You voted to tax the rich

[Just Jim]

Kalama Mark,

could you tell us which president started the "progressive incometax"?

jj

 

[Stomper]

How many companies left Oregon for other states of the union? How many rich people moved from the state?

LOL.. YOU moved out of the state, and I KNOW you have moolah... I saw photos of your guns and that INSANE safe you keep (kept) them in!

 

[bugeye]

This myth of the poor - abused rich is rather funny considering that the upper 20% own 94% of the wealth in the US, and the lower 50% pretty much own none of it. That the manipulated to the point of bursting, housing bubble acted as a wonderful pump to transfer money from the middle to the ubbers. That the people that live off the increase of prices in the stock market have made a full 'jobless' recovery after being bailed out by the federal reserve and the federal government at the publics expense. And that not one person has so far been held responsible for this to any extent beyond a mild financial slap on the wrist.

Meanwhile, our competition, the bleeding heart socialist Chinese execute people for making products with a small amount of lead paint, let alone the blood bath that would follow if a powerful group of business interests stole trillions of dollars worth of wealth from the majority? It seems our competition is smart enough not to encourage this sort of activity, while here in the good ol' land of the free - home of the brave we believe that the rich are gods, so lets not dishonor our position as worshippers and ask them to pay for cleaning up their own messes.

 

[fuhr52]

Easy to see class warfare works. How is it that depending were you are at on the economic scale, the money your earn is yours and the government should let you keep it. But cross over that line and your income belongs to the people and you should be happy to let go. Flat tax with no loop holes would be great but too much politics to make it happen. As for business raising prices to cover taxes, wake up people, businesses don't stay in business without making a profit. Taxes are part of the cost of doing business. Either raise prices or cut cost somewhere else to retain profit margin. No different than cutting cost to maintain your house hold budget. But like I said class warfare works. Why fix it if it isn't broke.

 

[bugeye]

Easy to see class warfare works. How is it that depending were you are at on the economic scale, the money your earn is yours and the government should let you keep it. But cross over that line and your income belongs to the people and you should be happy to let go. Flat tax with no loop holes would be great but too much politics to make it happen. As for business raising prices to cover taxes, wake up people, businesses don't stay in business without making a profit. Taxes are part of the cost of doing business. Either raise prices or cut cost somewhere else to retain profit margin. No different than cutting cost to maintain your house hold budget. But like I said class warfare works. Why fix it if it isn't broke.

Now Americans just about never agree with each other (even in here where we pretend we know what is going on and promote the iconic Yosemite Sam to heroic stature), so that class warfare bit is only going to go so far. The wealthy own the media in the US, and the only thing that has saved us as a free people is that the wealthy don't all think the same thing, or at the very least, that they are unsure as to what actions represent their own best interests. The non wealthy don't agree either, there is something just unamerican about agreeing, and IMHO, that is the greatest thing about us as a people. It has prevented tyrants from both above and below. What we are talking about here is mild adjustments in the distribution of wealth, and this is natural steering of any system toward a safe middle ground something that both sides of the wealth line should see as best interests. History, has shown us what happens when either the haves, or the have nots, take everything. Really not the sort of legacy I want to leave to my kids.

 

[duginsky]

To whom? To better organized, better represented, better paid, better subsidized, better lobbied, better connected and better looking folks than you and I. Both the Republican and Democratic parties are controlled by those listed above.

All modesty aside, I have to say I am more handsome than Ron Wyden...


It's time for folks that pay attention and care to re-assess their affiliations and dedications, whether religious, political or labor or cause related. Back the scope off from 12 power on your 'hot button' topic, and pan out to 3 power. Get the big picture. Those that are concerned can zoom out, get perspective, and realize it's all screwed up, and perhaps implement systemic change.

Or not.

 

[fuhr52]

Of course the rich own the media as we as most businesses. Depends on how you define rich. Don't know too many homeless people owning a business. As for class warfare going so far it's still working. Look at some of the posts here, my neighbor has tow cars and a camper and I only have one car. Not fair. Of course the neighbor may have taken the risk of owning a business and working long hours. Still not fair. America is about being the best you can be. Not the government telling you that you only qualify for a certain job because of your blood line or gender or skin color. If you are lucky enough to grab the brass ring more power to you. The government shouldn't force you to share your wealth with anyone. Share with whomever you want or stuff it in a mattress, it's your wealth.

 

[Brown Trout]

Would somebody explain to me the logic of taxing some people more than others? I think Karl Marx explained it best in his Communist Manifesto. He was a big fan of the progressive income tax.

