If we taxed the rich more, how would it affect job creation?

Page 7 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

JKing106

Platinum Member
Mar 19, 2009
2,193
0
0
Originally posted by: blackangst1
Originally posted by: JKing106
Originally posted by: blackangst1
Originally posted by: JKing106
Originally posted by: aeternitas
I would have to agree 100k is pretty much a fortune to the vast majority of people in the USA.. not to mention the people on Earth. Unless you are stupid and get yourself into huge debt because you buy over your means. Didnt a bunch of people do that and now banks are pissed off?

$100k per year. It astounds me that anyone can think that's a small sum of money. Maybe to a trust fund baby, or a socipathic social climber.

I dont think anyone is saying its a small amount of money. You called it "a fortune". Which it is FAR from. Its upper middle class.

It's a figure of speech. Jesus, you're dumb. COMPARITIVELY, it IS a fortune. Did you miss the part where half the population lives on less than $50k?

I honestly dont think you know the value of a dollar.

In 2006 there was an HBO documentary about giving a near homeless guy $100,000 with the premise they can follow his progress and how he spends it. He didnt blow huge amounts of money and it was gone in 9 months. He didnt even really buy anything expensive other than a pickup for like $35,000.

The point? $100k isnt as much as you think it is. Certainly no where near a "fortune".

Link to this documentary? Provide proof, not just "I saw this thing one time..."

Your argument is disengenuous. If you take someone who has literally nothing, and they try to reintegrate themselves into mainstream society, of course $100k is not going to last in this economy. Why the fuck did he spend $35k on pickup anyway? You can buy a damn good used one for $5k, or less. The guy was stupid with his money. Also, we were talking about $100k per year, not one lump sum. But you knew that, didn't you?

 

SunSamurai

Diamond Member
Jan 16, 2005
3,914
0
0
Originally posted by: blackangst1
Originally posted by: JKing106
Originally posted by: aeternitas
I would have to agree 100k is pretty much a fortune to the vast majority of people in the USA.. not to mention the people on Earth. Unless you are stupid and get yourself into huge debt because you buy over your means. Didnt a bunch of people do that and now banks are pissed off?

$100k per year. It astounds me that anyone can think that's a small sum of money. Maybe to a trust fund baby, or a socipathic social climber.

I dont think anyone is saying its a small amount of money. You called it "a fortune". Which it is FAR from. Its upper middle class.

Are you insane? Its only upper-middle class because you're looking at the rich without looking at how much of the worlds/USA population that is!

For the VAST MAJORITY of the USA and the WORLD, 100k a year is a TREASURE that would vault almost any family from rags to huge opportunities in life. It opens countless doors.

When my grandmother died and left 100k to each of her kids, it was a huge deal. My parents invested it and it has become by definition, a fortune to have had access to. I think peoplew like you don't really get where the vast majority of people in this country are, let alone the world. Youre off in your own little world where 100k = X amount of lavish vacations somewhere. Alot of us have not had a vacation for years and struggle to balance keeping the car working, with trying to get back into school and find a job thats more generally needed with the times.

Get a grip on reality!

 

JKing106

Platinum Member
Mar 19, 2009
2,193
0
0
Originally posted by: aeternitas
Originally posted by: blackangst1
Originally posted by: JKing106
Originally posted by: aeternitas
I would have to agree 100k is pretty much a fortune to the vast majority of people in the USA.. not to mention the people on Earth. Unless you are stupid and get yourself into huge debt because you buy over your means. Didnt a bunch of people do that and now banks are pissed off?

$100k per year. It astounds me that anyone can think that's a small sum of money. Maybe to a trust fund baby, or a socipathic social climber.

I dont think anyone is saying its a small amount of money. You called it "a fortune". Which it is FAR from. Its upper middle class.

Are you insane? Its only upper-middle class because you're looking at the rich without looking at how much of the worlds/USA population that is!

For the VAST MAJORITY of the USA and the WORLD, 100k a year is a TREASURE that would vault almost any family from rags to huge opportunities in life. It opens countless doors.

When my grandmother died and left 100k to each of her kids, it was a huge deal. My parents invested it and it has become by definition, a fortune to have had access to. I think peoplew like you don't really get where the vast majority of people in this country are, let alone the world. Youre off in your own little world where 100k = X amount of lavish vacations somewhere. Alot of us have not had a vacation for years and struggle to balance keeping the car working, with trying to get back into school and find a job thats more generally needed with the times.

