Jump to content

Fact check: The wealthy already pay more taxes


mettech

Recommended Posts

Some more info for all:

http://blogs.reuters.com/chrystia-freeland/2011/09/20/modern-capitalism-isnt-working-for-the-middle-class/

 

Chrystia Freeland» See all analysis and opinionModern capitalism isn’t working for the middle class

Sep 20, 2011 13:16 EDT

inShare.We know one thing for sure: the gap between rich and poor in the United States has widened in the past 30 years. In 2007 the top 1 percent of earners took home 18.3 percent of national income — that is more than two and a half times their level in 1973, when their share was 7.7 percent. Those at the top haven’t enjoyed such a big slice of the national pie since 1929. The middle-class dominated nation that the Greatest Generation inhabited has become as polarized as the plutocracies of Latin America or as America itself was during its fevered Gilded Age.

 

For a long time, the United States was in denial about its growing income gulf. The middle class clung to the old promise of mass affluence — and used home equity loans and credit card debt to make that dream real.

 

The elite, particularly the conservative intellectuals who have dominated the national economic debate since the Reagan era, insisted that growing income inequality was propaganda invented by the class warriors on the left, and cited robust consumer spending as evidence. In a 1998 speech at Jackson Hole at the annual gathering of American economists and economic policy makers, Alan Greenspan, then chairman of the Federal Reserve, argued that what mattered was what people could buy, not what they earned.

 

“Inequality in consumption, when measured by current outlays, is less than inequality in income,” he said. Greenspan illustrated his point with some unusual measures of inequality — ownership of consumer goods like dishwashers, microwaves and clothes-dryers. The comforting result? Even though inequality as measured in dollars was growing, when measured in dishwashers, microwaves and clothes dryers it was decreasing.

There seems to be some giant social experiment going on to see how far this can be pushed. Re. the efficacy of government spending - at best the results are mixed. Let's take 2 countries - one of which I am intimately familiar with, and the other which I am somewhat familiar, having now done 8 different projects there over the past 10 years: Japan has lowered and lowered interest rates since the Asian financial crisis in the mid-90s. They have a fabulous infrastructure. They also have lingering sluggishness and very large public debt. China, on the other hand, spent a much larger percentage of GDP on stimulus spending following the 2008 crisis than the US did - something like 3x as much as a percentage of GDP - and their economy is growing at 9-point-something %. For as supposedly discredited as stimulus spending is, there are certainly some major players (like the world's 2nd and 3rd largest economies) playing that card. The idea that you can slash the social safety net (or as Rove and Luntz have renamed it "entitlement") and turn 200,000 government employees out on the street and that is somehow going to revive the economy might be supportable by some arcane sophistry. It is certainly not supported by common sense. Likewise, the idea that tax cuts for the rich are going to do it - in the face of all evidence to the contrary also shows a considerable disconnect with reality.

 

sargent22.jpg

 

Maybe I'm missing something, but the idea that taxing an individual taxpayer on his income from dividends is "double taxation" because the corporation he received it from already paid taxes on the income that generated it makes about as much sense to me as saying I shouldn't have to pay taxes on my income from consulting fees because the person paying it to me already paid taxes on it when it was their income. Talk about a red herring. It simply favors the non-working rich. Nothing more, nothing less. Given the overall drift of the economy over the last 30 years, the wealthy and their water bearers screaming "class warfare" is about as convincing as Hitler accusing the Danes of belligerence before occupying them.

Edited by retro-man
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

... Unlike the poor???:angry2:

 

The poor doesn't pay fucking income tax... and they get a "earned income return" on top of paying little or no income tax.:finger:

 

When the CEO is making multimillion, those under him/her are making a mil..........and at the bottom they are making $8.00 WTF do you expect?

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

When the CEO is making multimillion, those under him/her are making a mil..........and at the bottom they are making $8.00 WTF do you expect?

 

I expect the people making $8.00 to learn a new skill or get educated so they can earn more than $8.00 an hour. Then the new workers just entering the work force can take their place.

 

Minimum wage jobs aren't careers unless you want them to be.

 

Do you think CEOs were handed these multimillion dollar jobs or do you think they worked hard for decades to get there?

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I expect the people making $8.00 to learn a new skill or get educated so they can earn more than $8.00 an hour. Then the new workers just entering the work force can take their place.

Minimum wage jobs aren't careers unless you want them to be.

Do you think CEOs were handed these multimillion dollar jobs or do you think they worked hard for decades to get there?

 

Maybe you haven't heard, there is a serious recession out there. Many jobs have been lost, good paying jobs. They have been replaced by mostly low paying jobs. Some have been lucky enough to get A job. Jobs that put food on the table, and maybe, maybe pay the ballooning mortgage.

 

Maybe you've heard about it on the news? it's been covered almost every night.

