Raising Taxes On The Rich Would Reduce Income Inequality

Truth Detector said:
Still stuck on stupid I see; I asked you why income differential/inequality is an issue and how the rich are to blame? Try to be honest for once in your pathetic life and answer the question honestly without the dishonest stupidity that constantly erupts from your keyboard.

Again; what does LiHEAP have to do with taxing the rich to reduce income inequality?
Click to expand...

what is the title of this thread, moron?

LiHEAP is a government program that helps pay the heating bills of poor people, effectively RAISING their income. What does THAT have to do with reducing income inequality? It has everything to do with it... and YOU LIED about it. YOU ARE A LIAR. LIAR. shit-for-brains moron.
 
maineman said:
what is the title of this thread, moron?
Click to expand...

I can't say I am surprised you have to ask this question based on your dishonest efforts to avoid it. Thanks for proving my case.

But alas; you're to stupid to comprehend the irony in the above. LMAO

maineman said:
LiHEAP is a government program that helps pay the heating bills of poor people, effectively RAISING their income.
Click to expand...

Wrong again dunce; they stil have the SAME income. It is a subsidy used by corrupt politicians to buy the votes of dunces while ignoring the reason people are in poverty. It is a band aid that does NOTHiNG to reduce income inequality but makes Liberal dunces feel good about themselves by caring more than anyone else on the planet.

Why do these people need subsidies? Was it because the rich earn too much?

maineman said:
What does THAT have to do with reducing income inequality? It has everything to do with it... and YOU LIED about it.
Click to expand...

Wrong again shit-for-brains; it has nothing to do with it unless you can prove Bill Gates is the cause of the need for subsidies. Good luck with spinning that one shit-for-brains.

maineman said:
YOU ARE A LIAR. LIAR. shit-for-brains moron.
Click to expand...

LMAO; the irony you wallow in is way above your pay grade and intelligence level.
 
Truth Detector said:
Still stuck on stupid I see; I asked you why income differential/inequality is an issue and how the rich are to blame? Try to be honest for once in your pathetic life and answer the question honestly without the dishonest stupidity that constantly erupts from your keyboard.

Again; what does LiHEAP have to do with taxing the rich to reduce income inequality?
Click to expand...

Well, first you claimed people who take advantage of the LiHEAP program do not benefit from it, then you denied ever making that claim.

We are just trying to determine which time you were lying.

Of course you, being just another petty partisan crybaby, have denied doing just that even though your own contradictory words are right there for everyone to read for themselves.
 
Truth Detector said:
Still stuck on stupid I see; I asked you why income differential/inequality is an issue and how the rich are to blame? Try to be honest for once in your pathetic life and answer the question honestly without the dishonest stupidity that constantly erupts from your keyboard.

Again; what does LiHEAP have to do with taxing the rich to reduce income inequality?
Click to expand...

Anyone else notice that the dishonest dunces on the left still refuse to answer these questions? Why do you think that is?
 
Truth Detector said:
Of course you will; because as a hypocrite and dishonest dunce who whined about gotchya's on this thread, it is all you can glom onto after being exposed as an ignorant dunce who doesn't know what he is talking about in this thread.

You're stuck permentntly on that special brand of stupid you bring to every thread. You lost the argument, so now you glom onto an issue that you falsely portray and has nothing to do with the topic. This is what dishonest idiots do; avoid topics, avoid facts, advance strawman claims and wallow in a never ending circle of stupidity changing claims and asking the same stupid questions over and over again, in addition to never honestly answering any questions asked of them.

I'll prove it again; how has the income of Bill Gates or Steven jobs caused the income inequality Liberal dunces rail about? How many poor people did their efforts cause? How many low paying jobs were the result of their efforts?

The honest answer is that the wealth these individuals created as a result of their efforts and ideas created more wealth and LESS inequality. Yet dunces like you point your finger at them and declare their wealth as unfair and then stupidly demand the Government take more of that wealth foolishly claiming that this will miraculously reduce "income inequality" based on nothing more substantive than "because you say so" using your laughably stupid version of math and declarations of "after tax income".

