Progressive idea 80% tax - income over $500K doesn't go far enough to fix income inequality

page: 1
11
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 24 2014 @ 01:43 PM
link   
www.nysun.com...

The Democratic party seems to be excited about fixing "income inequality", even Obama has been talking about it lately.

An economist has written a book that has liberals, Democrats, and progressives thrilled at his proposed solutions.




He advocates sharply higher tax rates on both income and capital. For America, he recommends “a rate on the order of 80 percent on incomes over $500,000 or $1 million a year,” along with rates of “50 or 60 percent on incomes above $200,000.” In addition to that, he proposes a tax on capital of one percent a year on fortunes of about $1,380,000, increasing to an annual tax of five or ten percent a year on fortunes of several hundreds of millions or billions of dollars. That would be enforced globally with new tax forms requiring everyone to disclose the value of all assets.


I say that is not good enough!

There should be an 80% tax on all personal assets over $3 Million because $3 Million is the accepted savings needed for a comfortable retirement. With exemptions for the primary residence, and one vehicle per person in the household. That would bring about true income equality.

How about it!

Should we start a white house petition so that people who live off trust funds and hide money in stocks/bonds and other sources of "non-income, income" which is currently not considered income will have to live off what the rest of us do.




edit on 24-4-2014 by grandmakdw because: clarity of thought



+27 more 
posted on Apr, 24 2014 @ 01:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: grandmakdw
There should be an 80% tax on all personal assets over $3 Million because $3 Million is the accepted savings needed for a comfortable retirement.


And with life expectancy growing each year who is to say how much anyone will need?

You want income equality? Go get a better job. Go be an entrepreneur. Stop looking to others to fix your money issues.



posted on Apr, 24 2014 @ 01:49 PM
link   
a reply to: grandmakdw

Are you being sarcastic, or do you truly believe we should take peoples stuff, and profits, just so we're all in the boat?



posted on Apr, 24 2014 @ 01:52 PM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

You have a point, perhaps the income taxed should be reevaluated every year to make sure that the top 1% are always paying 80% on all their assets and income.

Then amount the top 1% have will keep declining due to income equality and so each year the amount taxed at 80% should logically move to a lower amount of income until we are all living on what welfare recipients live on. After all that is clearly the goal of the people who are pushing for income equality - fairness for all.


+6 more 
posted on Apr, 24 2014 @ 01:54 PM
link   
a reply to: grandmakdw

Let's start with taking Harry Reid's hidden assets....


Nope, I work hard for my money. You can't have it to give to someone who wants to sit on their butt, and live off hand outs.

I pay my *fair* share of taxes. That's all I'm giving you. You want free stuff, not my problem.

Des



posted on Apr, 24 2014 @ 01:54 PM
link   
a reply to: terriblyvexed

Those who are familiar with my posts will recognize the absurd sarcasm regarding what the progressives and liberals are promoting as a good idea.



posted on Apr, 24 2014 @ 01:56 PM
link   
So how does taking 80% of what some rich guy has help put money in my pocket?

Is it supposed to trickle down from the government to me? My taxes will go away? My mortgage will get paid? Cars will become more affordable? Food and gas won't be going up week after week?

Connect the dots for me. Don't use hypothetical or promises of government action because those are fairy tales.

Take a dollar from a rich man and increase my quality of life. Go through it from A to B to C so I can see how this action will directly benefit me.



posted on Apr, 24 2014 @ 01:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: grandmakdw
Then amount the top 1% have will keep declining due to income equality and so each year the amount taxed at 80% should logically move to a lower amount of income until we are all living on what welfare recipients live on.


You know, I cannot tell if you are being sarcastic or not but why in the hell would anyone want to aspire to have a welfare recipient's income?

How about we get people to the point where they can earn as much as their ability and entrepreneurship can generate.



edit on 24-4-2014 by AugustusMasonicus because: networkdude has no beer



posted on Apr, 24 2014 @ 01:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: grandmakdw
a reply to: terriblyvexed

Those who are familiar with my posts will recognize the absurd sarcasm regarding what the progressives and liberals are promoting as a good idea.


You should go edit your post to reflect that. It does need some clarification. Otherwise, many will think you agree with the OP.

Des



posted on Apr, 24 2014 @ 02:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: grandmakdw
Then amount the top 1% have will keep declining due to income equality and so each year the amount taxed at 80% should logically move to a lower amount of income until we are all living on what welfare recipients live on.


You know, I cannot tell if you are being sarcastic or not but why in the hell would anyone want to aspire to have a welfare recipient's income?

How about we get people to the point where they can earn as much as their ability and entrepreneurship can generate.






Guess I need to be clearer than just emoticons. The sarcasm is dripping off my fingers.

Interesting to see that people think the progressives and liberals would actually want my exaggerated but logical extension of an idea they are excited about.

The idea is to show those who think the original proposition by the author is a good one what it could lead to.



posted on Apr, 24 2014 @ 02:07 PM
link   
a reply to: Destinyone

Actually, it is ok as is. I am fascinated by the responses.

