Inequality in American Income ... Something Wrong Here.
- Thread starter MA-Caver
- Start date
Steve
Mostly Harmless
@Lucky/Ballen, there is a huge amount of statistical information available on the irs.gov website. I don't have the time to retrace my steps, but I urge you to take a look on your own.
I mentioned earlier that I'd cut/paste a paragraph because I knew then that people would miss it: And I will say this one time just to be very, very clear, because this is where people got butthurt in the last thread. I don't think that "the rich" are screwing anyone. I don't think that "the rich" are inherently dishonest. I DO think that they're doing just fine and aren't being victimized. I ALSO think that rich people, like everyone else, should pay THEIR SHARE.
I'll just add, I'm not pissed about this. We're having a discussion. I'm not giving it much thought one way or the other outside of posting in this thread. Let's keep things in perspective.
@Sukerkin, thank you for looking those up.
Lucky, I take exception to this statement. What "feel" am I giving? I've gone out of my way to be explicit. I'm not talking about fraud, nor am I suggesting that what is being done is illegal. If anything, I'm saying that the tax code is broken top to bottom.
I mentioned earlier that I'd cut/paste a paragraph because I knew then that people would miss it: And I will say this one time just to be very, very clear, because this is where people got butthurt in the last thread. I don't think that "the rich" are screwing anyone. I don't think that "the rich" are inherently dishonest. I DO think that they're doing just fine and aren't being victimized. I ALSO think that rich people, like everyone else, should pay THEIR SHARE.
I'll just add, I'm not pissed about this. We're having a discussion. I'm not giving it much thought one way or the other outside of posting in this thread. Let's keep things in perspective.
@Sukerkin, thank you for looking those up.
LuckyKBoxer
Master Black Belt
@Lucky/Ballen, there is a huge amount of statistical information available on the irs.gov website. I don't have the time to retrace my steps, but I urge you to take a look on your own.
Lucky, I take exception to this statement. What "feel" am I giving? I've gone out of my way to be explicit. I'm not talking about fraud, nor am I suggesting that what is being done is illegal. If anything, I'm saying that the tax code is broken top to bottom.
I mentioned earlier that I'd cut/paste a paragraph because I knew then that people would miss it: And I will say this one time just to be very, very clear, because this is where people got butthurt in the last thread. I don't think that "the rich" are screwing anyone. I don't think that "the rich" are inherently dishonest. I DO think that they're doing just fine and aren't being victimized. I ALSO think that rich people, like everyone else, should pay THEIR SHARE.
I'll just add, I'm not pissed about this. We're having a discussion. I'm not giving it much thought one way or the other outside of posting in this thread. Let's keep things in perspective.
@Sukerkin, thank you for looking those up.
you keep mentioning in the thread how outraged you are that they are not paying income tax.
my point is there is a reasont hey are not paying income tax.
you seem to give the impression that you think that no matter what their expenses, or cases are that they should be paying income tax no matter what.
my point is they would if they were simply making the money without anything else... but they are filing tax returns, and obviously have some massive deductions.
I do not see the problem. If a person who is making over a million a year in income is not paying taxed legally its because he is putting that money to use in a whole hell of alot of ways that are doing a whole hell of alot more then a few hundred thousand dollars in taxes would be doing.
Steve
Mostly Harmless
I don't know how I can be more clear. I'm not outraged that the rich are rich. My belief now, as it was then, is that the rich and the poor are well taken care of and it's the rest of us in the middle who shoulder the most of the burden. My point now, as it was then, is that conversations on people who don't pay taxes should not focus just on the poor.
Where's my love, billcihak. You thank lucky, but I don't get any? I'm hurt.
Where's my love, billcihak. You thank lucky, but I don't get any? I'm hurt.
Twin Fist
Grandmaster
this is manifestly untrue, and it has been provent o be untrue, the "rich" maybe 10% of the population pay the MAJORITY as in OVER 50% of the tax revenues of this country
so THEY are shouldering MOST of the burden.
Steve
Mostly Harmless
Instead of retyping it all, I'll just cut/paste from earlier in this same thread.
The top 1% owns almost 40% of the stock, over 60% of the financial securities and over 60% of all business equity in the USA.
This same top 1% has a total of just shy of 40% of the privately held wealth in the USA.
The top 10% wealthiest individuals in the USA own almost 90% of investment assets in the USA, while the bottom 90% have over 70% of the debt.
The top 20% comprises 85% of the total net worth in the USA.
So, at the very least, qualify your statement somewhat. It's incredibly specious to suggest that the top 10% are paying out of proportion to their relative wealth and income.
LuckyKBoxer
Master Black Belt
so once again you are into punishing success, and forgiving failures..
I am not so into that, and that is not what I understand helped make our country great..
but it sure seems to be a big part of what is sinking us into a mediocre country fast.
Steve
Mostly Harmless
Oh jesus christ. No. I'm saying that, if they own most of everything, and make most of the income, it follows that they would pay most of the real tax dollars. Once again, just pointing out that they are not to be pitied. We do have a progressive tax system in the USA. It's specious, however, to simply say, "Hey, they pay over 50% of the taxes. Poor them!" If they make over 50% of the income in real dollars, they SHOULD be paying over 50% of the taxes. That doesn't mean that, relative to your income and mine, they are paying out of proportion to their wealth.
Why do you guys feel so bad for these guys? I don't get it. You have a hard on for screwing the bottom 20% or so, but seem hell bent on giving every benefit of the doubt to the top 20%. Is it hero worship? Envy?
I'll say again, it's about not giving a free pass to anyone and having a conversation about the tax code top to bottom to ensure that everyone pays THEIR FAIR SHARE.
LuckyKBoxer
Master Black Belt
so since you are all about equality and fairness...
since they own 60% of the wealth, and pay 60% of the taxes... or whatnot should they also have 60% of the say in how things are done?
