The Top 1% Super Rich Americans

[QUOTE="Jfisch93"]

[QUOTE="Planet_Pluto"]That would be an awfully long way to go to deliver pizzas, or for people to go out to dinner. :?

Planet_Pluto

So, just for sport, I'll re-ask the questions.......

What did this person do wrong (how is he a villian)?

Has this person NOT "given back" to society in general?

[QUOTE="Planet_Pluto"]

[QUOTE="Jfisch93"] You just use the pizza joint to steer away from my argument. Look at any big name brands. Look at any product in your home. Most likely, it will have a stamp MADE IN CHINA on it. If most products had MADE IN USA instead of MADE IN CHINA on it, most likely america would not be in such a mess.

comp_atkins

So, just for sport, I'll re-ask the questions.......

What did this person do wrong (how is he a villian)?

Has this person NOT "given back" to society in general?

If anything we can call the rich the dead beats here.. They have benefited from the system in these past 10 years then any one else in 50 years time.. Yet they are paying disportionatly less money.. Taxes are not about punishment.. They are about sustaining a system so every one can prosper on.. If one small group is prospering the most through this system.. Then they shoudl be the ones having to pay the mos tinto the system to sustain it for every one including themselves.. I swear to god are people this disillusioned to think that the rich got where they were at, by their skills and power alone?

[QUOTE="comp_atkins"][QUOTE="Planet_Pluto"]You just completely changed the scenario I created to avoid the fact that you (apparently) have no problem punishing my fictional "Person A."

So, just for sport, I'll re-ask the questions.......

What did this person do wrong (how is he a villian)?

Has this person NOT "given back" to society in general?

sSubZerOo

If anything we can call the rich the dead beats here.. They have benefited from the system in these past 10 years then any one else in 50 years time.. Yet they are paying disportionatly less money.. Taxes are not about punishment.. They are about sustaining a system so every one can prosper on.. If one small group is prospering the most through this system.. Then they shoudl be the ones having to pay the mos tinto the system to sustain it for every one including themselves.. I swear to god are people this disillusioned to think that the rich got where they were at, by their skills and power alone?

When you have the leader of the free world claiming that people making over $250K are NOT 'paying their fair share,' that amounts to being painted a villian.

Further, as the saying goes, I've never been hired by a poor person.

People start-up small businesses ALL THE TIME that throught their skills and power along make them large amounts of money. I had the pleasure of working for one of these people a few years back. He took out a loan to start a storefront, glass, glazing company. Hired Union Glaziers (and paid prevailing wages and all benefits), and through nothing but his own hard work and determination, he reached the level of success he enjoys today.

Admittedly I'm a little cranky today, but I'm so tired of this culture of failure we have in this country today. There's no way to succeed on my own. The only way people are successful is by stealing from the poor. Give me a break already.

[QUOTE="comp_atkins"][QUOTE="Planet_Pluto"]You just completely changed the scenario I created to avoid the fact that you (apparently) have no problem punishing my fictional "Person A."

So, just for sport, I'll re-ask the questions.......

What did this person do wrong (how is he a villian)?

Has this person NOT "given back" to society in general?

sSubZerOo

If anything we can call the rich the dead beats here.. They have benefited from the system in these past 10 years then any one else in 50 years time.. Yet they are paying disportionatly less money.. Taxes are not about punishment.. They are about sustaining a system so every one can prosper on.. If one small group is prospering the most through this system.. Then they shoudl be the ones having to pay the mos tinto the system to sustain it for every one including themselves.. I swear to god are people this disillusioned to think that the rich got where they were at, by their skills and power alone?

you hit the nail right on the head sub. like jim said, the top 400 richest people in america have more money than over 50% of the entire country combined. yet their complaining about more taxes? what is going on here?!?

[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]

[QUOTE="comp_atkins"] he is not a villain and taxes are not punishment. Planet_Pluto

If anything we can call the rich the dead beats here.. They have benefited from the system in these past 10 years then any one else in 50 years time.. Yet they are paying disportionatly less money.. Taxes are not about punishment.. They are about sustaining a system so every one can prosper on.. If one small group is prospering the most through this system.. Then they shoudl be the ones having to pay the mos tinto the system to sustain it for every one including themselves.. I swear to god are people this disillusioned to think that the rich got where they were at, by their skills and power alone?

