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.

 

Tax the super-rich or riots will rage in 2012: Six reasons we can’t stop coming economic meltdown

page: 1
10
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 01:05 AM
link   
Tax the super-rich or riots will rage in 2012 Commentary: 6 reasons we can’t stop coming economic meltdown


What a year. Rage in London, Egypt, Athens, Damascus. All real. Just a metaphor in the new “Planet of the Apes” film? No, much more. Warning: More rage is dead ahead. Across our planet a new generation is filled with rage. High unemployment. Raging inflation. Dreams lost. Hope gone. While the super -rich get richer and richer.

Listen to that hissing: The fuse is rapidly burning, warning us. Wake up before the rage explodes in your face. This firestorm is endangering America’s future. From forces outside, yes. But far more deadly, from deep within our collective psyche. We have lost our moral compass. We are self-destructing.

Crackpot warning? No. This warning comes from the elite International Monetary Fund. A recent IMF report looked at “the causes of the two major U.S. economic crises over the past 100 years, the Great Depression of 1929 and the Great Recession of 2007,” writes Rana Foroohar, an economics editor at Time magazine.

“There are two remarkable similarities in the eras that preceded these crises. Both saw a sharp increase in income inequality and household-debt-to-income ratios.” And in each case, “as the poor and middle-class were squeezed, they tried to cope by borrowing to maintain their standard of living.”

There’s a new bubble blowing. No one can stop it ... soon it will explode.

Yes folks, the new “Rise of the Planet of the Apes” film delivers a powerful warning paralleling the IMF red flags. Listen to reviewer Zaki Hasan in HuffPost. Here’s the scenario. What’s ahead for America as the inequality gap gets bigger, the job market stagnates, inflation rages, a double-dip recession nears. Hasan’s vision goes beyond metaphor. We see a psychological profile of America as an addict lost in an addiction. And like all addicts, we cannot see, nor stop, our self-destructive behavior...

Warning: The rage is sweeping London, Damascus, Tripoli, the spreading Sahara desert. Is America next?

Tax the super-rich, or revolution will overrun America next


1. Warning: High unemployment is a global ticking time bomb
2. Warning: Tax cuts for the rich increase youth unemployment
3. Warning: Rich get richer on commodity inflation, poor get angrier
4. Warning: The super-rich are blinded by their addiction to money
5. Warning: Politicians are corrupted by this super-rich addiction to greed
6. Warning: Soon the revolutionaries will rage, then dominate ‘Third World America’

Wake up folks. Super-rich addicts are destroying the American Dream for everyone. They’re destroying the American economy. They don’t care about you. Yes, they hear the ticking time bomb. They’re stockpiling cash. Don’t say you weren’t warned. The IMF sees a new collapse sweeping across the planet. Open your eyes. You’re not watching a film. This is not a metaphor. Plan now for the revolution, class warfare, market crash, economic collapse, plan for another depression.


The urgency in the conclusion is quite alarming but really, quite plausible and justified. Now while I have never been a fan of the rich, I'm not suggesting that they are all bad or don't care by any means, having posted this article. However I do agree that generally, the super-rich (as referred to in this article) probably care less about the welfare of the poor than what some deluded people think otherwise.

But the point of posting this article is not to rant against the rich, but to point out yet again, another urgent call to prepare and brace for what is becoming a growing chorus of people sounding the alarm bells that economic catastrophe is indeed ahead and in fact, it is already hitting some countries so hard that we see people standing in the way of gunfire and looking death in the eye as they protest against it!

It would not be sensationalism or fear mongering in my opinion to suggest this is coming to America and soon other parts of the world as economic conditions continue to deteriorate and poor(er) people get further squeezed and impoverished to the point that they amass into a violent and unrelenting protest against the corrupt greedy system, having nothing further to lose than their dignity and will to fight for freedom against the oligarchy corporate political structure.

