Top 1% pays 50% of the taxes.

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Budmantom

Originally posted by: Robor

Originally posted by: winnar111

Originally posted by: Deleted member 4644

You mean the same deductions and credits that rich get, but even more? Way more?

You mean the credits that phase out?

BTW, your hero Clinton had people paying higher tax rates before Bush slashed all the brackets.

Again? I need to make a 'winnar1111 but Clinton' sig. :roll:

Most people I know lived better under Clinton. Bush, not so much.

I lived good under Clinton, great under Bush let's see how we do under Obama.... not looking so good.

That's because the bill for the excesses we enjoyed under Bush is due.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Seeing how the poor are the unhealthiest segment of our population, I would say there is much they can do in the way of prevention. But no. They dont care. They only care when their lifestyle choice bites them in the ass.

Now mind you, this is a very general statement, and no need to post anecdotal evidence to the contrary. But its a fact-the poor dont give a shit about taking care of them selves. They only want handouts from those they bitch about when shit goes wrong.

I look around and it doesn't seem like the rest of society takes good care of themselves either, it's just that those who can afford it have the health services to keep them going longer. It's just not the poor who are fat asses, American's in general are gluttons and pigs. Most Americans over the age of 35 are just disgusting lard asses, rich, middle class or poor.

 

[blackangst1]

Originally posted by: nobodyknows

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: nobodyknows

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: nobodyknows

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: nobodyknows
You mean the richest people pay more in taxes then people who don't make enough money to be able to afford to see a doctor? Wow, how unfair!!

Are you talking about people who who don't make enough money to pay any taxes in the first place and can go to Health Care Centers and pay little or nothing for health care, health care that is subsidized by those who do pay taxes? How unfair, indeed.

So tell me, what kind of care do these places provide?

Heart surgery?

Cancer treatment?

Knee/shoulder or other joint repair/replacement?

Seeing how the poor are the unhealthiest segment of our population, I would say there is much they can do in the way of prevention. But no. They dont care. They only care when their lifestyle choice bites them in the ass.

Now mind you, this is a very general statement, and no need to post anecdotal evidence to the contrary. But its a fact-the poor dont give a shit about taking care of them selves. They only want handouts from those they bitch about when shit goes wrong.

Sorry. but that's only YOUR opinion and a "handy" one at that considering you chosen view..

I know plenty of people who are working full time and can't afford health insurance. I know of people who lost everything they had because they didn't have decent health insurance or their health insurance premiums went up so high after someone got a serious illness that they couldn't afford it.

Yes, not only is it handy, its fact. I see you cant point out anything I said as fallacy.

It's a fact they every poor person has a unhealthy life style? I suppose you also believe every rich person has a healthy life style? And it must be true because you say so?!?

:laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh:

Once again you fail at reading the word GENERALITY. I never used the word "every".

 

[borosp1]

Income tax is only one way too look at taxes. Most rich and ultra rich make there money off investments. Making money on dividents and stock/option trades is taxed at a much lower rate than income tax. Thats how Rich stay rich and poor stay poor. Poor and middle class cant afford to live of investments and they pay @ 35% tax rate while the rich and ultra rich who live off investment income pay 15% tax rate:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dividend_tax

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: borosp1
Income tax is only one way too look at taxes. Most rich and ultra rich make there money off investments. Making money on dividents and stock/option trades is taxed at a much lower rate than income tax. Thats how Rich stay rich and poor stay poor. Poor and middle class cant afford to live of investments and they pay @ 35% tax rate while the rich and ultra rich who live off investment income pay 15% tax rate:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dividend_tax

That is only for dividends and long term capital gains. Short term capital gains is taxed at your normal income tax rate. And your 35% tax rate is for people making over 350k a year, not poor or middle class.

Long term/dividend capital gains is actually 5% for lower income people.

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: TheSnowman

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: TheSnowman
The rich have far too many loopholes to get out of paying as much as they should, flat tax time. That isn't going to break anyone. And not that this is coming from someone in the top 5% percent, thanks to well invested inheritance, but that still puts my income at far less than the the swindling money grubbers at the top.