When you have the leader of the free world claiming that people making over $250K are NOT 'paying their fair share,' that amounts to being painted a villian.

Further, as the saying goes, I've never been hired by a poor person.

People start-up small businesses ALL THE TIME that throught their skills and power along make them large amounts of money. I had the pleasure of working for one of these people a few years back. He took out a loan to start a storefront, glass, glazing company. Hired Union Glaziers (and paid prevailing wages and all benefits), and through nothing but his own hard work and determination, he reached the level of success he enjoys today.

Admittedly I'm a little cranky today, but I'm so tired of this culture of failure we have in this country today. There's no way to succeed on my own. The only way people are successful is by stealing from the poor. Give me a break already.

And your pont falls flat on your face when I am talking about the super rich and corporations.. They make much more then 250k form the system.. And benefit the most from teh system thanks to lobbying and the services the government provides.. The fact of the matter is they have much more to lose, and the security the US provides protects it.

ANd I find your point HILARIOUS we are not stealing from the rich and giving to the poor.. Your ignorance is astounding.. The government taxes to set a certain standard for equal opertunity.. Its called REALITY.. If we were to embrace darwinian like economics, freedom wouldn't exist because the most powerful woudl ensure it.. Seriously open a history book.. You will notice equal oppetunity was a thing put forward with the help of government programs (even now its lagging) than anything else.. Every one has the possibility of being successful.. BUt so does a one legged man who runs marathon.. It doesn't mean he is not handicapped and less likely to be successful to do it.. Thats where equal oppertunity comes into.. As it stands the greatest factor is winning the sperm lottery in being born into a rich family that statistically garentees your success then anything else.. People need to wake up and stop looking at the rags to rich stories throught he world and realize how few they are towards the rags to rags story with peopel still working their asses off.

On the topic of taking money from the rich that they have earned, I'll quote myself from a thread some time ago..........

From Previous Thread/Post:

Example:
- Person A takes out a business loan to open a small pizza joint
- After a few years, the loan is finally paid off
- A few years later, the reward for the risk is paying off, and Person A is taking home, say, $100k per year
- Person A takes out a second loan to open another joint in the next town
- After a few years, the second loan is finally paid off
- A few years later, the second risk is paying off and Person A is taking home another $100K per year (now a total of $200K)
- A few years later and a few more investments later, Person A is taking home a cool $1million per year.....

What exactly did Person A do wrong? Should Person A get NO CREDIT for forming who-knows-how-many jobs? Considering he'd need help managing the individual locations, will likely need to hire accountants, lawyers, insurance agents, advertising consultants, construction companies and make purchases from food vendors as well as kitchen equipment vendors...... how is this person NOT giving back to society as a whole? Keep in mind, he already IS in a considerably high tax bracket. How exactly is Person A the villian in all of this? Considering the work (and risk) that Person A took upon himself, how do we justify telling him, "Ok there, buddy. We've decided that you've earned more than you need......so we're going to go ahead and take a big chunk of it."

Planet_Pluto

[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]

[QUOTE="comp_atkins"] he is not a villain and taxes are not punishment. Planet_Pluto

If anything we can call the rich the dead beats here.. They have benefited from the system in these past 10 years then any one else in 50 years time.. Yet they are paying disportionatly less money.. Taxes are not about punishment.. They are about sustaining a system so every one can prosper on.. If one small group is prospering the most through this system.. Then they shoudl be the ones having to pay the mos tinto the system to sustain it for every one including themselves.. I swear to god are people this disillusioned to think that the rich got where they were at, by their skills and power alone?

Admittedly I'm a little cranky today, but I'm so tired of this culture of failure we have in this country today. There's no way to succeed on my own. The only way people are successful is by stealing from the poor. Give me a break already.

lol you act like everyone can be CEOs. we NEED construction workers, we NEED waiters and busboys, we NEED cooks and janitors. we
NEED these people to keep this country running. now i'm sure what some of these "super rich" people are doing is more important than cooks and contruction workers but does the wage disparity between them need to be that ****ing huge?

