A 70% tax on income above $10 million; what do we think of this idea?

[blackangst1]

That does not confirm your earlier bullshit assertion of 30-50% increases in many sectors over the last 4 years.

What is 7x4? I know in it, specifically network security, I've doubled my income in the last 4 years doing the same thing.

 

[blackangst1]

I put it together just fine. The chances of you or any of us ever being subjected to a marginal tax rate of 70% above $10M/yr are negligible.

You're just a solid defender of the greed of the ultra wealthy.

I sure am. It hurts no one except those like you who are butt hurt about it. It's their money. Let them do what they want. The ultra wealthy more in taxes and donate more as a group than anyone else.

 

[Jhhnn]

What is 7x4? I know in it, specifically network security, I've doubled my income in the last 4 years doing the same thing.

Good for you. Anecdotes are not data. A 7.5% increase in DC wages doesn't extrapolate to the rest of the country, either, or to the years previous.

Your original assertion was erroneous. Get over it.

 

[Jhhnn]

I sure am. It hurts no one except those like you who are butt hurt about it. It's their money. Let them do what they want. The ultra wealthy more in taxes and donate more as a group than anyone else.

Given the usual non-veracity of what you offer my point stands. It's not about you, and if it ever is you'll still be rich.

I'm not butt hurt about people being rich. Hell- I'm richer than most. It does bother me when that gets abused the way it has been from Reagan forward. It's particularly egregious when the GOP cuts what are already obscenely low taxes for the ultra wealthy. We're borrowing money from the Rich to give it back to them as tax cuts so we can pay them interest forever.

It's also important to realize that extreme concentrations of wealth & income serve to destabilize the economy. That only hurts the ultra wealthy on their balance sheets, not in the way they live. The last time the titans of Wall st blew it with greed devastated millions of families through no fault of their own.

 

[blackangst1]

Given the usual non-veracity of what you offer my point stands. It's not about you, and if it ever is you'll still be rich.

I'm not butt hurt about people being rich. Hell- I'm richer than most. It does bother me when that gets abused the way it has been from Reagan forward. It's particularly egregious when the GOP cuts what are already obscenely low taxes for the ultra wealthy. We're borrowing money from the Rich to give it back to them as tax cuts so we can pay them interest forever.

It's also important to realize that extreme concentrations of wealth & income serve to destabilize the economy. That only hurts the ultra wealthy on their balance sheets, not in the way they live. The last time the titans of Wall st blew it with greed devastated millions of families through no fault of their own.

Then let's work on campaign contribution laws so the wealthy cant donate millions to get senators in their pockets. I'd be good with that. That way senators don't owe the rich favors and they keep their money.

Good?

 

[Jhhnn]

Then let's work on campaign contribution laws so the wealthy cant donate millions to get senators in their pockets. I'd be good with that. That way senators don't owe the rich favors and they keep their money.

Good?

I'm terribly sorry but the SCOTUS ruled in citizens united that money is speech. The best we can hope for on that front is transparency that Rich GOP donors seek desperately to avoid.

It doesn't even approach the issue of taxation at all.

 

[blackangst1]

I'm terribly sorry but the SCOTUS ruled in citizens united that money is speech. The best we can hope for on that front is transparency that Rich GOP donors seek desperately to avoid.

It doesn't even approach the issue of taxation at all.

I guess we both have fantasies then.

 

[fskimospy]

I sure am. It hurts no one except those like you who are butt hurt about it. It's their money. Let them do what they want. The ultra wealthy more in taxes and donate more as a group than anyone else.

They pay about the same percentage of their income in total taxes and fees as the rest of the country. The idea that they pay the most by some big margin focuses solely on federal income taxes and ignores all the other ones.

Like I said before unless you think the ultra wealthy are responsible for basically all productivity advances over the last 40 years then we do in fact have a problem. Taxing them to get back the money they never did anything to earn anyway seems reasonable, no?

 

[Jhhnn]

They pay about the same percentage of their income in total taxes and fees as the rest of the country. The idea that they pay the most by some big margin focuses solely on federal income taxes and ignores all the other ones.

Like I said before unless you think the ultra wealthy are responsible for basically all productivity advances over the last 40 years then we do in fact have a problem. Taxing them to get back the money they never did anything to earn anyway seems reasonable, no?

He doesn't know shit about taxes. What you offer doesn't apply to the ultra wealthy, anyway, given that they hide their ultra low tax rates in the higher rates paid by people in the lower echelons of the 1%. Schlubs at the $500K or so entry level of the 1% pay 5% more than the people at the tippy top who make more than $60M.

