The Evil of Being Wealthy

[JohnEdward]

Who implement that, wasn't me? Often times when I would teach kids, some wouldn't have dues. Some kid's parents struggled and wanted to give their kid an opportunity no matter how much of a financial strain it was on the family. Some kids wanted to train, parents didn't have the money. Other kids did have the money but didn't want to pay, and would justify it by saying they didn't have the money. Or complain about the other kids who didn't have money and where discounted. I would pull out two $10 dollars in bills and give the rich kid $1.00 in change and the poor kid the rest. I would this this is the money you will use to pay dues for this and next month. I will change each of you 75 cents per month to train. The I would say to the rich kid after taking his money now how are you going to train the rest of the year with only a quarter. The I turn to the other kid will all the money, and say to the rich kid with the quarter how much should I him? Should I charge proportionally to income? I'd say when I change a poor kid too much they will not come back because they don't have the money too.

 

[WC_lun]

You're the 99%? Isn't that precious?
The top 1% that has been so reviled lately, pays OVER THIRTY EIGHT PERCENT of ALL Federal income taxes.
That isn't enough?

...and they make over 40% of the total money made in this country. I mean as long as we are throwing out stats.

 

[Big Don]

...and they make over 40% of the total money made in this country. I mean as long as we are throwing out stats.

They pay more with the Bush tax cuts (for the rich) than they did without them...
Why should 1% of the population pay nearly 40% of the taxes? Is that fair? I don't think so.

 

[Makalakumu]

In Atlas Shrugged, the character of James Taggert comes to mind when I think about this thread. How many James Taggerts do you see on Wall Street?

 

[elder999]

You're the 99%? Isn't that precious?

No, it's not precious. It's just the truth. I'm have a net worth of less than the $25 million I need to build my submarine. It'll never happen, unless I win the lottery, which I only play when the prize is that high-I play the lottery for "submarine money." Seriously :lfao:

Bill Gates just went to U.S. Submarines and bought one for that much a few years back. I don't resent it or begrudge it-I just offer it up as I offered up my own story-as a matter of perspective. He's in that 1%. We're somewhere near the top of the 99%. The gulf between that and the 1% is vast-far more vast than the gulf between us and the lower 50% of that 99%. Understand? Just perspective.

The top 1% that has been so reviled lately, pays OVER THIRTY EIGHT PERCENT of ALL Federal income taxes.
That isn't enough?

Well, no, Don-it's not. Bill Gates doesn't think so. Warren Buffet doesn't think so. The tax rates that they pay are the same one I pay at, and they're pretty much as low as they've ever been since WWII. Hell, during the Eisenhower administration-the Republican paradise of the 50's, a time of unprecedented economic growth, and the greatest growth of the middle class, we'd have been paying more than 90% income tax. While I don't expect or desire a return to that, with a U.S. national debt of $14 trillion dollars , some sort of increas makes sense. The Bush tax-cuts do not. Not under the current way taxes are structured, anyway. Something like Cain's "9,9,9" plan would be an even bigger income tax cut, but really boils down to what will essentially be a 20-30% tax rate for everyone but corporations, who will truly only pay 9%-and it's they that should be taxed most severely, in my opinion, not the Bill Gateses and Warren Buffets of this world, and certainly not people in my income bracket, or the middle class-it's simply criminal that GE can take jobs overseas and pay no income tax for years, and make a profit-and Boehner and my other fellow Republicans will complain about taxing "job creators." Of course, they'll bring those jobs back once the middle class has been reduced to poverty, and education is only for the elite.

That's why Obama made former GE CEO, Jeff Immelt his "jobs czar." :lfao:

We're all so screwed-most of us don't even know it enough to even bother asking for a reach around. :lfao:

 

[WC_lun]

They pay more with the Bush tax cuts (for the rich) than they did without them...
Why should 1% of the population pay nearly 40% of the taxes? Is that fair? I don't think so.

ummm Lets see, the top 1% pay 38% of the taxes while they get a tad over 40% of the total income. Your right, its not fair, there is a 2% descrepency there IF you believe everyone should pay at the same rate. Another way of looking at it is the people who get a little less than 60% percent of the total income in the US pay 62% of the taxes.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

So raise the taxes 3%, take that money and issue monthly stim checks to the folks making under 14k a year, who bothered to file tax returns. It'll equal an extra $700 a year per person then. Wealth, redistributed.

 

[Steve]

You're the 99%? Isn't that precious?
The top 1% that has been so reviled lately, pays OVER THIRTY EIGHT PERCENT of ALL Federal income taxes.
That isn't enough?

The top 1% accounts for about 35% of the total net worth in the country. The top 20% accounts for around 85% of the total net worth in the country.

The top 1% accounts for over 42% of the total financial wealth in the country. The top 20% puts that number up to about 93%.

The top 1% owns about 50% of the investment assets. The top 20% owns 88% of them.

The top 1% makes about 21% of the income. The top 20% makes over 60% of the income. In order to be a top 1%'er, you'd need to make about $380k per year. If you make over about $80k/year, you're in the top 20%.

In contrast, the top 1% only has 5% of the total debt. The top 20% has just over 25% of the total debt.

Are you part of the 80%? If you make less than $80k/year, you are part of the 80% that owes 75% of the debt, but makes only about 40% of the income (not 40% of what they make... as a group, total, adding all of your 80%'er income together, the sum is 40% of the total income for the country). Your investments total about 12% of all of the investments in the country. That includes your 401ks. And your total net worth is in the 15% range.