[QUOTE="Planet_Pluto"]

On the topic of taking money from the rich that they have earned, I'll quote myself from a thread some time ago..........

From Previous Thread/Post:

Example:
- Person A takes out a business loan to open a small pizza joint
- After a few years, the loan is finally paid off
- A few years later, the reward for the risk is paying off, and Person A is taking home, say, $100k per year
- Person A takes out a second loan to open another joint in the next town
- After a few years, the second loan is finally paid off
- A few years later, the second risk is paying off and Person A is taking home another $100K per year (now a total of $200K)
- A few years later and a few more investments later, Person A is taking home a cool $1million per year.....

What exactly did Person A do wrong? Should Person A get NO CREDIT for forming who-knows-how-many jobs? Considering he'd need help managing the individual locations, will likely need to hire accountants, lawyers, insurance agents, advertising consultants, construction companies and make purchases from food vendors as well as kitchen equipment vendors...... how is this person NOT giving back to society as a whole? Keep in mind, he already IS in a considerably high tax bracket. How exactly is Person A the villian in all of this? Considering the work (and risk) that Person A took upon himself, how do we justify telling him, "Ok there, buddy. We've decided that you've earned more than you need......so we're going to go ahead and take a big chunk of it."

F1ame_Shie1d

The rich also benefit the most fromt eh govenrment they have control over regulations, that nothing close can the rich support.. Yet people some how think its unfair the rich shouldn't get taxed more.. Yet they benefit from the system the most both through security and social programs which gives them a worker base.. But they also have control of washington far more than any other group through lobbying..

[QUOTE="F1ame_Shie1d"]

[QUOTE="Planet_Pluto"]

On the topic of taking money from the rich that they have earned, I'll quote myself from a thread some time ago..........

From Previous Thread/Post:

Example:
- Person A takes out a business loan to open a small pizza joint
- After a few years, the loan is finally paid off
- A few years later, the reward for the risk is paying off, and Person A is taking home, say, $100k per year
- Person A takes out a second loan to open another joint in the next town
- After a few years, the second loan is finally paid off
- A few years later, the second risk is paying off and Person A is taking home another $100K per year (now a total of $200K)
- A few years later and a few more investments later, Person A is taking home a cool $1million per year.....

What exactly did Person A do wrong? Should Person A get NO CREDIT for forming who-knows-how-many jobs? Considering he'd need help managing the individual locations, will likely need to hire accountants, lawyers, insurance agents, advertising consultants, construction companies and make purchases from food vendors as well as kitchen equipment vendors...... how is this person NOT giving back to society as a whole? Keep in mind, he already IS in a considerably high tax bracket. How exactly is Person A the villian in all of this? Considering the work (and risk) that Person A took upon himself, how do we justify telling him, "Ok there, buddy. We've decided that you've earned more than you need......so we're going to go ahead and take a big chunk of it."

sSubZerOo

The rich also benefit the most fromt eh govenrment they have control over regulations, that nothing close can the rich support.. Yet people some how think its unfair the rich shouldn't get taxed more.. Yet they benefit from the system the most both through security and social programs which gives them a worker base.. But they also have control of washington far more than any other group through lobbying..

[QUOTE="Planet_Pluto"]

[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]

If anything we can call the rich the dead beats here.. They have benefited from the system in these past 10 years then any one else in 50 years time.. Yet they are paying disportionatly less money.. Taxes are not about punishment.. They are about sustaining a system so every one can prosper on.. If one small group is prospering the most through this system.. Then they shoudl be the ones having to pay the mos tinto the system to sustain it for every one including themselves.. I swear to god are people this disillusioned to think that the rich got where they were at, by their skills and power alone?

lazerface216

Admittedly I'm a little cranky today, but I'm so tired of this culture of failure we have in this country today. There's no way to succeed on my own. The only way people are successful is by stealing from the poor. Give me a break already.

lol you act like everyone can be CEOs. we NEED construction workers, we NEED waiters and busboys, we NEED cooks and janitors. we
NEED these people to keep this country running. now i'm sure what some of these "super rich" people are doing is more important than cooks and contruction workers but does the wage disparity between them need to be that ****ing huge?

