Bernie makes outrageous comment on Trump budget

[Winston]

And the IRS says they do.

Actually according to the IRS says they pay more than their "share"...

High Income Earners (over $250K a year)
Earn approximately 28% of the total AGI
Pay 55% of the total federal income tax burden

All other earners earn 72% of the total AGI
Pay 45% of the total federal income tax burden

What percent of the wealth do they own?

What difference does that make? Are we taxing wealth in addition to income now?

It makes a huge difference.

Look, I agree, the wealthy pay too much of the total tax burden. But the rich, they LOVE IT LIKE THIS. They pay most of the tax burden, but they own DAMN NEAR ALL THE INCOME PRODUCING ASSETS.

We can fix the problem. We just increase the marginal tax rate on the wealthy.

You appear to be contradicting yourself, if they already "pay to much" of the total income tax burden then why does it matter if they own "damn near all" (which isn't true btw) of the income producing assets since those assets produce INCOME which is taxed as you put it "too much".

The current tax system was designed by the "rich", to protect the "rich", if you don't like the results the answer probably isn't to be found by tinkering with the rate structure under the current tax code (which frankly is a national embarrassment).

Hell, all we really have to do is tax unearned income the same as earned income

Unearned income is already taxed at a higher rate than earned income, just ask anybody that's bought a winning lottery ticket what rate they paid.

and eliminate the cap on income subject to Social Security taxes.

..and pay higher earners larger SS payouts? If you don't do that you're suggesting eliminating the veneer of entitlement that remains for SS and turning into just another welfare program.

But when marginal tax rates were significantly higher the wealthy paid a significantly lower percentage of the total tax burden. There are very real, and very concrete reasons for this.

That's because the tax code is designed to favor those who can afford legions of attorneys and accountants as is our banking and monetary system.

It really is fundamental economics. And when I say fundamental, well there hasn't been any "new" viable economic concept introduced in more than a hundred years.

What part of your argument is "really fundamental economics"? and what "fundamental" economic principles does it entail?

I would be happy to explain the economic principals to you but first we need to establish a baseline of your own understanding of economics. The first thing we need to do is explain the difference between earned and unearned income. Lottery winnings are taxed, and considered, EARNED INCOME. In fact, on the federal level, lottery winnings are taxed exactly like the income you earn from your job.

In fact,much of unearned income is taxed at the same marginal tax rate as earned income. Annuity payments, pension distributions, interest income, dividends, and passive real estate earnings are all taxed at the marginal tax rate. It is the special treatment of capital gains and unqualified dividends that is the problem.

It is really pretty simple. If you dig ditches you pay a higher tax rate than if you rent out shovels. When that happens, well pretty soon nobody wants to dig any ditches and everyone wants to rent out shovels. Hello howdy, that is the modern American economy. You know supply and demand.

I mean conservatives are all about, when you tax something more than something else, well people DEMAND more of that which is taxed lower. WORK IS TAXED HIGHER THAN SPECULATION. What the hell do you think is going to happen.

I mean let's suppose you are a lawyer. A damn good lawyer. You make good money in your field. You also play the market. Why, with Social security and state income taxes, you probably pay almost fifty cents on the dollar in taxes from your lawyer work. But your investments, well you only pay fifteen cents on the dollar. You are encouraged, by the tax system, to speculate in an area you have no expertise instead of INVESTING in your own expertise. It is FUBARED.

Look, all this is really simple. Back in the old days, when marginal tax rates were much higher on the wealthy and capital gains were taxed the same as earned income, the Federal government was able to finance itself with taxes. But the wealthy figured out rather quick, it was much better to LOAN THE GOVERNMENT MONEY AT INTEREST, than pay the government taxes. That is all that has happened. The Reagan revolution PURPOSELY cut taxes knowing full well it would devastate the federal budget. But Reagan also implemented the most massive tax increase in history on the poor and middle class. Before he took office the cap on income subject to Social Security taxes was less than thirty grand. He increased the cap significantly, and to this day his built in inflationary adjustment increases that amount each and every year.

 

[Jimmy_Chitwood]

bernie is a bit of a hypocrite.

Yet, the rich should pay their share.

And the IRS says they do.

Probably because the rich have ways to reduce their share to zero.

According to the IRS, the top 5% of wage earners pay 88% of income taxes collected! Perhaps there should be a minimum tax so the 47% of Americans who currently don't pay income taxes have to pay something so they some skin in the game!

