Top income brackets should be taxed at 99%. - Page 2 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

"It's the economy, stupid!"

Moderator: PoFo Economics & Capitalism Mods

Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#15048748
BigSteve wrote:
Very true, in fact.

I asked you why it wasn't fair to both taxpayers. You are obviously not capable of providing an answer. That would be okay if you would just admit that, but your tap-dancing and obfuscating reveals that you're not capable of doing that, either...



So this is your standard troll when you have nothing to say.. Pretend what I said didn't happen.

Please note that the decline in how much democracy we have matches the decline in the condition of the Republic.

Not a coincidence..
#15048766
late wrote:So this is your standard troll when you have nothing to say.. Pretend what I said didn't happen.

Please note that the decline in how much democracy we have matches the decline in the condition of the Republic.

Not a coincidence..


You have not even come close to explaining how a flat tax would destroy the country...
#15048774
BigSteve wrote:
You have not even come close to explaining how a flat tax would destroy the country...



You are ignoring what I did say.

Take 2 Stiglitz books, and call me in the morning you've finished them.
#15048781
@BigSteve doesn't understand how taxes work. Everyone pays the same rate. Your first $1000 is taxed at 0% regardless of whether you earn $900 per year or 9,000,000.

I'd like to implement a maximum wage since tax brackets always get eroded and allow new robber barons to assert themselves. A 12:1 ratio that limits executive pay to no more than 12 times the median income would massively reduce inequality not just by limiting pay but also by encouraging companies to pay their staff more.
#15048804
@AFAIK,
Elsewhere I have suggested that your max. wage/income be tied to the set poverty level. With the poverty level being the amount welfare pays, or a min. wage worker earns for working 30 or 40 hours a week.
This could be combined with your idea with the max. wage being whichever is less.
Obviously the multipliers would be different.

I also suggested a temporary wealth tax to more quickly take away the excess wealth the 0.1% have stolen over the last 30-40 years.
And I suggested that if you renounce your citizenship and leave that then you can't own shares in American Comp. or contribute to US elections {directly of indirectly}. And your children who are still US citizens can't inherit any of your money over $100K when you die.
#15048815
late wrote:You are ignoring what I did say.

Take 2 Stiglitz books, and call me in the morning you've finished them.


You have no point. You have no argument.

Your "opinion", therefore, is completely devoid of value...
#15048822
Why a Flat-Rate Tax is Unfair: A Quick Overview of America's Wealth Inequality and Tax Structure
The reason why a progressive tax structure works best is that it bases off someone’s ability to pay. For somebody that makes $25,000 dollars a year compared to someone that makes a million dollars, a tax rate at 10% is more damaging to their ability to survive off their income than someone who makes a million dollars. For example, after taxes (with a 10% tax rate), it is hard to survive on $22,500 compared to $900,000.
Image

Middle-class and working-class people are what stimulate economy because many are forced to spend the majority of their income on needs such as food and housing. Allowing them to keep more of their income, allows them to spend more which will increase the economy and the nation’s GDP.

Realizing the wealth inequality and the fact that middle-class and working-class people are what stimulate the economy, it should be at no shock that as wealth-inequality increases, the strength of the economy weakens.

Until Corporations and their CEOs pay their workers a living wage, and give up part of their income, they should be responsible for making up the taxes that many people are no longer able to pay.Because many companies like Walmart, pay such a low-wage that the taxpayers are forced to subsidize Walmart’s greed through welfare, and then those big-shot CEOs go on TV and complain that they have to pay taxes and criticize those who rely on social services like welfare to survive. The average Walmart cost taxpayers $400,000 per store.

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2013/5 ... -Structure
#15048828
Godstud wrote:
Why a Flat-Rate Tax is Unfair



Thanks.

Because a flat tax is so egregiously bad, and politically DOA, I don't usually bother getting into it in detail.

Let's just say that's another vote to bring back the joys of medieval living.
#15048910
Godstud wrote:The reason why a progressive tax structure works best is that it bases off someone’s ability to pay.


Actually, no.

Asking someone who's rich to pay more in taxes is a system which is based off their ability to pay...

For somebody that makes $25,000 dollars a year compared to someone that makes a million dollars, a tax rate at 10% is more damaging to their ability to survive off their income than someone who makes a million dollars. For example, after taxes (with a 10% tax rate), it is hard to survive on $22,500 compared to $900,000.


And if neither was taxed at all it would be harder to live off of $25K a year than off of $1 million. That in no way, though, explains why someone who has more should pay more.

If you're making $1 million a year, you're not living at $25K a year lifestyle. You're living a $1 million lifestyle. Those who want the rich to pay more are those who believe that the rich should live like the poor, and that's stupid.

