Wealth Redistribution

The reason for posting this article is not just to show the great disparity of wealth but to counter the frequent and bogus argument which goes something like this; "If we tax the rich we'll all end up poor."

As the article explains the majority of Americans have no idea how much money the wealthy actually have. This has a bearing on people making erroneous comments such as "The deficit is too high. We can't afford a medical plan. We can't tax the wealthy any more." The truth is we can tax the wealthy more. A lot more and they will still be wealthy.

The country can afford a medical plan. The country can afford to feed and house the needy. The money is there. Unfortunately, people don't know/understand that.

(Excerpt) In the poll, the vast majority of Americans across the political, gender and wealth spectrum displayed a markedly skewed understanding of how America's money is divided. On average, respondents though that the rich hold only 58% of the nation's wealth, 32% less than their actual holdings. They thought that the middle class controls 13% of the country's wealth, more than three times their actual holdings. As for the bottom 40% of the population, the assumption was that the lower class and poor own a measly 9% of the country's wealth. In reality, these two groups control about one thirtieth of that amount. (End)
http://www.dailyfinance.com/story/a...-wealth-redistribution/19684224/?ncid=webmail

You're a good example of what America is blessed with, unbelievable stupidity! This stupidity combines with an inane jealously of others, who you view as unfairly having more than you do. In your rather simple mind, you think a person who makes over $250k a year, has more money than they need, and are probably getting more than they deserve. You fail to consider the majority of these people are small business owners, who provide nearly 90% of all private sector jobs in America. They also have expenses which go along with making $250k per year, that you and I don't have. They have to pay for accountants and CPA's, lawyers, and brokers... they have to entertain clients, participate in civic functions, contribute to charities, and take care of every relative they have, because hey, Uncle Joe makes $250k a year! AND...They are currently taxed higher than anyone else in America. They payer higher utility bills, higher mortgage payments, higher grocery bills, higher property taxes, and since they mostly live in upscale neighborhoods, they pay higher school and local taxes as well. It's not cheap to be "rich!"

But, this brings me to another misconception you're having. Just because someone has an earned income of $250 a year, doesn't mean they are wealthy. The truly "rich" person, does not have to earn an income at all, they already have wealth, they don't need to earn an income. In fact, some rich people are so wealthy, they actually try to LOSE money each year, so they can take a tax write-off. They buy fledgling baseball teams, and things like that, so that when they pay their CPA to figure up their taxes, the dividends they earn for the year, are offset by loss, and they don't end up getting soaked. People who are earning an income of $250k a year, are perhaps trying to become wealthy, but they are not "the rich!" Again, most of them are small business owners, who have a multitude of costs associated with running a business.

Here's an interesting fact for you to ponder. Allowing the Bush tax cuts to expire, will generate approximately $700 billion from the people making over $250k per year, but a whopping $2 trillion from the "middle class!" So who do the Bush tax cuts effect the most? Who will pay the most if they expire? The middle class! In the meantime, you have burdened the small business owners, who create 90% of the private sector jobs, with a massive tax increase. Now, what do you think they are going to do about that? Do you think they are going to move to the ghettos? Do you think they are going to sell the Jaguar and drive a Pinto? Do you think they are going to eat beans and bologna rather than steak and lobster? NOPE... they are going to hire fewer people, expand their businesses less, and maybe layoff some folks. If they don't really NEED to earn any more income, they might just cash it all in and retire to the Bahamas. But in NO case, does anything they will do, help the middle class or encourage jobs and growth, and the economy will continue to decline.

You need to overcome your jealousy of others, and realize, a slight decrease in their tax rates, or even just (in this case) keeping their tax rates stable, will encourage them to expand their business and thus, create new jobs. Instead of trying to punish people for their success, try rewarding them, and encouraging more success, and you will see jobs created, businesses grow, and prosperity emerge. If you were making $250k a year, and next year, you will make $350k, that's $100k more you have to spend on stuff... people who sell you that stuff make money, people who make that stuff earn more, everyone prospers. Take $100k away, and the opposite will happen.
 
