The Angry Rich

[Icepick]

Ahh, po' babies. If they don't like the dues, they're always free to leave the club. Awfully funny how few of them do, however. They want all the privileges and perks of living here -- including their fabulous wealth -- but they don't want to pay the tab when it comes due.

You took the words right out of my mouth. Well said.

 

[Icepick]

Apparently, he believes people have some sort of an obligation to do disagreeable or dangerous work cheaply.

Labor is the driving force behind all economic production while Capital/CEOs/Hedge funders etc is used to organize labor. Both have value.

I think the driving factor behind the point he's making is the very large disparity between the annual incomes of entry-level employees to the incomes of the persons at the top (CEO's, boards of directors and other highly paid corporate officers.) The wage disparity must be brought back into check if we are to preserve our system of government. If the economy continues to trend in the direction it has then there will be tougher times ahead for the majority of the working citizens.

 

[Icepick]

You REALLY think that a poor person on welfare and food stamps relies MORE government services than the CEO of a trucking company?

The poor person gets, let's say, $1500 per month, on the high end. He has virtually no assets, and therefore virtually nothing to protect.

The rich person gets the benefits of a built, (mostly) maintained, and (mostly) functioning interstate highway system. He enjoys these benefits for both himself and for his company. This highway system was very expensive to build and is also expensive to maintain.

The rich person gets the benefits of an in-place legal system and corresponding officers of the law, to protect his assets from the masses of jealous poor people. He enjoys these benefits for both himself and for his company. This legal system was very expensive to build and is also expensive to maintain.

The rich person gets the benefits of a built and maintained military to protect his assets from seizure by foreign powers. He enjoys these benefits for both himself and for his company. This military was very expensive to build and is also expensive to maintain.

How, by any stretch of the imagination, is the poor person using *MORE* government services?

Great comment. The rich absolutely benefit from our infrastructure just as much (if not more) than everyone else. The rich would love to continue enjoying these benefits while paying less and less in the form of taxes.

There is no class of people with a greater sense of ENTITLEMENT than the very wealthy in the United States.

 

[Darwin333]

Great comment. The rich absolutely benefit from our infrastructure just as much (if not more) than everyone else. The rich would love to continue enjoying these benefits while paying less and less in the form of taxes.

There is no class of people with a greater sense of ENTITLEMENT than the very wealthy in the United States.

LMAO

Like I said, I agree that taxes must go up but to equate the "entitlement" mentality of someone who thinks they are owed someone elses money to that of someone who thinks they deserve to keep more of their own money is beyond absurdity.

I still haven't gotten an answer to my previous question either. So we tax the rich for another $70B a year..... exactly where does the other $1,230,000,000,000 come from? If the tax was already in place it would have reduced this years deficit by 5%.

 

[Zebo]

LMAO

Like I said, I agree that taxes must go up but to equate the "entitlement" mentality of someone who thinks they are owed someone elses money to that of someone who thinks they deserve to keep more of their own money is beyond absurdity.

I still haven't gotten an answer to my previous question either. So we tax the rich for another $70B a year..... exactly where does the other $1,230,000,000,000 come from? If the tax was already in place it would have reduced this years deficit by 5%.

Where do you get 70 billion? Remove cap alone on SS you raise 500B - imagine applying it to all forms of income let alone raising marginal rates.

 

[Jhhnn]

LMAO

Like I said, I agree that taxes must go up but to equate the "entitlement" mentality of someone who thinks they are owed someone elses money to that of someone who thinks they deserve to keep more of their own money is beyond absurdity.

I still haven't gotten an answer to my previous question either. So we tax the rich for another $70B a year..... exactly where does the other $1,230,000,000,000 come from? If the tax was already in place it would have reduced this years deficit by 5%.

Tax increases are politically unpalatable if the wealthiest aren't seen to be paying more than the rest of us. As it is, they often pay less, something that's well known.

It's a great time for America's wealthiest citizens to lead by example, sacrifice for the country that's done so much for them, right?