You can't make a poor person wealthy by making a wealthy person poor...

Middle-class and working-class people are what stimulate economy because many are forced to spend the majority of their income on needs such as food and housing. Allowing them to keep more of their income, allows them to spend more which will increase the economy and the nation’s GDP.


I am probably what you would consider "rich".

If you think for a second that I don't spend money, and a lot of it, you're nuts. If I keep more of it, I'm going to spend more of it.

Or do you think rich people don't go shopping?

Until Corporations and their CEOs pay their workers a living wage, and give up part of their income, they should be responsible for making up the taxes that many people are no longer able to pay.


I used to sell guitars. I was a regional sales manager for a large guitar company. I did that for eight years. I averaged about $145,000 a year.

Selling fuckin' guitars.

When I had my best year, the owner of the company spent $3.5 million on a house on the southern California coast.

Should he have given up some of his income because I couldn't afford a $3.5 million house on the southern California coast?
#15049038
What Big Steve does NOT grok is that people who make a lot of money are using their economic power to suck income from the labor, efforts, or the sales of others and call it their income. They think that using their economic power to do this without limits is the "rational" think to do.
What they don't see is that in a Christian civilization it is considered a massive character flaw to redefine "ruthlessly selfish" as being "rational", And so think that acting in *that* rational way is not a character flaw.

You see Mainstream Economic schools of thought have taught them that if everyone acted in a ruthlessly selfish way all the time, then *EVERYONE* WOULD GET THE MOST OUT OF THE RESOURCES BEING CONSUMED. After all who can object to people being rational. And to *not behave in a rational way* is irrational, and who should want to behave in an irreational way.

Mainstream economists claim to have proven this. This being that a free market will be guided by the invisible hand to see to it the stuff produced is distributed in a way that everyone agrees to and has no regrets at all about it. The assumptions they use to prove this include a few that are false.
#15049272
late wrote:I already told you the punch line. It would end what there is of democracy, and slide most Americans toward poverty even faster than they are now.

And I provided a link if you wanted more.

Time to put the big boy pants on.


Taxing the rich into oblivion will not solve the problem of the poor. Eliminating the rich class and hence the income gap will not eliminate poverty.

In every society there will always be people at the bottom and it is the duty of the society care for this people. However, this people are not poor because someone else is rich.
#15049273
Taxing them into oblivion? You're shitting us, right, @Julian658 ?

YOU PAID TAXES. THESE CORPORATIONS DIDN’T.
At least 60 companies reported that their 2018 federal tax rates amounted to effectively zero, or even less than zero, on income earned on U.S. operations, according to an analysis released today by the Washington, D.C.-based think tank, the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy. The number is more than twice as many as ITEP found roughly, per year, on average in an earlier, multi-year analysis before the new tax law went into effect.

Company U.S. Effective Tax Rate
Amazon.com –1%
Delta Air Lines –4%
Chevron –4%
General Motors –2%
EOG Resources –7%
Occidental Petroleum –1%
Honeywell International –1%
Deere –12%
American Electric Power –2%
Principal Financial –3%
FirstEnergy –1%
Prudential Financial –24%
Xcel Energy –2%
etc.
https://publicintegrity.org/business/ta ... ons-didnt/
#15049275
Godstud wrote:Taxing them into oblivion? You're shitting us, right, @Julian658 ?

YOU PAID TAXES. THESE CORPORATIONS DIDN’T.
At least 60 companies reported that their 2018 federal tax rates amounted to effectively zero, or even less than zero, on income earned on U.S. operations, according to an analysis released today by the Washington, D.C.-based think tank, the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy. The number is more than twice as many as ITEP found roughly, per year, on average in an earlier, multi-year analysis before the new tax law went into effect.

Company U.S. Effective Tax Rate
Amazon.com –1%
Delta Air Lines –4%
Chevron –4%
General Motors –2%
EOG Resources –7%
Occidental Petroleum –1%
Honeywell International –1%
Deere –12%
American Electric Power –2%
Principal Financial –3%
FirstEnergy –1%
Prudential Financial –24%
Xcel Energy –2%
etc.
https://publicintegrity.org/business/ta ... ons-didnt/


Fuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuck. My effective rate for 2018 was 20%!

Aren't corporations legal people in the US? Shouldn't they pay the same as us real legal people?
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 9
EU-BREXIT

This is a dumb comparison because a change of the[…]

It's my firm belief that going green is no longer[…]

It's really hard, @Pants-of-dog to call someone […]

Rich's post could potentially be Anti-semetic, lo[…]