The rich get richer and the poorer remain poorer?

[usmcstinger]

The discussion is about markets not about the personal finances of random people you know.

If you have anything to say about the changes in markets that have lead to growing income inequality then I will be happy to respond.

Until then....

ROFLMAO

Not people I know. Examples of the irresponsible things people do with their finances.
We're not discussing markets. They have not changed. Market based economy is just that. Market based. No one would be bitching if they were not running out of money before the end of the current week or pay period. Why would they?
Your entire premise is based on your belief that inequality exists. It doesn't. For that to be true, then equality would have been the economic model in the first place. Never has. Never will. We have brilliant minds and creative hands. We have ditch diggers and convenience store workers. Is it your notion that they should be equally compensated because "they work hard"?...Please. We are not talking about lifting those at the bottom. The process begins with punishing those at the top.
This inequality thing is simply a political argument set forth to build a voting base for democrats.
In short, it's a narrative.

Yes the issue is about markets.

Yes they can change and have changed.

No it is not about paying ditch diggers the same as "brilliant minds."

No it is not about punishing those at the top.

So yeah, you are just pathetically wrong on all of your points.

The issue is that upward mobility ( making more money ) and downward mobility ( making less money ) has continued to take place all along the income ladder.

 

[usmcstinger]

Let me get this straight. Your sources to prove that the Tax Foundation isn't a reliable source are Paul Krugman and Wikipedia?

Idiot, please. Shut the hell up before you actually hurt yourself.

The Tax Foundation article was based on a CBO Study. Are you going to say that the CBO is not a viable source. You name calling shows how immature you are. Grow up.

When did I say the Tax Foundation OR the CBO were unreliable? I said Paul Krugman and Wikipedia were unreliable sources to depend on for calling the Tax Foundation unreliable.

Never mind growing up. Grow literate. Dumbass.[/QUOTE
There you go again!

 

[Bombur]

Oh but it is. What's the number one idea you libs put forth in your alleged solution to so called 'income inequality'? Confiscatory taxation and government control. That in and of itself is punishment.
Knock it off with the insults. (Pathetically)...Is that why you came here? To heap insults on people who dare to disagree with your point of view.
Let me know. I can get down into the gutter with the best of them. Debate or trade barbs. Your call.

The point of taxing the rich more is to allow us to tax the middle class less. Using the word "punishment" is juvenile and just a lame appeal to emotion. I am not all that interested in illogical arguments like that.

This argument has been settled.
The so called 'wealthy' already pay the lion's share of taxes.
Taxation solves nothing. We see that in the gigantic federal and state spending deficits.
You libs hang on to this notion that all problems can be solved by throwing money at them.
Ok, so explain why for example in the states of New Jersey, California, Illinois and New York extract some of the nation's highest tax revenue streams yet, each of these states has massive debt and deficit.
If you are going to respond with "the rich don't pay enough', you are wasting keystrokes.
BTW, your Keynesian theory regarding tax them more so the others can be taxed less is false.
A) government will always find things on which to spend the so called 'savings' B) if taxes are increased to the point where individuals have significantly less to spend, they move away from the taxes.
And example of "B" is the billions of dollars in wealth that have left the above states for other more business and income friendly locales. Since the mid 2000's, over $70 billion has left the state of New Jersey. Another $100 billion has disappeared from NY. That along with over 3 million in population since the beginning of the last decade.
The States of Texas, Arizona and New Mexico are depopulating California.
The kind of taxation you seek IS punishment. Your 'interest' irrelevant.

They will continue to pay a higher percentage of income taxes as income inequality gets worse. Saying they pay the "lion's share" isn't all that meaningful when the reason they pay so much more is because they have so much more.

I was not stating theory when I said the point was about the nature of tax rates. I was establishing the context in which the discussion was taking place. I was not arguing for increased tax revenue.

The idea that all economic activity can be attributed to tax rates is a fairy tail told to the ignorant so that the rich can get out of paying taxes.

 

[Bombur]

Not people I know. Examples of the irresponsible things people do with their finances.
We're not discussing markets. They have not changed. Market based economy is just that. Market based. No one would be bitching if they were not running out of money before the end of the current week or pay period. Why would they?
Your entire premise is based on your belief that inequality exists. It doesn't. For that to be true, then equality would have been the economic model in the first place. Never has. Never will. We have brilliant minds and creative hands. We have ditch diggers and convenience store workers. Is it your notion that they should be equally compensated because "they work hard"?...Please. We are not talking about lifting those at the bottom. The process begins with punishing those at the top.
This inequality thing is simply a political argument set forth to build a voting base for democrats.
In short, it's a narrative.

Yes the issue is about markets.

Yes they can change and have changed.