Ah, the ole, 47% myth again. Some people must work really hard to stay so uninformed.

1. The 47% statistic only refers to people who do not pay federal income taxes, not people who don’t pay taxes at all. Nearly everybody pays state taxes, such as sales tax.
2. The number of people who don’t pay federal income taxes is actually 43% now, not 47%.
3. Most people who don’t pay federal income tax do pay federal payroll taxes. Only 14.4% pay no federal taxes at all
4. Of that 14.4% who pay no federal taxes, 9.7% are elderly, leaving only 4.7% who are working-age Americans paying no federal taxes
5. Overall, people in the bottom 20% pay 19% of their income to taxes and people in the top 1% pay 33%
6. Although the rich do pay higher taxes at the federal level, the poor pay more of their income to state taxes than the rich in every state.

Myth: 47 Percent Don't Pay Taxes - zFacts

Learn to read public schooler.

The quote you had your unrelated and off topic hissy fit to stated the IRS income taxes.

An you lecture on state taxes, sales tax, and payroll taxes.

Try and keep up and ask for all the help you need from the non-public school educated.

 

[Cellblock2429]

Bernie Sanders called Trump's budget "grotesquely immoral". Thank God this socialist scum bag didn't get elected or else we'd be talking about increased taxes on the middle class and rich and more big government. Sanders: Trump budget is 'grotesquely immoral'

bernie is a bit of a hypocrite.

Yet, the rich should pay their share.

/--- They pay more than their share. You deadbeats should pay your own way.

 

[kiwiman127]

Yet, the rich should pay their share.

And the IRS says they do.

Probably because the rich have ways to reduce their share to zero.

According to the IRS, the top 5% of wage earners pay 88% of income taxes collected! Perhaps there should be a minimum tax so the 47% of Americans who currently don't pay income taxes have to pay something so they some skin in the game!

Ah, the ole, 47% myth again. Some people must work really hard to stay so uninformed.

1. The 47% statistic only refers to people who do not pay federal income taxes, not people who don’t pay taxes at all. Nearly everybody pays state taxes, such as sales tax.
2. The number of people who don’t pay federal income taxes is actually 43% now, not 47%.
3. Most people who don’t pay federal income tax do pay federal payroll taxes. Only 14.4% pay no federal taxes at all
4. Of that 14.4% who pay no federal taxes, 9.7% are elderly, leaving only 4.7% who are working-age Americans paying no federal taxes
5. Overall, people in the bottom 20% pay 19% of their income to taxes and people in the top 1% pay 33%
6. Although the rich do pay higher taxes at the federal level, the poor pay more of their income to state taxes than the rich in every state.

Myth: 47 Percent Don't Pay Taxes - zFacts

Learn to read public schooler.

The quote you had your unrelated and off topic hissy fit to stated the IRS income taxes.

An you lecture on state taxes, sales tax, and payroll taxes.

Try and keep up and ask for all the help you need from the non-public school educated.

Yeah, like no one believes you are not a product of public education. Your posts expose you as a liar.
Speaking of reading comprehension. You seemed to miss something in my post..
Most people who don’t pay federal income tax do pay federal payroll taxes. Only 14.4% pay no federal taxes at all

 

[Borillar]

Bernie Sanders called Trump's budget "grotesquely immoral". Thank God this socialist scum bag didn't get elected or else we'd be talking about increased taxes on the middle class and rich and more big government. Sanders: Trump budget is 'grotesquely immoral'

bernie is a bit of a hypocrite.

Yet, the rich should pay their share.

And the IRS says they do.

Yeah. Good thing they have the repugs to make sure the tax laws and loopholes favor them.

 

[Jimmy_Chitwood]

Bernie Sanders called Trump's budget "grotesquely immoral". Thank God this socialist scum bag didn't get elected or else we'd be talking about increased taxes on the middle class and rich and more big government. Sanders: Trump budget is 'grotesquely immoral'

bernie is a bit of a hypocrite.

Yet, the rich should pay their share.

And the IRS says they do.

Yeah. Good thing they have the repugs to make sure the tax laws and loopholes favor them.

And so when the leftists controlled things they closed all them?

 

[Jimmy_Chitwood]

And the IRS says they do.

Probably because the rich have ways to reduce their share to zero.

According to the IRS, the top 5% of wage earners pay 88% of income taxes collected! Perhaps there should be a minimum tax so the 47% of Americans who currently don't pay income taxes have to pay something so they some skin in the game!