We are clearly seeing signs of this all around the world and there's no stopping it now.











edit on 16-8-2011 by surrealist because: (no reason given)




posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 01:52 AM
link   
I say bring it. People are angry at the rich? What else is new?

The rich don't care? That's not new either. It's going to take people losing their s*#t and probably causing harm to others for that moment of clarity.

It is going to take a period of great turmoil for us to rise like the metaphorical pheonix from the ashes.

The only thing I can say about class warfare is at least it will be a war worth fighting for once. No fake enemies that the government has declared as hostiles, but real enemies that have actually caused harm to every working class stiff in this once great country.

The denial of these people being the problem has to end.

I don't like violence, but there is a point where it is the final resort. We are at that point as a nation. No country is a bigger enemy than ourselves.

The rich are in control here. Their agenda is flawed and not in the best interest of the people. The people will overtake them.

I try to talk myself out of this stance on this daily, but in the end, it is what it is. They are the problem. We just wanted to survive.



posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 02:53 AM
link   
reply to post by surrealist
 


If anything is evident from all Western riots is that the poor, the underclass, the whatever you want to call it won't target the rich. They target themselves.. they burn their own stores, rob their own people, beat their own neighbors far, far, far away from the where the rich reside. The rich are effectively protected by a shield of general stupidity, greed, and lack of information among the poor.



posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 06:28 AM
link   
It's scary to watch. But the old, corrupted establishment has to come down
in order for a new one to rise up. It's going to be painful. I just hope the new
one represents the people and not the elite. Order Out Of Chaos. This is
what they've been waiting for. If we use violence then we give them a reason
to use violence against us. It's time to use creative thinking America! We need
to think of all the ways to protest without using violence. Little ways we can
all stop feeding the machine. And build community. Get to know our neighbors.
Start looking for ways to protect ourselves without giving into violence.



posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 06:53 AM
link   
reply to post by surrealist
 


You can not touch the "super rich" while they are the ones that runs countries, pay for political whores and influences law making.

At least here in the US that is who the country is run and is for the rich and corporate America benefits only.


The populace is nothing but milking cows to them.



posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 12:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Rockpuck
[more

I could not agree more.



posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 12:29 PM
link   
First of all, let me say that I agree with the OP about our situation, and the history brought up by some of the posters. My agreement ends there. There are no enemies which cannot be defeated, period. For me to expand on this, I would have MIB knocking on the door, so I have to leave this one alone. I will say this however; if you believe that you cannot defeat them, you have already defeated yourselves.

I have no further responses to this subject, so don't push...



posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 12:43 PM
link   
Eat the rich. Take a golden sheet.
I'm all for it.

I'd like to relive the French Revolution. Watch people devolve back into club swinging apes. That would be a period of time worth remembering. Instead of sitting around the camp fire asking friends if they remember the name of the gay neighbor on some useless tv show from 2 decades ago, we'd have real things to remember and discuss.



posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 12:54 PM
link   
I shall enjoy the view of the world burning with me. People are no longer human. They have become programmed into mindless drones, "Eat work sleep die". The world has become a cesspool of the needy and the "I want's". We have stood around and watched it all unfold. We let it happen.

Not a word was spoken, not a finger raised.

Let it burn I say, let it burn...



posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 04:38 PM
link   
Hmm.

I will use my gym analogy again as point #1.

#1 - I work out at a gym next to a Walmart. Many customers of Walmart appear not to have visited a gym even once. I'm gradually losing fat and gaining muscle, while the people out the window seem to be gaining fat and losing muscle. Now should government in the interest of 'distributing fitness' see me as a donor of muscle to the people outside the window? I mean, didn't some politician say it is a civil right for all people to be equally healthy? Didn't another politician say it was a civil right for all people to be equally wealthy, regardless of if they worked for it or not? That last politician was Stalin.

Debt is too high.

