Why does the left demonize affordable energy?

[JoeB131]

Not according to the CBO, and the IRS tax data.

Ywan, you do realize income tax isn't the only tax collected, right? That all the other taxes collected hit the working class harder? Or are you just fucking stupid. Good thing you inherited money.

 

[JoeB131]

Prior to 1978, 63% of the population lived on less than $2 a day. Now it's much higher, and there is massive inequality. There are millions of business startups that have billionaires in the center of them. You are crazy. Flat out, you don't know what you are talking about.

Most of China is still dirt poor. China's economic growth has been due to letting big corporations rape the country in a way they aren't allowed to in the west anymore. China is goingto be a BIG problem when one billion Chinese realize there's nothing "Trickling down".

 

[JoeB131]

Cuba was almost on par with the US standard of living. Now they are impoverished.

No, it wasn't. Here's what JFK had to say about Pre-revolutionary Cuba.

"I believe that there is no country in the world including any and all the countries under colonial domination, where economic colonization, humiliation and exploitation were worse than in Cuba, in part owing to my country's policies during the Batista regime. I approved the proclamation which Fidel Castro made in the Sierra Maestra, when he justifiably called for justice and especially yearned to rid Cuba of corruption. I will even go further: to some extent it is as though Batista was the incarnation of a number of sins on the part of the United States. Now we shall have to pay for those sins. In the matter of the Batista regime, I am in agreement with the first Cuban revolutionaries. That is perfectly clear."—U.S. President John F. Kennedy, interview with Jean Daniel, 24 October 1963[27]

Except what we've done is spent 55 years punishing Cuba for rejecting us.

What amazes me is that you praise China, which has a truly horrible human rights record, including persecuting religion, forcing women to have abortions and executing people to sell their organs, but you are still pissy at Cuba for rejecting us.

And you have the fucking gall to call yourself a "Christian".

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Irrelevent. I had to cash it out in 2011 to pay medical bills

Very relevant because most of us that were in the market made a killing when it came back. For instance my investment company stopped buying shares when the market began to tumble. They just sat on my employers (and my) contributions. When it hit bottom, they poured all that money back in. It was like buying two shares for the price of one.

 

[JoeB131]

Very relevant because most of us that were in the market made a killing when it came back. For instance my investment company stopped buying shares when the market began to tumble. They just sat on my employers (and my) contributions. When it hit bottom, they poured all that money back in. It was like buying two shares for the price of one.

Guy, so you are rich against this week? Because you keep flipping back between being so poor you have to go on disability and not being able to afford health insurance to being so rich you just don't know what to do with all your money.

I can't talk about what the scammers who ran our 401K did, because I don't know. What I do know is that in 2009, after I was let go from that job because I had run up too many medical bills, they were posting 60% losses. And these were in the "Safe stocks".

Simply put, I'm not going to bet that I can outsmart the wall street scammers. I'll take my nice social security, thank you. And if we can get single payer health care and put the crooked insurance companies out of business, I'm down for that, too.

 

[Andylusion]

Are you kidding?

So you sold your stocks, when they were on sale? You sold your assets when the value was low? Are you seriously telling me that is what you did? Yes or no, did you sell off your assets when the price was on sale???

Actually, I had to cash part of it out to pay off medical bills in 2011. The rest I had to convert to an IRA that gains no interests.

And that's the point. I should not be spending my life trying to outsmart the market. They have thousands of little scumwads manipulating the Casino. I have a full time jobs, thanks. I also have a part time business. I simply don't have time to research markets all day like the parasites do.

200 years ago, and James Madison directly warned all of us, about people like you. You should be honored that such an amazing man, had the ability to warn us of tyrant scum like you.

Fuck James Madison. Another Slave-raping asshole. America isn't great because a bunch of slave raping assholes didn't want to pay their fair share in taxes. America is great because progressives like Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, FDR, JFK, LBJ, MLK made their smarmy talk actually mean something.

You aren't afraid of socialism, you are afraid of Democracy. Democracy is coming, buddy.