Get a grip on reality!

Amen. Thank you.

 
Nov 29, 2006
15,606
4,055
136
Originally posted by: aeternitas
I would have to agree 100k is pretty much a fortune to the vast majority of people in the USA.. not to mention the people on Earth. Unless you are stupid and get yourself into huge debt because you buy over your means. Didnt a bunch of people do that and now banks are pissed off?

I wouldnt say 100k is a fortune, but it is a great income. Outside of the large major cities NY, LA, SF, etc 100k will take you far. Hell i only make half that am happy. Id shit myself if i got 100k a year.
 
Nov 29, 2006
15,606
4,055
136
Originally posted by: blackangst1
Originally posted by: JKing106
Originally posted by: blackangst1
Originally posted by: JKing106
Originally posted by: aeternitas
I would have to agree 100k is pretty much a fortune to the vast majority of people in the USA.. not to mention the people on Earth. Unless you are stupid and get yourself into huge debt because you buy over your means. Didnt a bunch of people do that and now banks are pissed off?

$100k per year. It astounds me that anyone can think that's a small sum of money. Maybe to a trust fund baby, or a socipathic social climber.

I dont think anyone is saying its a small amount of money. You called it "a fortune". Which it is FAR from. Its upper middle class.

It's a figure of speech. Jesus, you're dumb. COMPARITIVELY, it IS a fortune. Did you miss the part where half the population lives on less than $50k?

I honestly dont think you know the value of a dollar.

In 2006 there was an HBO documentary about giving a near homeless guy $100,000 with the premise they can follow his progress and how he spends it. He didnt blow huge amounts of money and it was gone in 9 months. He didnt even really buy anything expensive other than a pickup for like $35,000.

The point? $100k isnt as much as you think it is. Certainly no where near a "fortune".

But we are talking about $100k per year. NOT a one time lump sum. Sure a lump some of $100k wouldnt last very long.
 

Atreus21

Lifer
Aug 21, 2007
12,007
572
126
Why do you want government to raise taxes? On anybody?

Is it just that you don't think it's right someone makes more money than you do?
 

Mean MrMustard

Diamond Member
Jan 5, 2001
3,144
10
81
Are you insane? Its only upper-middle class because you're looking at the rich without looking at how much of the worlds/USA population that is!

For the VAST MAJORITY of the USA and the WORLD, 100k a year is a TREASURE that would vault almost any family from rags to huge opportunities in life. It opens countless doors.

When my grandmother died and left 100k to each of her kids, it was a huge deal. My parents invested it and it has become by definition, a fortune to have had access to. I think peoplew like you don't really get where the vast majority of people in this country are, let alone the world. Youre off in your own little world where 100k = X amount of lavish vacations somewhere. Alot of us have not had a vacation for years and struggle to balance keeping the car working, with trying to get back into school and find a job thats more generally needed with the times.

Get a grip on reality!

Yes! So it needs to be taxed MORE!

:roll:

 

blackangst1

Lifer
Feb 23, 2005
22,914
2,359
126
Originally posted by: JKing106
Originally posted by: blackangst1
Originally posted by: JKing106
Originally posted by: blackangst1
Originally posted by: JKing106
Originally posted by: aeternitas
I would have to agree 100k is pretty much a fortune to the vast majority of people in the USA.. not to mention the people on Earth. Unless you are stupid and get yourself into huge debt because you buy over your means. Didnt a bunch of people do that and now banks are pissed off?

$100k per year. It astounds me that anyone can think that's a small sum of money. Maybe to a trust fund baby, or a socipathic social climber.

I dont think anyone is saying its a small amount of money. You called it "a fortune". Which it is FAR from. Its upper middle class.

It's a figure of speech. Jesus, you're dumb. COMPARITIVELY, it IS a fortune. Did you miss the part where half the population lives on less than $50k?

I honestly dont think you know the value of a dollar.

In 2006 there was an HBO documentary about giving a near homeless guy $100,000 with the premise they can follow his progress and how he spends it. He didnt blow huge amounts of money and it was gone in 9 months. He didnt even really buy anything expensive other than a pickup for like $35,000.