I'd be a lot more sympathetic to class warfare had I not read $90,000 in NY and $58,000 in Hawaii will get you food stamps. WTF
 
You're a good example of what America is blessed with, unbelievable stupidity! This stupidity combines with an inane jealously of others, who you view as unfairly having more than you do. In your rather simple mind, you think a person who makes over $250k a year, has more money than they need, and are probably getting more than they deserve.

It has nothing to do with a person who makes over $250k a year having more than they deserve. It has to do with the poor having less than they need.

The US produces enough food to feed every citizen. If someone can not afford proper food there is something wrong. The same with housing. We have the technology and resources to house every citizen. There is no reason to have people sleeping on the street or in tents in a park because they lost their home/job.

If you are aware of another way to solve those problems other than tax people who have money please share it.

In the meantime, you have burdened the small business owners, who create 90% of the private sector jobs, with a massive tax increase. Now, what do you think they are going to do about that? Do you think they are going to move to the ghettos? Do you think they are going to sell the Jaguar and drive a Pinto? Do you think they are going to eat beans and bologna rather than steak and lobster? NOPE... they are going to hire fewer people, expand their businesses less, and maybe layoff some folks. If they don't really NEED to earn any more income, they might just cash it all in and retire to the Bahamas. But in NO case, does anything they will do, help the middle class or encourage jobs and growth, and the economy will continue to decline.

A massive tax increase? $800.00 increase on wages of $275,000/yr. Is that what you consider massive?

As for businesses laying off people that is just nonsense. Businesses hire employees so the employee will make money for them. If a business is taxed more then common sense dictates the business will hire more employees so they'll make more money for the employer.

Your thinking is convoluted. Businesses are not benevolent entities. A business owner does not sit down and think, "Gee, I made a lot of money this year. Maybe I'll hire someone so I can give it to them."

The reasoning is the opposite. The business owner is thinking, "If I hire someone will I make more money?"

You need to overcome your jealousy of others, and realize, a slight decrease in their tax rates, or even just (in this case) keeping their tax rates stable, will encourage them to expand their business and thus, create new jobs.

You’ve been listening to Joe the Plumber, haven’t you? His remarks about not buying a business because the taxes would be raised $800 on an income of $275,000/yr. are asinine.

Instead of trying to punish people for their success, try rewarding them, and encouraging more success, and you will see jobs created, businesses grow, and prosperity emerge. If you were making $250k a year, and next year, you will make $350k, that's $100k more you have to spend on stuff... people who sell you that stuff make money, people who make that stuff earn more, everyone prospers. Take $100k away, and the opposite will happen.

No one is punishing anyone. Expecting people with resources to help those in need is not punishment. You have an absurd way of looking at things.

As for your example that’s just more nonsense. No one objects to anyone making money. The problem has to do with people refusing to help others. People rant about government interference when their idea of interference is the government trying to help those less fortunate.

The country is going through tough times. We all have to pull together.
 
It has nothing to do with a person who makes over $250k a year having more than they deserve. It has to do with the poor having less than they need.

The US produces enough food to feed every citizen. If someone can not afford proper food there is something wrong. The same with housing. We have the technology and resources to house every citizen. There is no reason to have people sleeping on the street or in tents in a park because they lost their home/job.

If you are aware of another way to solve those problems other than tax people who have money please share it.



A massive tax increase? $800.00 increase on wages of $275,000/yr. Is that what you consider massive?

As for businesses laying off people that is just nonsense. Businesses hire employees so the employee will make money for them. If a business is taxed more then common sense dictates the business will hire more employees so they'll make more money for the employer.

Your thinking is convoluted. Businesses are not benevolent entities. A business owner does not sit down and think, "Gee, I made a lot of money this year. Maybe I'll hire someone so I can give it to them."

The reasoning is the opposite. The business owner is thinking, "If I hire someone will I make more money?"



You’ve been listening to Joe the Plumber, haven’t you? His remarks about not buying a business because the taxes would be raised $800 on an income of $275,000/yr. are asinine.



No one is punishing anyone. Expecting people with resources to help those in need is not punishment. You have an absurd way of looking at things.