Ah, the ole, 47% myth again. Some people must work really hard to stay so uninformed.

1. The 47% statistic only refers to people who do not pay federal income taxes, not people who don’t pay taxes at all. Nearly everybody pays state taxes, such as sales tax.
2. The number of people who don’t pay federal income taxes is actually 43% now, not 47%.
3. Most people who don’t pay federal income tax do pay federal payroll taxes. Only 14.4% pay no federal taxes at all
4. Of that 14.4% who pay no federal taxes, 9.7% are elderly, leaving only 4.7% who are working-age Americans paying no federal taxes
5. Overall, people in the bottom 20% pay 19% of their income to taxes and people in the top 1% pay 33%
6. Although the rich do pay higher taxes at the federal level, the poor pay more of their income to state taxes than the rich in every state.

Myth: 47 Percent Don't Pay Taxes - zFacts

Learn to read public schooler.

The quote you had your unrelated and off topic hissy fit to stated the IRS income taxes.

An you lecture on state taxes, sales tax, and payroll taxes.

Try and keep up and ask for all the help you need from the non-public school educated.

Yeah, like no one believes you are not a product of public education. Your posts expose you as a liar.
Speaking of reading comprehension. You seemed to miss something in my post..
Most people who don’t pay federal income tax do pay federal payroll taxes. Only 14.4% pay no federal taxes at all

Q: Why are you changing the topic to payroll taxes when we were discussing Federal Income Tax?

A: You lost.

THE END

 

[kiwiman127]

Probably because the rich have ways to reduce their share to zero.

According to the IRS, the top 5% of wage earners pay 88% of income taxes collected! Perhaps there should be a minimum tax so the 47% of Americans who currently don't pay income taxes have to pay something so they some skin in the game!

Ah, the ole, 47% myth again. Some people must work really hard to stay so uninformed.

1. The 47% statistic only refers to people who do not pay federal income taxes, not people who don’t pay taxes at all. Nearly everybody pays state taxes, such as sales tax.
2. The number of people who don’t pay federal income taxes is actually 43% now, not 47%.
3. Most people who don’t pay federal income tax do pay federal payroll taxes. Only 14.4% pay no federal taxes at all
4. Of that 14.4% who pay no federal taxes, 9.7% are elderly, leaving only 4.7% who are working-age Americans paying no federal taxes
5. Overall, people in the bottom 20% pay 19% of their income to taxes and people in the top 1% pay 33%
6. Although the rich do pay higher taxes at the federal level, the poor pay more of their income to state taxes than the rich in every state.

Myth: 47 Percent Don't Pay Taxes - zFacts

Learn to read public schooler.

The quote you had your unrelated and off topic hissy fit to stated the IRS income taxes.

An you lecture on state taxes, sales tax, and payroll taxes.

Try and keep up and ask for all the help you need from the non-public school educated.

Yeah, like no one believes you are not a product of public education. Your posts expose you as a liar.
Speaking of reading comprehension. You seemed to miss something in my post..
Most people who don’t pay federal income tax do pay federal payroll taxes. Only 14.4% pay no federal taxes at all

Q: Why are you changing the topic to payroll taxes when we were discussing Federal Income Tax?

A: You lost.

THE END

Federal Payroll taxes are taxes on what? Income maybe?

 

[LogikAndReazon]

Bernie Sanders called Trump's budget "grotesquely immoral". Thank God this socialist scum bag didn't get elected or else we'd be talking about increased taxes on the middle class and rich and more big government. http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/334949-sanders-trump-budget-is-grotesquely-immoral

He has never been the same since the DNC stabbed him in the back.

sad really

Nonsense...... Hes the same rumpled, old, commie, hack hes always been......

 

[Jimmy_Chitwood]

According to the IRS, the top 5% of wage earners pay 88% of income taxes collected! Perhaps there should be a minimum tax so the 47% of Americans who currently don't pay income taxes have to pay something so they some skin in the game!

Ah, the ole, 47% myth again. Some people must work really hard to stay so uninformed.

1. The 47% statistic only refers to people who do not pay federal income taxes, not people who don’t pay taxes at all. Nearly everybody pays state taxes, such as sales tax.
2. The number of people who don’t pay federal income taxes is actually 43% now, not 47%.
3. Most people who don’t pay federal income tax do pay federal payroll taxes. Only 14.4% pay no federal taxes at all
4. Of that 14.4% who pay no federal taxes, 9.7% are elderly, leaving only 4.7% who are working-age Americans paying no federal taxes
5. Overall, people in the bottom 20% pay 19% of their income to taxes and people in the top 1% pay 33%
6. Although the rich do pay higher taxes at the federal level, the poor pay more of their income to state taxes than the rich in every state.