Probably not. Many follow the Grover Norquist school of snivelling and raving, like the time he likened progressive taxes to the holocaust. They'd feel totally violated and all paying 20% capital gains tax on hundreds of millions in income, rather than 15%.

 

[Darwin333]

I think the driving factor behind the point he's making is the very large disparity between the annual incomes of entry-level employees to the incomes of the persons at the top (CEO's, boards of directors and other highly paid corporate officers.) The wage disparity must be brought back into check if we are to preserve our system of government. If the economy continues to trend in the direction it has then there will be tougher times ahead for the majority of the working citizens.

CEO's, especially the type you are talking about, are much fewer and far between than small business owners. When I started my company, I put up over half of my life savings in cash and got a loan for the rest of the money that I required with my house as collateral. I have had a few jobs go south on me that I, and I alone, had to cut a check out of my pocket to complete. I pay my workers well and while my own pay is not disproportionately larger (yet, I hope it to be one day) if and when that day comes I damn well deserve it. Not once have any of my workers said "Hey, here is some money to cover that $20K loss" or "Hey bud, want me to put my house up on that loan too so that you aren't carrying all of the risk or so we can buy a new machine".

The risk I have taken is not even in the same league as the risk that they have taken. Who the fuck are you to say that I shouldn't be rewarded much more for the risk that I have taken. Not to mention the fact that the risk I have taken provided them with the job they have now. When you put your OWN nuts on the table then you can talk about how "disproportionate" my pay is compared to theirs otherwise you can kiss my ass.

If my projections, which are on the conservative side (I hope), are correct then I will be considered in the same category as those CEOs next tax year. Don't get me wrong, I despise those bastard banksters and think they should be thrown in fucking jail for blatantly fraudulent acts that they committed but I will be getting lumped in with them and all those CEO's and that is fucked up.

The day the .gov, or anyone else, tells me what I can make is the day a whole lotta people lose their jobs and I close up shop. The day I feel the reward isn't worth the risk, same thing.

 

[Darwin333]

Tax increases are politically unpalatable if the wealthiest aren't seen to be paying more than the rest of us. As it is, they often pay less, something that's well known.

It's a great time for America's wealthiest citizens to lead by example, sacrifice for the country that's done so much for them, right?

Probably not. Many follow the Grover Norquist school of snivelling and raving, like the time he likened progressive taxes to the holocaust. They'd feel totally violated and all paying 20% capital gains tax on hundreds of millions in income, rather than 15%.

Still doesn't answer my question. You can tax the rich at 100%, take literally every dime of their income and you still can't close the budget gap.

Where does the other 95% come from?

 

[Darwin333]

Where do you get 70 billion?

The CBO.

The discussion is about ending the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy, that will get us about $70B a year.

I haven't ran any numbers on SS caps but $500B doesn't sound right. That would be like a 20% increase to the entire federal revenue (off the top of my head, I'll double check in a bit.... daughters having a sleepover for her Bday, 12 9 year old girls.... I am sure that I will be spending quite a bit of time searching for my sanity)

 

[Darwin333]

Where do you get 70 billion? Remove cap alone on SS you raise 500B - imagine applying it to all forms of income let alone raising marginal rates.

Sorry for the DP but like I said, chasing my sanity around. You got a link to that $500B number? Sounds like they did the same thing with it as they did with the current tax increase for the rich.

They love saying "our deficit is $1.3T so we can't let the wealthiest keep costing us $700B with the Bush tax cuts". The problem with that is, the $1.3T is for THIS year and the $700B number is over 10 years (that is where I get $70B a year). Are you sure that $500B isn't over a period of time longer than a single year? If its a CBO number, they always use 10 year numbers meaning it would net an average of $50B a year.

 

[cubby1223]

Where do you get 70 billion? Remove cap alone on SS you raise 500B - imagine applying it to all forms of income let alone raising marginal rates.

Will they receive more back from Social Security for the extra money they put in?

No?

Then what is the point of suggesting it? Just call it a tax hike, whether it comes in the form of fica tax or income tax, a tax is a tax.

But when you use the terminology "remove cap" you are implying that they are getting some sort of special privileged deal from the government, which is not true.