As for your example that’s just more nonsense. No one objects to anyone making money. The problem has to do with people refusing to help others. People rant about government interference when their idea of interference is the government trying to help those less fortunate.

The country is going through tough times. We all have to pull together.

Wait did you really just say if businesses are taxed more they'll hire more employees?
 
Wait did you really just say if businesses are taxed more they'll hire more employees?

I said, "The business owner is thinking, "If I hire someone will I make more money?"

A business is taxed on income, not employees. Dixie's assumption is if a business is taxed less the business/person will hire more employees. That's just nonsense.

If a person is paying more in taxes and wants more money they will work longer hours. The same applies to a business owner. If they pay more taxes they are going to look for ways to make more money. No business is going to keep an employee on payroll if the employee is not making money for the business. Therefore, if the business owner desires more money because they are paying more in taxes they are going to look for ways to make more money and the way to make more money is to hire more employees.
 
I said, "The business owner is thinking, "If I hire someone will I make more money?"

A business is taxed on income, not employees. Dixie's assumption is if a business is taxed less the business/person will hire more employees. That's just nonsense.

If a person is paying more in taxes and wants more money they will work longer hours. The same applies to a business owner. If they pay more taxes they are going to look for ways to make more money. No business is going to keep an employee on payroll if the employee is not making money for the business. Therefore, if the business owner desires more money because they are paying more in taxes they are going to look for ways to make more money and the way to make more money is to hire more employees.

That is just ass backwards thinking to me. In fact I do not understand it. Lowering taxes on a business allows it to keep more its profit which allows the owner to reinvest more money into the company which includes new employees.

You want to give reverse incentives. "We're going to make it harder for you to make money (higher taxes) and therefore you'll want to higher more employees?" Besides you who thinks like that?

Even your hero is for cutting taxes for small businesses? Now why would he be for that?
 
It has nothing to do with a person who makes over $250k a year having more than they deserve. It has to do with the poor having less than they need.

The US produces enough food to feed every citizen. If someone can not afford proper food there is something wrong. The same with housing. We have the technology and resources to house every citizen. There is no reason to have people sleeping on the street or in tents in a park because they lost their home/job.

If you are aware of another way to solve those problems other than tax people who have money please share it.

There are soup kitchens, shelters, Churches, and thousands of charitable organizations around the country...give all you want....there is welfare, medicaid, and hundreds of other programs for the needy....we have Soc. Sec. , etc.....we even have free cellphone and free minutes for welfare people....no one need starve or sleep under bridges...if anyone is starving it must be being kept a secret from the mass media for decades....

A massive tax increase? $800.00 increase on wages of $275,000/yr. Is that what you consider massive?

As for businesses laying off people that is just nonsense. Businesses hire employees so the employee will make money for them. If a business is taxed more then common sense dictates the business will hire more employees so they'll make more money for the employer.

So you just hire more people to make you more money?....that statement is beyond stupid and I won't dignify it with a response.

Your thinking is convoluted. Businesses are not benevolent entities. A business owner does not sit down and think, "Gee, I made a lot of money this year. Maybe I'll hire someone so I can give it to them."

The reasoning is the opposite. The business owner is thinking, "If I hire someone will I make more money?"

Compared to what you said above, this statement is ridiculous...

You’ve been listening to Joe the Plumber, haven’t you? His remarks about not buying a business because the taxes would be raised $800 on an income of $275,000/yr. are asinine.

As a businessman (even as an amateur businessman) you don't have a clue...nothing...so as above, I can't educate you in one or 2 sentences....if you knew what it costs an employer to hire, train and pay an employee $15k a year, you'd be astonished....

No one is punishing anyone. Expecting people with resources to help those in need is not punishment. You have an absurd way of looking at things.

Taxes ARE a form of punishment if a certain group is taxed far more than is everyone else...no matter what the method or excuse...

As for your example that’s just more nonsense. No one objects to anyone making money. The problem has to do with people refusing to help others. People rant about government interference when their idea of interference is the government trying to help those less fortunate.