Its pretty hilarious that people buy into this crap when a single look at reality illustrates that hardwork alone does not guarentee success.. Its a multitude of things.. And wha tthey actually preach is they want to END equal oppertunity of all kinds even though its the only thing that helped create the US what it is today.. The countries out there with out equal oppertunity funding and legislation are the ones that are third world and second world countries.. With a few rich tha tcontrol everything and a massive poor population.. They have no oppertunities to get educated, and only a select lucky few are able to pul themselves up.. I am sick of this romantic nonsense of rags to riches stories while completely ignoring the billions that are rags to rags.. The fact of the matter is this.. We are systematically seeing the destruction fo teh Middle **** The rich are not shrinking they are growing in wealth.. And it has nothing to do with hard work... IT has to do that they have control of the system and the power to press the government for anything benefitical or block anything thats against them.. THats why I find the tea partiers hilarious they are a frustrated group of middle and lower ****people that are actually supporting policies and ideologies that HURT them rather then help them.. It shilarious really.

[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]

[QUOTE="F1ame_Shie1d"]Think of it this way. They either raise the taxes on the super rich who can EASILY afford to lose a few $ a year or they tax hike the already poor.

Planet_Pluto

The rich also benefit the most fromt eh govenrment they have control over regulations, that nothing close can the rich support.. Yet people some how think its unfair the rich shouldn't get taxed more.. Yet they benefit from the system the most both through security and social programs which gives them a worker base.. But they also have control of washington far more than any other group through lobbying..

No they don't.. They have nothing to lose.. And are given minimal support they are also given the worse of government instiutions whether its failing schools or being housed int he worse places in the United STates.. They also have NO say in government policy what so ever.. The Rich on the other hand thanks to the current environment has had them radically increase their profits with no real effort, have complete control over government thanks to lobbying.. And have the best security by the government because they have the most to lose.. You seriously need to open your eyes if you think the poor are the ones benefiting the most fromt eh system.. If that were the case we would see the poor gain the most riches, and the rich become poor.. Unfortuantely for you, your twisted logic doesn't match up with REALITY.

[QUOTE="Planet_Pluto"]

[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]

If anything we can call the rich the dead beats here.. They have benefited from the system in these past 10 years then any one else in 50 years time.. Yet they are paying disportionatly less money.. Taxes are not about punishment.. They are about sustaining a system so every one can prosper on.. If one small group is prospering the most through this system.. Then they shoudl be the ones having to pay the mos tinto the system to sustain it for every one including themselves.. I swear to god are people this disillusioned to think that the rich got where they were at, by their skills and power alone?

lazerface216

Admittedly I'm a little cranky today, but I'm so tired of this culture of failure we have in this country today. There's no way to succeed on my own. The only way people are successful is by stealing from the poor. Give me a break already.

lol you act like everyone can be CEOs. we NEED construction workers, we NEED waiters and busboys, we NEED cooks and janitors. we
NEED these people to keep this country running. now i'm sure what some of these "super rich" people are doing is more important than cooks and contruction workers but does the wage disparity between them need to be that ****ing huge?

To help you out with one philosophy of how people make what they make....... a part of it depends on the amount of money/capital you are in charge of.A big part of my job is negotiating costs between contractors and the city. By doing so, there is X-million-dollars that I'm 'responsible' for, and I'm paid a pretty decent salary to do so. However, some of the more senior guys that do work similar to me are 'responsible' for 2X-million-dollars, and they make more than I do. I have no idea what our President, CEO and Partners make, but considering they are 'responsible' for, I don't know, 350X-million-dollars, I'd say they make a pretty penny and rightfully so.

[QUOTE="surrealnumber5"]

[QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"]

The diamond market that De Beers exists in is completely unregulated. It couldn't be any freer. And I don't know how the rest of your post is relevant.

