Should The Rich Be Required To Pay Higher Taxes In the US?

Sure , raise the tax rate to 90% then you know what those 1% will do? Why they will stop earning of course.

Think the Waltons need to keep Wal Mart open to eat? Of course not, they could close every store in the company tomorrow and it wouldn't affect them at all.

The workers , however............

Sure, we had EFFECTIVE rates 3 times today's rates 1932-1980, did they stop creating wealth? lol


average_effective_federal_tax_rates.png


AMAZING THE RIGHT SUCKS OFF THE PLUTOCRAT CLASS!

NO ONE should pay a 80% tax rate, that's just stupid.
 
Sure , raise the tax rate to 90% then you know what those 1% will do? Why they will stop earning of course.

Think the Waltons need to keep Wal Mart open to eat? Of course not, they could close every store in the company tomorrow and it wouldn't affect them at all.

The workers , however............

Except NOBODY pays tax rates. Not even you.
 
Sure , raise the tax rate to 90% then you know what those 1% will do? Why they will stop earning of course.

Think the Waltons need to keep Wal Mart open to eat? Of course not, they could close every store in the company tomorrow and it wouldn't affect them at all.

The workers , however............

Sure, we had EFFECTIVE rates 3 times today's rates 1932-1980, did they stop creating wealth? lol


average_effective_federal_tax_rates.png


AMAZING THE RIGHT SUCKS OFF THE PLUTOCRAT CLASS!

NO ONE should pay a 80% tax rate, that's just stupid.

You mean like when John Paulson gamed the system and "made" $4.7 billion in 2007? Oh wait, he didn't pay 80%, it was 15%


How Goldman secretly bet on the U.S. housing crash
 
The simple solution, for those of you who are annoyed by people amassing wealth, is to stop giving them your money.


Without false premises, distortions and lies, what would the right wingers EVER have Bubs?

Uh.... are you just mashing keys randomly, or do you you mean something with that?


Who knew your false premise on the left "hating" wealth would go over your head? Oh wait, I bet it didn't, just ANOTHER right wing denier!
 
The simple solution, for those of you who are annoyed by people amassing wealth, is to stop giving them your money.


Without false premises, distortions and lies, what would the right wingers EVER have Bubs?

Uh.... are you just mashing keys randomly, or do you you mean something with that?


Who knew your false premise on the left "hating" wealth would go over your head? Oh wait, I bet it didn't, just ANOTHER right wing denier!

Your left/right delusion has you trapped.
 
Sure , raise the tax rate to 90% then you know what those 1% will do? Why they will stop earning of course.

Think the Waltons need to keep Wal Mart open to eat? Of course not, they could close every store in the company tomorrow and it wouldn't affect them at all.

The workers , however............

Sure, we had EFFECTIVE rates 3 times today's rates 1932-1980, did they stop creating wealth? lol


average_effective_federal_tax_rates.png


AMAZING THE RIGHT SUCKS OFF THE PLUTOCRAT CLASS!

NO ONE should pay a 80% tax rate, that's just stupid.
No, it isn't. Tax rates must meet the exigency or they are useless in case of any need of popular support.

In any case, wartime public policies should require wartime tax rates or there should be no delegation of wartime social Powers.
 
The simple solution, for those of you who are annoyed by people amassing wealth, is to stop giving them your money.


Without false premises, distortions and lies, what would the right wingers EVER have Bubs?

Uh.... are you just mashing keys randomly, or do you you mean something with that?


Who knew your false premise on the left "hating" wealth would go over your head? Oh wait, I bet it didn't, just ANOTHER right wing denier!

Your left/right delusion has you trapped.

Right Bubba, CONservative/Libertarian policy NEVER is on the correct side of US history

PLEASE give me one POLICY EVER?
 
The simple solution, for those of you who are annoyed by people amassing wealth, is to stop giving them your money.


Without false premises, distortions and lies, what would the right wingers EVER have Bubs?

Uh.... are you just mashing keys randomly, or do you you mean something with that?


Who knew your false premise on the left "hating" wealth would go over your head? Oh wait, I bet it didn't, just ANOTHER right wing denier!

Your left/right delusion has you trapped.

Right Bubba, CONservative/Libertarian policy NEVER is on the correct side of US history

PLEASE give me one POLICY EVER?

Your left/right delusion has you trapped.
 
Without false premises, distortions and lies, what would the right wingers EVER have Bubs?

Uh.... are you just mashing keys randomly, or do you you mean something with that?


Who knew your false premise on the left "hating" wealth would go over your head? Oh wait, I bet it didn't, just ANOTHER right wing denier!