Its called freedom....we are a free people...we are free to be greedy and free to be charitable....we are free to help our neighbors and free not to....we are free to give our money away and free to hide it under a rock...and every nickel we spend is a nickel that is indirectly helping someone else....robbing Peter to pay Paul is immoral....confiscating the property of others have earned is wrong....If living in a free nation is not to your liking....move.

The country is going through tough times. We all have to pull together.
'
 
Last edited:
It has nothing to do with a person who makes over $250k a year having more than they deserve. It has to do with the poor having less than they need.

The US produces enough food to feed every citizen. If someone can not afford proper food there is something wrong. The same with housing. We have the technology and resources to house every citizen. There is no reason to have people sleeping on the street or in tents in a park because they lost their home/job.

For the past 70 years, we've implemented program after program at the Federal level, to assist the poor, and what results have we seen? There are still, just as may poor people today, as 70 years ago. In fact, the poverty level is essentially the same as it was in 1964. So why hasn't your idea worked? We can discuss that if you like, but to sit here doe-eyed and pretend the reality is something else, is naive and ignorant of history.

There are countless examples of people who have risen up from poverty to make something of themselves, and in absolutely NO case, was it because of government assistance. Star Parker's story is a classic example. She spent her teen and early adult years on welfare, and she is now a highly educated African-American running for public office, author of several books, a well-paid public speaker, and noted Conservative. Was her welfare check the secret to her success? Nope, because some of the same people who were once her neighbors in the projects, are still in the projects. You may have seen my recent thread about Antoine Dodson (search that name, if not), and the reason I posted the thread and keep bumping it periodically, is because I think his story is remarkable. Here is a guy who lived in the projects in Huntsville with his sister, she was attacked by a would-be rapist, and he appeared on a news broadcast with a very passionate and emotional response, which subsequently went viral on the Internet because of his animated delivery. Some guys from NY made a music video out of it, now Dodson is a celebrity, making all kinds of money selling t-shirts, doing commercials, becoming somewhat 'famous' from the incident. Now, was it his welfare check that brought him fame and fortune? Again, no it wasn't. It's the drive and determination to succeed. Some people have that, and some people don't. Life gives some people lemons, and some will make lemonade, while others whine and moan about their situation. Money doesn't solve that problem, attitude solves that problem and it always will. You can't fix the problem with more money, it doesn't work, we've tried to do this for the past 70 years, with dismal results. You think we should just keep trying the same thing that hasn't worked, the textbook definition of insanity.

As for businesses laying off people that is just nonsense. Businesses hire employees so the employee will make money for them. If a business is taxed more then common sense dictates the business will hire more employees so they'll make more money for the employer.

Your thinking is convoluted. Businesses are not benevolent entities. A business owner does not sit down and think, "Gee, I made a lot of money this year. Maybe I'll hire someone so I can give it to them."

The reasoning is the opposite. The business owner is thinking, "If I hire someone will I make more money?"

You don't even know what you are talking about here. Businesses don't hire people when they know it will cost them MORE! When they don't know how much matching unemployment they may have to pay in 2011, because Congress continues to extend benefits, when they don't know what their cost for health insurance will be, when they don't know what kind of taxation they are facing in the future, they are NOT GOING TO HIRE MORE PEOPLE! Case in point, they are NOT HIRING MORE PEOPLE NOW!

You’ve been listening to Joe the Plumber, haven’t you? His remarks about not buying a business because the taxes would be raised $800 on an income of $275,000/yr. are asinine.

I don't know where you get this $800 figure from. Expiration of the Bush tax cuts, raises the top marginal rate from 35% to 39.6% That's a 4.6% increase. Do the math... that's $11,500.00 ...not $800! That doesn't include all the extra cost of unemployment compensation, matching health care expenses, and other associated fees involved in employment. There is also an increase in Capital Gains taxes, which is largely the money small business uses to expand their business. Without expansion, there are no new jobs.
 
The reason for posting this article is not just to show the great disparity of wealth but to counter the frequent and bogus argument which goes something like this; "If we tax the rich we'll all end up poor."