Beyond that, many state & local taxes are highly regressive as well-

https://itep.org/whopays/

 

[Meghan54]

What is 7x4? I know in it, specifically network security, I've doubled my income in the last 4 years doing the same thing.

So, what you're saying is that since there was a 7% increase in one year, that should apply to 4 years without anything to back up that claim to get your magical "30-50% wage increase"........typical.

 

[Ventanni]

In case you were wondering, the only time Democrats had enough control to do anything about it was in the middle of a recession when you can't do anything about it other than spend on stimulus. Hopefully you at least acknowledge that it was the right thing to do at the time, but they were fucking punished for it at the polls in 2010 and have been blocked from doing ANYTHING since. The last President to do anything right with respect to the deficit before that was another Democrat, by the way.

I'd agree with that. And yes, I'd agree that Democratic presidents have, overall, been more fiscally responsible than Republicans in my lifetime for sure.

But definitely not through a 70% tax on high income earners. We are out of our minds if we think that is going to be in any way effective. France did that and it was an absolute failure as the wealthy re-registered their citizenship and tax shelters elsewhere. Trust me, if we pass that here in the US, it'll happen real quick.

And no, I'm not all about giving the wealthy everything they want.

 

[IronWing]

Yes because a national genocide policy is the same as a national tax policy.

lol at this guy.

Careful, glenn is a fascist so that’s probably true in his world.

 

[fskimospy]

I'd agree with that. And yes, I'd agree that Democratic presidents have, overall, been more fiscally responsible than Republicans in my lifetime for sure.

But definitely not through a 70% tax on high income earners. We are out of our minds if we think that is going to be in any way effective. France did that and it was an absolute failure as the wealthy re-registered their citizenship and tax shelters elsewhere. Trust me, if we pass that here in the US, it'll happen real quick.

And no, I'm not all about giving the wealthy everything they want.

Empirical research suggests the optimal marginal tax rate on high earners could be as high as 76%.

https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/jep.25.4.165

Does that make you reconsider? While this certainly isn’t the last word, it should absolutely make you stop and think why you would label such a thing as crazy.

 

[blackangst1]

So, what you're saying is that since there was a 7% increase in one year, that should apply to 4 years without anything to back up that claim to get your magical "30-50% wage increase"........typical.

In the sector I'm employed in yes.

 

[fskimospy]

In the sector I'm employed in yes.

Right but nationwide data shows largely stagnant wages over the last decade and even in the last couple of years. Again, I think it took until this most recent quarter for real wages to have a net increase under Trump.

That’s really bad.

 

[Collider]

Ok ok - someone please enlighten me on how high earners get to pay less taxes than the rest?

Just looked up current tax rates and the highest bracket pays 2-3 times more than the 2nd/3rd brackets where most people fall into.

Everyone keeps saying its the loopholes, so if you mention "loopholes" - please be specific to list out exact accounting techniques / tax code clauses that the wealthy are taking advantage of.

Just want to know how its done once I start earning that much

 

[cytg111]

Consumption is a completely different part of the equation. However, since you seem hell bent on discussing it, lets talk about it. Are you in favor of monopolies? Because that is the same principle applied to the consumption side of the equation. You have one party with significantly more bargaining leverage compared to the consuming party. Do you support allowing monopolies in our economy?

No one is hating on innovators. We are just saying people will innovate to make 3 million a year just as much as they would to make 10 million a year. There is no significant difference in the lifestyle that person can lead. Note that an innovator taking their money and investing it into the company to pay workers would not be taxed as income, which is one of the reasons a high tax rate is ideal, so that people use the money instead of hoarding the money. Otherwise, they begin to accumulate assets. Would you be fine if an innovator took control of all the wealth in America? and everyone else owned nothing and worked pay check to paycheck to simply earn the right to live from that individual? Sounds peachy.

Additionally, market rate is determined by the power disparity between the individuals doing the negotiating, not just the value added by each individual. The one with greater power receives greater benefits not because he is adding more value, but because he has more freedom in the choice. If one person has a backhoe and another has a shovel, the person with the backhoe can pay the person with the shovel to run his backhoe, and do no work whatsoever beyond providing resources for those that work. The person working the backhoe has the option to either run the backhoe for that individual or use his own shovel. Yes, he can make more running the backhoe than the shovel, but he isn't going to receive the value he adds because he doesn't have the same bargaining power.

This post has an overload of logic and common sense .. I am not sure ATPN is ready for it!