It never occurs to you that when efforts like these are made, they will do NOTHING to change income inequality but instead, increase it. Income inequality is the result of Government efforts that destroy investment activity, restrict economic growth and make excuses for the failure of our educational systems to graduate literate and competent citizens.

Arrogant Liberal dunces constantly promote the idiotic claim that people are too stupid to take care of themselves and therefore, need Liberal intellectuals who should be entitled to run Government because they care more than anyone else on the planet to tell them what they need and provide it to them by taking it from those who earn it.

It is a stupid and failed agenda that has historically failed everywhere it is practiced. You haven't showed how income inequality is an issue caused by the rich; you've removed any doubt your a dunce of epic proportions who hasn't the first clue what you are talking about.
Click to expand...

BUMP
 
ZappasGuitar said:
Well, first you claimed people who take advantage of the LiHEAP program do not benefit from it, then you denied ever making that claim.

We are just trying to determine which time you were lying.

Of course you, being just another petty partisan crybaby, have denied doing just that even though your own contradictory words are right there for everyone to read for themselves.
Click to expand...

LMAO; you truly are a repugant dipshit.
 
Truth Detector said:
Still stuck on stupid I see; I asked you why income differential/inequality is an issue and how the rich are to blame? Try to be honest for once in your pathetic life and answer the question honestly without the dishonest stupidity that constantly erupts from your keyboard.

Again; what does LiHEAP have to do with taxing the rich to reduce income inequality?
Click to expand...

this thread doesn't BLAME income inequality on the rich. This thread merely opens for discussion whether or not raising taxes (raising marginal income tax rates and changing the way that capital gains and dividend income is taxed for example) could help reduce the income inequality between the rich and the poor, which has been growing at an alarming rate over the last thirty years.

Clearly from a mathematical perspective, raising the top end marginal tax rates and addressing the loophole that allow the rich to shelter large portions of their pre-tax earnings would do exactly what the OP suggests... it would reduce the income inequality between the high income citizenry and those in lower tax brackets.

Whether you think that is good fiscal/social policy or not is another question entirely.

LiHEAP is a program, funded by tax dollars, that offsets a recurring monthly expense of some very poor people living in colder areas of the US. Now you have said two different things here in this thread about that program. You have said that LiHEAP is NOT a benefit to its recipients, and you have said that you did NOT say that LiHEAP is not a benefit to its recipients. In fact, it is. It is just the same as if someone gave them an increase in their income. It is the state government actually helping them to pay one of their monthly bills. This frees up those funds that they would have been forced to use on heat to let them buy other things. It is one of the ways that increasing the taxes on high income Americans - while slightly reducing THEIR post tax incomes - those tax dollars could help more and more people on the bottom end of the scale, effectively raising their income by covering expenses that would normally be a drain on that income.
 
maineman said:
this thread doesn't BLAME income inequality on the rich. This thread merely opens for discussion whether or not raising taxes (raising marginal income tax rates and changing the way that capital gains and dividend income is taxed for example) could help reduce the income inequality between the rich and the poor, which has been growing at an alarming rate over the last thirty years.

Clearly from a mathematical perspective, raising the top end marginal tax rates and addressing the loophole that allow the rich to shelter large portions of their pre-tax earnings would do exactly what the OP suggests... it would reduce the income inequality between the high income citizenry and those in lower tax brackets.

Whether you think that is good fiscal/social policy or not is another question entirely.

LiHEAP is a program, funded by tax dollars, that offsets a recurring monthly expense of some very poor people living in colder areas of the US. Now you have said two different things here in this thread about that program. You have said that LiHEAP is NOT a benefit to its recipients, and you have said that you did NOT say that LiHEAP is not a benefit to its recipients. In fact, it is. It is just the same as if someone gave them an increase in their income. It is the state government actually helping them to pay one of their monthly bills. This frees up those funds that they would have been forced to use on heat to let them buy other things. It is one of the ways that increasing the taxes on high income Americans - while slightly reducing THEIR post tax incomes - those tax dollars could help more and more people on the bottom end of the scale, effectively raising their income by covering expenses that would normally be a drain on that income.
Click to expand...