-Sun_Tzu-

How is it not free? De Beers secured its monopoly status entirely through private means. The diamond industry has historically been a completely unregulated market - it was about as laissez faire as possible. And I don't see how the rest of your post has anything to do with the question of whether or not a free-market capitalist society is sustainable.

[QUOTE="Planet_Pluto"]

[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]

The rich also benefit the most fromt eh govenrment they have control over regulations, that nothing close can the rich support.. Yet people some how think its unfair the rich shouldn't get taxed more.. Yet they benefit from the system the most both through security and social programs which gives them a worker base.. But they also have control of washington far more than any other group through lobbying..

sSubZerOo

No they don't.. They have nothing to lose.. And are given minimal support they are also given the worse of government instiutions whether its failing schools or being housed int he worse places in the United STates.. They also have NO say in government policy what so ever.. The Rich on the other hand thanks to the current environment has had them radically increase their profits with no real effort, have complete control over government thanks to lobbying.. And have the best security by the government because they have the most to lose.. You seriously need to open your eyes if you think the poor are the ones benefiting the most fromt eh system.. If that were the case we would see the poor gain the most riches, and the rich become poor.. Unfortuantely for you, your twisted logic doesn't match up with REALITY.

I hear ya about all the deals made is smoke-filled-back-rooms, but unless a law is broken, the only people to blame are the politicians that allow it to happen. A business is in the business of making money, no to subsidize the life of a population. A government is in the business of (supposedly) making sure businesses stay within the lines.

[QUOTE="lazerface216"]

[QUOTE="Planet_Pluto"]

Admittedly I'm a little cranky today, but I'm so tired of this culture of failure we have in this country today. There's no way to succeed on my own. The only way people are successful is by stealing from the poor. Give me a break already.

Planet_Pluto

lol you act like everyone can be CEOs. we NEED construction workers, we NEED waiters and busboys, we NEED cooks and janitors. we
NEED these people to keep this country running. now i'm sure what some of these "super rich" people are doing is more important than cooks and contruction workers but does the wage disparity between them need to be that ****ing huge?

To help you out with one philosophy of how people make what they make....... a part of it depends on the amount of money/capital you are in charge of.A big part of my job is negotiating costs between contractors and the city. By doing so, there is X-million-dollars that I'm 'responsible' for, and I'm paid a pretty decent salary to do so. However, some of the more senior guys that do work similar to me are 'responsible' for 2X-million-dollars, and they make more than I do. I have no idea what our President, CEO and Partners make, but considering they are 'responsible' for, I don't know, 350X-million-dollars, I'd say they make a pretty penny and rightfully so.

i'll be the first to admit that i'm no economics expert, you probably have a better handle on that area than me. it's the fact that 400 people in this country have more money than the lower 150,000,000+ people combined. that seems just....not right. don't you agree?

[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]

[QUOTE="Planet_Pluto"]The people that benefit most are the ones that pay NO income taxes yet receive a variety of benefits. Again, to use your term, those are the 'deadbeats.'

Planet_Pluto

No they don't.. They have nothing to lose.. And are given minimal support they are also given the worse of government instiutions whether its failing schools or being housed int he worse places in the United STates.. They also have NO say in government policy what so ever.. The Rich on the other hand thanks to the current environment has had them radically increase their profits with no real effort, have complete control over government thanks to lobbying.. And have the best security by the government because they have the most to lose.. You seriously need to open your eyes if you think the poor are the ones benefiting the most fromt eh system.. If that were the case we would see the poor gain the most riches, and the rich become poor.. Unfortuantely for you, your twisted logic doesn't match up with REALITY.

I hear ya about all the deals made is smoke-filled-back-rooms, but unless a law is broken, the only people to blame are the politicians that allow it to happen. A business is in the business of making money, no to subsidize the life of a population. A government is in the business of (supposedly) making sure businesses stay within the lines.