No it is not about paying ditch diggers the same as "brilliant minds."

No it is not about punishing those at the top.

So yeah, you are just pathetically wrong on all of your points.

The issue is that upward mobility ( making more money ) and downward mobility ( making less money ) has continued to take place all along the income ladder.

Less income mobility is a possible and likely outcome of income inequality but the issue of income inequality encompasses more than just that.

 

[OnePercenter]

Answered in an earlier post.
But to repeat....See "Soviet Union"...70 years of "from each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs".
FAIL..
Command and control economics leaves ZERO incentive for the producers to produce. The inventors to invent. The skilled to ply their trade. Why? Because policy of the central government mandates the taking of the fruits of that labor for government to distribute as it sees fit. This of course after the government ruling elite gets it's cut of the bounty.
There is a solution to your problem. If you believe you are under paid, do something about it. Get training. Go back to school. Go to your boss and ask what you can do to improve your value to the employer....Above all, Stop complaining.

-Nothing that you wrote has anything to do with my plan. All my plan does is move taxes into the hands of Americans to spend as they see fit, and control greed.

-Let's put a stop to this 'value to the employer' bullshit. As an employer (for decades) I can tell you with fact that employees make employers 100% of revenue. So I ask you; What is the value of employees?

Redistribution through taxation. Tried by the old USSR...And failed.
Employees have two core functions. One, is to do the work that the employer cannot do themselves. Two, in doing the work, generating revenue for the company to justify the employee's presence.
If you are truthful in your claim....Well, let's do it this way. As an employer, what is the largest percentage of cost to produce or provide a service?

More redistribution bullshit? Great! Another talking point without relevance!

As an employer, what is the largest percentage of cost to produce or provide a service?

The same people that make all of my money for me.

 

[Listening]

While America certainly has its share of people in chronic poverty and those with vast wealth, we are an economically mobile society. There are no class or cast systems that might prevent anyone with initiative from bettering their station in life. IRS data tracking the same group of taxpayers between 1999 and 2007 showed that Americans can move from one economic group to another fairly quickly.For example, nearly 60% of taxpayers who began in the lowest income group in 1999, moved to a higher income group by 2007. Conversely, roughly 40% of taxpayers who started out in the highest income group moved to lower income groups within eight years.
Official Statistics on Inequality, the Top 1%, and Redistribution | Tax Foundation

Hey lets just go on our merry way here in America. There is no problem. It's just the jealous poor people bitching about whatever they bitch about.

One day, when the ultra rich control 60% of the nations income, will you be surprised that the ultra rich pay an even higher percentage of income tax?

How about if the ultra rich have 80% of the nations income. Still be surprised that they pay the bulk of the income tax.

Them poor ultra rich people. I bet you feel for them. All the vitriol and jealousy directed at them. Poor poor ultra wealthy people.

But I do want to be clear about one thing. I could give a flying fuck less if the ultra rich people were taxed at 50% of their income. If you make 10 million a year and can't get by on 5 million a year, fuck ya is what I say. They don't have an income problem, they must have a spending problem.

And who cares what "you say" ? Certainly not me.

If you make 10 million a year, you are doing pretty good. Economics teaches that such incomes should not exist in an open market. Why don't you explain how they exist to begin with. Please, pray tell.

If you can't...then STFU.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Where is OWS?

 

[Cecilie1200]

The Tax Foundation article was based on a CBO Study. Are you going to say that the CBO is not a viable source. You name calling shows how immature you are. Grow up.

When did I say the Tax Foundation OR the CBO were unreliable? I said Paul Krugman and Wikipedia were unreliable sources to depend on for calling the Tax Foundation unreliable.

Never mind growing up. Grow literate. Dumbass.[/QUOTE
There you go again!

Expecting people to be able to read and comprehend in English? Yeah, I'm quirky that way.

 

[thereisnospoon]

-Nothing that you wrote has anything to do with my plan. All my plan does is move taxes into the hands of Americans to spend as they see fit, and control greed.

-Let's put a stop to this 'value to the employer' bullshit. As an employer (for decades) I can tell you with fact that employees make employers 100% of revenue. So I ask you; What is the value of employees?

Redistribution through taxation. Tried by the old USSR...And failed.
Employees have two core functions. One, is to do the work that the employer cannot do themselves. Two, in doing the work, generating revenue for the company to justify the employee's presence.
If you are truthful in your claim....Well, let's do it this way. As an employer, what is the largest percentage of cost to produce or provide a service?

More redistribution bullshit? Great! Another talking point without relevance!

As an employer, what is the largest percentage of cost to produce or provide a service?

The same people that make all of my money for me.