Myth: 47 Percent Don't Pay Taxes - zFacts

Learn to read public schooler.

The quote you had your unrelated and off topic hissy fit to stated the IRS income taxes.

An you lecture on state taxes, sales tax, and payroll taxes.

Try and keep up and ask for all the help you need from the non-public school educated.

Yeah, like no one believes you are not a product of public education. Your posts expose you as a liar.
Speaking of reading comprehension. You seemed to miss something in my post..
Most people who don’t pay federal income tax do pay federal payroll taxes. Only 14.4% pay no federal taxes at all

Q: Why are you changing the topic to payroll taxes when we were discussing Federal Income Tax?

A: You lost.

THE END

Federal Payroll taxes are taxes on what? Income maybe?

Turn off the Katy Perry and read this three times:

"According to the IRS, the top 5% of wage earners pay 88% of income taxes collected! Perhaps there should be a minimum tax so the 47% of Americans who currently don't pay income taxes have to pay something so they some skin in the game!"


If you still think we are talking about Medicare and Social Security

you should sue the public schools you went to honey

I don't know how else to help you?
But ask?

 

[deanrd]

Normal people would say Bernie is right.

 

[OnePercenter]

Bernie Sanders called Trump's budget "grotesquely immoral". Thank God this socialist scum bag didn't get elected or else we'd be talking about increased taxes on the middle class and rich and more big government. Sanders: Trump budget is 'grotesquely immoral'

bernie is a bit of a hypocrite.

Yet, the rich should pay their share.

And the IRS says they do.

The rich/wealthy pay the same percentage of their total income in federal tax as you?

 

[LogikAndReazon]

Just think of the social justice programs marxist civil servants could fund with other peoples stolen estate assets.....
They could even decide who has the most wants and needs to be fulfilled....lol

Americanistas Unite !!!!!!!

 

[LogikAndReazon]

There should be maximums/caps on income and accumulated wealth....You know, to be fair !!!

Artificial equality of outcomes for all !!!!!!

 

[NightFox]

Actually according to the IRS says they pay more than their "share"...

High Income Earners (over $250K a year)
Earn approximately 28% of the total AGI
Pay 55% of the total federal income tax burden

All other earners earn 72% of the total AGI
Pay 45% of the total federal income tax burden

What percent of the wealth do they own?

What difference does that make? Are we taxing wealth in addition to income now?

It makes a huge difference.

Look, I agree, the wealthy pay too much of the total tax burden. But the rich, they LOVE IT LIKE THIS. They pay most of the tax burden, but they own DAMN NEAR ALL THE INCOME PRODUCING ASSETS.

We can fix the problem. We just increase the marginal tax rate on the wealthy.

You appear to be contradicting yourself, if they already "pay to much" of the total income tax burden then why does it matter if they own "damn near all" (which isn't true btw) of the income producing assets since those assets produce INCOME which is taxed as you put it "too much".

The current tax system was designed by the "rich", to protect the "rich", if you don't like the results the answer probably isn't to be found by tinkering with the rate structure under the current tax code (which frankly is a national embarrassment).

Hell, all we really have to do is tax unearned income the same as earned income

Unearned income is already taxed at a higher rate than earned income, just ask anybody that's bought a winning lottery ticket what rate they paid.

and eliminate the cap on income subject to Social Security taxes.

..and pay higher earners larger SS payouts? If you don't do that you're suggesting eliminating the veneer of entitlement that remains for SS and turning into just another welfare program.

But when marginal tax rates were significantly higher the wealthy paid a significantly lower percentage of the total tax burden. There are very real, and very concrete reasons for this.

That's because the tax code is designed to favor those who can afford legions of attorneys and accountants as is our banking and monetary system.

It really is fundamental economics. And when I say fundamental, well there hasn't been any "new" viable economic concept introduced in more than a hundred years.

What part of your argument is "really fundamental economics"? and what "fundamental" economic principles does it entail?

I would be happy to explain the economic principals to you but first we need to establish a baseline of your own understanding of economics. The first thing we need to do is explain the difference between earned and unearned income. Lottery winnings are taxed, and considered, EARNED INCOME. In fact, on the federal level, lottery winnings are taxed exactly like the income you earn from your job.