First: So you cashed it out to pay medical bills. Whose fault is that? A: nobodies fault. Just life. B: Your fault for not having insurance. C: Your fault for not having enough insurance.

Notice who isn't on that list? The wealthy 1%. Not their fault, no matter how you cut that.

Second: You claim to have lost 35% of your investment value. Now you claim you didn't cash anything out until 2011. Which is it dude?

See a problem with your statement? By 2011, the market had recovered all that way to only roughly a 10% to 15% drop. If you did not cash out, you can't possibly have lost 35% of your value. Not possible.

That drop in 2008, was when I made the most money. The stocks were on sale. I bought stocks at almost 50% off. When they recovered, I made tons. Of course, I kept my money in the market.... I have health insurance for health care needs.

LOL. Dude, YOU should be afraid of Democracy. Everyone should be afraid of Democracy. If 51% of the public thinks they can take everything you own, and leave you a slave.... they can do that and democracy has succeed. The only people who are not afraid democracy, are fools who think they are the 51%, and the ignorant.

Reminds me of a story of a family in Russia who supported Lenin. Democracy triumphed over the monarchy. By the way.... you do know that "Soviet" means "council", right? That's why they called the "workers councils".... Soviets.

This family in Russia supported the Soviets right up to the very day they were carted away in Stalin's purges. Suddenly their foolish thinking that they were the 51% ended with a firing squad. The only reason we know the tale is because the children escaped to tell the world what happen to their pro-democracy parents.

All the freedoms you enjoy today, are only there because the founding fathers of this country feared Democracy. And they warned us of people like you, and here you are, willing to throw it all away in the name of your ideology.

I can see why you hate the founding fathers of this country, given they have you pegged to the wall. If your side does win, I wonder if any of your children will survive to tell us of your foolishness.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

That drop in 2008, was when I made the most money. The stocks were on sale. I bought stocks at almost 50% off. When they recovered, I made tons. Of course, I kept my money in the market.... I have health insurance for health care needs.

That's exactly what the investment company that handles our retirement accounts did.

 

[JoeB131]

First: So you cashed it out to pay medical bills. Whose fault is that? A: nobodies fault. Just life. B: Your fault for not having insurance. C: Your fault for not having enough insurance.

1) Bush's fault for fucking up the economy.
2) I had insurance, but when i started filing for medical treatment, Cigna and my employer did their level best to get rid of me.
3) Most insurance sucks. We just don't find out about it until we get sick. The one thing that my medical adventures cured me of is any republican bullshit.

Notice who isn't on that list? The wealthy 1%. Not their fault, no matter how you cut that.

Well, yeah, I do totally blame the Rich Jews who owned the company I worked for screwing over their long term employees when the recession hit.

Second: You claim to have lost 35% of your investment value. Now you claim you didn't cash anything out until 2011. Which is it dude?

I think it was more like 60%, and it never increased back all that much by the time I cashed it out. Keep in mind, I took the SAFE investments, or the ones I told were safe.

LOL. Dude, YOU should be afraid of Democracy. Everyone should be afraid of Democracy. If 51% of the public thinks they can take everything you own, and leave you a slave.... they can do that and democracy has succeed. The only people who are not afraid democracy, are fools who think they are the 51%, and the ignorant.

Yeah, I know. You guys live in terrible fear that the rich might have to follow the same laws the rest of us do.

Because the last thing you want is to finally have your fantasies about being rich come true, and find out that it's not all that.

You see, I'd have no problem going back to the Pre-Reagan days when the rich paid 70% taxes and their workforces were unionized. You see, that's how Communism was defeated, by making Capitalism less of a Shit Sandwich.

 

[Andylusion]

First: So you cashed it out to pay medical bills. Whose fault is that? A: nobodies fault. Just life. B: Your fault for not having insurance. C: Your fault for not having enough insurance.

1) Bush's fault for fucking up the economy.
2) I had insurance, but when i started filing for medical treatment, Cigna and my employer did their level best to get rid of me.
3) Most insurance sucks. We just don't find out about it until we get sick. The one thing that my medical adventures cured me of is any republican bullshit.