Yes redistribution. FAIL..
Second item...You did not answer my question.
Double FAIL.
Your dream of a socialist utopia in the US will never come to fruition.
If it is your desire to live in such a place, I suggest to renounce your citizenship and high tail it the hell out of here.

 

[thereisnospoon]

The point of taxing the rich more is to allow us to tax the middle class less. Using the word "punishment" is juvenile and just a lame appeal to emotion. I am not all that interested in illogical arguments like that.

This argument has been settled.
The so called 'wealthy' already pay the lion's share of taxes.
Taxation solves nothing. We see that in the gigantic federal and state spending deficits.
You libs hang on to this notion that all problems can be solved by throwing money at them.
Ok, so explain why for example in the states of New Jersey, California, Illinois and New York extract some of the nation's highest tax revenue streams yet, each of these states has massive debt and deficit.
If you are going to respond with "the rich don't pay enough', you are wasting keystrokes.
BTW, your Keynesian theory regarding tax them more so the others can be taxed less is false.
A) government will always find things on which to spend the so called 'savings' B) if taxes are increased to the point where individuals have significantly less to spend, they move away from the taxes.
And example of "B" is the billions of dollars in wealth that have left the above states for other more business and income friendly locales. Since the mid 2000's, over $70 billion has left the state of New Jersey. Another $100 billion has disappeared from NY. That along with over 3 million in population since the beginning of the last decade.
The States of Texas, Arizona and New Mexico are depopulating California.
The kind of taxation you seek IS punishment. Your 'interest' irrelevant.

They will continue to pay a higher percentage of income taxes as income inequality gets worse. Saying they pay the "lion's share" isn't all that meaningful when the reason they pay so much more is because they have so much more.

I was not stating theory when I said the point was about the nature of tax rates. I was establishing the context in which the discussion was taking place. I was not arguing for increased tax revenue.

The idea that all economic activity can be attributed to tax rates is a fairy tail told to the ignorant so that the rich can get out of paying taxes.

What business is it of your how much any one has?

 

[OnePercenter]

Redistribution through taxation. Tried by the old USSR...And failed.
Employees have two core functions. One, is to do the work that the employer cannot do themselves. Two, in doing the work, generating revenue for the company to justify the employee's presence.
If you are truthful in your claim....Well, let's do it this way. As an employer, what is the largest percentage of cost to produce or provide a service?

More redistribution bullshit? Great! Another talking point without relevance!

As an employer, what is the largest percentage of cost to produce or provide a service?

The same people that make all of my money for me.

Yes redistribution. FAIL..
Second item...You did not answer my question.
Double FAIL.
Your dream of a socialist utopia in the US will never come to fruition.
If it is your desire to live in such a place, I suggest to renounce your citizenship and high tail it the hell out of here.

Your ignorance is astounding!

 

[OnePercenter]

This argument has been settled.
The so called 'wealthy' already pay the lion's share of taxes.
Taxation solves nothing. We see that in the gigantic federal and state spending deficits.
You libs hang on to this notion that all problems can be solved by throwing money at them.
Ok, so explain why for example in the states of New Jersey, California, Illinois and New York extract some of the nation's highest tax revenue streams yet, each of these states has massive debt and deficit.
If you are going to respond with "the rich don't pay enough', you are wasting keystrokes.
BTW, your Keynesian theory regarding tax them more so the others can be taxed less is false.
A) government will always find things on which to spend the so called 'savings' B) if taxes are increased to the point where individuals have significantly less to spend, they move away from the taxes.
And example of "B" is the billions of dollars in wealth that have left the above states for other more business and income friendly locales. Since the mid 2000's, over $70 billion has left the state of New Jersey. Another $100 billion has disappeared from NY. That along with over 3 million in population since the beginning of the last decade.
The States of Texas, Arizona and New Mexico are depopulating California.
The kind of taxation you seek IS punishment. Your 'interest' irrelevant.

They will continue to pay a higher percentage of income taxes as income inequality gets worse. Saying they pay the "lion's share" isn't all that meaningful when the reason they pay so much more is because they have so much more.

I was not stating theory when I said the point was about the nature of tax rates. I was establishing the context in which the discussion was taking place. I was not arguing for increased tax revenue.

The idea that all economic activity can be attributed to tax rates is a fairy tail told to the ignorant so that the rich can get out of paying taxes.

What business is it of your how much any one has?

The reason the rich pay a less effective tax rate are the same people that made you their Bitch.

 

[thereisnospoon]

More redistribution bullshit? Great! Another talking point without relevance!



The same people that make all of my money for me.

Yes redistribution. FAIL..
Second item...You did not answer my question.
Double FAIL.
Your dream of a socialist utopia in the US will never come to fruition.
If it is your desire to live in such a place, I suggest to renounce your citizenship and high tail it the hell out of here.