................ No the governments job is for the common good in ensuring the safety, stability and freedoms put forward by the Constitution of the society.. And that is my point these business don't give crap about the people, they are purely profit based, something that does not work well if it contorl sa society.. We are seeing this, the corproations have literally taken over the government through lobbying.. And what I am trying to tell you is the subsidies meant for the extremely poor are failing.. Not because they are lazy, but because the system put forward is failing.. The poor regardless of the welfare they get are still given the WORSE environments for housing, schooling and work.. Yet you expec tthem to some how improve when statistically they ar still the worse off of ever such things.. These subsidies are not meant to give a free ride, they are meant to give equal possibility in lifting themselves up out of poverty.. Something that is failing, even more so then ever before..

Furthermore the super rich and corporations are actually are GREATER burden now then then poverty stricken.. They not only demand far more money diverted to them.. But they are infact sucking money out of the government and people and investing itacrossof seas.. GE isa prime example of this.. They recently posted record breaking profits.. Thanks to loop holes and tax cuts.. They paid 0% in taxes.. In fact the govenrmetn actually gave them subsidities in th billions.. During this time GE cut jobs in the US, not created them.. SO we can argue that they are in fact costing the country FAR more then wha thte poor is right now..

The difference between you and me is this.. I support a equal balanced approach.. I do not support a darwinian like economy in which the super rich/powerful pretty much crush everything else, which is ALWAYS the outcome in such environments.. In which a select few control everything, and the rest scrap by.. THis country was built on the backs of middle class with equal opportunity, something that is getting destroyed right now.. And we are only seeing the supposed job creator swell with funds.. Yet jobs are not being created..

I weep for how unfairly the richest among us are being treated.nocoolnamejim

And this is really where the thread should end..

Then we have problems like this

Where stagnating wages for years now is screwing over everyone from doing things like going to college. Of course Cool the obvious response will be "well they worked hard for those wages damnit!"..

The Bush tax cuts are set to expire in 2013? I think they should just let them expire. If across the board tax cuts help the rich more than other groups, then across the board tax raises will affect the rich more as well. The bottom 50% pay no federal income tax, so there taxes won't go up.

The Bush tax cuts are set to expire in 2013? I think they should just let them expire. If across the board tax cuts help the rich more than other groups, then across the board tax raises will affect the rich more as well. The bottom 50% pay no federal income tax, so there taxes won't go up.

sonicare

The Bush tax cuts are set to expire in 2013? I think they should just let them expire. If across the board tax cuts help the rich more than other groups, then across the board tax raises will affect the rich more as well. The bottom 50% pay no federal income tax, so there taxes won't go up.

[QUOTE="nocoolnamejim"][QUOTE="sonicare"]

The Bush tax cuts are set to expire in 2013? I think they should just let them expire. If across the board tax cuts help the rich more than other groups, then across the board tax raises will affect the rich more as well. The bottom 50% pay no federal income tax, so there taxes won't go up.

sonicare

[QUOTE="Planet_Pluto"]

[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]

sSubZerOo

................ No the governments job is for the common good in ensuring the safety, stability and freedoms put forward by the Constitution of the society.. And that is my point these business don't give crap about the people, they are purely profit based, something that does not work well if it contorl sa society.. We are seeing this, the corproations have literally taken over the government through lobbying.. And what I am trying to tell you is the subsidies meant for the extremely poor are failing.. Not because they are lazy, but because the system put forward is failing.. The poor regardless of the welfare they get are still given the WORSE environments for housing, schooling and work.. Yet you expec tthem to some how improve when statistically they ar still the worse off of ever such things.. These subsidies are not meant to give a free ride, they are meant to give equal possibility in lifting themselves up out of poverty.. Something that is failing, even more so then ever before.. I've told my own 'rags to (hopefully) riches' story on this site at least a half a dozen times so I won't bore anyone with it again, but yes, I most certainly DO expect people to improve their own situations. The government should not be in the business of putting people all at equal starting points, they should only be ensuring that everyone is offered the same rights and protections TO MAKE IT ON THEIR OWN. Beyond that, government should be providing a 'safety net' for people that fall on hard times, until THEY get THEMSELVES back on their feet.