Notice who isn't on that list? The wealthy 1%. Not their fault, no matter how you cut that.

Well, yeah, I do totally blame the Rich Jews who owned the company I worked for screwing over their long term employees when the recession hit.

Second: You claim to have lost 35% of your investment value. Now you claim you didn't cash anything out until 2011. Which is it dude?

I think it was more like 60%, and it never increased back all that much by the time I cashed it out. Keep in mind, I took the SAFE investments, or the ones I told were safe.

LOL. Dude, YOU should be afraid of Democracy. Everyone should be afraid of Democracy. If 51% of the public thinks they can take everything you own, and leave you a slave.... they can do that and democracy has succeed. The only people who are not afraid democracy, are fools who think they are the 51%, and the ignorant.

Yeah, I know. You guys live in terrible fear that the rich might have to follow the same laws the rest of us do.

Because the last thing you want is to finally have your fantasies about being rich come true, and find out that it's not all that.

You see, I'd have no problem going back to the Pre-Reagan days when the rich paid 70% taxes and their workforces were unionized. You see, that's how Communism was defeated, by making Capitalism less of a Shit Sandwich.

As I have posted before, the sub-prime boom, and the price bubble that popped, started in 1997. Trying to blame shift to a president who wasn't in office, when the boom and bubble started, is not logical.

You are not owed anything by the company, simply because you worked there, and got paid. Unless you are telling me they screwed you out of your agreed wage. I don't know where this idea came from, that if you get sick, your employer is obligated to pay someone who isn't working.

You are not owed anything dude. Funny how you talk about me in a fantasy, when you are the one angry that your myth didn't come true.

Safe investments? Safe investments don't make any money. If you wanted safe, you should have kept your money at a local bank. Then you can complain everyone is getting rich, while your money sits not earning any interest.

Even so, your story still doesn't add up. If you invested in "safe" investments, like bonds, then most of the bond funds barely lost 10%, and recovered within a year.

The Bond Fund of America, recovered 100% of it's lost value, by the end of 2009. If you didn't cash out until 2011, you can't possibly have lost a single penny.

I don't know what you did, but what you are describing isn't possible. None of the so-called safe funds, did as badly as stocks did. And most, if not all, recovered in a short time span.

The only way you lost 35%, or 60% is if you were not invested in safer funds, and you sold your stocks at the bottom of the market. The exact opposite of what the rich tell you to do.

 

[Andylusion]

Yeah, I know. You guys live in terrible fear that the rich might have to follow the same laws the rest of us do.

Because the last thing you want is to finally have your fantasies about being rich come true, and find out that it's not all that.

You see, I'd have no problem going back to the Pre-Reagan days when the rich paid 70% taxes and their workforces were unionized. You see, that's how Communism was defeated, by making Capitalism less of a Shit Sandwich.

Making up crap again? Yeah you guys live in terrible fear, that you can't make the rich give you their money, and that you can't violate their property rights because you are greedy and driven by envy.

The rich did not pay 70% in taxes. They never did. Who in their right mind, is going to earn money to pay 70% of it in taxes? That's why the rich paid less of the tax bill prior to the 1980s, than they do today. Statistical fact.

And as far as fantasies, you are the one living in the myth that you are not the rich. YOU are the rich. YOU are the 1% of the world. Not me. The irony is, if you actually got your way, people like me, would be taking your retirement from you. Leftism is a mental illness, that destroys the host of the illness. You are a prefect example of exactly that.

Look at Venezuela, and Greece, and France. All your anti-rich policies resulted in the biggest supporters of those policies, being destroyed and suffering from those policies. The poor in Venezuela today, are lucky if they food, let alone electricity.... but you sure stuck it to the rich....or did you.... because they seem to have left the country. Only the poor and impoverished are left to starve. Good job suicide left-ists. Jim Jones would be proud to serve your koolade.

 

[westwall]

Solar-powered plane takes off on third leg of U.S. journey

Why are so many RWs stuck in the 19th century (even then most cars were electric)?

