Why do people believe in redistrubution of wealth and more taxes for the rich?

Where i am from asking a minority to sacrifice for the majority is garbage lets put the numbers in this conversation you are talking about less than 10 million to pony up for the 310 million how is that fair?

It's not even close to being even if you took every dime it still would not make a difference because too many people are cosumning the wealth of others and there people are going take more what that ends up doing is funding something for a day or a year at best and then what?

Who are you going to tax next?

The only solution is to return to the era when more people are producing than consuming everyone a king and none a serf.

reply to post by Jezus


I don't know, maybe the bottom 80% did double over 20 years, but the graph might not show the changes well, but 1 million in 1980s dollars is the same as 2 million today so that increase is normal with inflation. And a person who made 15k in the 80s would be a 30ker today, but the chart can't show that fine of change.

I don't see anything really damning about the charts.

Do you people know that the highest income tax US ever had was 92 percent, and it was in the 50s?

Why in that time no one complained about those high tax rates being socialist? no one complained because it was understood and accepted that the richer you are, the more taxes you have to pay.

Just a side note..

I paid 32k in federal taxes last year and I kind of personally feel that anyone who paid less doesn't have a leg to stand on to say I should pay more. IMHO

Everyone focuses on what people have left over after taxes and never look at what is actually paid.

Take Warren Buffet when he said his personal sec paid a higher percent then he did. Well, I can easily guess his personal sec is in the 1% group and most likely didn't give billions away, so ya I would say the statement is true, but really doesn't give us a good picture.

This guys nails it down, If all OWS supporters were as well spoken and as informed as him they would get a lot more support...

www.youtube.com...

reply to post by gwydionblack


Here it is: Where do you think they got the money in the first place? They stole it from us; do you think the money just appears from somewhere? People have to work for it, they do real work in the real world to produce real wealth and value. The corporate system is set up to concentrate the wealth higher and higher up the pyramid. No-one on the planet is worth what these corporate leeches are getting. The wealthy do none of the work yet they get most of the benefits (education, health care, the freedom to travel, quality goods and foods) of peoples labors. Any 'redistribution' would be the people that bled and struggled for the wealth day in and day out for lifetimes getting a fairer share of the benefits of their work.

simple concept google paid 4.3% in taxes last year I paid 43% in taxes last year because I can't afford to set up shell corporations and move money around - is there 900,000,000 in taxes alot more than my 17,000 in taxes yes are they bending the law because they can afford to and I can't yes, is that unfair essentially yes.

the problem is exceptions when you start making them you can legitimize anything, to solve this make a flat 10% income tax with no other fees fines or regulations. business will boom people will be happy and oppressive countries like the UK with there VAT rape will see money flow from there country into ours.

Originally posted by apacheman
reply to post by Honor93

 

You didn't notice I called for a global cap on wealth? I live in the US, so that's where I focus first. In any case I'm not sure what your point about Indian billionaires is.

Capping wealth harms no one, not even the billionaires, save only in their ego. Releasing their excessive wealth back into the global economy will obviously do wonders for it in a myriad of ways: better wages, more infrastructure built, more solutions implemented that are currently hanging fire due to lack of funds, more research...the list is endless.

Explain how someones choices are restricted because they have merely $1 billion as opposed to $10 billion. I see no limit on what they can reasonably do, save buy governments and foment wars.

I'm glad to see you support abortion, gay marriage, polygamy, and public nudity as individual rights, and are against drug laws, against mandatory car insurance, and speed limits as they are all infringements upon individual rights.

Oh, sorry, you weren't talking about those individual rights, just the money ones.

my point Was about the multitude of billionaires in several countries, India just happened to be first on the list. (which clearly, you never even bothered to review )

any cap, global or otherwise is UNAmerican, period ... no other point necessary.

please, prove this ...