Your left/right delusion has you trapped.

Right Bubba, CONservative/Libertarian policy NEVER is on the correct side of US history

PLEASE give me one POLICY EVER?

Your left/right delusion has you trapped.

As usual, NOTHING from you. Shocking
 
Sure , raise the tax rate to 90% then you know what those 1% will do? Why they will stop earning of course.

Think the Waltons need to keep Wal Mart open to eat? Of course not, they could close every store in the company tomorrow and it wouldn't affect them at all.

The workers , however............

Sure, we had EFFECTIVE rates 3 times today's rates 1932-1980, did they stop creating wealth? lol


average_effective_federal_tax_rates.png


AMAZING THE RIGHT SUCKS OFF THE PLUTOCRAT CLASS!

NO ONE should pay a 80% tax rate, that's just stupid.

You mean like when John Paulson gamed the system and "made" $4.7 billion in 2007? Oh wait, he didn't pay 80%, it was 15%


How Goldman secretly bet on the U.S. housing crash

You mean like when John Paulson gamed the system and "made" $4.7 billion in 2007?

He didn't game the system, comrade.
 
Sure , raise the tax rate to 90% then you know what those 1% will do? Why they will stop earning of course.

Think the Waltons need to keep Wal Mart open to eat? Of course not, they could close every store in the company tomorrow and it wouldn't affect them at all.

The workers , however............

Sure, we had EFFECTIVE rates 3 times today's rates 1932-1980, did they stop creating wealth? lol


average_effective_federal_tax_rates.png


AMAZING THE RIGHT SUCKS OFF THE PLUTOCRAT CLASS!

NO ONE should pay a 80% tax rate, that's just stupid.

You mean like when John Paulson gamed the system and "made" $4.7 billion in 2007? Oh wait, he didn't pay 80%, it was 15%


How Goldman secretly bet on the U.S. housing crash

You mean like when John Paulson gamed the system and "made" $4.7 billion in 2007?

He didn't game the system, comrade.
not only did he not game the system, he still paid more than most people will make in a lifetime.
I think that is far more than his fair share.
Now, back to the question that nobody can answer.
what is it that gives anyone the right to someone else s money.
isn't that really what the left is worried about, what they want? they want someones earned income redistributed to them.
 
Do not let anyone who wails about "fair share", or "pay more", or any other nebulous term get away with it. Always insist that they quantify it. What exactly is a "fair share"? Exactly how much more should they be forced to pay?


incomeinequality.gif


average_effective_federal_tax_rates.png



CBPP2.png




lede_3723_%28wasnt%29.jpg



lede_3723_%28pluto%29.jpg



Income-Inequality02.jpg
So, what's your number? You do realize, don't you, that you perfectly illustrate my point? You're yelling that they need to pay more. Okay, how much more? What figure would satisfy your envy?


Envy huh? lol

Weird how the "job creators" pre Reaganomics loved our nation enough to pay enough of a tax "burden' that we not only built the best infrastructure in the world, but had almost no debt, THEN we decided this Punishing" the "job creators" was somehow not only unfair, but held our economy back? lol

AGAIN, LETS GO BACK TO THE TAX RATES WHERE THE TOP 1/10TH OF 1% OF US PAID 50%-70% (EFFECTIVE) FROM 1932-1980?
Okay, so, since that won't do anything to the Obama deficit, what, beyond spite, will be accomplished by doing so? And what will you do when they avoid paying a lot of taxes and are still rich? Demand more?
 
Do not let anyone who wails about "fair share", or "pay more", or any other nebulous term get away with it. Always insist that they quantify it. What exactly is a "fair share"? Exactly how much more should they be forced to pay?


incomeinequality.gif


average_effective_federal_tax_rates.png



CBPP2.png




lede_3723_%28wasnt%29.jpg



lede_3723_%28pluto%29.jpg



Income-Inequality02.jpg
So, what's your number? You do realize, don't you, that you perfectly illustrate my point? You're yelling that they need to pay more. Okay, how much more? What figure would satisfy your envy?


Envy huh? lol

Weird how the "job creators" pre Reaganomics loved our nation enough to pay enough of a tax "burden' that we not only built the best infrastructure in the world, but had almost no debt, THEN we decided this Punishing" the "job creators" was somehow not only unfair, but held our economy back? lol

AGAIN, LETS GO BACK TO THE TAX RATES WHERE THE TOP 1/10TH OF 1% OF US PAID 50%-70% (EFFECTIVE) FROM 1932-1980?
Okay, so, since that won't do anything to the Obama deficit, what, beyond spite, will be accomplished by doing so? And what will you do when they avoid paying a lot of taxes and are still rich? Demand more?


