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: 9
11
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 27 2014 @ 08:20 AM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: andr3w68

Yes,

Something needs to be done.

How 'bout the government gets off their collective butts and gets the jobs back.

Higher taxes won't get people out of the gutters. It will put more people in the gutters just like it has been.

Jobs will get people's butts in motion.



Everything has the made in China stamp on it, from corelle to alarm clocks, to our hardrives and computers.

In order to prosper, and also insure that we're not being silently murdered via some very bad toxic materials, since China has a very bad reputation for using lead and poisoning food/milk, etc. and for animal violations, I think its high time that citizens in many countries take back the industries by producing their own products, cottage industries, and buy from each other. Thats the key, to actually commit to where their money is spent.

Jobs are not as important as cottage industries and many many small businesses.

Government and non profits need to focus on creating funds for ordinary people to get into their own businesses.




posted on Apr, 27 2014 @ 08:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: WeAreAWAKE





You know...while we are at it. There are unloved people in the world. There are also those who are very loved, married, etc. I say we should take some of their love and distribute it to the unloved. It is completely unfair that the "loved ones" have it and others don't. Lets hate these loved people and demonize them for what they have. Fair is fair...right?


Quite possibly the best post on this subject yet.

You wrote a parable of biblical proportions.
edit on 27-4-2014 by grandmakdw because: fix quote



posted on Apr, 27 2014 @ 08:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: 00018GE
I always notice that those who rail against the "rich" NEVER are against the biggest hoarder of wealth, "the federal Government"


That is so true and they don't redistribute the money "fairly" like they promised instead

they take lavish trips (congressmen, senators, president) in the name of diplomacy with the middle class's $
they have meals so expensive they would pay a months rent for the poor with your money and my money
they have secretaries, undersecretaries, staff, advisers, drivers, some have servants and cooks etc. paid for with your money and my money
they enter office upper middle class to slightly rich and end up uber rich on a salary under $250K (huh???????)



posted on Apr, 27 2014 @ 09:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: justwokeup
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.


Unfortunately, that doesn't happen in real life. Warren Buffett is a great fan of inheritance tax and all other forms of taxation that bankrupt companies. It means that family run businesses like ranchers aren't passed down the generations, but instead are forced to sell up and be bought up by the oligarchs.



posted on Apr, 27 2014 @ 10:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: jimmyx

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?



Ok, I think your real problem is that some people have wealth and others don't. Where does wealth get created when everyone gets paid the same? People that front the money in ventures are the ones risking their money in hopes of making much more money from the venture, that's how business works.

To use your example though, lets say the Combined Walton family gave half of their wealth back to Walmart employees evenly over the 22 years since Sam Walton died. Let's see how much the wealth spreads and how it will change the lives of the average Walmart Employee. I bet they will make so much they won't want to work anywhere else other than Walmart.

Let's do the math.

78 Billion divided by 22 years is roughly 3.5 Billion per year.
There are 2.2 Million people working at Walmart. Lets assume to be progressive we equally distribute that money to each employee.
Lets further assume that each employee currently makes $10 hour and works 40 hours a week. Roughly $21,000 a year.
That 78 Billion should make a huge impact right?

Well if every Walmart employee were to get an equal share of that 78 Billion over the past 22 years............they would get a increase in salary of 77 cents per hour, or $1,611 for each of those 22 years. Do the math, I did. They will now make a yearly salary of $22,500 roughly.

Surprised?

What I am trying to get at is that you are mad that the Wealthy have money and that they don't "Share their wealth". If you run a business, I would assume you would run it at a profit.

What would be a good profit margin for you to make percentage-wise in a business you own after paying all your bills, your employees and your taxes? I am genuinely curious as to your answer.



posted on Apr, 27 2014 @ 10:48 AM
link   
a reply to: MarlinGrace


I am not sure how the government subsidizes the waltons I am unaware of that.

It subsidizes them by providing welfare/food assistance to the employees, because Walmart doesn't pay a livable wage.