The point? $100k isnt as much as you think it is. Certainly no where near a "fortune".

Link to this documentary? Provide proof, not just "I saw this thing one time..."

Your argument is disengenuous. If you take someone who has literally nothing, and they try to reintegrate themselves into mainstream society, of course $100k is not going to last in this economy. Why the fuck did he spend $35k on pickup anyway? You can buy a damn good used one for $5k, or less. The guy was stupid with his money. Also, we were talking about $100k per year, not one lump sum. But you knew that, didn't you?

http://www.associatedcontent.c...000_of_free.html?cat=9

Youre full of excuses arent you kiddo.
 

blackangst1

Lifer
Feb 23, 2005
22,914
2,359
126
Originally posted by: aeternitas
Originally posted by: blackangst1
Originally posted by: JKing106
Originally posted by: aeternitas
I would have to agree 100k is pretty much a fortune to the vast majority of people in the USA.. not to mention the people on Earth. Unless you are stupid and get yourself into huge debt because you buy over your means. Didnt a bunch of people do that and now banks are pissed off?

$100k per year. It astounds me that anyone can think that's a small sum of money. Maybe to a trust fund baby, or a socipathic social climber.

I dont think anyone is saying its a small amount of money. You called it "a fortune". Which it is FAR from. Its upper middle class.

Are you insane? Its only upper-middle class because you're looking at the rich without looking at how much of the worlds/USA population that is!

For the VAST MAJORITY of the USA and the WORLD, 100k a year is a TREASURE that would vault almost any family from rags to huge opportunities in life. It opens countless doors.

When my grandmother died and left 100k to each of her kids, it was a huge deal. My parents invested it and it has become by definition, a fortune to have had access to. I think peoplew like you don't really get where the vast majority of people in this country are, let alone the world. Youre off in your own little world where 100k = X amount of lavish vacations somewhere. Alot of us have not had a vacation for years and struggle to balance keeping the car working, with trying to get back into school and find a job thats more generally needed with the times.

Get a grip on reality!

Oh you wanna pull the world into this argument? Then fuck your bitching about the poor. Theyre WEALTHY compared to alot of the world. And fuck them complaining they dont have enough. They have LUXURY compared to alot of the world. You really want to go there with this argument? You act like *I* am rich or something. Fuck that too. You wanna talk about knowing about what its like growing up on public assistance? You wanna talk about 13 countries specifically and how they compare to the USA? I will sink you. I have more first hand knowledge than you do.

People like me you say?
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
348
126
Originally posted by: Atreus21
Why do you want government to raise taxes? On anybody?

Is it just that you don't think it's right someone makes more money than you do?

I have to at least give you credit that you are honest in exposing your utter lack of any clue about the liberal position.

Liberals don't 'like paying taxes' compared to magically having the society without them, but they might 'happily pay them' in terms of understanding why they're needed.

Imagine if you were talking with someone you have hired to do something you need - a plumber, a doctor - and you constantly tell them how you don't like paying them.

Well, of course you don't, but why do you keep complaining to them about it? There's no point - you either decide you should hire them and pay, or you don't hire them and pay.

Are you expecting them not to charge you?

You seem to be expecitng some magic way for society to work without taxes.

I think maybe it's just how people are clueless abut what makes a society function, and why some taxes and even wasteful spending are part of the system. No one's foudn a better way - show me any nation in the world, and I'll show you imperfections in the society in taxing and spending. So why are you constantly complaining not about the legitimate issues that deserve attention to be corrected when they happen, but about paying seeming any taxes, always wanting to pay 'less' no matter how low they are?

Liberals have a pretty simply approach - pay what makes sense, and consider whether it makes sense. Not just 'strip it to the stinking bone becuase we HATE HATE GOVERNMENT'.

Republicans spend too much, in giveaways to big business of tax dollars - not to mention policies that let big business cost too much to society in other ways as well (e.g., lax pollutions laws that make the taxpayers clean up the mess). Libertarians spend too little, unwittingly wanting to turn the US into the desert of Arizona or a Mad Max society, just oblivious to the needs of a modern society, often ideologically dominated. Who's Goldilocks in the middle? Democrats. No one's perfect, but there they are.