Top 1% are taxed at 23% EFFECTIVE rates. Go to 46% and the deficit IS wiped out Bubs

AND still leaves them VASTLY wealthy. Weird right Bubs?


AGI ($ millions)

Top 1% income $1,976,738 (trillion)


Summary of Latest Federal Income Tax Data




average_effective_federal_tax_rates.png





Sanders.jpg
 
Reagan must have been the most powerful man to have ever lived.

The guy served only eight years in office, I don't think the GOP held majority in either the House or Senate however this guy got every policy he ever wanted passed and after 27 years not one Democrat, even when they held the House and Senate, can't undo a damn thing he did to ruin the country. Are Democrats this clueless or what? Even under Obama the rich are getting richer! Neither he nor Clinton are capable of changing the direction. Reagan was superhuman!
 
Sure , raise the tax rate to 90% then you know what those 1% will do? Why they will stop earning of course.

Think the Waltons need to keep Wal Mart open to eat? Of course not, they could close every store in the company tomorrow and it wouldn't affect them at all.

The workers , however............

Sure, we had EFFECTIVE rates 3 times today's rates 1932-1980, did they stop creating wealth? lol


average_effective_federal_tax_rates.png


AMAZING THE RIGHT SUCKS OFF THE PLUTOCRAT CLASS!

NO ONE should pay a 80% tax rate, that's just stupid.

You mean like when John Paulson gamed the system and "made" $4.7 billion in 2007? Oh wait, he didn't pay 80%, it was 15%


How Goldman secretly bet on the U.S. housing crash

You mean like when John Paulson gamed the system and "made" $4.7 billion in 2007?

He didn't game the system, comrade.
not only did he not game the system, he still paid more than most people will make in a lifetime.
I think that is far more than his fair share.
Now, back to the question that nobody can answer.
what is it that gives anyone the right to someone else s money.
isn't that really what the left is worried about, what they want? they want someones earned income redistributed to them.


John Paulson should be rotting in prison

John Paulson and the Greatest Pump and Short Fraud Ever

By now, everybody knows that the market for collateralized debt obligations was riddled with fraud in the lead-up to the financial crisis. What is less known is the fact that hedge fund managers helped create and inflate the market for these toxic securities specifically so that they could bet against them and profit from the inevitable collapse.

An example of a particularly sordid scheme, orchestrated by hedge fund billionaire John Paulson, was discovered some time ago by David Fiderer, a blogger for the Huffington Post. The information in Fiderer’s blog is rather incriminating, and, of course, the mainstream media is not on the case, so I think it bears repeating.

In a close reading of Wall Street Journal Gregory Zuckerman’s book, “The Greatest Trade Ever”, an otherwise starry-eyed account of Paulson’s bets against the mortgage market, Fiderer discovered this nugget:

“Paulson and [partner Paolo Pellegrini] were eager to find ways to expand their wager against risky mortgages. Accumulating it in the market sometimes proved to be a slow process. So they made appointments with bankers at Bear Stearns, Deutsche Bank (NYSE:DB), Goldman Sachs (NYSE:GS), and other banks to ask if they would create CDOs that Paulson & Co. could essentially bet against.”

As Fiderer explains, Paulson asked the banks to create those CDOs “so that they could be sold to some suckers at close to par. That way, Paulson’s hedge fund could approach some other sucker who would sell an insurance policy, or credit default swap, on the newly minted CDOs. Bear, Deutsche and Goldman knew perfectly well what Paulson’s motivation was. He made no secret of his belief that the CDOs subordinate claims on the mortgage collateral were close to worthless. By the time others have figured out the fatal flaws in these securities which had been ignored by the rating agencies, Paulson could collect up to $5 billion.

Paulson not only initiated these transactions, he also specified the terms he wanted, identifying which mortgages would be stuffed into the CDOs, and how the CDOs should be structured. Within the overall framework set by Paulson’s team, banks and investors were allowed to do some minor tweaking.”

It is not clear which banks ultimately participated in Paulson’s scam, but Fiderer quotes Bear Stearns trader Scott Eichel as saying that his bank refused. “It didn’t pass the ethics standards;” Eichel said, “it was a reputation issue and it didn’t pass our moral compass. We didn’t think we could sell deals that someone was shorting on the other side.” Bear Stearns’ moral compass was usually pointed towards the darker regions, but perhaps this is why Paulson subsequently became one of the more eager short sellers of Bear Stearns’ stock.
 

Forum List

Back
Top