7 billion dollars a year go to the underpaid employees at Wamart, McDonalds and the like - that's our TAX MONEY....

if those people had a livable wage, they would NOT NEED food stamps or any assistance whatsoever.

'I Can Barely Afford My Children's Shoes:' My Life As A McDonald's Worker


Meet Melinda Topel, a single mother with a college degree raising four children on poverty wages and no sick days.

Topel has to face difficult decisions like these on a daily basis. But she isn’t alone. She’s one of about four million fast-food employees nationwide struggling to survive on low-wage work. While fast-food corporations rake in billions each year, workers are paid the minimum wage or slightly above it. In turn, workers like Topel not only struggle with bills, but have to rely on public assistance. And like most fast-food workers, although she works full-time, Topel doesn’t receive any kind of benefits or paid sick days.

That’s why Topel and other fast-food workers across the country are fighting for a $15 per hour wage and a union.

“We deserve to go to work everyday and pay our bills like everyone else,” she said. “And our kids deserve new shoes or school supplies.… The CEOs of these multi-billion-dollar companies are putting the profits in their pockets — and we made them those profits… and it shouldn’t be like that.”


No, it should NOT be like that....
keep reading:


Topel started her job making $8 an hour, working 40 hours each week. Soon after, she decided to go to college in hopes of eventually landing better employment. “I worked full-time, went to school full-time and raised four kids full-time,” she said, adding that she got a degree in medical billing and coding in 2006 and another in computer applications in 2012.


And keep on still reading:


While Melinda Topel, and the hundreds of thousands like her, struggle to pay their bills, CEOs of these low-paying corporations pay themselves millions. A new report by Demos found that the average fast food CEO salary was $23.8 million in 2013. This makes the CEO-to-worker pay ratio 1,200 to one, which is more than quadruple the ratio in the nation’s overall economy. How did this happen? In the past decade, fast-food CEOs’ wages have increased more than 400 percent, while worker wages increased 0.3 percent.

(emphases are mine)
I understand not wanting the evil government to have its mitts on the money, because YES, they spend recklessly.

But the fact is, that a fast food CEO makes 1200 times as much as the workers, and those WORKERS have to go on government assistance TO SURVIVE.

There are some really good points on both sides in this debate.
Free trade/global corporations ARE a huge problem, and we should never have initiated it.
FORCE the corporations to pay the same taxes they would if they were stateside, regardless of where they are 'doing business' ,AND give them breaks if they pay their workers A FAIR WAGE that eliminates the need for government assistance to their workers; eliminate tax havens, and provide WORKERS enough to contribute TO the economy, rather than having to ask for help.

And yes "unearned income" should be taxed as 'INCOME'.

If you all want to remove the government oversight of welfare, then YOU MAKE SURE your workers, your neighbors, the newly emancipated have enough income to live on, and don't need it!

God this site is becoming such a right-wing soapbox that it's nauseating.
No, I don't like big government, but I also don't like the system's setup the way it is.

WHY ON EARTH should the government have to pay assistance to persons employed by a private industry?
Oh. Wait...yeah, because the "investors" won't get THEIR 'wages' for INVESTING.

Well you know what? If every one of those underpaid, hardworking people just up and left - or even called in sick for a few days ---
THEN WHAT?

Human Resources used to be a good thing - now it's a sledge-hammer used by corporations to keep people from earning even a tiny percentage of what the investors/CEOs get to keep. Excessive bonuses and salaries are disgusting.


edit on 4/27/2014 by BuzzyWigs because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 27 2014 @ 11:15 AM
link   

originally posted by: AlaskanDad

They have bought our government, destroyed our job market, they are hoarding trillions of dollars away from our economy, they have manipulated our markets to todays inflationary levels and are the cause of our war mongering; how could that possibly effect our quality of life?

I agree with 100s of billions, but trillions? Trillion is a Government word.....