As I pointed out in another thread monthsd ago, most middle class families dont utilize the loopholes available to them. Having loopholes isnt the problem. Taxes paid isnt the problem. Even if the wealthy paid 50% of their income in taxes, those in the 70th percentile would STILL bitch, The problem is class envy. When I hear the poor and middle class complain about the rich in the real world, they arent talking about how much more they should pay in taxes. They talk about the fact they have lots and those complaining have less. THAT is the problem. The fact of the matter is, if you make 5 mill/yr, and only net 2.5 mill because of taxes, guess what-people will complain you have 2.5 million. Its class envy pure and simple.

You can't see the problem because you have you head in the sand pointing your finger at others rather than addressing my comments.

So youre problem is with loopholes the rich have? How about this. We make all the same loopholes available to everyone.

Oh wait...

Your statement of fact is akin to everyone can be a professional golfer.

Uh not really. Tax code is purposely complicated to make it unavailable to most just from a intellectual point, requiring lots of money to hire those to take full advantage of the laws and it's 95% written for investments and business - which most people don't have but work instead. Could they? Sure but it's remote.

Loopholes, a simple one, like taking accelerated depreciation , one year, on over 8800 GVW construction vehicles is what allowed wealthy Doctors, realtor's, and other businessmen to buy posh H2's and write their urban assault vehicle off in one year - fist off all you have to be self employed to take advantage of it - second you have to have an extra 60K lingering about you don't want to be taxed on third you have to know about it. That eliminates about 95% of population.

 

[borosp1]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: borosp1
Income tax is only one way too look at taxes. Most rich and ultra rich make there money off investments. Making money on dividents and stock/option trades is taxed at a much lower rate than income tax. Thats how Rich stay rich and poor stay poor. Poor and middle class cant afford to live of investments and they pay @ 35% tax rate while the rich and ultra rich who live off investment income pay 15% tax rate:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dividend_tax

That is only for dividends and long term capital gains. Short term capital gains is taxed at your normal income tax rate. And your 35% tax rate is for people making over 350k a year, not poor or middle class.

Long term/dividend capital gains is actually 5% for lower income people.

On a % How many poor and middle class live off investments vs. Rich and ultra Rich?

 

[blackangst1]

Originally posted by: Zebo

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: TheSnowman

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: TheSnowman
The rich have far too many loopholes to get out of paying as much as they should, flat tax time. That isn't going to break anyone. And not that this is coming from someone in the top 5% percent, thanks to well invested inheritance, but that still puts my income at far less than the the swindling money grubbers at the top.

As I pointed out in another thread monthsd ago, most middle class families dont utilize the loopholes available to them. Having loopholes isnt the problem. Taxes paid isnt the problem. Even if the wealthy paid 50% of their income in taxes, those in the 70th percentile would STILL bitch, The problem is class envy. When I hear the poor and middle class complain about the rich in the real world, they arent talking about how much more they should pay in taxes. They talk about the fact they have lots and those complaining have less. THAT is the problem. The fact of the matter is, if you make 5 mill/yr, and only net 2.5 mill because of taxes, guess what-people will complain you have 2.5 million. Its class envy pure and simple.

You can't see the problem because you have you head in the sand pointing your finger at others rather than addressing my comments.

So youre problem is with loopholes the rich have? How about this. We make all the same loopholes available to everyone.

Oh wait...

Your statement of fact is akin to everyone can be a professional golfer.

Uh not really. Tax code is purposely complicated to make it unavailable to most just from a intellectual point, requiring lots of money to hire those to take full advantage of the laws and it's 95% written for investments and business - which most people don't have but work instead. Could they? Sure but it's remote.

Loopholes, a simple one, like taking accelerated depreciation , one year, on over 8800 GVW construction vehicles is what allowed wealthy Doctors, realtor's, and other businessmen to buy posh H2's and write their urban assault vehicle off in one year - fist off all you have to be self employed to take advantage of it - second you have to have an extra 60K lingering about you don't want to be taxed on third you have to know about it. That eliminates about 95% of population.

Sorry, I didnt intend that. What I meant was, tax loopholes at certain income levels wont help those at lower incomes because of the thresholds they require to take advantage. Not every loophole is available to everyone (obvious statement is obvious). Its like kids and homes (neither of which I have at the moment-by choice)...I cant take those deductions at tax time because I dont qualify. I dont cry about it, it is what it is. But then I get other tax advantages others dont too.

