It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

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

page: 8
11
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 26 2014 @ 08:29 PM
link   
I always notice that those who rail against the "rich" NEVER are against the biggest hoarder of wealth, "the federal Government"




posted on Apr, 26 2014 @ 08:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: jimmyx

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: jimmyx

originally posted by: thisguyrighthere
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.

I can show you how it has hurt you....www.truth-out.org...
how much longer are you going to stay in the bent-over position for these people?.....how much income do Americans have to give up to satisfy these people?....how much more wealth from the middle class and poor, needs to be transferred up to these people before you can "connect the dots"?


Look at my post about the CEO of Boeing...lowering his 13 million per year to 800k gives Boeing employees 100 bucks per year raise....

I need the dots connected too...


it's not only the CEO, it's the other officers, and investors in the stock....besides Boeing pays it's employees well. Exxon makes 7 to 10 billion in profits every 90 days, and still gets tax refunds from federal taxpayers. Wal-Mart owner sam Walton who died in 1992 left his fortune to these family members who in 2013 are multi-billionaires
...Christy Walton...age 59...38.7 billion
...jim Walton...age 66...36.4 billion
...alice Walton ...age 64...35.9 billion
...s. robson Walton...age 70...35.9 billion
...ann Walton...age 65...5.1 billion
...nancy Walton...age 62...4.3 billion

the combined net worth of these 6 family members alone is 156.3 billion, which if this family was a country, they would be at number 58 out of 187 countries in terms of GDP (gross domestic product).............so tell me why they ARE NOT paying their own workers a livable wage?



First let me say you can go out and start your WalMart anytime you want. Sam Walton didn't start out big, just one store at a time.

Secondly remember a trillion is 1000 billion currently your government has spent 17,000 billion to much and you are expected to pay it back. The Walton fortune does even make 2% of the deficit and all the billionaire fortunes added together don't add up to 17 trillion. Then whose money are you going to take? This makes you fall into the divide and conquer paradigm the government likes to espouse. Quit doing it make them accountable.

Thirdly my cousin started working for Sam Walton in Ark. in the main warehouse making minimum, he had the stuff it takes to work hard and move up. He retired a few years back quite wealthy. He earned it. I have family friends in Tenn. that work at a Walmart and are paid well above minimum. Affording cars, housing, food and children, sounds liveable to me. I have nothing to do with Walmart it's just the truth.

Your issues aren't with the rich your issues are with the government and yourself. Vote theses bums out get responsible representatives and get rid of the knucklehead people there now. I think I could throw a dart into a phone book and do better than the likes for Harry Reid, and John Boehner. What chance does a economy have when it overspends to the tune of 17 trillion dollars, and it's going up. The GWP is about 74 trillion that means our government has overspent 23% of the entire world GDP. Explain that. This also means if you add the bottom 100 countries together our government has spent more money than they take in combined.

Note: I got these number from Wikipedia



posted on Apr, 26 2014 @ 08:57 PM
link   
a reply to: Greven

Okay, let me be a bit more specific, since we want to be precise on these things. President Woodrow Wilson instituted and saw the policies pass under his administration which, in no small part, led to taxation growing to levels that functioned to limit wealth.

The national policies which led to a great deal of the misery and suffering this nation sees today, in fact, were born during the 1913-1921 term Wilson served. There are a handful of Presidents who, if taken in total isolation as individuals for their decisions and outcomes, can be credited with the worst our nation has and has had. Wilson ranks near the top of that very short list. You are right tho...it wasn't technically accurate to suggest the rates were there directly under him.

In terms of more recent performance by United States Presidents, I created a little thread on that a while back. It covers the tail end of the 90+ % upper personal tax rates in the first 3 Presidents I profiled. It makes for an interesting perspective.

ATS Members Guide to Modern Presidents



posted on Apr, 26 2014 @ 09:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: grandmakdw
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.


People who earn that much money can choose when to and not to work - it's like extra play money for them. Consider a pop star - they can choose when to go out on a concert tour or just stay at home. So if they do a six month tour and make 10 million, they'll only get to make 3 million. Then they might as well do a two month tour and still make 3 million, since those four months don't earn them anything, especially since they have royalties coming in from albums and merchandise. Similar rules apply to film stars.

They will refuse to work in the USA, if they are taxed to death.