#2 - The national debt is $14,619,379,466,208. That's $14,619,379 (Millions). The top 1% earn $1,685,472 (Millions). If you took ALL income from the top 1%, it would still take nearly 14 years to pay off the national debt. In fact if you took ALL income from ALL taxpayers where the total income is $8,426,625 (Millions), it still would not pay off the national debt.

The bottom 50% don't contribute as much as the top 1%.

#3 - Taxes paid by the top 1% is $392,149 (Millions) which is 23.27% of their total income. Taxes paid by the bottom 50% is $27,873 (Millions) which is 2.59% of their total income. Now who contributes more?

The issue is not what your neighbor makes or has. It's about the jobs you don't have. Labor is being replaced by cost cutting and automation. Stores with jobs are being replaced by websites built with offshore cheap labor. Companies are fearful of socialist politics, the Obama push for a redistribution of wealth (robbery). So rather than invest in labor and expand, companies are batting down the hatches for a coming storm and are saving their cash. The opinions of the OP in a social construct is exactly what is collapsing the job market. Push for taxing the wealthy, push for redistributing the wealth, and you raise the risks associated with income creation, therefore people will park their cash in low risk low return investments like Treasuries. Good job.
_______________

So who are the super rich? Glad you asked. Any household that makes more than $380,354/year is in the top 1%. Sounds like alot, but take two salaries and vest in a few stock options or sell a stock and you're hit. Some top 5% households pop into the 1% category a brief year. You've contributed $392,149 (Millions) in income tax or 23.27%, which is 38% of the total income tax paid.

Who is in the top 5%? Any household that makes more than $159,619/year. This means pretty much everyone who had to get a student loan to get the job. You've contributed $213,569 (Millions) in income tax or 17.21% of your income, which is 58.72% of the total income tax paid.

Numbers in this post refer only to Federal taxes and are from: www.taxfoundation.org...
edit on 16-8-2011 by Dbriefed because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 05:50 PM
link   
reply to post by Dbriefed
 


So when you assert that the bottom 50% don't contribute as much as the top 1%, do you mean that is because they don't contribute as much relative to their incomes, or relative to the absolute amount of revenues collected in taxes?

Would you suggest that the bottom 50% be taxed more? Do you realise by doing this and undermiming the spending capacity of the bottom 50%, that you invariably undermine the profitability of the top 1% of those who invest in business ventures as there would be far fewer people paying for their (probably useless, how much more crap do we need anyway) products or services?

We can suggest taking it further, and launch a Syrian style offensive on the poor and pillage their belongings if they have no money, and sell these off and distribute proceeds from the sales to the rich and wealthy so they have more money to invest in jobs and productivity (albeit overseas and technologies that further displace workers anyway).

While I think the rich are probably paying their way, though a lot of them do get around the system through whatever loopholes, the answer is not to further burden the poor or middle-class either. I would much rather be paying 35% in taxes on an annual income of $330k than paying 2% on $33k a year. I would be much better off financially. Your number crunching fails to acknowledge this.

edit on 16-8-2011 by surrealist because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 17 2011 @ 01:08 AM
link   
I'm just looking at pure numbers. Either as a percentage of income paid as tax, or as a Dollar amount, the top 1% pay more than the bottom 50%.

To put it in perspective, say you paid $39,214 in taxes or 24% of your income, and there is a 50 person apartment building across the street that paid $2,787 or 2.5% of their income. Then the 50 people protest that you're not paying enough and they're going to get you. You would say WTF?

The idea that the rich don't support the socially needy is not supported by the numbers. It's a assumption that gained life of it's own, it's become a false meme.

I am strongly against the income tax. Our salaries belong to our families, and the government is criminal in stealing a chunk of our salaries from our families. A per-capita or income tax was against the constitution before the Socialist party advocated the income tax in 1887, the Democratic party advocated the income tax in 1892 and 1908, and this undermining of the constitution was ratified in 1913, the same year the Federal Reserve Bank was established by the famous eight families of power.