I am hoping to see if anyone thinks that logical extension of what the author proposes is a good idea.

I am trying to point out what implementing policies to enact what Obama and the Dems are calling for - fixing "income inequality" - will actually lead to.



posted on Apr, 24 2014 @ 02:16 PM
link   
a reply to: grandmakdw

This no fixing anything is just grabbing more money to support the growing welfare class in the nation, because let face it none of that money is to create jobs.



posted on Apr, 24 2014 @ 02:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: grandmakdw
a reply to: Destinyone

Actually, it is ok as is. I am fascinated by the responses.

I am hoping to see if anyone thinks that logical extension of what the author proposes is a good idea.

I am trying to point out what implementing policies to enact what Obama and the Dems are calling for - fixing "income inequality" - will actually lead to.


Oh, I think we are way past the *what it will lead to* point.

The infrastructure of many inner cities have declined to the point of massive cutting back on tax supported services, such as fire and police departments. No budgets to fix roads, nor support expansion of regular programs of upkeep.

Most of it is due to diverting money to provide a higher quality of life to a lot of lazy-assed people, who want what the working class have, for free.

And, we have a bunch of power hungry, greedy politicians, who are more than willing to take it from us, to give to them, to stay in power.

Des

edit on 24-4-2014 by Destinyone because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 24 2014 @ 02:29 PM
link   
See, this is our problem. Personally, I don't think that there should be an increase in taxes, just a cap on income. Cap income at say 500,000 per year, and ensure there is a trickle down effect.

There is not a job on the face of this planet that warrants more than 500,000 per year.

There are however MANY jobs that warrant more than 8.50/hr and don't get it.

All that increasing the taxes are going to do, is give our government more money to spend moving drugs into our country, and fund more black projects for taking away our freedoms.



posted on Apr, 24 2014 @ 02:35 PM
link   
How about we get government to run on its current Diet first.

Before we talk about shoveling more cash down the bottomless gullet of Government spending and over reach.

We need to starve the beast, not feed it unlimited capital.
edit on 24-4-2014 by benrl because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 24 2014 @ 02:40 PM
link   
a reply to: andr3w68

Bullcrap!

Who are you, or anyone for that matter, to say my income gets capped at a certain dollar amount.

If I work my ass off building a small start-up company with my own capital, and end up hiring in the long run 500 people. Why shouldn't I get the financial reward from what I built. You sound like Obama's...*you didn't build that*...bullcrap.

What you are proposing is taking away incentive for job building and creating a better cash flow in the economy.

Dumb idea you got there...

Des
edit on 24-4-2014 by Destinyone because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 24 2014 @ 02:53 PM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Typical narrow minded right wing ideology "go get a different job". I bet you have plenty of anecdotal evidence to prove your point, yourself included!

However, anyone with half a brain cell, and all sociologists who study history , across the world, across cultures, can see that the current inequality is fragmenting societies. Even the rich turn on themselves. Which means that that "new job" is a temporary reprieve for an inevitable collapse.....oh let me guess not the fault of the greedy but the the fault of the hungry.......

Here in Britain 80% of the wealth is in the hands of the families who inherited wealth gained through land ownership of land given to the original nobles by William the Conqueror in 1066 to control the saxon peasants.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Come on wake up. Perfectly OK to feather the nest with stolen land back then but laws created by those very same nobles over the centuries make it illegal to grab it back !!!!!!!!!!! Oh and look who tells us we musnt't tax them. Some people are so gullable as to listen to these people.

I would not be at all surprised to find a similar distortion of the ownership of capital in the US as well.



posted on Apr, 24 2014 @ 02:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: yorkshirelad
Typical narrow minded right wing ideology "go get a different job". I bet you have plenty of anecdotal evidence to prove your point, yourself included!


I can back it up with paystubs. And just for your personal edification I am not even remotely rightwing.



posted on Apr, 24 2014 @ 02:56 PM
link   
a reply to: grandmakdw

Give government 100% of all incomes, regardless of how much.

Then the government can determine;
what you need
what you want
what you can spend
where you can live
what you can eat
what you can smoke
what you can drink
what you can wear



posted on Apr, 24 2014 @ 02:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: andr3w68
See, this is our problem. Personally, I don't think that there should be an increase in taxes, just a cap on income. Cap income at say 500,000 per year, and ensure there is a trickle down effect.

There is not a job on the face of this planet that warrants more than 500,000 per year.

There are however MANY jobs that warrant more than 8.50/hr and don't get it.

All that increasing the taxes are going to do, is give our government more money to spend moving drugs into our country, and fund more black projects for taking away our freedoms.


But is capping income really enough?

What about all those rich guys who don't have an "income" as it is defined by the tax code? Do think there should be a cap on all assets, including trust funds, etc?


What is your solution to all the rich who don't have an "income" but live off the checkbook of their corporation or a trust fund?

I'd really like to hear your idea.





top topics
 
11
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join