Furthermore the super rich and corporations are actually are GREATER burden now then then poverty stricken.. They not only demand far more money diverted to them.. But they are infact sucking money out of the government and people and investing itacrossof seas.. GE isa prime example of this.. They recently posted record breaking profits.. Thanks to loop holes and tax cuts.. They paid 0% in taxes.. In fact the govenrmetn actually gave them subsidities in th billions.. During this time GE cut jobs in the US, not created them.. SO we can argue that they are in fact costing the country FAR more then wha thte poor is right now..On the topic of GE, just another reminder that Obama and company thought it was a good idea to make the head of GE the Jobs Czar. While it does make Obama look hypocritical, I think the more important thing is that it does support a lot of your claims about big business 'taking over' the government.

The difference between you and me is this.. I support a equal balanced approach.. I do not support a darwinian like economy in which the super rich/powerful pretty much crush everything else, which is ALWAYS the outcome in such environments.. In which a select few control everything, and the rest scrap by.. THis country was built on the backs of middle ****with equal opportunity, something that is getting destroyed right now.. And we are only seeing the supposed job creator swell with funds.. Yet jobs are not being created..I don't see how your approach is all that balanced. It seems you just want to increase taxes on 'the rich' while I don't hear anything about having EVERYONE contribute (even if very small ways), nor do I hear you proposing any ways to stop the rediculous waste that our government spends. I also think that something that never gets mentioned is that if we want more taxes coming in, how about we stop making all of these rules and regulations that are preventing busnisses from hiring so we can increase the size of the tax base? I read an article this morning how just last month ALONE, new 'red tape' is estimated to cost businesses 9.5 billion +/- That is NOT condusive to hiring, in my opinion.

We also never factor in the cost of illegal immigration. I hear all these claims that costs associated with medical care, schooling, etc etc is just a 'drop in the bucket.' While I don't even believe that as a starting point, if we want to fix this thing, we have to go after EVERY 'drop in the bucket' until it's overflowing.

[QUOTE="sonicare"]

The Bush tax cuts are set to expire in 2013? I think they should just let them expire. If across the board tax cuts help the rich more than other groups, then across the board tax raises will affect the rich more as well. The bottom 50% pay no federal income tax, so there taxes won't go up.

nocoolnamejim

I'm all about taxing the rich and especially big corporations, but I know that all they'll do is raise prices just like when min. wage went up. Greedy bas*****. No way they could ever cut into their profits. They'd rather destroy the country than ever do anything good for it. As long as they make their quarterly profit margin and get their bonuses, that's all that matters. At least taxing their a** individually makes up for some of it.

[QUOTE="sonicare"][QUOTE="nocoolnamejim"] I agree with this approach. surrealnumber5

[QUOTE="nocoolnamejim"][QUOTE="sonicare"]

The Bush tax cuts are set to expire in 2013? I think they should just let them expire. If across the board tax cuts help the rich more than other groups, then across the board tax raises will affect the rich more as well. The bottom 50% pay no federal income tax, so there taxes won't go up.

Planet_Pluto

[QUOTE="surrealnumber5"]

[QUOTE="sonicare"] I think it makes sense. Economy did fine when we had higher tax levels under Reagan and Clinton. We need to up our revenues if we are serious about paying off the debt. Even the wealthy should want that, otherwise we could default or end up massively devaluing our currency - currency in which they have their wealth. nocoolnamejim

[QUOTE="nocoolnamejim"][QUOTE="surrealnumber5"] are we going to step back regulations to those periods as well? including employment burdens?

surrealnumber5

[QUOTE="nocoolnamejim"][QUOTE="sonicare"]

The Bush tax cuts are set to expire in 2013? I think they should just let them expire. If across the board tax cuts help the rich more than other groups, then across the board tax raises will affect the rich more as well. The bottom 50% pay no federal income tax, so there taxes won't go up.

Planet_Pluto

[QUOTE="BATTOSAI76"]

No. What right does the government have to tax higher those that make more money. They didn't necessarily do anything bad to get it. The fed is just punishing success, which is something that Americans should strive for if they see fit. And the people who think the rich should be taxed more are just being b*****, If they made that kind of money they sure as hell wouldn't want it heavily taxed.

Vuurk

Or it provides temporary financial relief for people as they transition between jobs (refering to unemployment). I am aware that abuses exist in the system, but they do provide a certain amount of good for people who need it.