People in need should be supported by their families, churches and neighbors. Society has come a long way from that. Since there's a belief that government provides the support of last resort, people don't feel a need to support their neighbor or often family. There's no history of supporting each other that creates a feeling of responsibility.
edit on 17-8-2011 by Dbriefed because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 17 2011 @ 01:11 AM
link   
According to this thread, Wall Street targeted for Britain-style riots,'Day of rage' aims to 'bring down the stock market' chances are it's gonna happen.


~AMNQ



posted on Aug, 17 2011 @ 06:50 AM
link   
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.



Originally posted by Dbriefed
#1 - I work out at a gym next to a Walmart. Many customers of Walmart appear not to have visited a gym even once. I'm gradually losing fat and gaining muscle, while the people out the window seem to be gaining fat and losing muscle. Now should government in the interest of 'distributing fitness' see me as a donor of muscle to the people outside the window? I mean, didn't some politician say it is a civil right for all people to be equally healthy? Didn't another politician say it was a civil right for all people to be equally wealthy, regardless of if they worked for it or not? That last politician was Stalin.

Your analogy is quite incorrect. It would be more accurate if the fat walmart visitors denied you access to the gym. That is what is occurring in the financial “real world”. For an example, lets just say that you get out there and work your butt off far in excess of most of these rich who inherited their old family money, and you invented something spectacular. You do not have the assets that the rich do, and they will use their money and influence to eventually steal the profits from your invention by one means or another. Whether they do it by directly buying your patent for pennies on the dollar, or by using their lawyers to skate around your trademarks to build a competing product to put yours out of business.

The rich have artificially held the middle class down quite unfairly over the years and made profit off their sweat while expecting them to use up what little assets that they have to cover the expenses of the lower class.

Let me give you another example. Walmart is very well known for costing the US government money for each store that they operate by paying their employees so poorly, with no benefits, that it causes them to rely on social services for their basic survival needs. What that equates to, is one of the richest families in America using our tax dollars to pay for the upkeep of their employees while they generate a profit of them! All the while the Waltons, and Walmart as a corporation pay less in taxes then you or I do while generating a HUGE tax debt…

Why should they not be forced to pay fair wages and benefits to their employees, which would decrease the cost of social services, and be good for the economy?


Originally posted by Dbriefed
#2 - The national debt is $14,619,379,466,208. That's $14,619,379 (Millions). The top 1% earn $1,685,472 (Millions). If you took ALL income from the top 1%, it would still take nearly 14 years to pay off the national debt. In fact if you took ALL income from ALL taxpayers where the total income is $8,426,625 (Millions), it still would not pay off the national debt.

A vast majority of that debt has been accumulated because of the upper classes failure to play fair when given the chance to “trickle down” to their employees. That causes the employees to seek government assistance for everything from retirement, to medical insurance. All these things should be, and used to be, paid out of the pockets of the employers. Now the employers shirk their responsibility to those who make them profitable, and expect other lesser Americans (middle class) to foot that bill, while they rake in record profits.

Originally posted by Dbriefed
#3 - Taxes paid by the top 1% is $392,149 (Millions) which is 23.27% of their total income. Taxes paid by the bottom 50% is $27,873 (Millions) which is 2.59% of their total income. Now who contributes more?

Then why doesn’t that upper 1% employ some of that lower 50% at fair wages so they can contribute back into the system instead of taking from it? I mean after all that’s why we give those upper 1% their tax breaks to begin with, and if they are not going to use those tax breaks to trickle back to the lower classes, then they need those tax breaks removed.


Originally posted by Dbriefed
The issue is not what your neighbor makes or has. It's about the jobs you don't have. Labor is being replaced by cost cutting and automation. Stores with jobs are being replaced by websites built with offshore cheap labor.

All being done by that upper 1%, whom you seem to wish to defend, to rake in ever increasing profits by eliminating those costly employee creatures. If they had their way, they would eliminate all employees, to maximize profits, while the rest of us starve and the country crashes under an overburdened social services debt. They don’t care though, as long as there is profit in it for them.