Capital gains and dividend income is taxed equally for everyone no matter the income....totally just and fair. Just as goods cost the same for everyone and not priced
according to ones income....

It is only marginal rates that single out certain wage earners for higher, unjust tax rates.....we should be free to earn whatever we can, without be punished with
some punitive tax rate for success....

The principle where individuals receive compensation proportional to the amount of labor and talent they contribute to production is true in capitalism and yes, even socialism....

thats what makes this subject of "income inequality" so ridiculous......

its a manufactured problem whose sole purpose is to breed class warfare.


I be interested in hearing what tax loopholes are only available for certain income individuals and at what incomes do they kick in....
 
Last edited:
I am sure you think it's "fair" that capital gains and dividend income is taxed at a constant, but much lower rate than income... lower, that is, if you're in the top tax brackets.... if you are not, the tax benefit from those forms of income are not really realized.... sort of like charitable deductions. If a poor man gives a charity a chunk of money, he'll get about 10% of it back in the form of a reduction in his income tax. If a rich man gives that exact same chunk of money, he'll get back 35% of it, even though he can much more easily afford to be generous. And capital gains and dividend income, while technically "available" to all income levels, are almost exclusively the benefit of the wealthy. The top 1% enjoy 75% of the capital gain benefit. Another deal for the wealthy is the step up in basis for inherited assets. If your Daddy was a wealthy man and had bought a whole bunch of IBM stock back when it was selling for less than a dollar, if HE tried to sell it today, the size of the capital gain on that asset would be enormous. If he wills it to you, however, you're able to adjust the basis of that asset to today's current market value...and THEN turn around and sell those assets and not pay a penny in capital gains taxes. The tax code is rigged to benefit the rich, and all the while, they and their shills whine about how Unfair the tax code is. It's ridiculous.
 
A poor man doesnt pay income tax so no benefit unless it nudges up his earned income tax credit. Capital fains should be lower as the income that paid for that investment was already taxed at a marginal rate and instead of sitting on it like Scrioge McDuck it was invested to provide money for capital investment which = jobs. And msybe if thst poor guy had the skills he ciuld get one and no longer be poor.

maineman said:
I am sure you think it's "fair" that capital gains and dividend income is taxed at a constant, but much lower rate than income... lower, that is, if you're in the top tax brackets.... if you are not, the tax benefit from those forms of income are not really realized.... sort of like charitable deductions. If a poor man gives a charity a chunk of money, he'll get about 10% of it back in the form of a reduction in his income tax. If a rich man gives that exact same chunk of money, he'll get back 35% of it, even though he can much more easily afford to be generous. And capital gains and dividend income, while technically "available" to all income levels, are almost exclusively the benefit of the wealthy. The top 1% enjoy 75% of the capital gain benefit. Another deal for the wealthy is the step up in basis for inherited assets. If your Daddy was a wealthy man and had bought a whole bunch of IBM stock back when it was selling for less than a dollar, if HE tried to sell it today, the size of the capital gain on that asset would be enormous. If he wills it to you, however, you're able to adjust the basis of that asset to today's current market value...and THEN turn around and sell those assets and not pay a penny in capital gains taxes. The tax code is rigged to benefit the rich, and all the while, they and their shills whine about how Unfair the tax code is. It's ridiculous.
Click to expand...
 
maineman said:
I am sure you think it's "fair" that capital gains and dividend income is taxed at a constant, but much lower rate than income... lower, that is, if you're in the top tax brackets.... if you are not, the tax benefit from those forms of income are not really realized.... sort of like charitable deductions. If a poor man gives a charity a chunk of money, he'll get about 10% of it back in the form of a reduction in his income tax. If a rich man gives that exact same chunk of money, he'll get back 35% of it, even though he can much more easily afford to be generous. And capital gains and dividend income, while technically "available" to all income levels, are almost exclusively the benefit of the wealthy. The top 1% enjoy 75% of the capital gain benefit. Another deal for the wealthy is the step up in basis for inherited assets. If your Daddy was a wealthy man and had bought a whole bunch of IBM stock back when it was selling for less than a dollar, if HE tried to sell it today, the size of the capital gain on that asset would be enormous. If he wills it to you, however, you're able to adjust the basis of that asset to today's current market value...and THEN turn around and sell those assets and not pay a penny in capital gains taxes. The tax code is rigged to benefit the rich, and all the while, they and their shills whine about how Unfair the tax code is. It's ridiculous.
Click to expand...