Great. A plane fly's around the world and takes MONTHS to accomplish the goal. I could fly around the world in my Bonanza in a couple of weeks with complete safety. These guys put their lives in danger to accomplish their stunt, for stunt it was. As a technology demonstrator it's a failure. The idea of a tech demonstrator is to highlight a new more efficient way of doing things.

This did nothing of the sort. Instead it showed that you can spend a ridiculous amount of money to build an aircraft that requires and entire team of people to keep on mission. That risked the lives of its pilots with every takeoff and landing, that required them to not sleep for DAYS at a time, with the concurrent loss of attention and fine motor skills which further endangers the aircraft.

And, to top it off, it is useless as a passenger carrying aircraft. It can NEVER lift more than a single person into the air. No matter how big you make the plane that is the simple reality. Solar power is cute as an advertising scheme, but other than that in the aviation field it is worthless.

 

[JoeB131]

As I have posted before, the sub-prime boom, and the price bubble that popped, started in 1997. Trying to blame shift to a president who wasn't in office, when the boom and bubble started, is not logical.

again, Bush was the guy who appointed porn-watching regulators who did nothing to curb the excesses.

The boom wasn't the problem, it was the banks selling those mortgages as investments that was the problem.

 

[JoeB131]

Making up crap again? Yeah you guys live in terrible fear, that you can't make the rich give you their money, and that you can't violate their property rights because you are greedy and driven by envy.

The rich did not pay 70% in taxes. They never did. Who in their right mind, is going to earn money to pay 70% of it in taxes? That's why the rich paid less of the tax bill prior to the 1980s, than they do today. Statistical fact.

again, lying with statistics. Income taxes on the rich went down, all the other taxes on the rest of us went up. the rich got richer, the poor got poorer.

 

[westwall]

Making up crap again? Yeah you guys live in terrible fear, that you can't make the rich give you their money, and that you can't violate their property rights because you are greedy and driven by envy.

The rich did not pay 70% in taxes. They never did. Who in their right mind, is going to earn money to pay 70% of it in taxes? That's why the rich paid less of the tax bill prior to the 1980s, than they do today. Statistical fact.

again, lying with statistics. Income taxes on the rich went down, all the other taxes on the rest of us went up. the rich got richer, the poor got poorer.

No one paid 90% dummy. There were so many tax deductions that the real rate was closer to 18% for the wealthy.

 

[Andylusion]

As I have posted before, the sub-prime boom, and the price bubble that popped, started in 1997. Trying to blame shift to a president who wasn't in office, when the boom and bubble started, is not logical.

again, Bush was the guy who appointed porn-watching regulators who did nothing to curb the excesses.

The boom wasn't the problem, it was the banks selling those mortgages as investments that was the problem.

This is like going to a doctor that gives you a lethal injection of a virus and morphine. So every time you feel great and the symptoms of the virus don't appear for years. Then you get a new doctor, and the virus starts affecting you.

Instead of blaming the doctor that give you the lethal injection, you blame the new doctor for not curing the virus that he didn't give you.

You are living with a myth. All left-ism is based on myths, and this myth is that somehow Bush could magically have prevented a bubble, that already existed, years before he came into office.

An economic bubble is like a soap bubble being blown up with air. If you do nothing the bubble pops, if you do something the bubble pops. Either way, the bubble is going to pop. Soap bubbles pop, that's what they do.

The moment that Bush did anything to 'curb excesses' the bubble would pop. Economic bubbles only survive on continuous investing into the bubble. The moment investing into the bubble is curbed, the bubble will pop.

Now the fact is, the vast majority of government, especially on the left-wing side, believed that lowering lending standards was a benefit. That increasing home ownership was inherently a plus. Pual Krugman supported the housing bubble. Bill Clinton supported the housing bubble. Maxine Waters, Nancy Pelosi, Franklin Raines (who was appointed by Bill Clinton), Barnie Frank, Gregory Meeks, and the list of pro-housing bubble people in Washington was endless.