As far as I know, gambling winnings are considered unearned income and are taxed at a flat 25% rate (withholding rate of up to 28% may be required in some circumstances) , unless of course gambling happens to be your profession (in which case winnings would be taxed as regular income).
Here's a quick & dirty page on it:
Gambling Winnings Income Taxes, Taxable Income from Gambling

It is the special treatment of capital gains and unqualified dividends that is the problem.

It is really pretty simple. If you dig ditches you pay a higher tax rate than if you rent out shovels. When that happens, well pretty soon nobody wants to dig any ditches and everyone wants to rent out shovels. Hello howdy, that is the modern American economy. You know supply and demand.

I believe your model is broken there, there is no difference in the income tax rate between an individual digging ditches and an individual renting out shovels, of course deductions have to be factored in but from an income standpoint there is no difference; furthermore if everybody rented out shovels and nobody dug ditches there would be no demand for shovel rentals, in other words it's the demand for ditches which drives the demand for both diggers and shovels.

I mean conservatives are all about, when you tax something more than something else, well people DEMAND more of that which is taxed lower. WORK IS TAXED HIGHER THAN SPECULATION. What the hell do you think is going to happen.

I agree with you here, speculation is a (serious) problem as the global financial sector has largely become a giant casino that bets on price action instead of pursuing it's original purpose of financing economic output. Capital investment on the other hand is the primary driver of productivity and output growth which is the basis for higher wages, greater abundance (lower prices) and generally speaking, economic prosperity. Taxing capital investment at higher rates not only discourages investment in future economic output it also encourages excessive risk taking by those least able to afford it since it pushes up the level where yields are worthwhile and thus forces individuals to take greater risks to enjoy returns that stay ahead of inflation + taxes.

The big conundrum IMHO is the differentiation between investment and speculation, exactly how you do is that is subject to all sorts of manipulation from both a political patronage standpoint and a cooking the books standpoint.

The bottom line is, if you're concerned with economic inequality (which you appear to be) , looking at taxation and redistribution is IMHO looking in the wrong direction, it's a smokescreen, it's never worked as an equalizer and probably never will. all it does is increase the size of the pot that politicians and bureaucrats have to play with while at the same time punishing success and rewarding the wrong kinds of behavior, The results speak for themselves on this one.

The lions share of upward wealth transfer is a factor of both the existing monetary/banking system (distribution effects of inflation + banker directed capital flows) and our political system (patronage + good old fashioned graft) and I don't see any way either one of those two problems can be addressed without tearing down the entire system and starting over.

 

[Winston]

What percent of the wealth do they own?

What difference does that make? Are we taxing wealth in addition to income now?

It makes a huge difference.

Look, I agree, the wealthy pay too much of the total tax burden. But the rich, they LOVE IT LIKE THIS. They pay most of the tax burden, but they own DAMN NEAR ALL THE INCOME PRODUCING ASSETS.

We can fix the problem. We just increase the marginal tax rate on the wealthy.

You appear to be contradicting yourself, if they already "pay to much" of the total income tax burden then why does it matter if they own "damn near all" (which isn't true btw) of the income producing assets since those assets produce INCOME which is taxed as you put it "too much".

The current tax system was designed by the "rich", to protect the "rich", if you don't like the results the answer probably isn't to be found by tinkering with the rate structure under the current tax code (which frankly is a national embarrassment).

Hell, all we really have to do is tax unearned income the same as earned income

Unearned income is already taxed at a higher rate than earned income, just ask anybody that's bought a winning lottery ticket what rate they paid.

and eliminate the cap on income subject to Social Security taxes.

..and pay higher earners larger SS payouts? If you don't do that you're suggesting eliminating the veneer of entitlement that remains for SS and turning into just another welfare program.

But when marginal tax rates were significantly higher the wealthy paid a significantly lower percentage of the total tax burden. There are very real, and very concrete reasons for this.

That's because the tax code is designed to favor those who can afford legions of attorneys and accountants as is our banking and monetary system.

It really is fundamental economics. And when I say fundamental, well there hasn't been any "new" viable economic concept introduced in more than a hundred years.

What part of your argument is "really fundamental economics"? and what "fundamental" economic principles does it entail?

I would be happy to explain the economic principals to you but first we need to establish a baseline of your own understanding of economics. The first thing we need to do is explain the difference between earned and unearned income. Lottery winnings are taxed, and considered, EARNED INCOME. In fact, on the federal level, lottery winnings are taxed exactly like the income you earn from your job.