Your charitable contribution example has a simple fix....a flat tax...as a percentage, no one would gain an advantage...the poor and the rich would enjoy the same percentage return.
The only reason the higher brackets get a higher percentage return is because they have paid a higher percentage tax in the first place....

capital gains and dividend income, are not "technically" available to all income levels, they are IN FACT available to all income levels, and are taxed equally...some people just happen
to have more capital gain and dividend income than others...just as weekly paychecks differ among everyone, thats not unfair, its reality....

On stocks....gains realized will be paid by estate tax....the estate is whats left over that can be passed on, but before that happens, the federal government takes its share. In 2010, the maximum rate was 35 percent; a few states levy an estate tax as well. Don't know what it is today....but tax will be levied one way or another....YOU as beneficiary of stock will not realize gains before you became the owner or be taxed again on Daddy's gains. The gov. has ways of getting its unfair share....

Inheritance tax occurs after the heirs have received their payouts from rich Uncle Billybob. It is a tax on the amount received and is paid by the heir. Inheritance taxes are levied by the states. This means that in many cases an estate is taxed twice -- first by the federal estate tax, then by the state inheritance tax

I'm sure you, being the rich guy with so much excess money, have gone to you financial adviser to make your tax share as little as possible....even though you say
its so unfair to others with lesser assets....
 
Last edited:
NOVA said:
Your charitable contribution example has a simple fix....a flat tax...as a percentage, no one would gain an advantage...the poor and the rich would enjoy the same percentage return.
The only reason the higher brackets get a higher percentage return is because they have paid a higher percentage tax in the first place....

capital gains and dividend income, are not "technically" available to all income levels, they are IN FACT available to all income levels, and are taxed equally...some people just happen
to have more capital gain and dividend income than others...just as weekly paychecks differ among everyone, thats not unfair, its reality....

On stocks....gains realized will be paid by estate tax....the estate is whats left over that can be passed on, but before that happens, the federal government takes its share. In 2010, the maximum rate was 35 percent; a few states levy an estate tax as well. Don't know what it is today....but tax will be levied one way or another....YOU as beneficiary of stock will not realize gains before you became the owner or be taxed again on Daddy's gains. The gov. has ways of getting its unfair share....
Click to expand...

they are "available", but, as I said, 75% of the benefits from capital gains tax write-offs go to the top 1%. I mean... Rolls Royce's are available to everybody, but what the fuck does that really mean.

You are wrong about the step up in basis....google it if you need to.
 
Capital gains are not denued technically or otherwise. If you have no dollars to invest its because you made that choice. One can get by on far fewer dollars than you do. May not be pleasant but it can be done.

NOVA said:
Your charitable contribution example has a simple fix....a flat tax...as a percentage, no one would gain an advantage...the poor and the rich would enjoy the same percentage return.
The only reason the higher brackets get a higher percentage return is because they have paid a higher percentage tax in the first place....

capital gains and dividend income, are not "technically" available to all income levels, they are IN FACT available to all income levels, and are taxed equally...some people just happen
to have more capital gain and dividend income than others...just as weekly paychecks differ among everyone, thats not unfair, its reality....

On stocks....gains realized will be paid by estate tax....the estate is whats left over that can be passed on, but before that happens, the federal government takes its share. In 2010, the maximum rate was 35 percent; a few states levy an estate tax as well. Don't know what it is today....but tax will be levied one way or another....YOU as beneficiary of stock will not realize gains before you became the owner or be taxed again on Daddy's gains. The gov. has ways of getting its unfair share....

I'm sure you, being the rich guy with some much excess money, have gone to you financial adviser to make your tax share as little as possible....even though you say
its so unfair to others with lesser assets....
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top