The Global Elite: Rigging the Rules That Fuel Inequality

[maineman]

Dear shit-for-brains; I work for a living. I don't cling to every moronic post you make thinking they need a rebuttal. The ignorance contained in most of what you post is sufficiently in evidence without the need for rebuttal.

Dunce.

so... you stick by your position that progressive income tax has nothing to do with adjusting the inequity of the distribution of wealth?

hahahahahahahahahahahahaha

and you WORK for a living? does your boss know you spend all day making a fool of your self on the world wide web?

 

[Truth Detector]

so... you stick by your position that progressive income tax has nothing to do with adjusting the inequity of the distribution of wealth?

hahahahahahahahahahahahaha

Dear moron; that was not my argument. You're welcome to find it if you can. But again, this is a testament to your incredible dishonesty and inability to comprehend what is being said. It was YOU who went off the rails about the progressive tax system for the purpose of equitably redistributing wealth; and that's simply moronic. But you're welcome to prove how the purpose of the progressive tax system was to redistribute wealth. Good luck with that shit-for-brains.

and you WORK for a living? does your boss know you spend all day making a fool of your self on the world wide web?

So you assume that when someone says they work for a living, they must be employed by someone. Another painfully stupid assumption by an incredibly ignorant small minded little man.

You're truly a charicature of the ignorance that infests those of a Liberal ideology.

The irony for you is that you think it is others who look foolish. That makes me laugh.

Carry on Commander dunce; you're the poster child of low information voters who gullibly follow and defend the inept dunce sitting in the White House.... yeah, you're a real winner.

LMAO

 

[maineman]

so... you stick by your position that progressive income tax has nothing to do with adjusting the inequity of the distribution of wealth?

Dear moron; that was not my argument. You're welcome to find it if you can.

FOUND IT!

He was responding to your moronic rant about “adjusting the obscene inequity of the distribution of wealth in this country” you dishonest moron. What the fuck does that have to do with a progressive income tax dunce?

who is the dunce here, you fucking brain dead bloviating moron?

 

[maineman]

hey truth deflector! green beans need stocking in aisle two!

 

[Truth Detector]

FOUND IT

who is the dunce here, you fucking brain dead bloviating moron?

You really are incredibly dumb aren't you? So in your retarded world, you believe that we have a progressive income tax for the purpose of redistributing wealth? Yes or no?

 

[canceled.2021.1]

again.... if you two morons want to debate the efficacy of progressive income tax, I remind you that that ship sailed a long long time ago. It was designed - from it's very inception to adjust the inequality of the distribution of wealth in this country. It reached its most "progressive" levels during the administration of Dwight D. Eisenhower where it was nearly two and a half times more "progressive" than it is today.

and it is interesting that the usually loquacious truth deflector has remained strangely silent ever since the idiocy of his remarks was exposed.

Well, if you mean that the country has accepted the notion of a progressive income tax, then yes you would be correct in the fact that that ship has sailed much like you did to Mexico. Be that as it may, with regards to its EFFICACY, you lefties are the ones bringing it up because you are screaming about income inequality AGAIN.

Might I remind you that the United States has the most progressive income tax system in the developed world. Yeah, it's true. But, don't take my word for it. You can read it all in this link I have provided for you.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...-the-world-its-government-is-among-the-least/

Now I know that this is from right wing think tank and not a normal bastion of liberal thought like ThinkProgress, but it will have to do.

So if we have the most progressive tax code in the developed world and income inequality is only increasing maybe something is failing? Ever think of that? No?

Spin away peaches.

 

[maineman]

You really are incredibly dumb aren't you? So in your retarded world, you believe that we have a progressive income tax for the purpose of redistributing wealth? Yes or no?

the "purpose"? I never said that. It DOES, however, impact the distribution of wealth. To say it does not is patently ridiculous. If you take more taxes from the wealthy than you do from the poor, the inequity in the distribution of wealth is altered. It's math.

 

[maineman]

Well, if you mean that the country has accepted the notion of a progressive income tax, then yes you would be correct in the fact that that ship has sailed much like you did to Mexico. Be that as it may, with regards to its EFFICACY, you lefties are the ones bringing it up because you are screaming about income inequality AGAIN.

Might I remind you that the United States has the most progressive income tax system in the developed world. Yeah, it's true. But, don't take my word for it. You can read it all in this link I have provided for you.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...-the-world-its-government-is-among-the-least/

Now I know that this is from right wing think tank and not a normal bastion of liberal thought like ThinkProgress, but it will have to do.

So if we have the most progressive tax code in the developed world and income inequality is only increasing maybe something is failing? Ever think of that? No?

Spin away peaches.

our income tax is much less progressive than it was in earlier years, under republican presidents.... and income taxes are not the only source of government revenue... many of the other taxes collected are NOT progressive, but rather regressive in nature.

 

[Truth Detector]

the "purpose"? I never said that. It DOES, however, impact the distribution of wealth. To say it does not is patently ridiculous. If you take more taxes from the wealthy than you do from the poor, the inequity in the distribution of wealth is altered. It's math.

Progressive taxation cannot "impact" the distribution of wealth. Where do you come up with this incredible nonsense?

It is painfully obvious you haven't the first clue of what you are ignorantly ranting about.