As far as I know, gambling winnings are considered unearned income and are taxed at a flat 25% rate (withholding rate of up to 28% may be required in some circumstances) , unless of course gambling happens to be your profession (in which case winnings would be taxed as regular income).
Here's a quick & dirty page on it:
Gambling Winnings Income Taxes, Taxable Income from Gambling

It is the special treatment of capital gains and unqualified dividends that is the problem.

It is really pretty simple. If you dig ditches you pay a higher tax rate than if you rent out shovels. When that happens, well pretty soon nobody wants to dig any ditches and everyone wants to rent out shovels. Hello howdy, that is the modern American economy. You know supply and demand.

I believe your model is broken there, there is no difference in the income tax rate between an individual digging ditches and an individual renting out shovels, of course deductions have to be factored in but from an income standpoint there is no difference; furthermore if everybody rented out shovels and nobody dug ditches there would be no demand for shovel rentals, in other words it's the demand for ditches which drives the demand for both diggers and shovels.

I mean conservatives are all about, when you tax something more than something else, well people DEMAND more of that which is taxed lower. WORK IS TAXED HIGHER THAN SPECULATION. What the hell do you think is going to happen.

I agree with you here, speculation is a (serious) problem as the global financial sector has largely become a giant casino that bets on price action instead of pursuing it's original purpose of financing economic output. Capital investment on the other hand is the primary driver of productivity and output growth which is the basis for higher wages, greater abundance (lower prices) and generally speaking, economic prosperity. Taxing capital investment at higher rates not only discourages investment in future economic output it also encourages excessive risk taking by those least able to afford it since it pushes up the level where yields are worthwhile and thus forces individuals to take greater risks to enjoy returns that stay ahead of inflation + taxes.

The big conundrum IMHO is the differentiation between investment and speculation, exactly how you do is that is subject to all sorts of manipulation from both a political patronage standpoint and a cooking the books standpoint.

The bottom line is, if you're concerned with economic inequality (which you appear to be) , looking at taxation and redistribution is IMHO looking in the wrong direction, it's a smokescreen, it's never worked as an equalizer and probably never will. all it does is increase the size of the pot that politicians and bureaucrats have to play with while at the same time punishing success and rewarding the wrong kinds of behavior, The results speak for themselves on this one.

The lions share of upward wealth transfer is a factor of both the existing monetary/banking system (distribution effects of inflation + banker directed capital flows) and our political system (patronage + good old fashioned graft) and I don't see any way either one of those two problems can be addressed without tearing down the entire system and starting over.

No, gambling winnings are considered earned income and taxed at the filer's marginal tax rate. Yes, it could be twenty five percent, but it could be lower and it could be higher, depends on the income of the filer. Gambling winnings are claimed on line 21 of the 1040, other income. There is no special rate for gambling winnings.

The driving force behind the wealth transfer is rent seeking of which political contributions are a driving force. You could address rent seeking by simply outlawing the practice. But the increased rent seeking is directly attributable to our tax system.

First up is the attempt to tame what is called rent-seeking—the practice of increasing wealth by taking it from others rather than generating any actual economic activity. Lobbying, for example, allows large companies to spend money influencing laws and regulations in their favor, but lobbying itself isn’t helpful for the economy besides creating a small number of jobs in Washington; it produces nothing but helps an already rich and influential group grow more rich and more influential. Stiglitz suggests that reducing rent-seeking is critical to reining in inequality, especially when it comes to complex issues such as housing prices, patents, and the power that large corporations wield.

To overhaul these behaviors and the policies that support it, Stiglitz says that America should give up what he deems the “incorrect and outdated” belief in supply-side economics, which grows from the premise that regulation and taxes dampen business opportunities and economic growth. Instead, massive changes to tax laws, regulations, and the financial sector are needed, he says, in order to curb rent-seeking. For instance, increasing tax rates, ending preferential treatment for top earners, and refining the tax code would decrease incentives to amass extreme amounts of wealth, since it would be so heavily taxed, and that tax would be difficult to shirk. Stiglitz suggests a 5 percent increase to the tax rate of the top 1 percent of earners—a move that he says would raise as much as $1.5 trillion over 10 years. He also calls for a “fair tax,” which would eliminate preferential tax treatment for money earned from capital gains and dividends—perks enjoyed primarily by people who can afford to own a lot of stock.

Stiglitz: Here's How to Fix Inequality