 

[blackangst1]

Originally posted by: borosp1

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: borosp1
Income tax is only one way too look at taxes. Most rich and ultra rich make there money off investments. Making money on dividents and stock/option trades is taxed at a much lower rate than income tax. Thats how Rich stay rich and poor stay poor. Poor and middle class cant afford to live of investments and they pay @ 35% tax rate while the rich and ultra rich who live off investment income pay 15% tax rate:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dividend_tax

That is only for dividends and long term capital gains. Short term capital gains is taxed at your normal income tax rate. And your 35% tax rate is for people making over 350k a year, not poor or middle class.

Long term/dividend capital gains is actually 5% for lower income people.

On a % How many poor and middle class live off investments vs. Rich and ultra Rich?

Just because the rich pay a smaller amount on dividends doesnt mean they are keep the poor, poor. I hope you werent implying that. And do you honestly think if the wealthy were taxed at even 50% people would quit bitching? Do you think people would say "well, they pay their fair share". Hell no. People dont get their panties in a bunch because of their tax breaks. They get upset because they are rich. Its class envy is all.

 

[nobodyknows]

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: nobodyknows

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: nobodyknows

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: nobodyknows

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: nobodyknows
You mean the richest people pay more in taxes then people who don't make enough money to be able to afford to see a doctor? Wow, how unfair!!

Are you talking about people who who don't make enough money to pay any taxes in the first place and can go to Health Care Centers and pay little or nothing for health care, health care that is subsidized by those who do pay taxes? How unfair, indeed.

So tell me, what kind of care do these places provide?

Heart surgery?

Cancer treatment?

Knee/shoulder or other joint repair/replacement?

Seeing how the poor are the unhealthiest segment of our population, I would say there is much they can do in the way of prevention. But no. They dont care. They only care when their lifestyle choice bites them in the ass.

Now mind you, this is a very general statement, and no need to post anecdotal evidence to the contrary. But its a fact-the poor dont give a shit about taking care of them selves. They only want handouts from those they bitch about when shit goes wrong.

Sorry. but that's only YOUR opinion and a "handy" one at that considering you chosen view..

I know plenty of people who are working full time and can't afford health insurance. I know of people who lost everything they had because they didn't have decent health insurance or their health insurance premiums went up so high after someone got a serious illness that they couldn't afford it.

Yes, not only is it handy, its fact. I see you cant point out anything I said as fallacy.

It's a fact they every poor person has a unhealthy life style? I suppose you also believe every rich person has a healthy life style? And it must be true because you say so?!?

:laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh:

Once again you fail at reading the word GENERALITY. I never used the word "every".

You can't talk out of both sides of your mouth, state your exact position. Are you saying that since some poor people have unhealthy life styles they should all suffer for it?

Or are you saying that everyone who has had a health problem that might be related to an unhealthy lifestyle should be denied insurance, thereby being forced to pay their medical bills out of their own pocket?

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: Zebo

What do you mean by economic burden? If I understand you right, I'd say

no, economic burden is who actually bears the brunt of the tax.

the best way to show it is with a graph.

http://pics.bbzzdd.com/users/elfenix/burden.jpg

the yellow and purple boxes combined is the amount of taxes collected. the green triangles are the dead-weight loss because they are trades that would have been made without the taxes, but were not made. dead weight loss is why taxes should be held to the minimum level, because those are valuable transactions otherwise (that is, unless the government is better at making purchasing decisions than the rest of us).

as you can see, the yellow box is much larger than the purple box. say the lower bound of the box is at $5, the market clearing price is $5.05, and the price paid after taxes is $5.15. in this example the consumer is bearing all of the yellow box, and the producer is bearing all of the purple box, in taxes. that is, economically.

doesn't matter who the legal burden of the taxes is on, or whether it's calculated at the time of purchase or just figured in with the price, the economic burden remains the same. the legal burden is usually placed on one party or another for political or collectibility reasons, and does not necessarily reflect the economic burden.

and that goes for all transactions. employment is another example. just to simplify, assume you're paid only in wage, you've got a tax of 20%. it's shared equally by you and your employer as the legal burden. let's also say your pay is $10,000. take home is $9,000, but your employer's total cost is $11,000. obviously, if the taxes weren't there, your employer would be willing to pay you anything up to $11,000, and you'd be willing to work for anything $9,000 or greater. where exactly you would end up would be the result of negotiation between you and your employer. you'll want to be closer to the $11,000, and they'll want to be closer to the $9,000. may come out near $10,000, may not.

So your saying taxes are a zero sum gain other than dead weight. I disagree because of competition and new faces. That competition increases as you level playing field, decreases moving towards monopoly.