So you have a million dollars invested, are you hording that from the economy? Now lets say you have 50 billion in Wal Mart Stock, are you hording? Our inflation rate of 1.5% is not bad at all...

How much does a politician cost? We can tax the rich 100% and the influence would still be there. Also, are you saying that taxing the rich 80% plus would have stopped the wars from ever happening? You like to mix emotional talking points into all this that really do not make much sense when you try to compare them.



Once again lol; it is everyones responsibility to keep our countries government honest and allowing the rich lobbying / bribing our politicians is not acting in a responsible manor.


So the answer is to tax anyone who makes over 465k 80%, ya that will fix it....geez

So the 10s of millions who vote these people into office where is there responsibility? The 10s of millions who get no where in life where is there responsibility?

It seems we want to put ALL the responsibility and blame on the top 5%, and the rest get a pass......


To be fair and honest, I agree with you on many of these points. There is far too much influence in our Government by powerful people, and the best candidate for the job will never be picked unless they got a billion dollar war chest, but heavy taxes will just drive the country down deeper. The super rich will just have more tax breaks so that they pay 80% on 20% of their profits where the 500k small business guy will be paying 80% on 80% or so and drive him into the ground.

How about 15% on 100% flat tax? In the end we would make a lot more and would only need 5 people working for the IRS and not 50,000.
edit on 27-4-2014 by Xtrozero because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 27 2014 @ 11:19 AM
link   
a reply to: Xtrozero
"So the answer is to tax anyone who makes over 465k 80%, ya that will fix it....geez"


YES! Less money to buy the politicians with. I don't care if they hide it overseas either. Just as long as they keep out of some congressman's pocket.



posted on Apr, 27 2014 @ 11:26 AM
link   
a reply to: BuzzyWigs

Not to pick on you or the article you quoted, but....

Does she not get Child Support and or alimony from the former Husband?

Even with her new job as a medical biller, starting salary in that field is around $22,500. That's an improvement over what she had at McDonalds but for a family of 5, which she is, the Federal Poverty Guideline is over $27,000. She is still qualifying for Government assistance.

Where's your outrage at the Doctors office or Hospital she probably works at???

See you think that a Doctors office will pay "fair wages" yet an employment entry job like fast food doesn't.

The Doctor makes too much money, lets cut his salary and give it to his employees.

Just saying.....



posted on Apr, 27 2014 @ 11:29 AM
link   

originally posted by: MOMof3
a reply to: Xtrozero
"So the answer is to tax anyone who makes over 465k 80%, ya that will fix it....geez"


YES! Less money to buy the politicians with. I don't care if they hide it overseas either. Just as long as they keep out of some congressman's pocket.


Really?

Sound like a nanny state where once again we are treated like children. Can't have too much money or you will do evil things with it, so the big daddy Government will need to hold on to that for you....

Do you really think the millions that may make 500k plus are buying politicians, or do you just consider them collateral damage to get to the true bad guys? It is an easy choice for you, I guess, when you are not a part of the collateral damage.

Lets tax everyone 100% and so we are all in the same boat....



posted on Apr, 27 2014 @ 11:30 AM
link   
a reply to: pavil


Where's your outrage at the Doctors office or Hospital she probably works at???

She's working at McDonalds, even AFTER she got her degree, because she can't find a job in that field.

And I have no idea what her child support or 'maintenance' issues are. But she's not working as a medical biller.

Or a computer person.



posted on Apr, 27 2014 @ 11:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: pavil
a reply to: BuzzyWigs

Not to pick on you or the article you quoted, but....

Does she not get Child Support and or alimony from the former Husband?

Even with her new job as a medical biller, starting salary in that field is around $22,500. That's an improvement over what she had at McDonalds but for a family of 5, which she is, the Federal Poverty Guideline is over $27,000. She is still qualifying for Government assistance.

Where's your outrage at the Doctors office or Hospital she probably works at???