So, the answer, Don, is no. It's not enough. The concentration of wealth in our country is appalling and getting worse.

http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html
http://www.irle.berkeley.edu/cwed/wp/wealth_in_the_us.pdf

 

[billc]

Warren Buffet would have a lot more credibility if he wasn't a tax cheat...

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=45889

Funny thing is, it turns out Buffett was being… shall we say… disingenuous when he claimed his “leaders” never got around to asking for his “shared sacrifice.” His company, Berkshire Hathaway, has been fighting the IRS tooth and nail to avoid paying its federal tax bill for nearly a decade.
How much of the State’s rightful money has this hypocrite been clutching in a white-knuckled death grip? Oh, only about a billion dollars or so. Bill Wilson of Americans for Limited Government

tallies up the bill:
Using only publicly-available documents, a certified public accountant (CPA) detailed Berkshire Hathaway’s tax problems to ALG researcher Richard McCarty. Now, the American people have a better idea of how much in back taxes the company could owe Uncle Sam.
According to page 56 of the company report, “At December 31, 2010… net unrecognized tax benefits were $1,005 million”, or about $1 billion. McCarty explained, “Unrecognized tax benefits represent the company’s potential future obligation to the IRS and other taxing authorities. They have to be recorded in the company’s financial statements.”
He added, “The notation means that Berkshire Hathaway’s own auditors have probably said that $1 billion is more likely than not owed to the government.”

And it has been pointed out by numerous Pundits, that corporations are never going to actually pay taxes. They pass their tax burden onto the people who buy their products, so, increase the tax rate on corporations, and you are increasing the taxes on what you actually buy, further hurting your bottom line, not theirs.

 

[Steve]

Yeah. Warren Buffet's such a loser. A rich guy advocating tax reform and a accountability among the top 1%. What a jerk. Can you believe that guy? :BSmeter:

 

[billc]

It would be nice if he actually paid the taxes he already owes, and then pulled out his check book and signed over all the money he wants to the federal government. What exactly is stopping him from giving 80 percent of his wealth to the government now, without having to force an unfair tax increase on everyone else.

 

[Sukerkin]

Prompted by post#89, a pertinent point to consider is why corporations can so abrogate the rules of the free market game as to get away with that.

Capitalism's greatest virtue is that anyone is supposed to be able to play but that only the lucky and the good get to walk away from the table with more in their pocket than when they started. For that principle to work, you have to have something like a level playing field with barriers to entry to the game that are not prohibitive. Corporations and cartels skew that field such that they not only do not have to make an efficient profit to stay in business (they just manipulate markets and politicians (or consume other lesser businesses if things get too tight)) but they prevent others from entering the game.

 

[Steve]

It would be nice if he actually paid the taxes he already owes, and then pulled out his check book and signed over all the money he wants to the federal government. What exactly is stopping him from giving 80 percent of his wealth to the government now, without having to force an unfair tax increase on everyone else.

Or he could advocate for tax reform, which is his right. I don't know the guy, so I can't say whether everything he does is above board, but a rich dude advocating that rich dude's pay more taxes is like the president of the NRA advocating for a national gun registry.

It's a glimpse behind the curtain. I think it's great.

 

[Makalakumu]

Prompted by post#89, a pertinent point to consider is why corporations can so abrogate the rules of the free market game as to get away with that.

Capitalism's greatest virtue is that anyone is supposed to be able to play but that only the lucky and the good get to walk away from the table with more in their pocket than when they started. For that principle to work, you have to have something like a level playing field with barriers to entry to the game that are not prohibitive. Corporations and cartels skew that field such that they not only do not have to make an efficient profit to stay in business (they just manipulate markets and politicians (or consume other lesser businesses if things get too tight)) but they prevent others from entering the game.

Bravo!

The one thing I would add is that corporations and cartels use the government as a tool to skew the playing field. If it was just naked competition, without interference, they couldn't do what they do or grow to the leviathans they have because they can't control innovations.

Corporations can't exist like they do without the force of law...which is a legalized monopoly on the use of force.

I posted about Ayn Rand's character, James Taggert, in post 84 and what people need to understand is that real James Taggert's exist. These are not good people and they are very, very wealthy.

 

[Big Don]

Yeah. Warren Buffet's such a loser. A rich guy advocating tax reform and a accountability among the top 1%. What a jerk. Can you believe that guy? :BSmeter:

When he complains that he pays too little taxes, when his company is A BILLION DOLLARS in arrears, yeah, he's full of ****, alright.

 

[JohnEdward]

This relates to what others have said about the playing field skewed by corporations and cartels, and Wall Street where people get ridiculously wealthy and not being good people, Joe Kennedy, Charles Ponzi, Bernard Madoff, Ken Lay, Andrew Fastow, Jeff Skilling, etc. We know them because they got caught.

 

[Steve]

When he complains that he pays too little taxes, when his company is A BILLION DOLLARS in arrears, yeah, he's full of ****, alright.

Don't change the subject, Don. You said that those poor little rich guys in the top 1% were being picked on. Do you honestly believe that they're victims? After seeing the stark reality about how much the top 1% actually owns, do you still think they're victims?

 

[elder999]

 

[WC_lun]

Acording to law now, corporations are people. Some people need to pay thier fair share of freaking taxes! Oh wait, those people (corporations) make lots of money. Guess they don't have to follow the same rules as the rest of us.

 

[Steve]

Here's an interesting statistic. We all know that there are people who have an effective tax rate of 0%. But would it surprise you to learn that over 1,500,000 of those people had an adjusted gross income of over $50,000 in 2008?

Another 6 million people with an AGI of over $50k had an effective tax rate of under 5%.

Over 16 million people with an AGI of over $50k had an effective tax rate of between 5 and 10%.

It's not just corporations.