 

Your progression ( new workers just entering the work force can take their place.

) is now a fairy tale. People are going to college and are in massive debt..........and finding no jobs.

 

Have you heard of nepotism? The term wasn't coined recently. And it happens all the time. So many "dynasty's" are simply that: Will Smith: huge star (Jada (not so talented) and son (really? There isn't another kid as talented?) The Bush Family (only one of them should have been elected to anything). And how many businesses was the Shrub given.......and ran into the ground? My link

 

Truly there are some very talented CEOs who forge their own ground, and make their own reputations. Others? Not so much. It was their daddy's firm, or daddy's money that paid for the Ivy League Education. And daddy's friends who help.

 

If you don't think there is a network of the extremely wealthy, designed to keep power, money and privilege, you are naive or very well insulated from reality.

Edited by timmm55
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

... Unlike the poor???:angry2:

 

The poor doesn't pay fucking income tax... and they get a "earned income return" on top of paying little or no income tax.:finger:

Context. The Rich = The top 3% of income earners while The Poor = The rest of us..

Edited by jpd80
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Retro, LEARN A LITTLE MATH. If the richest guy in the room makes 1 million, and the poorest guy makes nothing, The poorest guy in the room isn't any poorer if the richest guy makes 2 million, but the gap increased. Mathematically, the 0 never moves, but the maximum does. And don't forget to adjust for inflation.

 

If you think the world would be better off without Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, and Mark Zuckerberg, Then that is your prerogative, but their success has nothing to do with your lot in life. The biggest driver to extreme income growth is the ability of a Bill Gates to make money in every country in the world. That was impossible until the technology of commerce created global markets. Most of the success you deride is the product of people bringing in money from outside of the USA.

 

Athletes continue to raise the bar by setting new world records. This continues to increase the performance gap between average people and gifted athletes. Should this be reason to protest?

 

Please explain SPECIFICALLY how making rich people poor is going to help poor people.

 

In China there was only 1 millionaire: Mao. Your goal of very little gap between the richest and poorest was achieved (don't count the number of bodies...) Today they are minting new millionaires on a daily basis. The gap has never been wider. Care to try to find any one on China that preferred the old way?.

 

More common sense: IF government spending really works to stimulate the economy, wouldn't the US with 14 trillion in debt be doing a bit better? Spending comes to politicians like swimming to a duck. If politicians could produce full employment by spending don't you think that unemployment would have been eliminated say... 10 TRILLION dollars ago?

Edited by xr7g428
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe I'm missing something, but the idea that taxing an individual taxpayer on his income from dividends is "double taxation" because the corporation he received it from already paid taxes on the income that generated it makes about as much sense to me as saying I shouldn't have to pay taxes on my income from consulting fees because the person paying it to me already paid taxes on it when it was their income. Talk about a red herring. It simply favors the non-working rich. Nothing more, nothing less. Given the overall drift of the economy over the last 30 years, the wealthy and their water bearers screaming "class warfare" is about as convincing as Hitler accusing the Danes of belligerence before occupying them.

 

Hitler? really...

 

Yes you are missing something. Here is the correct analogy: Your company (you) makes money. Your company (you) pays taxes on its earnings. Then you have to pay taxes, again, on what is left, after already paying the taxes once. It was always your money. The same pot of money is being taxed twice. NO ONE questions the truth of that. Some countries do not tax corporate income, but instead tax the earnings when they are paid out (dividends) to the owners of the company (shareholders). Some countries tax the earnings of the company directly, and then do not tax the dividends. The USA does a little of both. If you add the two tax rates together, then you will see that the total is actually higher than ordinary income.

 

Of all people you should be the one encouraging companies to pay out earnings in dividends. Warren Buffet doesn't like dividends. He likes companies to keep their cash, because when he buys a company the cash they have on hand is like the money on the hood of a new car; it is his rebate. When companies pay out dividends, they stop hoarding cash. The cash becomes available for use by others. Warren Buffet is not the working mans friend. He doesn't create jobs, he buys companies and then uses the money they make to buy other companies. He is the guy that is trying to cut costs and increase margins to increase profits. He doesn't create companies, he milks them for all that they are worth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe I'm missing something, but the idea that taxing an individual taxpayer on his income from dividends is "double taxation" because the corporation he received it from already paid taxes on the income that generated it makes about as much sense to me as saying I shouldn't have to pay taxes on my income from consulting fees because the person paying it to me already paid taxes on it when it was their income. Talk about a red herring. It simply favors the non-working rich. Nothing more, nothing less. Given the overall drift of the economy over the last 30 years, the wealthy and their water bearers screaming "class warfare" is about as convincing as Hitler accusing the Danes of belligerence before occupying them.

Just to add to xr7g428's point......

