Wealth Taxes

[Turveyd]

Why has it become PC to hate on rich people, blame rich people for not doing enough to solve the worlds problems ?? ( not like money can fix all issues ), rich people paid to invented cars and planes and the medicines that keep PC's from going crazier after all.

Mates PC daughter thinks rich people should give there 2nd homes to the homeless and it's the job of rich people to help people and so she refuses to help anyone as she's not rich.

 

[LS1Z28]

I've never understood why the left is pushing legislation that has universally failed in Europe.

 

[gaussian]

The 400 wealthiest Americans of course pay exponentially more tax than any other income group, even if the tax rate is lower.

Even if the 400 wealthiest Americans paid effectively zero tax, they would contribute far more to society than any other income group.

This is a top tier boomer post.

Your first point is going to need a source. The latest numbers I could find was the top earners paid around 53.3% in INCOME tax, which is a far cry from "exponentially more". If you mean "exponentially more" in dollar value you are mislead by numbers and need to compare percents. This is elementary school personal finance. More to the point this is INCOME, which almost no absurdly wealthy person is paying on and so your numbers are fundamentally wrong.

The second point is conjecture and because you're boomerposting I find it hard to take you seriously.

 

[Banjo]

Why has it become PC to hate on rich people, blame rich people for not doing enough to solve the worlds problems ?? ( not like money can fix all issues ), rich people paid to invented cars and planes and the medicines that keep PC's from going crazier after all.

Mates PC daughter thinks rich people should give there 2nd homes to the homeless and it's the job of rich people to help people and so she refuses to help anyone as she's not rich.

Isn't that convenient for her. More time for meaningful endeavors like texting and tweeting her echo chamber mates without the burdens of problem solving.

 

[Turveyd]

Isn't that convenient for her. More time for meaningful endeavors like texting and tweeting her echo chamber mates without the burdens of problem solving.

Yep PC's blame everyone else, word shame everyone to make them look bad, ban words which they deem hurtful and replace with words that mean the same, while hating everybody and fighting for gay rights which they already have arrggghhhhhhhhh!!!

Actually help someone else, no that's the rich and the governments job.

 

[Maverick2608]

This is a top tier boomer post.

Your first point is going to need a source. The latest numbers I could find was the top earners paid around 53.3% in INCOME tax, which is a far cry from "exponentially more". If you mean "exponentially more" in dollar value you are mislead by numbers and need to compare percents. This is elementary school personal finance. More to the point this is INCOME, which almost no absurdly wealthy person is paying on and so your numbers are fundamentally wrong.

The second point is conjecture and because you're boomerposting I find it hard to take you seriously.

I wrote "tax" not "income tax." I specifically wrote "even if the tax rate is lower."

"... you are mislead by numbers..." It is spelled "misled."

Pretty arrogant to suggest something is elementary school when you cannot read and spell.

 

[piezoe]

Tax return reports income not wealth. High earners are not the same as wealthy people. And I doubt high earners pay less in taxes than low income people. And if a wealthy & retired person does not earn much and lives off his savings it's nobody's business. He already paid his fair share in taxes while accumulating wealth. I am sure they have in mind "wealth" for wealthy people (probably by deriving it from property tax while ignoring their "income") and "income" for poor people. And that's a fallacy.

Both the thread title and the link in the original thread concern tax and tax rates. One of the important taxes, among many, that citizens pay is the Federal income tax. Aggregate data on this kind of tax is widely available. Your comment that, " I am sure they have in mind "wealth" for wealthy people (probably by deriving it from property tax while ignoring their "income") and "income" for poor people." Although I have no idea whether you are correct, it does nicely point out that to make sense of these discussions of taxes and/or wealth one needs to be very clear about what is being compared. When Warren Buffett said his secretary paid a higher tax rate then he did, what was in the numerator and what was in the denominator of his rate calculation. One assumes in both cases it was the the adjusted gross, not the taxable income, in the denominator, but was it? Is it reasonable to you that Buffett should pay a lower rate? Buffett didn't think so. Should everyone pay the same rate? On Adj. gross? On taxable? One thing we we do know is that under the U.S. tax code, no matter how progressive, or non-progressive, everyone pays exactly the same rate on the same dollar rank earned in the same category- rich and poor alike. Unfortunately, I am sad to report, I don't have a millionth dollar earned in either the taxable or non-taxable category. Buffett probably does.