Yes, they've often spent big - but we've gotten a lot in return for it. People with medical care, a lower poverty rate, better education as much as it needs to improve - show me a societal compliaint, and I'mlikely to be able to show you where the Democrats have not gotten the spending they'd like to fix the problem and/or where Republicans have made it worse, from education to crime to business opportunities.
 
Nov 29, 2006
15,606
4,055
136
Originally posted by: Atreus21
Why do you want government to raise taxes? On anybody?

Is it just that you don't think it's right someone makes more money than you do?

I think what the OP was trying to get at was not an increase in tax on everyone. Just the ultra-rich. The middle-class and under would get lower taxes, therefor having more spending power to buy more crap from these ultra-rich. Its not like a tax increase on the rich will really make a difference in their lives. Oh Nos! Mr. Gates only has $20 BILLION now instead of $50 BILLION. What will he do? How can he survive?

The point is the ultra-rich have more money then they know what to do with and should be ashamed for not wanting to give more back to better the country that afforded them such luxuries.
 

blackangst1

Lifer
Feb 23, 2005
22,914
2,359
126
Originally posted by: Craig234
Originally posted by: Atreus21
Why do you want government to raise taxes? On anybody?

Is it just that you don't think it's right someone makes more money than you do?

I have to at least give you credit that you are honest in exposing your utter lack of any clue about the liberal position.

Liberals don't 'like paying taxes' compared to magically having the society without them, but they might 'happily pay them' in terms of understanding why they're needed.

Imagine if you were talking with someone you have hired to do something you need - a plumber, a doctor - and you constantly tell them how you don't like paying them.

Well, of course you don't, but why do you keep complaining to them about it? There's no point - you either decide you should hire them and pay, or you don't hire them and pay.

Are you expecting them not to charge you?

You seem to be expecitng some magic way for society to work without taxes.

I think maybe it's just how people are clueless abut what makes a society function, and why some taxes and even wasteful spending are part of the system. No one's foudn a better way - show me any nation in the world, and I'll show you imperfections in the society in taxing and spending. So why are you constantly complaining not about the legitimate issues that deserve attention to be corrected when they happen, but about paying seeming any taxes, always wanting to pay 'less' no matter how low they are?

Liberals have a pretty simply approach - pay what makes sense, and consider whether it makes sense. Not just 'strip it to the stinking bone becuase we HATE HATE GOVERNMENT'.

Republicans spend too much, in giveaways to big business of tax dollars - not to mention policies that let big business cost too much to society in other ways as well (e.g., lax pollutions laws that make the taxpayers clean up the mess). Libertarians spend too little, unwittingly wanting to turn the US into the desert of Arizona or a Mad Max society, just oblivious to the needs of a modern society, often ideologically dominated. Who's Goldilocks in the middle? Democrats. No one's perfect, but there they are.

Yes, they've often spent big - but we've gotten a lot in return for it. People with medical care, a lower poverty rate, better education as much as it needs to improve - show me a societal compliaint, and I'mlikely to be able to show you where the Democrats have not gotten the spending they'd like to fix the problem and/or where Republicans have made it worse, from education to crime to business opportunities.

The problem Craig is your comment "what makes sense". THAT is what people cant agree on. I dont think anyone minds paying taxes. As you've said, we get services etc out of it. Although I would add many of the social welfare programs created for the "poor" are just as a waste of money as corp welfare...but thats another thread. The problem is finding "what makes sense" to the majority of people.
 

BoberFett

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
37,563
9
81
Originally posted by: Craig234
I have to at least give you credit that you are honest in exposing your utter lack of any clue about the liberal position.

Haha, Craig thinks he's a liberal. The rest of post is easily ignored because he keeps trotting out this garbage about thinking he's liberal. I guess he's just a really authoritarian liberal.
 

blackangst1

Lifer
Feb 23, 2005
22,914
2,359
126
Originally posted by: soulcougher73
Originally posted by: Atreus21
Why do you want government to raise taxes? On anybody?

Is it just that you don't think it's right someone makes more money than you do?

I think what the OP was trying to get at was not an increase in tax on everyone. Just the ultra-rich. The middle-class and under would get lower taxes, therefor having more spending power to buy more crap from these ultra-rich. Its not like a tax increase on the rich will really make a difference in their lives. Oh Nos! Mr. Gates only has $20 BILLION now instead of $50 BILLION. What will he do? How can he survive?