Your ignorance is astounding!

Instead of a drive by post absent of substance, who don't you defend your position?
Have you nothing but silly one liners in response?
Come on....Bring something to the table.
You still have not answered the question.

 

[thereisnospoon]

They will continue to pay a higher percentage of income taxes as income inequality gets worse. Saying they pay the "lion's share" isn't all that meaningful when the reason they pay so much more is because they have so much more.

I was not stating theory when I said the point was about the nature of tax rates. I was establishing the context in which the discussion was taking place. I was not arguing for increased tax revenue.

The idea that all economic activity can be attributed to tax rates is a fairy tail told to the ignorant so that the rich can get out of paying taxes.

What business is it of your how much any one has?

The reason the rich pay a less effective tax rate are the same people that made you their Bitch.

Still you will not answer my question.
You do not know the answer, do you?
I think you're full of shit. You do not own a business, do you?.
Hey genius, I am beholden to no one. I could not care less what the guy in the private golf community is dong, who he is screwing or how many Bentlys he owns. It's none of my business and his shit has ZERO effect on my shit.
You impart a deep seated hatred of those you refer to as "rich"....Why is that?
The irony of it all is most wealthy people vote democrat and donate to liberal causes.
Why do you think those Northeastern States where most of the nation's wealth is located are all "blue"?

 

[OnePercenter]

What business is it of your how much any one has?

The reason the rich pay a less effective tax rate are the same people that made you their Bitch.

Still you will not answer my question.
You do not know the answer, do you?
I think you're full of shit. You do not own a business, do you?.
Hey genius, I am beholden to no one. I could not care less what the guy in the private golf community is dong, who he is screwing or how many Bentlys he owns. It's none of my business and his shit has ZERO effect on my shit.
You impart a deep seated hatred of those you refer to as "rich"....Why is that?
The irony of it all is most wealthy people vote democrat and donate to liberal causes.
Why do you think those Northeastern States where most of the nation's wealth is located are all "blue"?

The reason the rich pay a less effective tax rate are the same people that made you their Bitch.

 

[arKangel]

How can the poor get poorer? If you don't have anything, you cant have less than anything.

Slavery ya retard.
I bet you want poor people to just be slaves right?

 

[thereisnospoon]

The reason the rich pay a less effective tax rate are the same people that made you their Bitch.

Still you will not answer my question.
You do not know the answer, do you?
I think you're full of shit. You do not own a business, do you?.
Hey genius, I am beholden to no one. I could not care less what the guy in the private golf community is dong, who he is screwing or how many Bentlys he owns. It's none of my business and his shit has ZERO effect on my shit.
You impart a deep seated hatred of those you refer to as "rich"....Why is that?
The irony of it all is most wealthy people vote democrat and donate to liberal causes.
Why do you think those Northeastern States where most of the nation's wealth is located are all "blue"?

The reason the rich pay a less effective tax rate are the same people that made you their Bitch.

Repeating a dumb statement does not make it any more relevant.

 

[OnePercenter]

Still you will not answer my question.
You do not know the answer, do you?
I think you're full of shit. You do not own a business, do you?.
Hey genius, I am beholden to no one. I could not care less what the guy in the private golf community is dong, who he is screwing or how many Bentlys he owns. It's none of my business and his shit has ZERO effect on my shit.
You impart a deep seated hatred of those you refer to as "rich"....Why is that?
The irony of it all is most wealthy people vote democrat and donate to liberal causes.
Why do you think those Northeastern States where most of the nation's wealth is located are all "blue"?

The reason the rich pay a less effective tax rate are the same people that made you their Bitch.

Repeating a dumb statement does not make it any more relevant.

If you think my statement is dumb, then you must be their Bitch.

 

[Uncensored2008]

If you think my statement is dumb, then you must be their Bitch.

Have another bong hit and huff another can of spray paint - there are police cars out there that aren't going to shit on themselves!

OWS, sucking SEIU cock since 2008!

 

[JimH52]

While America certainly has its share of people in chronic poverty and those with vast wealth, we are an economically mobile society. There are no class or cast systems that might prevent anyone with initiative from bettering their station in life. IRS data tracking the same group of taxpayers between 1999 and 2007 showed that Americans can move from one economic group to another fairly quickly.For example, nearly 60% of taxpayers who began in the lowest income group in 1999, moved to a higher income group by 2007. Conversely, roughly 40% of taxpayers who started out in the highest income group moved to lower income groups within eight years.
Official Statistics on Inequality, the Top 1%, and Redistribution | Tax Foundation

Of course, it is the Ronald Reagan Trickle Down way...