 

[borosp1]

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: borosp1

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: borosp1
Income tax is only one way too look at taxes. Most rich and ultra rich make there money off investments. Making money on dividents and stock/option trades is taxed at a much lower rate than income tax. Thats how Rich stay rich and poor stay poor. Poor and middle class cant afford to live of investments and they pay @ 35% tax rate while the rich and ultra rich who live off investment income pay 15% tax rate:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dividend_tax

That is only for dividends and long term capital gains. Short term capital gains is taxed at your normal income tax rate. And your 35% tax rate is for people making over 350k a year, not poor or middle class.

Long term/dividend capital gains is actually 5% for lower income people.

On a % How many poor and middle class live off investments vs. Rich and ultra Rich?

Just because the rich pay a smaller amount on dividends doesnt mean they are keep the poor, poor. I hope you werent implying that. And do you honestly think if the wealthy were taxed at even 50% people would quit bitching? Do you think people would say "well, they pay their fair share". Hell no. People dont get their panties in a bunch because of their tax breaks. They get upset because they are rich. Its class envy is all.

Here is a good article for everyone... Warren Buffet a Billionaire pays less taxes than his secretary:

"Mr Buffett said that he was taxed at 17.7 per cent on the $46 million he made last year, without trying to avoid paying higher taxes, while his secretary, who earned $60,000, was taxed at 30 per cent."

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/t...tax/article1996735.ece

 

[blackangst1]

Originally posted by: nobodyknows



You can't talk out of both sides of your mouth, state your exact position. Are you saying that since some poor people have unhealthy life styles they should all suffer for it?

Or are you saying that everyone who has had a health problem that might be related to an unhealthy lifestyle should be denied insurance, thereby being forced to pay their medical bills out of their own pocket?

Neither one. Nice try at putting words into my mouth though.

 

[nobodyknows]

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: borosp1

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: borosp1
Income tax is only one way too look at taxes. Most rich and ultra rich make there money off investments. Making money on dividents and stock/option trades is taxed at a much lower rate than income tax. Thats how Rich stay rich and poor stay poor. Poor and middle class cant afford to live of investments and they pay @ 35% tax rate while the rich and ultra rich who live off investment income pay 15% tax rate:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dividend_tax

That is only for dividends and long term capital gains. Short term capital gains is taxed at your normal income tax rate. And your 35% tax rate is for people making over 350k a year, not poor or middle class.

Long term/dividend capital gains is actually 5% for lower income people.

On a % How many poor and middle class live off investments vs. Rich and ultra Rich?

Just because the rich pay a smaller amount on dividends doesnt mean they are keep the poor, poor. I hope you werent implying that. And do you honestly think if the wealthy were taxed at even 50% people would quit bitching? Do you think people would say "well, they pay their fair share". Hell no. People dont get their panties in a bunch because of their tax breaks. They get upset because they are rich. Its class envy is all.

You just can't seem to give a straight answer to a straight question can you?

 

[nobodyknows]

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: nobodyknows



You can't talk out of both sides of your mouth, state your exact position. Are you saying that since some poor people have unhealthy life styles they should all suffer for it?

Or are you saying that everyone who has had a health problem that might be related to an unhealthy lifestyle should be denied insurance, thereby being forced to pay their medical bills out of their own pocket?

Neither one. Nice try at putting words into my mouth though.

Another non-answer. What's a matter? Questions too tough for you?

 

[blackangst1]

Originally posted by: borosp1

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: borosp1

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: borosp1
Income tax is only one way too look at taxes. Most rich and ultra rich make there money off investments. Making money on dividents and stock/option trades is taxed at a much lower rate than income tax. Thats how Rich stay rich and poor stay poor. Poor and middle class cant afford to live of investments and they pay @ 35% tax rate while the rich and ultra rich who live off investment income pay 15% tax rate:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dividend_tax

That is only for dividends and long term capital gains. Short term capital gains is taxed at your normal income tax rate. And your 35% tax rate is for people making over 350k a year, not poor or middle class.

Long term/dividend capital gains is actually 5% for lower income people.

On a % How many poor and middle class live off investments vs. Rich and ultra Rich?