 

[Truth Detector]

So back to the moronic thread premise; who are these "global elites?" Are they elected? Do they huddle together and plot out how they can "rig" the rules to fuel inequality?

 

[maineman]

Progressive taxation cannot "impact" the distribution of wealth. Where do you come up with this incredible nonsense?

It is painfully obvious you haven't the first clue of what you are ignorantly ranting about.

if you take more taxes from the wealthy than you do from the poor, the distribution of wealth is impacted. To say otherwise is to deny basic math.

If citizen "A" earned a million dollars and citizen "B" earns a hundred thousand dollars, citizen "A" starts with ten times more pretax income than citizen "B". If you then tax citizen "A" at 90% and citizen "B" at only 20%, citizen "A" will end up with less than twice as much post tax income as citizen "B". And you say that such taxation does not impact the distribution of wealth? How big of a fool are you, really?

 

[Truth Detector]

if you take more taxes from the wealthy than you do from the poor, the distribution of wealth is impacted. To say otherwise is to deny basic math.

If citizen "A" earned a million dollars and citizen "B" earns a hundred thousand dollars, citizen "A" starts with ten times more pretax income than citizen "B". If you then tax citizen "A" at 90% and citizen "B" at only 20%, citizen "A" will end up with less than twice as much post tax income as citizen "B". And you say that such taxation does not impact the distribution of wealth? How big of a fool are you, really?

How does that distribute wealth? Does the "wealth" stolen by the Government now go to those who had less wealth?

Do you know the difference between "wealth" and income?

 

[maineman]

How does that distribute wealth? Does the "wealth" stolen by the Government now go to those who had less wealth?

Do you know the difference between "wealth" and income?

are you suggesting that income does not contribute to wealth?

 

[Truth Detector]

are you suggesting that income does not contribute to wealth?

I'm asking you; are they taxing wealth, or income? Is wealth the same as income? And if they are taxing "wealth", as you suggest, does that wealth transfer to those who are not as wealthy?

You're the presumed economics genius; I am merely asking you.

 

[maineman]

I never once suggested that progressive income tax taxes "wealth". I said it has an impact on the distribution of wealth and it clearly and undeniably does. For you to ask what progressive income tax has to do with the distribution of wealth is ridiculous.

moron.

 

[canceled.2021.1]

our income tax is much less progressive than it was in earlier years, under republican presidents.... and income taxes are not the only source of government revenue... many of the other taxes collected are NOT progressive, but rather regressive in nature.

Actually, you are incorrect. Did you know that in 1950 the marginal tax rate for those earning between $0 and $19,000 was 20%? Those numbers are adjusted for inflation BTW.

Today, someone making $19,000 not only pays ZERO in federal income taxes but they also get EITC in the form of a welfare payment. This conversation would go a lot better if you weren't ignorant of facts. How can it be in the advent of the internet that you lefties can be so misinformed? Do you have a different internet in Mexico?

 

[Truth Detector]

I never once suggested that progressive income tax taxes "wealth". I said it has an impact on the distribution of wealth and it clearly and undeniably does. For you to ask what progressive income tax has to do with the distribution of wealth is ridiculous.

moron.

I didn't say that you did. But in order for progressive tax rates to have an impact on wealth, isn't that saying the same thing?

But again, you didn't answer my questions, is wealth the same as income? And if taxes impact wealth, how is that wealth transferred to those who are not as wealthy?

Curious minds want to know. I'm feeling smarter just having this conversation with you; thanks!

 

[canceled.2021.1]

I never once suggested that progressive income tax taxes "wealth". I said it has an impact on the distribution of wealth and it clearly and undeniably does. For you to ask what progressive income tax has to do with the distribution of wealth is ridiculous.

moron.

But, you would be wrong.

Bill Gates is worth $40 billion. If you increase the top marginal rate to 90% does his wealth decrease? No it does not.

Yet you still cannot answer one basic question. If after 50 years of wealth transfers and over 100 years of progressive taxation you still have all of this income inequality, then what is the problem?

Second question. Why do you think you have a right to another persons property? What moral authority gives you the right to take someone else's property?

Let's say you have a bigger home than someone else, is that unfair? Should the government make it less fair by say forcing you to sell your home and have you move into a smaller home? Could the government force you to have those living in smaller houses move in with you? If not why not?

 

[Truth Detector]

Actually, you are incorrect. Did you know that in 1950 the marginal tax rate for those earning between $0 and $19,000 was 20%? Those numbers are adjusted for inflation BTW.

Today, someone making $19,000 not only pays ZERO in federal income taxes but they also get EITC in the form of a welfare payment. This conversation would go a lot better if you weren't ignorant of facts. How can it be in the advent of the internet that you lefties can be so misinformed? Do you have a different internet in Mexico?

Please don't confuse the professor; he is on the brink of telling me how progressive taxation distributes wealth. I don't want to miss out on this! .

 

[maineman]

Actually, you are incorrect. Did you know that in 1950 the marginal tax rate for those earning between $0 and $19,000 was 20%? Those numbers are adjusted for inflation BTW.

Today, someone making $19,000 not only pays ZERO in federal income taxes but they also get EITC in the form of a welfare payment. This conversation would go a lot better if you weren't ignorant of facts. How can it be in the advent of the internet that you lefties can be so misinformed? Do you have a different internet in Mexico?

what was the percentage differential in marginal tax rates between the highest and the lowest in 1950?