The point is the ultra-rich have more money then they know what to do with and should be ashamed for not wanting to give more back to better the country that afforded them such luxuries.

Are we talking about the same Bill Gates who founded Microsoft? The one who gives more than any other single person on the planet? The one who for the last 10 years have donated 50-60% of his annual salary to charity? The one who was quoted as saying "I think all billionaires should give away the vast majority of their fortunes" and he himself is doing so? You mean THAT Bill Gates?

:confused:
 

Fern

Elite Member
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
173
106
Originally posted by: her209
If you are a foreigner who owns a share in a US company, do you pay personal income taxes to the US government on profits distributed to you?

Yes. They (the company paying the dividend) just withholds the tax (20% rate IIRC) and forwards it to the IRS.

Fern

 

Fern

Elite Member
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
173
106
Originally posted by: Craig234
Originally posted by: Fern
-snip-

Well, then, I guess what we need is a race to the bottom until the countries of the world are bidding against each other to pay the rich to live there. Otherwise they might leave!

Silly.

Extremes are often bad, such is the case with extremely high tax rates. And no, the answer isn't jumping to the other extreme of having the lowest rate in the world.

Common sense should indicate that you just need to be competitive (and a rate of 75% is anything but competitive).

Fern
 

Fern

Elite Member
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
173
106
Originally posted by: Craig234
Originally posted by: b2386
Let's say I was a tenant in an apartment paying $500 a month for rent. I had an extremely nice landlord who was always on top of things that needed to be fixed or otherwise taken care of. Suppose I received a notice from the landlord on day saying my rent was going to be doubled to $1000 a month. If I told the landlord I was moving out due to the increase in rent, am I somehow betraying the landlord by doing do? Even though he was a great guy who did provide me with a place to live, would you really expect me to be obligated to stay? By your logic, the landlord should throw me out on the street and keep any belongings I had stored inside the apartment. That does not make any sense.

If you make up specious, fallacious analogies that lack any common sense, are you a right-winger? Probably.

When the flaws are reasonably small, they can pretty easily be discussed. When they're bogglingly large, it's a waste of time to try.

There's nothing at all wrong with b2386's analogy; at least not to those of us who know how to (and actually have) moved abroad to live in other countries. If income tax rates were to triple as the OP suggests I'm confident you see quite a few people leaving this "apartment building', of course it wouldn't be those who rents were subsidized by others.

Fern
 
Nov 29, 2006
15,606
4,055
136
Originally posted by: blackangst1
Originally posted by: soulcougher73
Originally posted by: Atreus21
Why do you want government to raise taxes? On anybody?

Is it just that you don't think it's right someone makes more money than you do?

I think what the OP was trying to get at was not an increase in tax on everyone. Just the ultra-rich. The middle-class and under would get lower taxes, therefor having more spending power to buy more crap from these ultra-rich. Its not like a tax increase on the rich will really make a difference in their lives. Oh Nos! Mr. Gates only has $20 BILLION now instead of $50 BILLION. What will he do? How can he survive?

The point is the ultra-rich have more money then they know what to do with and should be ashamed for not wanting to give more back to better the country that afforded them such luxuries.

Are we talking about the same Bill Gates who founded Microsoft? The one who gives more than any other single person on the planet? The one who for the last 10 years have donated 50-60% of his annual salary to charity? The one who was quoted as saying "I think all billionaires should give away the vast majority of their fortunes" and he himself is doing so? You mean THAT Bill Gates?

:confused:

Yup the same one who still has more money then he knows what to do with. Guess he isnt giving enough. Plus i was just using his name as an example anyways. Insert any multi-millionaires name there and it applies. Grow up and stop with the lame rebuttals and talk about the topic at hand.
 

blackangst1

Lifer
Feb 23, 2005
22,914
2,359
126
Originally posted by: soulcougher73
Originally posted by: blackangst1
Originally posted by: soulcougher73
Originally posted by: Atreus21
Why do you want government to raise taxes? On anybody?

Is it just that you don't think it's right someone makes more money than you do?