Just because the rich pay a smaller amount on dividends doesnt mean they are keep the poor, poor. I hope you werent implying that. And do you honestly think if the wealthy were taxed at even 50% people would quit bitching? Do you think people would say "well, they pay their fair share". Hell no. People dont get their panties in a bunch because of their tax breaks. They get upset because they are rich. Its class envy is all.

Here is a good article for everyone... Warren Buffet a Billionaire pays less taxes than his secretary:

"Mr Buffett said that he was taxed at 17.7 per cent on the $46 million he made last year, without trying to avoid paying higher taxes, while his secretary, who earned $60,000, was taxed at 30 per cent."

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/t...tax/article1996735.ece

Ive seen that. Doesnt invalidate my past post though. Even if the wealthy payed a higher percentage of the nation's collected taxes than they already do, to most, it still wouldnt be enough.

And for the record. If her net taxes was 30% she's fucking something up badly. Very badly. If she made $60,000 her standard deduction assuming she's single would be $5450. That would put her taxable income at $54,550. Per the 2008 tax tables her tax would be $9988, or roughly 19%.

 

[blackangst1]

Originally posted by: nobodyknows

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: borosp1

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: borosp1
Income tax is only one way too look at taxes. Most rich and ultra rich make there money off investments. Making money on dividents and stock/option trades is taxed at a much lower rate than income tax. Thats how Rich stay rich and poor stay poor. Poor and middle class cant afford to live of investments and they pay @ 35% tax rate while the rich and ultra rich who live off investment income pay 15% tax rate:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dividend_tax

That is only for dividends and long term capital gains. Short term capital gains is taxed at your normal income tax rate. And your 35% tax rate is for people making over 350k a year, not poor or middle class.

Long term/dividend capital gains is actually 5% for lower income people.

On a % How many poor and middle class live off investments vs. Rich and ultra Rich?

Just because the rich pay a smaller amount on dividends doesnt mean they are keep the poor, poor. I hope you werent implying that. And do you honestly think if the wealthy were taxed at even 50% people would quit bitching? Do you think people would say "well, they pay their fair share". Hell no. People dont get their panties in a bunch because of their tax breaks. They get upset because they are rich. Its class envy is all.

You just can't seem to give a straight answer to a straight question can you?

Is this a trick question? I would say...close to zero.

 

[blackangst1]

Originally posted by: nobodyknows

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: nobodyknows



You can't talk out of both sides of your mouth, state your exact position. Are you saying that since some poor people have unhealthy life styles they should all suffer for it?

Or are you saying that everyone who has had a health problem that might be related to an unhealthy lifestyle should be denied insurance, thereby being forced to pay their medical bills out of their own pocket?

Neither one. Nice try at putting words into my mouth though.

Another non-answer. What's a matter? Questions too tough for you?

I answered. My answer was "neither". A direct answer to a direct question.

 

[nobodyknows]

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: nobodyknows

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: nobodyknows



You can't talk out of both sides of your mouth, state your exact position. Are you saying that since some poor people have unhealthy life styles they should all suffer for it?

Or are you saying that everyone who has had a health problem that might be related to an unhealthy lifestyle should be denied insurance, thereby being forced to pay their medical bills out of their own pocket?

Neither one. Nice try at putting words into my mouth though.

Another non-answer. What's a matter? Questions too tough for you?

I answered. My answer was "neither". A direct answer to a direct question.

You're just running scared if you can't give a better response then that.

You lose.

 

[nobodyknows]

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: nobodyknows

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: borosp1

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: borosp1
Income tax is only one way too look at taxes. Most rich and ultra rich make there money off investments. Making money on dividents and stock/option trades is taxed at a much lower rate than income tax. Thats how Rich stay rich and poor stay poor. Poor and middle class cant afford to live of investments and they pay @ 35% tax rate while the rich and ultra rich who live off investment income pay 15% tax rate:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dividend_tax

That is only for dividends and long term capital gains. Short term capital gains is taxed at your normal income tax rate. And your 35% tax rate is for people making over 350k a year, not poor or middle class.

Long term/dividend capital gains is actually 5% for lower income people.

On a % How many poor and middle class live off investments vs. Rich and ultra Rich?

Just because the rich pay a smaller amount on dividends doesnt mean they are keep the poor, poor. I hope you werent implying that. And do you honestly think if the wealthy were taxed at even 50% people would quit bitching? Do you think people would say "well, they pay their fair share". Hell no. People dont get their panties in a bunch because of their tax breaks. They get upset because they are rich. Its class envy is all.