If anything, the whole world should be working on harmonizing tax laws so that there are no loopholes to hide in or under.



posted on Apr, 26 2014 @ 09:56 PM
link   
a reply to: MarlinGrace


If only wally world (wal mart) could earn enough profit to pay their employees enough to live on so the taxpayers did not need to pick up difference through welfare for their workforce.

Could you explain how taxing the Waltons would hurt our nation, or do feel the government owes them and should continue to subsidize their business and contribute to their fortune?

I have little faith in the story about your cousin since you have no proof of his income nor anything to back it up. My cousin worked for them and they wanted him to go on welfare to support his family, and they were always shorting his hours come payday.




Your issues aren't with the rich your issues are with the government and yourself. Vote theses bums out get responsible representatives and get rid of the knucklehead people there now. I think I could throw a dart into a phone book and do better than the likes for Harry Reid, and John Boehner. What chance does a economy have when it overspends to the tune of 17 trillion dollars, and it's going up. The GWP is about 74 trillion that means our government has overspent 23% of the entire world GDP. Explain that. This also means if you add the bottom 100 countries together our government has spent more money than they take in combined.


It might be possible to get responsible politicians if the rich were not bankrolling the most corrupt politicians they can find. having politicians that owe the rich for their office is a huge part of the corruption that has caused a 74 trillion dollar deficit.



posted on Apr, 26 2014 @ 10:15 PM
link   
Cap at 1 million? That sounds terrible. People will eventually lose all drive to build anything significant which will in turn affect jobs. Something should be done to help those struggling. Everyone should atleast have the necessities, which is roof over head and food in stomach.

Those that want high income tax and income caps are the greedy and selfish ones. Just because one makes a lot of money does not make them greedy.

80% (or any income tax) is dumb. Why should I work 5,6,7,8 months out of the year for the govermenet or other people? People that seriously want others to work for them are the greedy and selfish ones.

A person does deserve to make millions and billions a year, if they build an honest buisness that provides value for society. Just because you can get by on 100k a year, why should I only settle for 100k a year because you want to?

You're type of thinking seriously disgusts me.


originally posted by: andr3w68
a reply to: Destinyone

Well then how does a cap at 1M a year sound. Something needs to be done, because greed is a thing. If you built a company from the ground and have 500 employees, wouldn't the sense of pride be better trickling that extra money down to your employees? You can't tell me that someone actually deserves to make millions or even billions a year, regardless of what they do. If I can get by on less than 100k a year, what makes you need the ability to earn more than 500k+. The answer is nothing. If people stopped wanting to live in extreme excess, maybe some of the people who have nothing would be a little better off.

I have nothing against you personally, I just think it's wrong to be that greedy. At 500k per year you can live JUST FINE. If you live like a normal person, you can even take some really nice vacations, and maybe even own a yacht or two. Why do you need more than that?



posted on Apr, 26 2014 @ 11:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: AlaskanDad
a reply to: MarlinGrace


If only wally world (wal mart) could earn enough profit to pay their employees enough to live on so the taxpayers did not need to pick up difference through welfare for their workforce.

Could you explain how taxing the Waltons would hurt our nation, or do feel the government owes them and should continue to subsidize their business and contribute to their fortune?

I have little faith in the story about your cousin since you have no proof of his income nor anything to back it up. My cousin worked for them and they wanted him to go on welfare to support his family, and they were always shorting his hours come payday.




Your issues aren't with the rich your issues are with the government and yourself. Vote theses bums out get responsible representatives and get rid of the knucklehead people there now. I think I could throw a dart into a phone book and do better than the likes for Harry Reid, and John Boehner. What chance does a economy have when it overspends to the tune of 17 trillion dollars, and it's going up. The GWP is about 74 trillion that means our government has overspent 23% of the entire world GDP. Explain that. This also means if you add the bottom 100 countries together our government has spent more money than they take in combined.


It might be possible to get responsible politicians if the rich were not bankrolling the most corrupt politicians they can find. having politicians that owe the rich for their office is a huge part of the corruption that has caused a 74 trillion dollar deficit.


The story about my cousin is the truth, doesn't matter if you believe it or not. I am not sure how the government subsidizes the waltons I am unaware of that. They and the MSM have sure picked away at them. But it sure seems to me the countries problems are not because they are successful.

Since when has taking money from one person and giving it to another benefited anyone? When you tax the rich to the levels that would make a segment of the country happy what would be the incentive for them to invest, build, and create jobs? We have a long history of taking from one and giving to another with no success.