What exactly did Person A do wrong?

Planet_Pluto

[QUOTE="Planet_Pluto"]
What exactly did Person A do wrong?

Teenaged

[QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"]

[QUOTE="surrealnumber5"] the international market where the goods are sold? sure. how and where they opperate to get the goods to bring to market is far from free, and the rest of my post is relevant to the rest of your post.

surrealnumber5

How is it not free? De Beers secured its monopoly status entirely through private means. The diamond industry has historically been a completely unregulated market - it was about as laissez faire as possible. And I don't see how the rest of your post has anything to do with the question of whether or not a free-market capitalist society is sustainable.

And the reason why I don't think free-market capitalism sustainable is because I don't see what's stopping it from degenerating into crony capitalism. In a free-market, you have initial winners and you have initial losers. Obviously these initial winners are going to want to secure their winnings, and they certainly have the economic and political power to do that. So what's stopping them from doing that? They have every incentive to make the market less and less competitive and consolidate their market share, and they have almost no incentive to keep the market competitive.

This is all ignoring the serious problems that are inherent within free-market capitalism itself. There is no invisible hand (asymetrical information makes sure of that) and so an unregulated market is generally very inefficient and leads to a lot of harm.

[QUOTE="Hekynn"]TAX THE HELL OUT OF THEM!! Since they don't give a damn about the country or its people. That includes the Republicans in Congress they too needs to be taxed like hell! Vuurk

[QUOTE="Teenaged"]

[QUOTE="Planet_Pluto"]
What exactly did Person A do wrong?

Planet_Pluto

K.

Even if they were taxed, i dont see any of them moving aboard since america still has one of the lowest income tax ratesin the world

No. Yes I know they're filthy rich but if our government cannot be responsible with taxpayer money, why bother taxing the 1% super rich? This would only lead to the same thing our government has been doing: Spending and wasting money.

I think we need to reform our tax code to be simplified, give more control to the people with their own social security, medicare, and medicaid (because this doesn't always benefit the poor. In reality, it's a regressive system that screws those working and benefits the wealthy), eliminate programs that are unnecessary, and overall lower government spending.

[QUOTE="UniverseIX"][QUOTE="Vuurk"] Uneducated thinking at its finest.Vuurk

Income taxation is a punishment for success. However, sales tax and excise tax are not. Welfare programs and unemployment insurance also punish success. They are programs that provide incentives to not strive for their absolute success. People respond to incentives. It would be much more efficient, and productive for us as a country to provide incentives for success rather than failure.

Unless you want to go with anarchy. That would make more sense than your current posistion.

No. What right does the government have to tax higher those that make more money. They didn't necessarily do anything bad to get it. The fed is just punishing success, which is something that Americans should strive for if they see fit. And the people who think the rich should be taxed more are just being b*****, If they made that kind of money they sure as hell wouldn't want it heavily taxed.

[QUOTE="Vuurk"]

[QUOTE="UniverseIX"] You compared taxation to a form of punishment for the successful. No, I never once compared taxation to a form of punishment for success. However, income tax IS a form of punishment for success. Sales tax and excise tax are not however. Welfare and unemployment benefits also punish success. I don't think you have room to talk on this one. I don't think you have room to talk on this one.UniverseIX

Income taxation is a punishment for success. However, sales tax and excise tax are not. Welfare programs and unemployment insurance also punish success. They are programs that provide incentives to not strive for their absolute success. People respond to incentives. It would be much more efficient, and productive for us as a country to provide incentives for success rather than failure.

Ah this argument. Wealth isn't transfered, it's created. And no, it's not the individual's responsibility to owe money to the population. What you described is basically the story of the hen who baked bread all by herself without the aid of her animal friends, yet her animal friends demand the food. Point is, that person became rich because they worked hard. And those who worked hard, become wealthy in their own way (not super rich but those who live an earnest life).

Besides, many of the super rich already give so much in charity and other programs that actually benefit the needy unlike the government programs that misuse the money or benefit the scum of the earth, wheather it's drug dealers or African warlords.