You just can't seem to give a straight answer to a straight question can you?

Is this a trick question? I would say...close to zero.

Yeah, it's a trick question.

I just wanted to see you own the fact that there is going to be what you call "class envy" when a segment of the population lives off the money they inherited while others can't even make enough to afford the basics.

 

[OCedHrt]

Quoting from http://www.taxfoundation.org/news/show/250.html:
"The top-earning 25 percent of taxpayers (AGI over $64,702) earned 68.2 percent of the nation's income, but they paid more than four out of every five dollars collected by the federal income tax (86.3 percent)."

That puts me in the top 25% so I'm partially qualified to comment about this. While I would like to see lower taxes for me, I also see how it is infeasible to collect any more from those who make less. The solution is really to find out how to get these people to be worth more economically so that they can make more.

On a side note, I want to know how to get my taxes to 9.36% because I'm paying upwards of 30% federal.

 

[blackangst1]

Originally posted by: nobodyknows

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: nobodyknows

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: borosp1

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: borosp1
Income tax is only one way too look at taxes. Most rich and ultra rich make there money off investments. Making money on dividents and stock/option trades is taxed at a much lower rate than income tax. Thats how Rich stay rich and poor stay poor. Poor and middle class cant afford to live of investments and they pay @ 35% tax rate while the rich and ultra rich who live off investment income pay 15% tax rate:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dividend_tax

That is only for dividends and long term capital gains. Short term capital gains is taxed at your normal income tax rate. And your 35% tax rate is for people making over 350k a year, not poor or middle class.

Long term/dividend capital gains is actually 5% for lower income people.

On a % How many poor and middle class live off investments vs. Rich and ultra Rich?

Just because the rich pay a smaller amount on dividends doesnt mean they are keep the poor, poor. I hope you werent implying that. And do you honestly think if the wealthy were taxed at even 50% people would quit bitching? Do you think people would say "well, they pay their fair share". Hell no. People dont get their panties in a bunch because of their tax breaks. They get upset because they are rich. Its class envy is all.

You just can't seem to give a straight answer to a straight question can you?

Is this a trick question? I would say...close to zero.

Yeah, it's a trick question.

I just wanted to see you own the fact that there is going to be what you call "class envy" when a segment of the population lives off the money they inherited while others can't even make enough to afford the basics.

Thats the way it is! I dont know what your beef is....class envy, rich and poor, and even those who take advantage at the top AND at the bottom always have been, are, and always will be. So? In your perfect society everyone would be middle class or what?

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: blackangst1
Thats the way it is! I dont know what your beef is....class envy, rich and poor, and even those who take advantage at the top AND at the bottom always have been, are, and always will be. So? In your perfect society everyone would be middle class or what?

First, the words 'envy' and 'jealousy' have no place in discussing class issues, except in very narrow cases where they are*actually* relevant. 99% of the time, they are simply propaganda words used to avoid the real issues of fairness and to attack and discredit the vast majority of citizens' interests.

Second, in my ideal society, everyone would have the opportunity to be middle class, if they do the reasonable things needed to be, far more access than many have now.

Not everyone would do those things, and there would remain some poor people as a result, who could have basic needs met.

People would be properly incented, with carrots, rather than the current situation for many where there is needless suffering to extract every cent possible for the most wealthy.

There would remain rich people, but the word rich would be relatively changed; when our country was founded, the wealthiest man, George Washington, had a modest estate.

Times have changed and we can have people richer than that, but the taxes would greatly increase to prevent the sort of oligarchy we are faced with, that is getting worse.

We're on the road to the South American culture of oligarchy - which people don't seem to realiza that while they don't like it now, once it's in place is all but impossible to change.

 

[nobodyknows]

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: nobodyknows

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: nobodyknows

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: borosp1

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: borosp1
Income tax is only one way too look at taxes. Most rich and ultra rich make there money off investments. Making money on dividents and stock/option trades is taxed at a much lower rate than income tax. Thats how Rich stay rich and poor stay poor. Poor and middle class cant afford to live of investments and they pay @ 35% tax rate while the rich and ultra rich who live off investment income pay 15% tax rate:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dividend_tax

That is only for dividends and long term capital gains. Short term capital gains is taxed at your normal income tax rate. And your 35% tax rate is for people making over 350k a year, not poor or middle class.

Long term/dividend capital gains is actually 5% for lower income people.