As the article explains the majority of Americans have no idea how much money the wealthy actually have. This has a bearing on people making erroneous comments such as "The deficit is too high. We can't afford a medical plan. We can't tax the wealthy any more." The truth is we can tax the wealthy more. A lot more and they will still be wealthy.

The country can afford a medical plan. The country can afford to feed and house the needy. The money is there. Unfortunately, people don't know/understand that.

(Excerpt) In the poll, the vast majority of Americans across the political, gender and wealth spectrum displayed a markedly skewed understanding of how America's money is divided. On average, respondents though that the rich hold only 58% of the nation's wealth, 32% less than their actual holdings. They thought that the middle class controls 13% of the country's wealth, more than three times their actual holdings. As for the bottom 40% of the population, the assumption was that the lower class and poor own a measly 9% of the country's wealth. In reality, these two groups control about one thirtieth of that amount. (End)
http://www.dailyfinance.com/story/a...-wealth-redistribution/19684224/?ncid=webmail

during the eisenhower years, the upper tax rate was 90%

oh well
 
For the past 70 years, we've implemented program after program at the Federal level, to assist the poor, and what results have we seen? There are still, just as may poor people today, as 70 years ago. In fact, the poverty level is essentially the same as it was in 1964. So why hasn't your idea worked? We can discuss that if you like, but to sit here doe-eyed and pretend the reality is something else, is naive and ignorant of history.

There are countless examples of people who have risen up from poverty to make something of themselves, and in absolutely NO case, was it because of government assistance. Star Parker's story is a classic example. She spent her teen and early adult years on welfare, and she is now a highly educated African-American running for public office, author of several books, a well-paid public speaker, and noted Conservative. Was her welfare check the secret to her success? Nope, because some of the same people who were once her neighbors in the projects, are still in the projects. You may have seen my recent thread about Antoine Dodson (search that name, if not), and the reason I posted the thread and keep bumping it periodically, is because I think his story is remarkable. Here is a guy who lived in the projects in Huntsville with his sister, she was attacked by a would-be rapist, and he appeared on a news broadcast with a very passionate and emotional response, which subsequently went viral on the Internet because of his animated delivery. Some guys from NY made a music video out of it, now Dodson is a celebrity, making all kinds of money selling t-shirts, doing commercials, becoming somewhat 'famous' from the incident. Now, was it his welfare check that brought him fame and fortune? Again, no it wasn't. It's the drive and determination to succeed. Some people have that, and some people don't. Life gives some people lemons, and some will make lemonade, while others whine and moan about their situation. Money doesn't solve that problem, attitude solves that problem and it always will. You can't fix the problem with more money, it doesn't work, we've tried to do this for the past 70 years, with dismal results. You think we should just keep trying the same thing that hasn't worked, the textbook definition of insanity.



You don't even know what you are talking about here. Businesses don't hire people when they know it will cost them MORE! When they don't know how much matching unemployment they may have to pay in 2011, because Congress continues to extend benefits, when they don't know what their cost for health insurance will be, when they don't know what kind of taxation they are facing in the future, they are NOT GOING TO HIRE MORE PEOPLE! Case in point, they are NOT HIRING MORE PEOPLE NOW!



I don't know where you get this $800 figure from. Expiration of the Bush tax cuts, raises the top marginal rate from 35% to 39.6% That's a 4.6% increase. Do the math... that's $11,500.00 ...not $800! That doesn't include all the extra cost of unemployment compensation, matching health care expenses, and other associated fees involved in employment. There is also an increase in Capital Gains taxes, which is largely the money small business uses to expand their business. Without expansion, there are no new jobs.

fool
- a gratuitous fool from hitting the return key by mistake, see my next post
 
Last edited:
For the past 70 years, we've implemented program after program at the Federal level, to assist the poor, and what results have we seen? There are still, just as may poor people today, as 70 years ago. In fact, the poverty level is essentially the same as it was in 1964. So why hasn't your idea worked? We can discuss that if you like, but to sit here doe-eyed and pretend the reality is something else, is naive and ignorant of history.