 

Remember that part of stock price is based on dividend yield. If the dividend is too low, the stock price falls. In some cases, companies have borrowed money to pay dividends to maintain shareholder value.

 

But, the cost of the dividends (or corporate taxes) must come from somewhere, since companies don't create money.

 

So, the only two sources of cash left (to cover the cost of dividends or profit taxes) are either from labor (read: reduced wages or benefits) or customer (read: higher prices). That's how they can avoid the "double-taxation" of profits and dividends; by passing the burden of those costs to labor or customer.

 

You do it yourself. Because if your net from consulting fees (after taxes) isn't enough to satisfy you (or survive on), then you raise your price to your customer. You are passing the burden of your taxes to him.

 

If I really wanted to twist things (ala "tax cuts for the rich"), I could say you did it to the State of Washington (and Ford) when you got rid of your T-bird and bought a Versa to reduce your fuel/property tax (and operating cost) burden.

Edited by RangerM
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My two cents....

I have no idea why that post would have deserved a "-1". I made it a zero.

 

Context. The Rich = The top 3% of income earners while The Poor = The rest of us..

And that Us vs. Them is the genesis of class warfare. Too many people are worried about "them" when they should be focusing on themselves.

 

I am by no means in the top 3%, but I'm doing what I can to get there. So long as I'm not hurting anyone, I don't see any reason to vilify that.

Edited by RangerM
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe you haven't heard, there is a serious recession out there. Many jobs have been lost, good paying jobs. They have been replaced by mostly low paying jobs. Some have been lucky enough to get A job. Jobs that put food on the table, and maybe, maybe pay the ballooning mortgage.

 

Maybe you've heard about it on the news? it's been covered almost every night.

 

Your progression ( new workers just entering the work force can take their place.

) is now a fairy tale. People are going to college and are in massive debt..........and finding no jobs.

 

Have you heard of nepotism? The term wasn't coined recently. And it happens all the time. So many "dynasty's" are simply that: Will Smith: huge star (Jada (not so talented) and son (really? There isn't another kid as talented?) The Bush Family (only one of them should have been elected to anything). And how many businesses was the Shrub given.......and ran into the ground? My link

 

Truly there are some very talented CEOs who forge their own ground, and make their own reputations. Others? Not so much. It was their daddy's firm, or daddy's money that paid for the Ivy League Education. And daddy's friends who help.

If you don't think there is a network of the extremely wealthy, designed to keep power, money and privilege, you are naive or very well insulated from reality.

 

Why do you have issues with a family passing the business to their children?:idea:

 

Don't forget... the military will hire a person at a reasonable wage and send you to school... That's how I received my education and a fair standard of living for my family.

 

People have options for a living wage... the problem is... many of the whiners would rather stay at home and cry about how mistreated they are and complain about how others have it better because of Daddy.

 

No jobs around... move to a different location.

Unable to afford to go to school... join the military or earn a scholarship.

Family doesn't have a business for you to work at... start your own.

 

To fucking stupid or lazy to figure how to succeed in life... vote Democrat. (Please note that I do not endorse the idea that all Democrats are lazy or stupid... but the Democrats are the party that supports such people)

Here is a post about the noted issue. Nepotism vs. Family Business?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

When the CEO is making multimillion, those under him/her are making a mil..........and at the bottom they are making $8.00 WTF do you expect?

 

 

I expect the people making $8.00 to learn a new skill or get educated so they can earn more than $8.00 an hour.

Do you think CEOs were handed these multimillion dollar jobs or do you think they worked hard for decades to get there?

 

 

Maybe you haven't heard, there is a serious recession out there. Many jobs have been lost, good paying jobs. They have been replaced by mostly low paying jobs. Some have been lucky enough to get A job. Jobs that put food on the table, and maybe, maybe pay the ballooning mortgage.

 

Maybe you've heard about it on the news? it's been covered almost every night.

 

Your progression ( new workers just entering the work force can take their place.

) is now a fairy tale. People are going to college and are in massive debt..........and finding no jobs.

 

I never said that was any type of solution to unemployment. Almost everyone who is successful today worked a minimum wage job at some point. But they somehow worked their way up the ladder either with outstanding work performance, higher education/training or both.

 

You want more? Work for it. You want to be lazy? You get minimum wage and/or welfare. Your choice.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know 55 year old engineers who can't get jobs in their field because companies don't want to pay wages commiserate with their education and experience levels. Forced to retiree before they wanted too, after decades of hard work.

 

If nobody wants to hire them then there must be a reason. Just because they have education and experience doesn't necessarily make them good engineers. Either way they retired and got a pension - and probably a nice severance package also. It happens.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What gets lost in communication is that a lot of executives, salary/bonuses reported are in fact success linked,

here's one example:

 

 

 

 

Q: Some Ford workers are upset about your compensation. (Mulally made $26.5 million in salary, stock options, bonus and other compensation last year). What would you say to an hourly worker who asks why your pay is fair when a new hire makes less than $30,000 a year?