Why we don't simply tax everyone a set portion of their income, eliminate the loopholes? That would make too much sense. Without a progressive income tax it would make it more difficult to demonize those that make more money than us, it would lower the animosity which would in turn all but do away with class warfare. I just don't like that--what else would we do with our time? Keep a close eye on the politicians and how they spend our money? Nah- let's just sit around and complain about the rich not paying their fair share.

 

[rufus]

I've spent 40 years working for the wealthy. I had a client that grew up in Foster Homes, and became a United Airlines Pilot, and land owner. He is now 70 and bought a 60' yacht that he and his wife enjoy. They had seven kids and all of them have done fine.

I had another client who went to Body & Fender school at a junior college right out of high school. By age 30 he had his own business. He's now 57 and has grown his business nicely since then. 45' sailboat

Another client of mine started at Walmart as a checker. He kept taking college courses and now he is the Actuary for Walmart at their headquarters. He has his own indoor shooting range.

I can site many examples of people who did well who came from humble, and less than humble beginnings.
Anyone, anyone at all who believes they are being held down by someone else or by "The Man" is only being held down by their own self-imposed limitations, and not by any extraneous source or person.

Flat broke immigrants come from all over the world to the U.S. and shame dozens of home-grown white boys in this country by their industrialism, and go-for broke attitude when it comes to pursuing education, careers, and their own businesses.

On the other hand there is no shame at all in being employed, and being content at whatever you do. Most people are like that, and such a life is good enough for most of us.

But, for those that are always blaming "The Man" (the wealthy) or somebody else for their own lot in life, I suggest you leave that attitude at the door as the only one who suffers is you, and yours. Oh... And it doesn't change anything for you. You and you alone remain in doldrums of life. Either make changes, or be content with your lot in life and enjoy what you have.

This nation is either the land of opportunity (capitalism) or the land of entitlements (socialism), depending on one's political slant. That's what it boils down to.

With capitalism, the sky is the limit. With socialism, you always run out of other people's money.

 

[bugeye]

This nation is either the land of opportunity (capitalism) or the land of entitlements (socialism), depending on one's political slant. That's what it boils down to.

With capitalism, the sky is the limit. With socialism, you always run out of other people's money.

You have to have a balance of both sides or the poor start killing the rich and that makes for a mess. As to the opportunity that seems to be mostly over China these days, as our capitalist system has decided that we really don't need to make much of anything in the USA because it costs more to make things here. Anyway, I'm not sure what the point of making anything is in a world that has created futures markets that have decided, for the benefit of all the players involved, that pumpable dirt (oil) is worth a $100 a barrel. Capitalism is a terrible system if you allow; business interests to buy the gov, insider trading, monopolistic control of markets, encourage risky behavior, allow the bankers to make the rules for the benefit of the bankers, and allow the trading of 1000 trillion dollars in contracts that are backed by assets less than the actual value of the paper they are printed on (Credit default swaps). I'm not saying that wealthy people don't deserve the wealth they have, I'm saying that they should be paying their fair share of the taxes. Seems to me if you own 94% of the wealth you should be paying about 94% of the taxes.

 

[Just Jim]

Originally Posted by bugeye
"YI'm not saying that wealthy people don't deserve the wealth they have, I'm saying that they should be paying their fair share of the taxes. Seems to me if you own 94% of the wealth you should be paying about 94% of the taxes."

Seems to me if people work and earn their wealth they should be able to keep it. Socialist always want to share the wealth of others because socialist can't seem to earn for themselves. We would be better off as a country if the socialist would leave our money alone and go earn some by work, not stealing.

jj

 

[elsullo]

Originally Posted by bugeye
"YI'm not saying that wealthy people don't deserve the wealth they have, I'm saying that they should be paying their fair share of the taxes. Seems to me if you own 94% of the wealth you should be paying about 94% of the taxes."

Seems to me if people work and earn their wealth they should be able to keep it. Socialist always want to share the wealth of others because socialist can't seem to earn for themselves. We would be better off as a country if the socialist would leave our money alone and go earn some by work, not stealing.

jj

First, one more time: "socialist" is NOT a plural noun! Grammatically you should say "a socialist" or "the socialists" if you want to continue pretending to know what you are talking about.

Second, I SUPPORT the very-wealthy actually working and earning their wealth, and would love to see them start DOING that! There are relatively few "self-made" millionaires; most are born into a huge cushion of dough and inherit their grubstake and education. Then they hire people to "grow" their money, usually by investments rather than actual production of anything. And if anything is produced, it is made by a large bunch of people who are paid only a fraction of the value of what they produce with the Owner keeping most of the profits. Meanwhile society as a whole breeds, cares for, educates and transports the workers for the benefit of the Owner. It is only right that these Owners pay taxes for the infrastructure of society which feeds a steady supply of capable workers to the door of their business, for the Owners to extract profit from.