 

[gaussian]

One thing we we do know is that under the U.S. tax code, no matter how progressive, or non-progressive, everyone pays exactly the same rate on the same dollar rank earned in the same category- rich and poor alike. Unfortunately, I am sad to report, I don't have a millionth dollar earned in either the taxable or non-taxable category. Buffett probably does.

Though the wealthiest Americans generally have a higher tax rate, their effective tax rate is what you need to look for. While the number may be higher, there are more avenues to avoid taxes not available to lower class people, thus bringing their effective tax rate down near zero rather than near 50% where it should be (approximately the income level tax for their bracket). A poor person may even get significant money back if they had millions available to make a rats nest of shell corporations to funnel their money through and various 501(c)3s to draw tax benefits from - and these are just a few of the legal options the ultra wealthy have to avoid paying their fair share for the social services they use!

The largest wealth gap since the robber baron days didn't happen by accident. Closing your eyes and pretending billionaires got there by being good at business and excellent citizens to their countrymen is ignorant at best, and malicious at worst. With Facebook and Google villages forming we are trotting ever closer to serfdom and we should wake and realize these billionaires are not the friends of the wealthy retiree (5-10MM in net worth), nor the friends of the working class, nor working poor.

Pretty arrogant to suggest something is elementary school when you cannot read and spell.

Classic internet troll. Target my spelling to strawman me instead of attacking my argument with the one source I asked for. Nice.

 

[piezoe]

Though the wealthiest Americans generally have a higher tax rate, their effective tax rate is what you need to look for. While the number may be higher, there are more avenues to avoid taxes not available to lower class people, thus bringing their effective tax rate down near zero rather than near 50% where it should be (approximately the income level tax for their bracket). A poor person may even get significant money back if they had millions available to make a rats nest of shell corporations to funnel their money through and various 501(c)3s to draw tax benefits from - and these are just a few of the legal options the ultra wealthy have to avoid paying their fair share for the social services they use!

The largest wealth gap since the robber baron days didn't happen by accident. Closing your eyes and pretending billionaires got there by being good at business and excellent citizens to their countrymen is ignorant at best, and malicious at worst. With Facebook and Google villages forming we are trotting ever closer to serfdom and we should wake and realize these billionaires are not the friends of the wealthy retiree (5-10MM in net worth), nor the friends of the working class, nor working poor.



Classic internet troll. Target my spelling to strawman me instead of attacking my argument with the one source I asked for. Nice.

Ideally, we should be constantly on guard against our nature; something we are much better at as we grow old. Could this be a reason why a 70-year-old president is a better bet then a 35-year-old? And yet we also have an example before our eyes that a mentally flawed person is a bad bet no matter their age. And too, we have examples of those who are wise beyond their years. At the least, this casual observation is both an indictment against our maker and evidence of the brilliance of our species.

And what does this have to do with your post? Nothing and everything.

 

[gaussian]

Ideally, we should be constantly on guard against our nature; something we are much better at as we grow old. Could this be a reason why a 70-year-old president is a better bet then a 35-year-old?

There is no question a 70 year old is unfit to run the country on age alone. The average age is approaching 40, their views should align with the generational views of the forgotten generation (gen X) and yet here we are still spewing campaign slogans are trickle down garbage from the 70s like its new and exciting. Placing someone 2 generations separated from the average is a method of control. To keep the old and bad ideas alive because "those damn kids don't know anything". Sounds kind of like an oligarchy doesn't it.

The president should be able to identify with the average person, and a 70 year old career politician or billionaire is about as far from "average person" as you could possibly get. The ideal candidate is young. No older than 50. Mental decline in even the most spry elderly is a real thing, and as you can see by the current president it is clearly taking its toll. Bernie and Biden can barely remember who they are half the time and Trump is one adderall trip away from the loonie bin. If the elderly were so good at being constantly on guard against their nature perhaps they'd retire and stay out of politics!