what is fair is that this is about what you earn, and not on your profit, as this just leads to companies paying accountants to fiddle the books.

That’s a bunch of bullcrap. Sales tax is more a tax on the wealthy than the poor. They spend far more on taxable things than the poor who spend most of their money on non-taxable food. As for income tax, everyone should pay it, more than half the citizens of the USA don’t pay a dime in income tax, in fact many get money they never paid in through the earned income credit. The top five percent of earners pay over ninety percent of income taxes.

 

[MarathonMike]

Yeah, who decides what is "fair"?

It's difficult.

However I'll tell you what's not fair.

Walmart bribing the government to get a situation where they can pay their employees a wage that is so low, they can get government funding. Come off it, they should be paying a proper wage. The government should not be giving money to workers because their company are assholes.

What's not fair is a company going around the country saying "how much of a tax break will you give me for coming to your city/state?"

These 19 Fortune 100 Companies Paid Next to Nothing—or Nothing at All—in Taxes in 2021

Analysis shows that during a year of high corporate profits, many of the biggest corporations in America either paid minimal or no federal income taxes.

www.americanprogress.org

"These 19 Fortune 100 Companies Paid Next to Nothing—or Nothing at All—in Taxes in 2021"

Four companies were paying MINUS federal taxes.

How else do you incentivize a large company with lots of jobs to build in your city/state? You want the Federal government to dictate to Company X you must build here Company Y you must build there? I don't know about the Walmart situation but if you are a big dog, you have leverage.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

It also depends on how you measure wealth. Some people think the more time you use as you choose, the wealthier you are. Since time is the only thing any of us own, that may be the best approach.

 

[frigidweirdo]

That’s a bunch of bullcrap. Sales tax is more a tax on the wealthy than the poor. They spend far more on taxable things than the poor who spend most of their money on non-taxable food. As for income tax, everyone should pay it, more than half the citizens of the USA don’t pay a dime in income tax, in fact many get money they never paid in through the earned income credit. The top five percent of earners pay over ninety percent of income taxes.

No, it's actually not.

Imagine you earn $30,000 a month compared to someone who earns $200,000 a month.

If I put an income tax of 20% on both of these, then the $30,000 will pay $6,000 in tax and the $200,000 will pay $40,0000 in tax

If I put a sales tax of 20% on items instead, the $30,000 will end up paying $6,000 in tax because they're going to spend all their money. The $200,000 might only spend $50,000, and therefore they're going to be paying $10,000 in tax.

In reality if you just had sales tax, it would need to be HIGHER than if you just had income tax, because you make more money from income tax than sales tax. So, a poor person who spends all their money will pay more.

Your argument is a wrong one. You're trying to say that the rich pay so much in income tax, they do, because they earn most of the money. However as a percentage of money that someone has, the rich are paying far, far less.

Also, the more money poor people have, the more they will buy (up to a certain amount), therefore more things will be bought, more things will be bought, meaning money is flowing more.

 

[frigidweirdo]

How else do you incentivize a large company with lots of jobs to build in your city/state? You want the Federal government to dictate to Company X you must build here Company Y you must build there? I don't know about the Walmart situation but if you are a big dog, you have leverage.

Why do you need to incentivize this? You need to have businesses everywhere. A company should be looking at whether there's enough workers, whether the infrastructure is good enough.

The US has so many towns and cities that are dying because of these "incentives". Have businesses everywhere competing FAIRLY. You don't need them to move into your town, city or state. Let small businesses grow within your state, instead of paying a large company to come in and destroy you small business sector.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

Have you ever wondered how someone could come to this country with nothing but the clothes they stand up in, can't speak the language and have no skills, yet end up millionaires?

They are willing to suffer. That's how.

Some years ago a man conducted an experiment with 5th graders. He offered a choice to the students. Every day he would offer a candy bar. The child could take the candy bar or not. At the end of the week, all those who chose not to take the candy bar got a box of candybars. Those who took the daily candy bar did not get a box of candy bars.

The white students deferred the candy. The black students took a candy bar every day when offered. At the end of a week, the black students said it was unfair that the white students had a whole box of candy bars while they had none.
That's inequality.

 

[DGS49]

Neither Government nor The Rich do anything to prevent people with the talent and initiative from acquiring and accumulating wealth. The examples are too numerous to count. The "argument" that they do is nothing but an excuse by losers for their failure to succeed.

If you don't think that The Rich pay enough in taxes, call your congress-person, but any FAIR tax system would have a maximum tax, expressed in dollars, beyond which the Sovereign may not reach. Elon ******* Musk paid ELEVEN BILLION DOLLARS in FIT in fiscal 2021. Enough?

 

[EvilCat Breath]

Why do you need to incentivize this? You need to have businesses everywhere. A company should be looking at whether there's enough workers, whether the infrastructure is good enough.

The US has so many towns and cities that are dying because of these "incentives". Have businesses everywhere competing FAIRLY. You don't need them to move into your town, city or state. Let small businesses grow within your state, instead of paying a large company to come in and destroy you small business sector.

Large businesses are the backbone of commerce. That's why there are incentives. They come in and employ people. Those employees need housing, services, they need grocery stores and hair salons. They need pet groomers and shoe stores. Why do you think malls die when the huge anchor stores move out?

 

[Yarddog]

How else do you incentivize a large company with lots of jobs to build in your city/state? You want the Federal government to dictate to Company X you must build here Company Y you must build there? I don't know about the Walmart situation but if you are a big dog, you have leverage.

Yep you have just described the old Soviet Union/ Russia where they had shit for quality and variety and then even less ambition. But the party line was Everyone was taken care of.