Capping wealth harms no one, not even the billionaires, save only in their ego

or find another argument ... your opinion proves nothing.

i agree more circulation of available funds, cash, liquidity (not wealth) is advisable and profitable for a greater portion of the population throughout the world.

we would disagree about the definition and the implication OWS places on "wealth".
i do not measure "wealth" in dollars and cents ... tis a shame that so many do, including you apparently.

your request is nonsense because i do not have, do not desire and am not concerned with the decisions of a billionaire.

however, i do know this ... i have many more options with $10 than i do with $1.
so, who would you be to restrict the options of anyone?

yes, i support choice (if that choice involves abortion, so be it ... tis not my choice to make, today)
yes, i support the birthright to choose (i may disagree with the choice made but i also enjoy my birthright to disagree, openly)

gay marriage, polygamy, and public nudity have what to do with the Federal Reserve, re-distributing wealth or more taxes for the rich?

and talk about strawman arguments ... drug laws ? car insurance? speed limits?
what do they have to do with a hill of beans let alone individual rights ???
tip: drug laws do NOT prevent or even deter drug use
---> car insurance does NOT prevent or even deter me from owning a car
---> speed limits are honored NOT obeyed.

really ... you need a foundational argument if you're going to address me, otherwise it's whitewash, nothing more ... and, in this case, your points don't even apply.

Originally posted by WarminIndy
I believe people should be paid a living wage and have access to education of their choice. We should not be dictated about where we would like to work or what interests we take. But we also need to improve our work ethic in this country. Someone should be paid for the work they do, not get paid for having a job but not working at it. Employees need to have safe places to work at without fear of losing their jobs for reporting workplace abuses.

Paid a living wage? By who? Heres an idea- work for your living wage. How would this improve work ethic like you say we need? People act so helpless. Its sad really.

reply to post by Xtrozero

I paid 32k in federal taxes last year and I kind of personally feel that anyone who paid less doesn't have a leg to stand on to say I should pay more. IMHO

Say what??? You paid 32k in taxes? News Flash --- that is more than the min wage worker EARNS...even someone earning $12/hour doesn't make $32k in INCOME!!

A leg to stand on??

Like I said before. You need to zip it.

Originally posted by openminded2011
How much of a sacrifice is it for the rich to pay more taxes? 1.8 million a year income instead of 2.2? What are we defining as sacrifice? Do they have 3 homes instead of 4?

Why should someone pay more taxes because they make more? Just because they make more? That is not an incentive to invest in small business opportunities that create more jobs for those that have less money. If you want to make more money- go make it yourself. So many leeches in this country.

reply to post by phishyblankwaters


Can anyone provide links to the "Tax Brakes" for the wealthy in the IRS tax codes so we can study these Tax Breaks" and see what solutions can be made.

Also, How much did Michael Moore's pay out in taxes of his multimillion dollar income last year? How about George Clooney? or George Soros? Nancy Pelosi? Harry Reid? Shawn Penn? Ron Paul? James "Goosebumps" Kelly (Chicago's Irish Mafia)? and all those who are making in excess of 1 Mil a year? the ones making over 1 mil a year not the middle class?

What loop holes did these guys use to not pay their fair share of taxes? If these used loopholes to pay less then they are hypocrites.

Q: What is a living wage?

A: Enough to pay the bills and have three meals a day. that would be a living wage.

To some if they are some of these trust fund babies at OWS a living wage is enough to play around all day and do nothing but protest something they themselves know nothing about.

Originally posted by circuitsports
simple concept google paid 4.3% in taxes last year I paid 43% in taxes last year because I can't afford to set up shell corporations and move money around - is there 900,000,000 in taxes alot more than my 17,000 in taxes yes are they bending the law because they can afford to and I can't yes, is that unfair essentially yes.

the problem is exceptions when you start making them you can legitimize anything, to solve this make a flat 10% income tax with no other fees fines or regulations. business will boom people will be happy and oppressive countries like the UK with there VAT rape will see money flow from there country into ours.

edit on 19-10-2011 by circuitsports because: (no reason given)

I didn't pay any taxes because I didn't make enough to pay any. what tax breaks did a get? A lower dependent deduction which will go down again this year, $50 maximum donation deduction for giving to my church, even though I gave $960 to my church last year the IRS only allows me to deduct $50.

This is my tax fix. Each person pays $100 per year per head. Family of five pays $500. times that in a population of lets say Los Angeles it would be a minimum of $700,000,000.00, times that by 3 per each State on an average(Hawaii and RI would be less of course) 1,050,000,000,000.00 per year income. Then the Feds also tax 3% sales tax in each state at the register, and 5% fuel tax at the pump, That is in an excess of a Trillion dollars per year. Each state charges 3% sales tax, and $50 per house/apartment in their State, County and cities get property taxes in their areas. Cut Congress and Senate pay in half and require on them what they impose on the people like Obama Care and no lifetime retirement.