See you think that a Doctors office will pay "fair wages" yet an employment entry job like fast food doesn't.

The Doctor makes too much money, lets cut his salary and give it to his employees.

Just saying.....



So I hire a person to do a job, the job is low skill, low education... Is it my responsibility to pay more than the job is worth because the person I hire has 5 kids and needs more money than what I can offer?

In Seattle they are pushing for a minimum wage of 15.00 for everyone, and I been listening to talk shows and it is interesting how many businesses will either need to shut down or reduce their workforce/move to not shut down... I'm not talking to increase profits, I'm saying to not shut the doors....



posted on Apr, 27 2014 @ 11:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
She's working at McDonalds, even AFTER she got her degree, because she can't find a job in that field.


It is most likely 60% plus of the people who go to college end up with a totally worthless degree that gets them basically a job at McDonalds. Most people who do go to college today should never go, they do not have the true aptitude needed, and should learn a viable skill instead.

I had two plumbers come to my house and it cost me 250 bucks an hour...just saying...

Colleges LIE! They create easy to get bull# degrees with the lie that a 100k job is just waiting for the grad. The grad finishes college with a 60k bill and finds that their degree means nothing in the workforce...who is to blame on this one?




edit on 27-4-2014 by Xtrozero because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 27 2014 @ 11:47 AM
link   
a reply to: Xtrozero


In Seattle they are pushing for a minimum wage of 15.00 for everyone, and I been listening to talk shows and it is interesting how many businesses will either need to shut down or reduce their workforce/move to not shut down... I'm not talking to increase profits, I'm saying to not shut the doors....

Okay, fair argument.

But we're talking about global corporations here, not you running your own business and employing people.
Are you 'traded' on Wall Street? If not, then this doesn't apply to you.

No, you should not have to shut your doors. But obscene profits by CEOs at megacorporations are costing YOU - because YOU, as a taxpayer, are subsidizing THEM. By pulling up their slack for not paying their employees a fair wage.

Do you see?



posted on Apr, 27 2014 @ 11:49 AM
link   
a reply to: Xtrozero


Colleges LIE! They create easy to get bull# degrees with the lie that a 100k job is just waiting for the grad. The grad finishes college with a 60k bill and finds that their degree means nothing in the workforce...who is to blame on this one?

I don't know.
You tell me...
because that's the predicament that I'm in -
Who IS to blame??? When I can't pay my student loans - should I be put in prison?
Stripped of my home and car and everything???

Because my chosen career has been 'out-sourced'? Or funds for it disappear?



edit on 4/27/2014 by BuzzyWigs because: (no reason given)


Oh, and by the way, it was not that I had no aptitude. I graduated at the top of my class, with honors. And it was graduate school, when I was 40. To try to improve my income, as a parent of two kids.

I'm not 'on the dole', either.
edit on 4/27/2014 by BuzzyWigs because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 27 2014 @ 12:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs

But we're talking about global corporations here, not you running your own business and employing people.
Are you 'traded' on Wall Street? If not, then this doesn't apply to you.

No, you should not have to shut your doors. But obscene profits by CEOs at megacorporations are costing YOU - because YOU, as a taxpayer, are subsidizing THEM. By pulling up their slack for not paying their employees a fair wage.

Do you see?



Sorry, I misread the article. My point still stands, even with that degree and she got a job as a medical biller, she would STILL be in poverty. I know of 2 friends that have degrees in the area the article refers too......neither got a good job in those fields and are now working doing something totally unrelated to the degree they have.

Fast Food Jobs, except maybe for management, aren't meant to support whole family's on. They aren't. They are meant for kids to learn what it takes to work and have a job. They are starter jobs, not lifetime careers.

Most McDonalds and other fast food places are owned by franchisees, most of whom are NOT traded on the NYSE and have to make the bills and hopefully have money left over. Labor and all of it's associated costs are either the #1 or #2 expenditure for a business, depending what it does. Franchise's aren't cheap to purchase.