None of them believed that there was a problem in the Housing market. None of them did. Frank famously declared there was no bubble at all, in 2005.

Now what exactly did you expect Bush to do? Do you think Bush is a dictator that can just demand everything change, in complete disregard to Congress which believed there was no problem?

And if Bush did.... and the bubble popped, and the economy crashed (which it would have), then what? You, and all your left-wing idiots, would be claiming there was nothing wrong, and Bush blew up the economy for no reason.

We both know that's true. You and me, right now, on this forum, we both know that if Bush had popped the housing bubble in 2004, or earlier, you would be right here, screaming that Bush screwed up the economy, and there was no housing bubble at all. Don't lie to me on this. I know better. Don't even try to tell me that if Bush blew up the economy in 2004, you'd be here talking about what a great job he did in stopping the housing bubble. You would be screaming that there was no bubble, and Bush just messed everything up.

 

[Andylusion]

Making up crap again? Yeah you guys live in terrible fear, that you can't make the rich give you their money, and that you can't violate their property rights because you are greedy and driven by envy.

The rich did not pay 70% in taxes. They never did. Who in their right mind, is going to earn money to pay 70% of it in taxes? That's why the rich paid less of the tax bill prior to the 1980s, than they do today. Statistical fact.

again, lying with statistics. Income taxes on the rich went down, all the other taxes on the rest of us went up. the rich got richer, the poor got poorer.

And yet, the rich now pay the greatest portion of all income tax revenue.

The top 1% of this country, in the 1970s to early 1980s, under your 70% tax rate, paid less than 20% of all income tax.

Today, under our 35% tax rate, they now pay 40%.

No matter how you cut it, the rich are shouldering more of the tax burden today under lower tax rates, than they did under your higher tax rates.

Just a fact.

And there are numerous examples of how dumb your higher tax rate is. Ronald Reagan famously would work during the year, just long enough to reach the higher marginal tax rate, and then quit for the rest of the year. Why work, when $70 out of every $100 would be stolen by the government? So he would go home to his ranch, and ride his horses, and you the poor would shoulder more of the tax burden, because he simply didn't earn any money for you to tax away.

And this is true today.

For example. If you were to jack up taxes back to 70%, do you know who wouldn't pay even one single penny more in taxes?

Mark Zuckerburg
Larry Ellison
Meg Whitman
Warren Buffet
The Waltons... any of them as far as I know.

Need more? There are dozens. Hundreds in fact. All with low salaries, that would not have to pay one penny more in tax, if you jacked up the tax rates.

And why is that? Warren Buffet only has a $100,000 a year salary. Your top marginal tax rate, only affects earnings over $466,000 a year.

You jack up the tax rates, and thousands of CEOs will drop their pay to Warren Buffets level, and you'll get less taxes from them, than you do right now.

That is exactly what we see in the data from the 1970s, and the 70% tax rates. As the tax levels came down, more and more rich and wealthy brought more money home, and were willing to pay the taxes. You just that tax rate up, and fewer and fewer will take the hit, which will force the poor and low-income groups to shoulder more of the burden.

Your greed and envy and hate, has blinded you to the facts and realities of life. That's why every country that has gone down the greed and envy path, has destroyed itself.

 

[JoeB131]

No one paid 90% dummy. There were so many tax deductions that the real rate was closer to 18% for the wealthy.

Link?

 

[Old Rocks]

Making up crap again? Yeah you guys live in terrible fear, that you can't make the rich give you their money, and that you can't violate their property rights because you are greedy and driven by envy.

The rich did not pay 70% in taxes. They never did. Who in their right mind, is going to earn money to pay 70% of it in taxes? That's why the rich paid less of the tax bill prior to the 1980s, than they do today. Statistical fact.

again, lying with statistics. Income taxes on the rich went down, all the other taxes on the rest of us went up. the rich got richer, the poor got poorer.

And yet, the rich now pay the greatest portion of all income tax revenue.

View attachment 78168

The top 1% of this country, in the 1970s to early 1980s, under your 70% tax rate, paid less than 20% of all income tax.