I would be perfectly fine with saying those that pay taxes are allowed to vote, and those that do not pay taxes have no vote...
works for me.
Xue Sheng
All weight is underside
Meanwhile, back in DC, there is a move to neuter OSHA…
Hmmm :hmm: I wonder who will benefit and who will be hurt by that
First, Job Safety was not part of our negotiations nor our agreement so I must do nothing. And secondly, you must be a business owner for OSHA’s code to apply and you're not. And thirdly, the OSHA code is more what you'd call "guidelines" than actual rules. Welcome aboard the Ship of state, Miss Turner .
Hmmm :hmm: I wonder who will benefit and who will be hurt by that
First, Job Safety was not part of our negotiations nor our agreement so I must do nothing. And secondly, you must be a business owner for OSHA’s code to apply and you're not. And thirdly, the OSHA code is more what you'd call "guidelines" than actual rules. Welcome aboard the Ship of state, Miss Turner .
granfire
Sr. Grandmaster
N. You guys are right. I see that now . We are being so unfair to thetop ten percent. Poor, poor... poor rich people.
LOL, I am sorry, but I don't really can feel a lot of pity for somebody who's tax cuts exceed my net worth by a multitude...
I think that's when the middle class people argue for more fairness for the upper crust overlooks that disparity. yes, a dollar is still a dollar, but sheesh, I need my extra money, and not buy a 3500$ purse to fill up the purse closet....
Steve
Mostly Harmless
Not commenting on rich vs poor. More of an elementary school English lesson. Fair doesn't mean equal. Fair means equitable. Something that is equitable is, by definition, fair. On the other hand, many things that are equal are not fair.
Take a relative scale, for example. You earn $20,000 last year and pay $200 in taxes. I earn $200,000 and pay $2000 in taxes. Woohoo for me!
Daddy Warbucks earns $2 million and pays $20,000 in taxes. Would you consider that fair?While not equal, I would consider this very fair. The above is, essentially, a 1% flat tax. Daddy Warbucks paid as much in taxes as you earned all year. But it was equitable because, as a percentage of his income, he paid the same amount.
This is the point I'm making.
LuckyKBoxer
Master Black Belt
Not commenting on rich vs poor. More of an elementary school English lesson. Fair doesn't mean equal. Fair means equitable. Something that is equitable is, by definition, fair. On the other hand, many things that are equal are not fair.
Take a relative scale, for example. You earn $20,000 last year and pay $200 in taxes. I earn $200,000 and pay $2000 in taxes. Woohoo for me!
While not equal, I would consider this very fair. The above is, essentially, a 1% flat tax. Daddy Warbucks paid as much in taxes as you earned all year. But it was equitable because, as a percentage of his income, he paid the same amount.
This is the point I'm making.
I am all for this tax structure, lets implement this immediately and throw away that nonsense I have been paying on....
1% FML thats great. Steve for President!
lol
btw I have never said poor rich people, thats just been your knee jerk reaction everytime anyone doesnt agree with your assessment on whats fair for taxes here.
I think what is continually being pointed out to you is the rich are paying their share, and more and you seem to want to tax them even more on top of that.. you want to complain when you see a figure that you have no idea what it means, or how it got there... and want to automatically cast the rich people as evil.
Steve
Mostly Harmless
Well, I don't think 1% will get the job done, but if we account for all income, I think that the tax rate would go down for just about everyone.
Not in these words, but you have gone out of your way to dismiss any negative statement about the top 10%, even if that statement was only to suggest that they pay their fair share along with everyone else.
Interestingly, if you agree with my "tax structure" above, you ALSO agree with my assessment on what's fair for taxes. If anything, for 10 or 12 posts, I've only been trying to bring you along with me, knowing that you're arguing points I haven't made. We don't disagree on what's fair. It's just been a hard road convincing you of that. But in order to get to a flat tax, it's critical to understand that there are people, primarily at the very top and at the very bottom, who aren't paying up.
I'm simply pointing out that if a flat tax were advantageous to the rich, we'd have it already. Period. The power and influence that the wealthy wield is formidable.
As far as casting anyone as evil, I believe I've gone out of my way to do otherwise. My position is reasonable, and it's even one that you agree with. The disagreement, in my opinion, stems from you mistakenly presuming that the rich are above reproach, and that I have a beef against them. While I don't have a beef against them, I also believe that they are subject to scrutiny.
All over the world flat tax doesn't work. The simple thing in this example is that person one on $20,000 a year is living below the poverty line. Yet they still have to pay the $200 tax that they can't afford. You earn your $200,000 and pay $2,000 Woohoo! You have heaps to spend. Daddy Warbucks earns the $2M and invests $1m in an enterprise that generates $20,000 of tax savings and pays no tax. The people in the middle pay the most tax in most places.Not commenting on rich vs poor. More of an elementary school English lesson. Fair doesn't mean equal. Fair means equitable. Something that is equitable is, by definition, fair. On the other hand, many things that are equal are not fair.
Take a relative scale, for example. You earn $20,000 last year and pay $200 in taxes. I earn $200,000 and pay $2000 in taxes. Woohoo for me!
While not equal, I would consider this very fair. The above is, essentially, a 1% flat tax. Daddy Warbucks paid as much in taxes as you earned all year. But it was equitable because, as a percentage of his income, he paid the same amount.
This is the point I'm making.
BTW, tax is normally closer to 20-30%. 25% applied to your example of the minimum wage of $20,000 takes $5,000 and already on the poverty line that person now has not enough money to live. You pay $50,000 WooHoo! but can live on $150,000. Daddy Warbucks structures his money to get the deductions, because he can, and pays nothing.
Sorry, that's the real world. :asian:
Similar threads