On a % How many poor and middle class live off investments vs. Rich and ultra Rich?

Just because the rich pay a smaller amount on dividends doesnt mean they are keep the poor, poor. I hope you werent implying that. And do you honestly think if the wealthy were taxed at even 50% people would quit bitching? Do you think people would say "well, they pay their fair share". Hell no. People dont get their panties in a bunch because of their tax breaks. They get upset because they are rich. Its class envy is all.

You just can't seem to give a straight answer to a straight question can you?

Is this a trick question? I would say...close to zero.

Yeah, it's a trick question.

I just wanted to see you own the fact that there is going to be what you call "class envy" when a segment of the population lives off the money they inherited while others can't even make enough to afford the basics.

Thats the way it is! I dont know what your beef is....class envy, rich and poor, and even those who take advantage at the top AND at the bottom always have been, are, and always will be. So? In your perfect society everyone would be middle class or what?

Slavery used to be "the way it is" too.

Now if you have nothing of substance to add but your tired sterotypes and bourgeois cliche's please just STFU.

 

[blackangst1]

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: blackangst1
Thats the way it is! I dont know what your beef is....class envy, rich and poor, and even those who take advantage at the top AND at the bottom always have been, are, and always will be. So? In your perfect society everyone would be middle class or what?

First, the words 'envy' and 'jealousy' have no place in discussing class issues, except in very narrow cases where they are*actually* relevant. 99% of the time, they are simply propaganda words used to avoid the real issues of fairness and to attack and discredit the vast majority of citizens' interests.

Second, in my ideal society, everyone would have the opportunity to be middle class, if they do the reasonable things needed to be, far more access than many have now.

Not everyone would do those things, and there would remain some poor people as a result, who could have basic needs met.

People would be properly incented, with carrots, rather than the current situation for many where there is needless suffering to extract every cent possible for the most wealthy.

There would remain rich people, but the word rich would be relatively changed; when our country was founded, the wealthiest man, George Washington, had a modest estate.

Times have changed and we can have people richer than that, but the taxes would greatly increase to prevent the sort of oligarchy we are faced with, that is getting worse.

We're on the road to the South American culture of oligarchy - which people don't seem to realiza that while they don't like it now, once it's in place is all but impossible to change.

First, I agree "envy" and "jealousy" shouldnt be part of a class discussion; however, it is reality. Propaganda or not, the action of envy and jealousy take place all too often.

I agree with your second point about middle class. You touch on an interesting point: "if they do the reasonable things needed to be, far more access than many have now." Is the middle class holding down the poor? Now thats an interesting concept, isnt it?

I disagree with your intent of your third point aqbout the meaning of rich being changed. If wealth were static, I would agree. But it isnt. New wealth is created every year, and lost every year. The only way to enforce that idea would be to put limits on wealth. Is that what youre implying? I'll save further comment without fully understanding your intent here.

On your comment of getting closer to south america's oligarchy culture...having spent considerable time in 3 countries in S America I will say the same thing I say to those who think we are moving towards a third world country: are we moving towards it? Sure. But we are far, far away from resembling it.

When people get all up in arms about wealth, they (in some cases rightfully so) go after people like the Hilton kids. But the fact is, as the middle class is shrinking, some ARE moving into the upper class. There IS opportunity, and it isnt easy, nor should it be. According to the World Wealth Report that Merryl Lynch puts out, the number of NEW millionaires in 2007 increased by 6 percent, bringing the total number of millionaires in the USA to just over 10 million. In 2006 the number grew by almost 8%.

AFA the poor go, as you have acknowledged, there will always be. Does that mean I think all of those who are poor are so deservedly? Of course not. I also think there are those who arent rich, but should be also. But it is what it is. Life isnt fair, and no amount of legislation will change that. Shit happens, right? But to say there isnt enough opportunity, well, we can agree to disagree. One example is nursing. Its what I call the nicely paid job Americans dont want. Did you know there's a severe shortage of nurses in the US? Of course you did. Did you know that of ALL newly registered RN's (Im not talking about CNA's...those arent really nurses) 40% of those were immigrated last year? Why? Did you know there are colleges that will provide an almost free education for nursing, so long as you keep your grades up? Shit man. If I was looking for a career change or a way out of the lower class thats the route I would go. Many nursing opportunities in the US also will provide a signing bonus AND relocation! This is just ONE example I know very well.

Anyhow.