Today, under our 35% tax rate, they now pay 40%.

No matter how you cut it, the rich are shouldering more of the tax burden today under lower tax rates, than they did under your higher tax rates.

Just a fact.

And there are numerous examples of how dumb your higher tax rate is. Ronald Reagan famously would work during the year, just long enough to reach the higher marginal tax rate, and then quit for the rest of the year. Why work, when $70 out of every $100 would be stolen by the government? So he would go home to his ranch, and ride his horses, and you the poor would shoulder more of the tax burden, because he simply didn't earn any money for you to tax away.

And this is true today.

For example. If you were to jack up taxes back to 70%, do you know who wouldn't pay even one single penny more in taxes?

Mark Zuckerburg
Larry Ellison
Meg Whitman
Warren Buffet
The Waltons... any of them as far as I know.

Need more? There are dozens. Hundreds in fact. All with low salaries, that would not have to pay one penny more in tax, if you jacked up the tax rates.

And why is that? Warren Buffet only has a $100,000 a year salary. Your top marginal tax rate, only affects earnings over $466,000 a year.

You jack up the tax rates, and thousands of CEOs will drop their pay to Warren Buffets level, and you'll get less taxes from them, than you do right now.

That is exactly what we see in the data from the 1970s, and the 70% tax rates. As the tax levels came down, more and more rich and wealthy brought more money home, and were willing to pay the taxes. You just that tax rate up, and fewer and fewer will take the hit, which will force the poor and low-income groups to shoulder more of the burden.

Your greed and envy and hate, has blinded you to the facts and realities of life. That's why every country that has gone down the greed and envy path, has destroyed itself.

Very interesting graph. So, the very rich are paying far less percentage in income but more of the tax total. That tell's me that they are getting far more of the total package of income than they have in the past.

 

[Andylusion]

Making up crap again? Yeah you guys live in terrible fear, that you can't make the rich give you their money, and that you can't violate their property rights because you are greedy and driven by envy.

The rich did not pay 70% in taxes. They never did. Who in their right mind, is going to earn money to pay 70% of it in taxes? That's why the rich paid less of the tax bill prior to the 1980s, than they do today. Statistical fact.

again, lying with statistics. Income taxes on the rich went down, all the other taxes on the rest of us went up. the rich got richer, the poor got poorer.

And yet, the rich now pay the greatest portion of all income tax revenue.

View attachment 78168

The top 1% of this country, in the 1970s to early 1980s, under your 70% tax rate, paid less than 20% of all income tax.

Today, under our 35% tax rate, they now pay 40%.

No matter how you cut it, the rich are shouldering more of the tax burden today under lower tax rates, than they did under your higher tax rates.

Just a fact.

And there are numerous examples of how dumb your higher tax rate is. Ronald Reagan famously would work during the year, just long enough to reach the higher marginal tax rate, and then quit for the rest of the year. Why work, when $70 out of every $100 would be stolen by the government? So he would go home to his ranch, and ride his horses, and you the poor would shoulder more of the tax burden, because he simply didn't earn any money for you to tax away.

And this is true today.

For example. If you were to jack up taxes back to 70%, do you know who wouldn't pay even one single penny more in taxes?

Mark Zuckerburg
Larry Ellison
Meg Whitman
Warren Buffet
The Waltons... any of them as far as I know.

Need more? There are dozens. Hundreds in fact. All with low salaries, that would not have to pay one penny more in tax, if you jacked up the tax rates.

And why is that? Warren Buffet only has a $100,000 a year salary. Your top marginal tax rate, only affects earnings over $466,000 a year.

You jack up the tax rates, and thousands of CEOs will drop their pay to Warren Buffets level, and you'll get less taxes from them, than you do right now.

That is exactly what we see in the data from the 1970s, and the 70% tax rates. As the tax levels came down, more and more rich and wealthy brought more money home, and were willing to pay the taxes. You just that tax rate up, and fewer and fewer will take the hit, which will force the poor and low-income groups to shoulder more of the burden.