 

[CryptoMiner]

This thread is so amusing to read...




Second accounts are not allowed.


esquared
Anandtech Forum Director

 

[cytg111]

Look to Russia if you want an even more extreme model of accumulation of wealth vs. poverty. You dont want to go there.

 

[cytg111]

This thread is so amusing to read...

Slow? Is that you? .

 

[Collider]

Look to Russia if you want an even more extreme model of accumulation of wealth vs. poverty. You dont want to go there.

So the solutions is what, to redistribute the wealth?

Wealth redistribution is how Russia got to this point, it happened in 1917

 

[cytg111]

So the solutions is what, to redistribute the wealth?

Wealth redistribution is how Russia got to this point, it happened in 1917

Thats a tad hyperbolic and two a giant stretch of the imagination, is it not?

I once heard of this dude that began taking birth control pills, a few weeks later he had his arm torn off in a centrifuge.
Conclusion : If you dont want your arms torn off, dont do birthcontrol.
AM I RIGHT ?

 

[Collider]

This post has an overload of logic and common sense .. I am not sure ATPN is ready for it!

I think he got lost in his own circular logic.

The backhoe costs more than the shovel, no?

 

[DarthKyrie]

The biggest loophole of all is taxing all LTCG's above $450K/yr or so at a flat rate of 20%, even if you make $450K/day.

What happens, of course, is that enormous incomes simply can't be spent but are rather re-invested to create more gains. It drives the price of real assets like housing out of range of ordinary Americans more & more every day. It's what the ownership society is all about- owning the plebes.

It's also what Trumpsters are really upset about, anyway. They look at what they have vs what it takes to retire above the poverty level & it pisses them off, rightfully so. They've done all the things they were supposed to do to avoid that- hard work, frugality & all the rest of honest conservative values but they're still fucked & they know it. Must be the Libs, the blacks, the browns, the moochers, & the illegals dragging them down. It couldn't be the greed of the powerful pushing them down. That's unthinkable.

Hey, I remember a country that once had an ownership society that owned all the land and all the business and the people had no hope of escaping their overlords. These same people had a Tsar named Nicholas II who decided to crush the blossoming Constitutional Monarchy system that the people wanted, this same system existed in his Grandmother Victoria's own country the United Kingdom. I think all remember what happened in the Russian Empire a few years later in 1917. I seem to remember the regular people of Russia were called serfs because they technically weren't slaves they just could never leave their present situation and were tied to the same land that they didn't own.

I'd agree with that. And yes, I'd agree that Democratic presidents have, overall, been more fiscally responsible than Republicans in my lifetime for sure.

But definitely not through a 70% tax on high income earners. We are out of our minds if we think that is going to be in any way effective. France did that and it was an absolute failure as the wealthy re-registered their citizenship and tax shelters elsewhere. Trust me, if we pass that here in the US, it'll happen real quick.

And no, I'm not all about giving the wealthy everything they want.

I doubt any rich person would ever give up their United States citizenship willingly. You do know the benefits that that citizenship comes with correct? Americans are rescued by their fellow Americans all around the world. How often have you heard about the kidnappings and rescue of Americans abroad from all walks of life? How about all the Americans on vacation or living abroad when a natural disaster strikes and are evacuated by their fellow Americans? Why do you think people, rich and poor, come here from all over the world to become citizens? That citizenship comes with a cost and it's paid for in taxes and usually the richer you are the more benefits you gain so you should naturally pay more for those same benefits.

I think he got lost in his own circular logic.

The backhoe costs more than the shovel, no?

No shit Sherlock we all know that the larger and more complex tool costs more. There is this saying among the rich that goes like this: "The first million is the hardest."
As the owner of the backhoe, you are entitled to the profits of the backhoe, after taxes of course. If you become successful enough to need to hire someone to operate the backhoe so you can focus solely on finding jobs to keep the backhoe operating 52 weeks a year you are no longer entitled to all of those same profits because you need to pay the operator. If you don't pay the operator that's slavery and outlawed in this country. How large of a company would the person in question have to have in order to be able to pay themselves or an employee more than $10M a year? How many years would you need to actually work to set you and your family up for generations to come?

Do me a favor and ask yourself: What kind of work ethic and sense of entitlement do you really want your family to have in the future? Wouldn't you want them to at least know what it's like to work instead of sucking off the teat of your success? Just look at Paris Hilton for the results of generational wealth.

 

[cytg111]

Second accounts are not allowed.


esquared
Anandtech Forum Director

- Did I call it or what? Wheres my trophy? :