I think every business owner would LOVE to pay their employees the best in the industry. It doesn't work out that way. You really wouldn't know unless you have ran your own business.



posted on Apr, 27 2014 @ 12:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
No, you should not have to shut your doors. But obscene profits by CEOs at megacorporations are costing YOU - because YOU, as a taxpayer, are subsidizing THEM. By pulling up their slack for not paying their employees a fair wage.
Do you see?


There are isolated cases of this...

I stated in a earlier post that the CEO of Boeing makes about 13 mil a year and if we cut that down to 800k (10 times the average salary there) that would give each employee 100 buck a year raise.

In the end what is a low skill/low education job worth? How much should I pay a stocker at Wal Mart, or a cashier? I'm not saying that there are not disparities, but since the beginning of time low skill jobs pay the lowest and have really never been what we would call a living wage.

So here is the problem...

We in America are too self centered and too much an individualist. For some reason we feel that every job should be a living wage job and when we look at the rest of the world it is not like that. I think two low paying jobs should equal a single living wage for two people. Two people living together should make enough on two low paying jobs to survive. The rest of the world does not all live on the idea that everyone should be able survive in a solo situation.

If a person wants to live on their own then they better work on their skills and get a higher paying job. If a couple has kids (or a single mom with 5 kids...) they better do the same.

My wife doesn't need to work so she takes care of our two kids and I work. My skills and education levels are rather high so I get paid well. If I didn't have that then she would need to work, and/or work on her skills too, but I do not see two minimum paying jobs as viable for a family of four. Does this mean we should raise minimum wages just because two people do not work on better skills and decide to have a bunch of kids too?



posted on Apr, 27 2014 @ 12:06 PM
link   
a reply to: Xtrozero

That's the crux of their arguement. I should get paid more than the job is worth. It doesn't matter if I could train a new person to do your job in a shift, their time is worth more than that. If that were the case, I would suggest they find a job that will pay that, rather than demand an entry level job pay more.



posted on Apr, 27 2014 @ 12:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
I don't know.
You tell me...
because that's the predicament that I'm in -
Who IS to blame??? When I can't pay my student loans - should I be put in prison?
Stripped of my home and car and everything???


The colleges are to blame, but there isn't anything you can do about it. If your major isn't the kind that by your junior year you do not have companies actively trying to recruit you then your degree is one of the 100s that are totally worthless.

Medical Billing is example of the new scam...schools are now going to teach you a skill instead of education....that 60k skilled job is just waiting for you...ya right...




Because my chosen career has been 'out-sourced'? Or funds for it disappear?


It was most likely not even a viable career the first day you started college, but the college would not tell you that, they just want your money...





Oh, and by the way, it was not that I had no aptitude. I graduated at the top of my class, with honors.



Why didn't you have engineer, doctor, MBA etc after your name then? 4.0 in 100s of degrees will get you a cup of coffee...[



edit on 27-4-2014 by Xtrozero because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 27 2014 @ 12:17 PM
link   
a reply to: Xtrozero


My wife doesn't need to work so she takes care of our two kids and I work. My skills and education levels are rather high so I get paid well. If I didn't have that then she would need to work, and/or work on her skills too, but I do not see two minimum paying jobs as viable for a family of four. Does this mean we should raise minimum wages just because two people do not work on better skills and decide to have a bunch of kids too?


I don't 'need to work' either, because my husband makes enough for us to live on - and I took care of the kids (before they got out on their own), and still am the 'home-maker' - I keep up with the house (we're talking bill-paying, budgeting, maintenance, inventory, cooking, cleaning, etc), and him...which is a FULL TIME JOB....

He's a veteran, with PTSD and chronic anxiety issues, and needs someone to care for him/our home - is that not worth anything?
My skills and education are proven, but I never made more than $25,000.....
yeah, I was working as a teacher/helper.

The pay was crap, but the rewards of helping outweighed it. Now I'm screwed.




top topics



 
11
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join