 

A: My compensation is entirely tied to the success of Ford. The vast majority of my compensation is at risk, because the numbers that you see are only realizable if we profitably grow the corporation. And that's the way it should be. I believe in it so much that most of the management team and most of the salary team -- and also our wonderful employees that are represented by the UAW -- have had profit-sharing plans. We're continuing to talk together about how to align all of our compensation even more. Because the most important thing for everybody is that they get a chance to participate in the profitable growth that we deliver.

 

 

What a great reply.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If nobody wants to hire them then there must be a reason. Just because they have education and experience doesn't necessarily make them good engineers. Either way they retired and got a pension - and probably a nice severance package also. It happens.

Companies also prefer to hire younger people in their mid 30s to early 40s with some experience, the reason being that these people

are looking to develop and advance and become part of the management structure. People that are in their 50s not so much,

they may still be strong contributors but when the choice comes down you can bet the younger skilled usually get the nod...

 

It says more about corporate managers / politics than the individuals they are looking to employ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But you said it again. Not everyone who works for it will get it. So its still not a solution.

 

The only thing that's guaranteed is that you have the opportunity to succeed. It may be harder now than it used to be but it's still there for those who are willing to work for it.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is some help for all of us to atain the wealth that many here want to attack.:idea:

 

CNBC

 

So how long will it take until you're a millionaire?

 

If you start with an initial $10,000 investment and your portfolio grows by 5 percent every year, here's how much you need to save each month to reach your $1 million goal by age 70, according to Bankrate.com's calculator.

 

• 25-year-olds have to save $450 a month. That's just $15 a day for the rest of your working years.

 

• 35-year-olds have to save $850 a month.

 

• 45-year-olds have to save $1,700 a month.

 

• 55-year-olds have to save $4,000 a month. (Of course, with an average inflation rate of 3 percent, that $1,000,000 nest egg will only be worth $642,000 in today's dollars. So that means you'll likely wind up having to save even more.)

 

if(window.yzq_d==null)window.yzq_d=new Object();window.yzq_d['4.1bs0Je5hU-']='&U=12cvo84ho%2fN%3d4.1bs0Je5hU-%2fC%3d-1%2fD%3dFSQR%2fB%3d-1%2fV%3d0';Still, for those who start early and save often, becoming a millionaire doesn't have to be a pipe dream.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know 55 year old engineers who can't get jobs in their field because companies don't want to pay wages commiserate with their education and experience levels. Forced to retiree before they wanted too, after decades of hard work.

 

That's not forcing them to retire, they are choosing to retire because they have decided the salary available is not worth the effort of going to work. Being forced to retire means they can't find a job, not that they can't find a job at their desired pay.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's not forcing them to retire, they are choosing to retire because they have decided the salary available is not worth the effort of going to work. Being forced to retire means they can't find a job, not that they can't find a job at their desired pay.

 

Don't be silly. Everyone is entitled to keep their current job for life with annual pay raises regardless of their individual skill set, the number of jobs needed for someone with that type of skill set versus the number currently in the market, the company's financial position and future direction and anyone who thinks otherwise is just a greedy capitalist pig. :shades:

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, don't be silly and don't put words into others mouths. Just simply go around parroting the lies the RNC want you to believe.

 

Really? Show me where I added any words to the post I quoted from you...

 

Honestly, I have no idea what the RNC wants me to believe. I am a free-thinker, and don't need a political party to tell me what I should think, say, or do!

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really? Show me where I added any words to the post I quoted from you...

 

Honestly, I have no idea what the RNC wants me to believe. I am a free-thinker, and don't need a political party to tell me what I should think, say, or do!

 

Me, too. I'm not a republican or a democrat - I hate party politics.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Me, too. I'm not a republican or a democrat - I hate party politics.

 

Why would someone "-" this (I "+"ed it just to counteract it :))? Seriously, isn't this the way it should be? Vote for the best candidate based on goals and values, and who gives a $hit about what party he/she belongs to. Abolish parties and a hell of a lot more would get done in congress, but then I guess non-thinkers wouldn't know who to vote for, and the members of congress wouldn't know whether they should vote yay or nay.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why would someone "-" this (I "+"ed it just to counteract it :))? Seriously, isn't this the way it should be? Vote for the best candidate based on goals and values, and who gives a $hit about what party he/she belongs to. Abolish parties and a hell of a lot more would get done in congress, but then I guess non-thinkers wouldn't know who to vote for, and the members of congress wouldn't know whether they should vote yay or nay.

 

I think you answered your own question.

 

BTW - are you sure we weren't separated at birth?

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...