So tell me whats the ratio of rich to poor? Lets just say to make it easy that the rich are 1% of the population that most claim, are you telling me the rich are the ones voting in this batch of current losers we have now? The other 99% sit quietly waiting for rich to pick and choose who is going to be elected and then they can continue to collect a check? Or is it the irreprehensible politicians pandering to the large masses of the voting poor with the money they take from the rich?

We have plenty of years on record of what doesn't work, when will someone get the fact increasing taxes on anyone isn't going to work. Taking money from you taking it from me and giving it to someone else through income tax, sales tax, fees, etc. only creates division and classes of people with petty jealousies toward one another. I have said it in many post quit letting the government divide us and make them accountable to the citizens.

“When the people find that they can vote themselves money,
that will herald the end of the republic.”

- Benjamin Franklin

"An economy hampered by restrictive tax rates
will never produce enough revenue to balance the budget,
just as it will never produce enough jobs or enough profits."

- John F. Kennedy



posted on Apr, 26 2014 @ 11:24 PM
link   


how does taking 80% of what some rich guy has help put money in my pocket?


Even if it doesn't, if we don't stop the wealthy from taking everything we'll all be in the poorhouse very soon.
America will be an aristocracy within a few decades if we don't stop them now, but it's probably too late already.



posted on Apr, 26 2014 @ 11:44 PM
link   
a reply to: grandmakdw
why should a person who works hard and builds a lot of money be taxed to death because some lazy sob wants to lie around and get high and drunk or pay more taxes because we letting illegal aliens come in by the thousands and letting them get free stuff like foodstamps and welfare checks . why tax the people but not the corporations who want to reap massive amounts of money with out spending any money on research or on their own crumbling infrastructure.



posted on Apr, 27 2014 @ 12:19 AM
link   
a reply to: proteus33




why should a person who works hard and builds a lot of money be taxed to death because some lazy sob wants to lie around and get high and drunk


Florida tried testing welfare recipients for drugs and the program was a failure because they found very few drug users. As for drunks why can our congress drink on the job, it would seem that having those that steer our country drunk would be more detrimental than a person driving a car.




or pay more taxes because we letting illegal aliens come in by the thousands and letting them get free stuff like foodstamps and welfare checks .


I must agree with you here.




why tax the people but not the corporations who want to reap massive amounts of money with out spending any money on research or on their own crumbling infrastructure.


Well it's obvious both should pay taxes, a bigger question is why we subsidize big oil with out tax money?

I see what you mean these folks really should not have to pay taxe on what they earn through hard work:


JPMorgan Chase boss Jamie Dimon got a 74% pay hike for last year, even though the bank was forced to pay billions in fines and settlements last year. In a government filing Friday, JPMorgan Chase (JPM, Fortune 500) said Dimon would receive $18.5 million worth of restricted stock that will vest over the next three years as his 2013 bonus. That's up from a $10 million bonus for 2012. His $1.5 million base salary remains unchanged.


Honest hard work like this deserves rewards and bailouts too! Taxing these people is simply wrong! sarcasm



posted on Apr, 27 2014 @ 12:43 AM
link   
I was thinking a bit more about this...and I might actually agree in one condition of this idea. People knock off the idea of going after their fellow citizens with net worth well within what a man can earn by innovation and hard work in a lifetime. $500k? A few million? That's silly. Lottery payouts run so far above that in single hits, it's comical. (This idea should go over with that segment of society too. Especially the ones who took it on payments).

If we want to attack wealth, then by goodness, lets drop the pretenses and attack TRUE wealth. The bottom of that, in my opinion, would be in the range of half a billion. $500 Million in net worth would place about #23 or #24 among the chart for Gross Domestic Product of nations. Right around Sweden and Belgium.

Don't mess with the millionaires who are well within the range their own hard work brought. Those are the people expanding by hiring, when it's not stupidly expensive by regulation and taxes to do it.

Give the Billionaires a little hair cut. That is the TRUE levels of power, for where it begins, IMO. Take Bloomberg of recent New York mayor fame. His recent Net Worth was placed at 31.9 Billion dollars. THAT is wealth...and THAT is what no politician would dare suggest ever be touched. Why?

THAT, and dozens like him (he's #11 for richest men in the nation) is where that mythical 1% are found. The 1% whom over 4 million people were in Occupy at it's height in 2011 to protest about. Those are the folks who buy politicians like we buy candy bars and can purchase a small nation with a personal check.