I think what the OP was trying to get at was not an increase in tax on everyone. Just the ultra-rich. The middle-class and under would get lower taxes, therefor having more spending power to buy more crap from these ultra-rich. Its not like a tax increase on the rich will really make a difference in their lives. Oh Nos! Mr. Gates only has $20 BILLION now instead of $50 BILLION. What will he do? How can he survive?

The point is the ultra-rich have more money then they know what to do with and should be ashamed for not wanting to give more back to better the country that afforded them such luxuries.

Are we talking about the same Bill Gates who founded Microsoft? The one who gives more than any other single person on the planet? The one who for the last 10 years have donated 50-60% of his annual salary to charity? The one who was quoted as saying "I think all billionaires should give away the vast majority of their fortunes" and he himself is doing so? You mean THAT Bill Gates?

:confused:

Yup the same one who still has more money then he knows what to do with. Guess he isnt giving enough. Plus i was just using his name as an example anyways. Insert any multi-millionaires name there and it applies. Grow up and stop with the lame rebuttals and talk about the topic at hand.

So tell us what you think is fair then. Cap wealth? At what level? Cap earning? At what level? Obviously you would support capping wealth, since so many who give so much still have too much...you want to take more from them. So what are your caps?
 

Fern

Elite Member
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
173
106
Originally posted by: JKing106
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Originally posted by: JKing106
2009 Income Tax Rates

0 - 8350 = 0%
8350 - 33950 - 15%
33950 - 82250 - 25%
82250 - 171550 - 28%
171550 - 373950 - 33%
373950 - cap - 35%

Nobody making $100k is taxed 70%, and never will be. If the pre 1980 income tax bracket was reinvoked, you would have to make $3 million a year to be taxed 70%. Are you seriously going to tell me you can't make it on $1.2 million a year? $100k a year is fucking fortune, and will be a little more than $70k after taxes. Boo fucking hoo. Don't buy shit you don't need, and you can live like a king on that kind of money.

Where's all the outrage over corporate welfare? The subsidies cheaters? It's always about the negros and wetbacks, isn't it? Probably because you don't want to piss off the people you're hoping to get some crumbs from.

"Can I get some crumbs offa yo table, massa? My wife needs a new BMDubya!"
Say what??

1. 100k is NOT a fortune, especially if you have kids.

2. There are TONS of families with combined incomes of over 100k.

3. Who the fuck are you to tell people that they make too much money and that they should stop crying about it? Tell the poor people to get off their lazy asses and work more. Tell the poor people that they aren't getting anymore free cell phones and free healthcare and free food and free childcare etc etc.

BTW come back when you move out of mom and dads house and get a job and tell us if you think you are paying too much or too little in taxes.

1. Yes, it is. Again, don't buy shit you don't need. BMW's, swimming pools, jet ski's, $500k McMansions. You know, "keep up with the Jones'" shit. The stuff that makes poor people feel superior to poorer people.

2. So? Where did I say there weren't?

3. You sure as fuck don't mind taking advantage of free public school, free public roads, and free police of fire department, do you? Your hypocrisy if fucking amazing. Fuck everyone else for taking your precious money, but those lazy fucks better pay theirs!

BTW Come back when you stop bending over for Limbaugh/Hannity/Coulter/Fox, etc. and start using your brain to think for yourself. You're a fucking embarrassment to yourself, and you're too stupid to realize it.

Somebody making a $100K buys a $500k house? WTH, were you a mortgage loan officier back in the day? You can't buy a $500K on a $100K (before taxes) salary, much less all that other stuff too.

Like you (apparently) I live quite frugally, but $100K isn't much in many places. I moved to my current location from Manhatten (NYC). $100K sucks there (like it would in SF etc). $100K where I live now would be great, but you couldn't get me to move back to NYC for that.

BTW: Public schools, police and fire dept aren't free. I know, I pay a ton in real estate taxes - that's what pays for those services (not income taxes).

Fern
 

JKing106

Platinum Member
Mar 19, 2009
2,193
0
0
Originally posted by: blackangst1
Originally posted by: soulcougher73
Originally posted by: Atreus21
Why do you want government to raise taxes? On anybody?

Is it just that you don't think it's right someone makes more money than you do?