Just these simple taxes and savings, the government can have more than enough for the social programs the "give me what I want and not what I earned crowd" desire.

reply to post by ker2010


Here's the same guy on show with Judge Napolitano

reply to post by ThreeThreeThree


Notice how you have so few stars and flags? Who are you? Jamie? Jamie Diimon???
I have some things to say to you...

please read!
you all fallow what others say. you are sheep and dont know it.
it is Not redistribution of wealth. it is keeping their hard earned money.
the rich use every trick that can come up with.
the taxes should be used for that man! be how much goes missing?
the rich use ever scam thay can come up with.
look around your home. do the things you own last as long as they should do?
do you Need them all?
they make them so they dont last. so you have to pay for another one!
is this right? look at all the money scams on TV and advertising.
we dont need a LOT of what we buy. but they use psychology to Make us buy.
they are like the devil, they trick us out of are money.
is it fair to use their scams to ROB us? No!
so give us ARE money back and stop scamming and robbing us.

Originally posted by wildtimes
reply to post by Xtrozero

 

I paid 32k in federal taxes last year and I kind of personally feel that anyone who paid less doesn't have a leg to stand on to say I should pay more. IMHO

Say what??? You paid 32k in taxes? News Flash --- that is more than the min wage worker EARNS...even someone earning $12/hour doesn't make $32k in INCOME!!

A leg to stand on??

Like I said before. You need to zip it.

why would this poster need to "zip it" ???
he/she is as much a 99%er as everyone else or doesn't that compute for you and your ilk??

see, that's the problem ... no one in the OWS movement can differentiate between 99% or 1% ... to you, they're all the same if they have what you want ... and that IS a problem for all.

besides, if you're protesting greed and envy, why don't you stand in solidarity with this 99%er or is your greed and envy rearing its ugly head or perhaps you think their earnings should be capped too ???

Originally posted by ThreeThreeThree

Originally posted by WarminIndy

Paid a living wage? By who? Heres an idea- work for your living wage. How would this improve work ethic like you say we need? People act so helpless. Its sad really.

I think that is exactly what I said. The reason that unions helped in the beginning was that they were forced to make workplaces safer. Somewhere along the way some union leaders got greedy. But we can't solve only one side of the coin, we have to think of both sides. I do not think it is right to move companies out of this country, the companies that produce consumer goods. The entire nation of consumer goods relies on the steel industry whether people realize it or not.

Think about it, not only are cars made of steel, but small appliances and medical equipment are as well. That steel production relies on coal but yet a group of people want to shut down coal mines and steel manufacturing plants to import our goods. That puts our workers out of jobs. So that is the other side we have to have answers for. Corporations should not have so many restrictions placed on them but at the same time our workers need to be paid for the work they do. And those goods should be manufactured at a rate that the consumer can afford them.

When we propose a set of answers, we also need to see the effects of those answers on other things. It creates a ripple effect and those most affected are the people who need those goods. So let's start by considering all sides just to find the most reasonable answers.

Originally posted by buddha
please read!
you all fallow what others say. you are sheep and dont know it.
it is Not redistribution of wealth. it is keeping their hard earned money.
the rich use every trick that can come up with.
the taxes should be used for that man! be how much goes missing?
the rich use ever scam thay can come up with.
look around your home. do the things you own last as long as they should do?
do you Need them all?
they make them so they dont last. so you have to pay for another one!
is this right? look at all the money scams on TV and advertising.
we dont need a LOT of what we buy. but they use psychology to Make us buy.
they are like the devil, they trick us out of are money.
is it fair to use their scams to ROB us? No!
so give us ARE money back and stop scamming and robbing us.

So you are saying people scam, trick and con us into buying their stuff eh? Yeah they do. You must also be saying that people fall for it, yes, they do. So in order to correct that aspect of the problem, people need to be more proactive about thinking about what they buy, if they get tricked, scammed, conned...bottom line it is their fault. If you are dumb enough to fall for the glitzy commercial for something you do not need, then well, you are the one to blame, not the company that is making the product to....yup, you guessed it, make money and put people to work making that product, doing the marketing that cons you into buying it, puts more people to work in other companies to make the materials to make said product, the stores selling that product need people to put it on the shelves etc etc etc.

Ya know the problem with socialism...eventually you run out of other peoples money.