Let's talk the real folks at the top, and I can get behind that 100%. There is a point where it's not about money, but ungodly levels of power in society by the mass accumulation of it.



posted on Apr, 27 2014 @ 02:15 AM
link   
a reply to: Wrabbit2000

Wrabbit an interesting thought, thanks!



posted on Apr, 27 2014 @ 03:34 AM
link   
a reply to: AlaskanDad

I don't need to know peoples income because it shouldn't be any of my business. Thats why my statement still stands. The people u picked up were professionals in their craft. Not some wasted crook trying to get ya to sign up with him or fund one of his "projects."

I've picked up s few of those crooks before. They hand out a check to them on a Sunday. By that afternoon it has been cashed after being reprinted out from another bank as a cashier's check and taken to a pawn shop for another 5 percent cut off of his original amount. Even after wasting 50 bux on a costco membership card under the staged name just to have a "picture id."

You can continue to measure people by their wealth and constantly become that nagging woman crying crocodile tears all you want. Raising taxes on the rich has been proven ineffective.


Companies continue to under cut other mom and pop shops out because the poor are so easily misguided by the distraction that is the modern money mechanics. Continuing to undercut people eventually rears its ugly head in their laps.

Continuing to raise thrir taxes will only turk out the more clever ones to dodge each bullet. Then it is back to square one.

Trying to fight the rich with your tactics is only going to create a hostility towards people with that same mindset.



posted on Apr, 27 2014 @ 04:28 AM
link   
This makes no sense as the big boys pay next to no tax if any at all right now, but there are tax laws right now! They get around em and always will cos they are friends with the people making the rules! Lol

And if you take this money you think it will inspire business? There would be little to no business if this was imposed! Lmao...

Besides have you never heard that stealing is not only wrong it is against the law! Not that gov cares about the law but still...



posted on Apr, 27 2014 @ 04:55 AM
link   
The problem to be tackled is not earned income inequality. Earned income taxes should be flat and as low as possible.

The problem is dynastic wealth passed down from one generation to another. Thats what we need eliminate. Its a corrupting influence on the system and if left unchecked it effectively eats the system from the inside.

I have no problem at all with a 90% inheritance tax that kicks in over a price threshold equivalent to a small dwelling and college education. When you die it all gets sold off and the state takes the lions share.

If done effectively it would prevent the slow accumulation of wealth and power within small closed groups. It would eliminate the problem in one generation.

Each generation gets to enjoy what they have the ability to earn themselves on merit. Nobody gets a free ride because their great great great grandfather was a tyrant. Nobody gets to be the sperm with the golden ticket.



posted on Apr, 27 2014 @ 07:48 AM
link   
a reply to: GiulXainx

All hyperbole and conjecture, never facts just your taxicab education, your opinions and your psychic ability to tell the honest from the crooks.

Good luck with that!



posted on Apr, 27 2014 @ 07:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: justwokeup
I have no problem at all with a 90% inheritance tax that kicks in over a price threshold equivalent to a small dwelling and college education. When you die it all gets sold off and the state takes the lions share.


Another arbitrary penalty based on someone's personal perception of reality. A 'small dwelling'? What is that, $300-400? A college education, $200-250? My home is worth more than that due to appreciation and having bought it at the right time in the market.

Why should whoever I leave that to be forced to sell it because it exceeds your random inheritance threshold? People like you who want to drag everyone down to their level are what is truly wrong with our view on success and entrepreneurship.



posted on Apr, 27 2014 @ 07:58 AM
link   
a reply to: Meee32

To big to fail, to big for jail and to you say big to tax, now that is just great isn't it. Maybe we should just bow down and worship them and beg they find us worthy of life.

There will never be easy solutions, but if we don't do something different soon we will not even have the right to vote, it will be a privilege for the rich only!



posted on Apr, 27 2014 @ 08:07 AM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus


It would seem that even some of richest know that we need to raise inheritance taxes:


Billionaire investors Warren Buffett and George Soros are calling on Congress to increase the estate tax as lawmakers near a decision on tax policies that expire Dec. 31. In a joint statement today, Buffett, Soros and more than 20 other wealthy individuals asked Congress to lower the estate tax’s per-person exemption to $2 million from $5.12 million and raise the top rate to more than 45 percent from 35 percent.


source



posted on Apr, 27 2014 @ 08:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: AlaskanDad
It would seem that even some of richest know that we need to raise inheritance taxes:


Not to the confiscatory levels outlined above.




top topics



 
11
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join