Your greed and envy and hate, has blinded you to the facts and realities of life. That's why every country that has gone down the greed and envy path, has destroyed itself.

Very interesting graph. So, the very rich are paying far less percentage in income but more of the tax total. That tell's me that they are getting far more of the total package of income than they have in the past.

Yes, that is exactly true. There are numerous ways in which the rich got fringe benefits that would either be untaxed, or less taxed.

I remember a specifically old story about I believe a Mining company, that had large mansion properties at each of it's mines. The claim was that it was company property for administration use, which in reality was nothing more than multiple vacation homes for the CEO, and top executives. This was really old, like 1940s and such.

In reality it was an indirect unpaid compensation for executives. A practice still done by many companies. Melvin Gordon of the Tootsie-roll company, racked up $1.2 Million in Private Corporate Jet expenses. Of course that's tax free.

Some companies own their own private resorts, which executives can use without cost, and of course without taxes. Others have personal "ranches" out in nowhere. Apparently I've read that some cattle ranches in the mid-west are openly willing to sell out to a corporation under contract, because then even if they have a bad year cattle-wise, they get a steady income from corporations, and all they have to do in entertain a few executives when they show up.

Then there are other options as well. The most obvious example is stock options. But you can also have restricted stocks, which can grow almost tax free for a number of years.

Another option is deferred income, which you are owed, but you simply don't take. The company can then use the money to invest, and that grows tax free. Worse if you have the money transferred to an IRA, and then to a trust fund, the money might never be taxed at all. Now of course you can't ever use the money directly, but you can live the rest of your life, retired at 55, living on the dividends from your investments, which would be as little as..... $200,000 a year, and never pay the top marginal tax rate.

And let's not even bother getting into the complexities of buying international property, and hiding assets over seas. You would pay the taxes in those countries, instead of the US taxes.... but.... many countries have a much lower top marginal rate than the US.

But back to your point... yes, that is exactly right. When the tax rate goes too high, people stop taking cash payments, and instead opt for alternative compensation, or even reduced compensation for less work. GE famously announced that executives no longer had any restriction on the number of paid-leave days they could have.

Would it be worth it to get paid a million less in salary to avoid 39% tax rates, and as compensation have unlimited paid time off? That would work for me.

See the only reason we have people that are taking home $2 Million in cash today, is because it's still worth it to most at 39% tax rates.

You jack the taxes up to 70%..... would it still be worth it? Or would company owned vacation resorts in Panama be an attractive alternative? Hmmmm?

 

[Andylusion]

No one paid 90% dummy. There were so many tax deductions that the real rate was closer to 18% for the wealthy.

Link?

Sigh.... I would have assumed that you would know this without a link.

Very well.

Over all, the rate was about 21% roughly. It did drop to 18%, but that was 1946 or 47, when the top rate fell under 90%.

But the bottom line is that his basic point was 100% correct. Contrary to your foolish left-wing utopianism, the wealthy have never.... as in NEVER.... paid the top marginal rate, or anything close. They never paid 90% of their income, or 80%, or 70% or 60% or 50% or 40%, and in fact, the effective tax rate on the wealthy has never been over 35%. It close in the late 1970s, early 80s, but I wager that was only an effect of the inflation.

Leftism is a belief in myths and legends. The fairy tales of ages past when the rich paid for everything you morons wanted. But it never happened. You people look at top marginal rates as if it means something.

The tax rate is almost meaningless, because people can find ways to avoid every tax. The higher the tax, the fewer people are willing to pay it.

You do realize that people earning just $37,000 or less, are supposed to be paying 25% in taxes.... right? And yet.... we know that 47% of the public pays ZERO income tax. It's funny how that fact doesn't surprise you, but your shocked that no one pays the top marginal rate either.

Rates don't matter. You can make the top marginal rate 100% if your are that dumb, it still won't matter. People won't pay your tax rates if they are too high. Look at Greece. They have some of the highest tax rates in the EU. By your logic they should be the richest country on Earth. Instead they are ruined.