I think what the OP was trying to get at was not an increase in tax on everyone. Just the ultra-rich. The middle-class and under would get lower taxes, therefor having more spending power to buy more crap from these ultra-rich. Its not like a tax increase on the rich will really make a difference in their lives. Oh Nos! Mr. Gates only has $20 BILLION now instead of $50 BILLION. What will he do? How can he survive?

The point is the ultra-rich have more money then they know what to do with and should be ashamed for not wanting to give more back to better the country that afforded them such luxuries.

Are we talking about the same Bill Gates who founded Microsoft? The one who gives more than any other single person on the planet? The one who for the last 10 years have donated 50-60% of his annual salary to charity? The one who was quoted as saying "I think all billionaires should give away the vast majority of their fortunes" and he himself is doing so? You mean THAT Bill Gates?

:confused:

Bill Gates doesn't have an altruistic bone in his body. His "Foundation" is an investment firm, hiding behind a charity front:

"The foundation invests the assets that it has not yet distributed, with the exclusive goal of maximizing the return on investment. As a result, its investments include companies that have been criticized for worsening poverty in the same developing countries where the Foundation is attempting to relieve poverty. These include companies that pollute heavily and pharmaceutical companies that do not sell into the developing world.[46] In response to press criticism, the foundation announced in 2007 a review of its investments to assess social responsibility.[47] It subsequently cancelled the review and stood by its policy of investing for maximum return, while using voting rights to influence company practices."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B...linda_Gates_Foundation

While it does do "charitable" work, it's about the same thing Gates has always been about: profit.

Also, you say Bill gives away 50-60% of his salary away a year? Bill's salary is $1 million per year. His personal wealth is $56 billion. Boy, he's really generous, isn't he?

Bill Gates never gave one dime to charity before Microsoft's antitrust lawsuit. He's only doing this because he doesn't want to die being known as the greediest man who ever lived. He didn't come up with the idea of "giving away his billions" before he died. Andrew Carnegie did, and he walked the walk. We'll see if Bill does.

Oh, and one more thing. Bill's father, and Warren Buffington, both support the estate tax, or "death tax." Bill better get to spending all that money before "the gubment steals his money!"


 
Nov 29, 2006
15,606
4,055
136
Originally posted by: blackangst1
Originally posted by: soulcougher73
Originally posted by: blackangst1
Originally posted by: soulcougher73
Originally posted by: Atreus21
Why do you want government to raise taxes? On anybody?

Is it just that you don't think it's right someone makes more money than you do?

I think what the OP was trying to get at was not an increase in tax on everyone. Just the ultra-rich. The middle-class and under would get lower taxes, therefor having more spending power to buy more crap from these ultra-rich. Its not like a tax increase on the rich will really make a difference in their lives. Oh Nos! Mr. Gates only has $20 BILLION now instead of $50 BILLION. What will he do? How can he survive?

The point is the ultra-rich have more money then they know what to do with and should be ashamed for not wanting to give more back to better the country that afforded them such luxuries.

Are we talking about the same Bill Gates who founded Microsoft? The one who gives more than any other single person on the planet? The one who for the last 10 years have donated 50-60% of his annual salary to charity? The one who was quoted as saying "I think all billionaires should give away the vast majority of their fortunes" and he himself is doing so? You mean THAT Bill Gates?

:confused:

Yup the same one who still has more money then he knows what to do with. Guess he isnt giving enough. Plus i was just using his name as an example anyways. Insert any multi-millionaires name there and it applies. Grow up and stop with the lame rebuttals and talk about the topic at hand.

So tell us what you think is fair then. Cap wealth? At what level? Cap earning? At what level? Obviously you would support capping wealth, since so many who give so much still have too much...you want to take more from them. So what are your caps?

I have not seriously sat down and ran any kind of numbers. I personally think the 75% (per the OP) is quite high. Maybe 50-60% would suffice off the top of my head. I agree with the OP that if the middle class and below had less taxes and more money to spend that it would create jobs to keep up with the new demand from the cosumers since they are buying more goods and services.

I guess i just dont understand the insane drive some people have to be ultra-rich. And by that i mean you have more money then you could ever fathom spending and couldnt even spend fast enough to get rid of it. It just reminds me of the whole "e-penis" thing except with money. I would love to be rich where i could afford anything i could ever want without thinking about it. But any more then that seems a waste to me. I would rather give all that extra back to the county/people that made me rich in the first place and to help create a better society.