Originally posted by Dbriefed
Who is in the top 5%? Any household that makes more than $159,619/year. This means pretty much everyone who had to get a student loan to get the job.

Where do you get this from?
I have known LOTS of people with a student loan that do not make anywhere near $100K/year. The national average right now is somewhere around $40K.

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.



posted on Aug, 17 2011 @ 06:55 AM
link   
You wont see hundreds of thousands upon tens of thousands, not even close to a million of Americans riot right across the US in 2012



posted on Aug, 17 2011 @ 10:39 AM
link   
reply to post by defcon5
 


It would help if you had numbers or references as a base for your opinions. Most of what you stated is unfounded.

The government encourages overseas economic development. The government encouraged handing out mortgages to masses of people who should never had one. The government created unaffordable entitlement programs that had no hope of scaling. It's the government that created the playing field and the rules. Blame the game.

For those looking forward to riots, who are you going to attack?

Your neighbor? Your local store? Your place of employment? Cops who share your political views? The public office that houses the politician you like?



posted on Aug, 17 2011 @ 11:14 PM
link   
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.


reply to post by Dbriefed
 


Sure, you want some numbers?
Lets start out with how Wal-mart rapes the US taxpayers from both sides…

Wal-Mart’s cost to Taxpayers
Wal-Mart's low prices don't come cheap. In fact, each Wal-Mart store employing 200 people costs taxpayers approximately $420,750 annually in public social services used by Wal-Mart workers whose low wages and unaffordable health insurance mean most of them are among the working poor. That's the finding of Everyday Low Wages: The Hidden Price We All Pay for Wal-Mart, a report by the minority staff of the U.S. House of Representatives Education and the Workforce Committee.


Wal-Mart Profits from Taxpayers
When Wal-Mart comes to town, consumers often pay more than they save. Not only does Wal-Mart ask taxpayers to subsidize the building of its giant retail stores, Wal-Mart pays its workers so little they regularly are forced to use emergency rooms and public services—at taxpayer expense.
First, the company usually asks for massive public tax subsidies and exemptions to build one of its big-box stores. Over the past 20 years, taxpayers have contributed at least $1 billion in subsidies to Wal-Mart stores and distribution centers, as well as to developers of shopping centers anchored by Wal-Mart stores, according to Good Jobs First, a nonprofit research group.
· A 2001 study commissioned by the city of Barnstable, Mass., found big-box retailers such as Wal-Mart annually depleted the town’s revenues by $794 per 1,000 square feet due to higher road maintenance costs and greater demand for public safety services.
· Elected officials in Cathedral City, Calif., gave Wal-Mart $1.8 million in tax rebates 10 years ago. Last year, when the city finally began getting its full $800,000 in annual sales taxes from the two stores, Wal-Mart decided to close them in 2005 and build a new supercenter in nearby Palm Desert. Cathedral City officials learned Wal-Mart was moving out after reading about it in the newspaper—at a time when the city already had a $3 million deficit.

Now lets take that times how many Wal-Mart run stores across the US:


How many Wal-Mart’s in the US
Unit count information as of August 31, 2008
· United States: 4,227 total units
o Wal-Mart discount stores (914)
o Supercenters (2,576)
o Sam's Clubs (594)
o Neighborhood Markets (143)

This means that just Wal-Mart alone generated roughly $1,778,510,250.00 annually in US tax debt, as of 2008, just by it's cost in social services used by its employees, not even counting the other tax rebates and tax breaks that it get from our government.
Lets look at some other corporations:


Chicago Sun-Times: Ten giant U.S. companies avoiding income taxes: Sen. Bernie Sanders list
1) Exxon Mobil made $19 billion in profits in 2009. Exxon not only paid no federal income taxes, it actually received a $156 million rebate from the IRS, according to its SEC filings.
2) Bank of America received a $1.9 billion tax refund from the IRS last year, although it made $4.4 billion in profits and received a bailout from the Federal Reserve and the Treasury Department of nearly $1 trillion.
3) Over the past five years, while General Electric made $26 billion in profits in the United States, it received a $4.1 billion refund from the IRS.
4) Chevron received a $19 million refund from the IRS last year after it made $10 billion in profits in 2009.
5) Boeing, which received a $30 billion contract from the Pentagon to build 179 airborne tankers, got a $124 million refund from the IRS last year.
6) Valero Energy, the 25th largest company in America with $68 billion in sales last year received a $157 million tax refund check from the IRS and, over the past three years, it received a $134 million tax break from the oil and gas manufacturing tax deduction.
7) Goldman Sachs in 2008 only paid 1.1 percent of its income in taxes even though it earned a profit of $2.3 billion and received an almost $800 billion from the Federal Reserve and U.S. Treasury Department.
8) Citigroup last year made more than $4 billion in profits but paid no federal income taxes. It received a $2.5 trillion bailout from the Federal Reserve and U.S. Treasury.
9) ConocoPhillips, the fifth largest oil company in the United States, made $16 billion in profits from 2007 through 2009, but received $451 million in tax breaks through the oil and gas manufacturing deduction.
10) Over the past five years, Carnival Cruise Lines made more than $11 billion in profits, but its federal income tax rate during those years was just 1.1 percent.

And that is the short list:


CBS News: Most Companies Pay No Federal Income Tax.
(AP) Two-thirds of U.S. corporations paid no federal income taxes between 1998 and 2005, according to a new report from Congress.

The study by the Government Accountability Office, expected to be released Tuesday, said about 68 percent of foreign companies doing business in the U.S. avoided corporate taxes over the same period.

Collectively, the companies reported trillions of dollars in sales, according to GAO's estimate.

None of this is new information, at the very least that last article dates back to 2009 and these stats go back to at least 1998.

Now lets take a bit of a stroll down memory lane here, and believe me I am going from memory here so the dates might be slightly askew and I am sure its not entirely complete.

But…
Late 1970’s: US manufactures started moving production offshore to cheaper venues, where they could exploit local populations with slave labor wages and no benefits.

Late 1980’s: US corporations started ditching pensions in lieu of stock based 401K’s that could be later stolen back from employees through stock market manipulation, making the employees solely reliant on Social Security and Medicaid during retirement.

2001-2002: Corporations smashed the IT boom by freezing all hiring, laying off employees, and off-shoring development and support. Forcing remaining employees to work harder to retain their jobs at lower wages and benefits.

2008: Under the excuse of the recession, all corporations pulled the same thing to the rest of the workforce that they did to the IT guys years earlier, forcing them to work excessively for less money and benefits with the constant threat of losing their jobs being held over their heads. Employees have put up with it for fear of being out in a market with no job growth.

All this was done while these same companies were stealing tax money under the umbrella of “trickle down economics”…

Now, these companies have had their chance to play fair, to give back to the US workforce and the US taxpayer that made them rich, but have instead chosen to be greedy and take money from both their workforce, the consumer, and the government (which is really the consumer and workforce again via taxes). I say enough of this greed, they had their chance and blew it, now make them pay out via the only means that will force them to play fair, through legislation making them pay their fair share back into this nation that made them rich to begin with…


As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.



posted on Aug, 18 2011 @ 01:34 PM
link   
reply to post by Rockpuck
 


The rich uses the middle class as shield between them and the poor. The middle class keeps the poor in check for the benefit of the rich.

It doesn't matter if you tax the super rich. They'll just do business where they'll earn the most (and it's not Amerika now.)



posted on Aug, 18 2011 @ 01:39 PM
link   
Most people do not think that taking money from a wealthy person, and giving it to a crack head is a good idea.

No reasonable person would think that.

But tea baggers, and wealthy people always try to employ that ideology. That someone wants to take their hard earned money, and give it to a crack head who has never worked a day in their life.