There are countless examples of people who have risen up from poverty to make something of themselves, and in absolutely NO case, was it because of government assistance. Star Parker's story is a classic example. She spent her teen and early adult years on welfare, and she is now a highly educated African-American running for public office, author of several books, a well-paid public speaker, and noted Conservative. Was her welfare check the secret to her success? Nope, because some of the same people who were once her neighbors in the projects, are still in the projects. You may have seen my recent thread about Antoine Dodson (search that name, if not), and the reason I posted the thread and keep bumping it periodically, is because I think his story is remarkable. Here is a guy who lived in the projects in Huntsville with his sister, she was attacked by a would-be rapist, and he appeared on a news broadcast with a very passionate and emotional response, which subsequently went viral on the Internet because of his animated delivery. Some guys from NY made a music video out of it, now Dodson is a celebrity, making all kinds of money selling t-shirts, doing commercials, becoming somewhat 'famous' from the incident. Now, was it his welfare check that brought him fame and fortune? Again, no it wasn't. It's the drive and determination to succeed. Some people have that, and some people don't. Life gives some people lemons, and some will make lemonade, while others whine and moan about their situation. Money doesn't solve that problem, attitude solves that problem and it always will. You can't fix the problem with more money, it doesn't work, we've tried to do this for the past 70 years, with dismal results. You think we should just keep trying the same thing that hasn't worked, the textbook definition of insanity.



You don't even know what you are talking about here. Businesses don't hire people when they know it will cost them MORE! When they don't know how much matching unemployment they may have to pay in 2011, because Congress continues to extend benefits, when they don't know what their cost for health insurance will be, when they don't know what kind of taxation they are facing in the future, they are NOT GOING TO HIRE MORE PEOPLE! Case in point, they are NOT HIRING MORE PEOPLE NOW!



I don't know where you get this $800 figure from. Expiration of the Bush tax cuts, raises the top marginal rate from 35% to 39.6% That's a 4.6% increase. Do the math... that's $11,500.00 ...not $800! That doesn't include all the extra cost of unemployment compensation, matching health care expenses, and other associated fees involved in employment. There is also an increase in Capital Gains taxes, which is largely the money small business uses to expand their business. Without expansion, there are no new jobs.

fool the actual increase is $1,150 = 275,000 - 250,000 * .046 as the extra 0.046 is only applied to the amount over 250,000
 
Income Gap Ignorance

bron315l.jpg


pfin86l.jpg


42.jpg


 
fool the actual increase is $1,150 = 275,000 - 250,000 * .046 as the extra 0.046 is only applied to the amount over 250,000

No, you pay income tax on the total amount of earned income, FOOL!

If you make $250,000.00 (I didn't use the $275k figure) your tax liability under the Bush tax plan is roughly $87,500 (35%), without the Bush tax cut, it jumps to $99,000 (39.6%), an increase of $11,500.00.
 
2009 tax tables state a 33% rate up to $372,950......

$41,754 + 33% of amt. over $171,550

$250,000 would be about 67,642 in taxes....about a 27% effective rate....Single Status
 
The pinheads only need to learn one simple thing....very simple....

What other people earn is none of your freakin' business....as long as the earnings were lawful .....it is just simply none of your business.....

Your focus should be on what you earn....and what you can do to legally earn more....how you can become more successful....

Its strange your parents didn't teach you that basic rule of life, mind your own business....
The problem with your argument is that what's good for the goose is what's good for the gander or you're a hypocrite. For example. If you believe what you say then if laborers decide to collectively bargain for what the market will bear for their services from an organization or refuse to provide that service then it's really none of your business what they earn. Correct?
 
2009 tax tables state a 33% rate up to $372,950......

$41,754 + 33% of amt. over $171,550

$250,000 would be about 67,642 in taxes....about a 27% effective rate....Single Status

are you a tax man?

does your amount reflect the graduated aspect of federal income taxes

according to your table, a person earning $372,950 would not pay any more tax if the rate for 35% is increased by 4.6%

just what would be the new tax rates for 2011 be if the dems have their way and if the reps have their way - anyone?
 
Back
Top