This is part of the phallacy that is making the majority of Americans very angry. Wealthy people get tax breaks for buying expensive cars, they get tax breaks for buying boats and airplanes.

I'm not wealthy but I am educated and I live comfortably within my means. And I am forced to pay a "School Fee", every year for my kids to attend a public school. Then I am forced to buy paper towels, toilet paper, handsoap and about $100.00 more of general goods including cleaning supplies because the school doesn't have money in it's budget to pay for basic cleaning materials.

At the same time My wealthy neighbor, and by neighbor I mean someone who lives in a walled community with privately armed guards, sends his kids to a "magnate" school.
Now this magnate school he pays $2000.00 a month for his kids to attend. And I'm OK with that.

Except that the magnate school ALSO gets about one third of the same budget as the public school my kid goes to.
So my taxes are being used by a private corporate for profit school that only a wealthy child can attend, and because of that I have to now pay a double tax in the form of non legal non binding school fees and school supply lists to send my kid to a public school while the wealthy neighbor actually gets a tax break of up to 40% of the tuition he paid to send his kid to a private school.

So the middle class is paying taxes so that wealthy parents can get a tax break for sending their kids to better schools than we can access.

THAT is what the problem is.

Wealthy people have more access to the political process. So they PAY to have lobbyists inspire legislation that only benefits the people within the range specified because that range is only accessible to those with X amount of wealth withstanding.


No wealthy person wants to see a true Flat tax or consumption tax system because those two things combined would actually benefit the middle class the most.

A Gross Holdings flat tax of 7%. So if you have 1 million dollars in the bank, and you own a house that is valued at 1.5 million dollars, and 2 mercedes worth 120k and a power yacht valued at 350k and a harley worth 80k
your tax bill for 2012 would be 7% of 3 million 50 thousand, or $213,500.00 Two hundred thirteen thousand five hundred.

Currently in my state, if I had the same set of figures, I would be paying roughly $300.0 a year for the harley, and that number drops every year. Nothing for the boat, other than the initial sales tax and a $20.00 annual registration fee. I'd put that million dollars into a trust and only pay tax on the interest I drew so I'd be paying about $2000.00 a year for that which would be mostly eaten up by the depreciation of the boats dropping value since I paid more than 100k for it I get to right off it's drop in value. And I'd be paying about 2% on the value of the house so my total tax bill for 2012 would be about $30000.00

30 thousand, versus 213 thousand. I can't imagine why wealthy people wouldn't want a gross value flat tax when they can have a tax system tailored to deliver them the highest values and lowest taxes in the world.

A scaled consumption tax would only start to become painful if you routinely purchased things that cost more than 1 million dollars.

How many of you out there have purchased anything worth more than your own home?



posted on Aug, 18 2011 @ 01:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dbriefed
reply to post by defcon5
 


It would help if you had numbers or references as a base for your opinions. Most of what you stated is unfounded.

The government encourages overseas economic development. The government encouraged handing out mortgages to masses of people who should never had one. The government created unaffordable entitlement programs that had no hope of scaling. It's the government that created the playing field and the rules. Blame the game.

For those looking forward to riots, who are you going to attack?

Your neighbor? Your local store? Your place of employment? Cops who share your political views? The public office that houses the politician you like?


I'm going to attack wealthy people who honestly think that they deserved to be paid $250,000.00 a year to turn down insurance claims for children with life threatening diseases.
Or who turned down insurance claims for people hurt at work.
Or who pushed a button that invested other peoples money into a computer controlled stock portfolio that ended up losing money, but the person who pushed the button took a 20% commision on the initial amount whether it lost or gained.

I'm going to attack all those self righteous greedy a holes who honestly believe that they deserve 250,000 a year for less work than a TEACHER or a FIREMAN ,or a SOLDIER had to do.

And I'll smile the whole time, and give them a customer satisfaction survey to fill out in hell.



new topics

top topics



 
10
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join