Again, those who benefit the most from society's infrastructure, the wealthy, can pay a larger percentage taxes to support that infrastructure. They "made" their money OFF OF society, and they can pay some of it back as a cost of having society engineered to serve them.........................elsullo

 

[rufus]

First, one more time: "socialist" is NOT a plural noun! Grammatically you should say "a socialist" or "the socialists" if you want to continue pretending to know what you are talking about.

Second, I SUPPORT the very-wealthy actually working and earning their wealth, and would love to see them start DOING that! There are relatively few "self-made" millionaires; most are born into a huge cushion of dough and inherit their grubstake and education. Then they hire people to "grow" their money, usually by investments rather than actual production of anything. And if anything is produced, it is made by a large bunch of people who are paid only a fraction of the value of what they produce with the Owner keeping most of the profits. Meanwhile society as a whole breeds, cares for, educates and transports the workers for the benefit of the Owner. It is only right that these Owners pay taxes for the infrastructure of society which feeds a steady supply of capable workers to the door of their business, for the Owners to extract profit from.

Again, those who benefit the most from society's infrastructure, the wealthy, can pay a larger percentage taxes to support that infrastructure. They "made" their money OFF OF society, and they can pay some of it back as a cost of having society engineered to serve them.........................elsullo

I'm curious. As "a socialist", just how much do you believe the wealthy should pay in taxes?

You do understand that the tax system is based on income, right?

Suppose the very wealthy did not feel like risking capital in a unfriendly business climate. They could just sit back, enjoy being rich, not create income and pay zero income tax. How many jobs are created then?

Speaking of creating jobs, how can thinking people not laugh when our president and that blithering idiot Joe Biden go on TV and speak of creating jobs? The only jobs they can create are in the Federal Government, and that does not benefit the economy one iota. In fact, it is a detriment.

They can, however, create a business climate that is hostile to investors (the wealthy) by raising taxes.

By playing politics with the tax structure, i.e. the "Obama tax cuts" (which were not cuts at all), these bozos have made a bad situation even worse. Nobody in their right mind is about to invest anything without knowing what to expect in the foreseeable future. Even the IRS is screwed up due to the indecision and outright failure of Congress and this administration.

And we wonder why the economy is like it is. Oh yeah, tax the rich. That'll fix it.

A surefire way to fix the economy is to declare a guaranteed two year across-the-board Federal tax holiday. The economy would be back on its feet within a month. A spending freeze sure would be nice too.

 

[Woodswalker]

Of all those people who left Oregon how many jobs did they take with them?

While I didnt leave OR...I know a fellow who took his injection molding business off to ID and 39 decent paying jobs with it. He was PISSED at the retroactive taxation, that cost him basically one employee's wages to that point...and MOST of their productivity as well. A 1 person hole in his business. As he is a Sub-S corp, guess where it all gets reported...therefore he is RICH.

elsullo, I'd tell you the particulars, but i was asked to not do so....but there are 34 of the 39 who have moved to ID or are working on it now...so look for good real estate deals a bit North of the Eugene area. There is a 17,000 square foot manufacturing facility with a 11,000 square foot warehouse right next to it, all empty now.

Rock on OR voters....Keep pushing those EEEEVIL rich folks who provide JOBS on out the door. REALLY shortsighted and STUPID.

 

[Woodswalker]

Again, those who benefit the most from society's infrastructure, the wealthy, can pay a larger percentage taxes to support that infrastructure. They "made" their money OFF OF society, and they can pay some of it back as a cost of having society engineered to serve them.........................elsullo

Uhm did you not READ the distributions posted above by Gunfixx?

Who pays the most taxes in this country?
The U.S. individual income tax is "highly progressive," with a small group of higher-income taxpayers paying most of the individual income taxes each year. Did you know that?
The top 5 percent of taxpayers pay more than one-half (53.8 percent) of all individual income taxes, but report roughly one-third (30.6 percent) of income.
The top 1 percent of taxpayers paid 33.7 percent of all individual income taxes in 2002. This group of taxpayers has paid more than 30 percent of individual income taxes since 1995. Moreover, since 1990 this group’s tax share has grown faster than their income share.
(IRS)

They DO pay MORE, both percentage and in dollar values...is that not enough for you? See my post about my friend's business that is NO LONGER IN OREGON.

 

[MikeE]

They can, however, create a business climate that is hostile to investors (the wealthy) by raising taxes.

By playing politics with the tax structure, i.e. the "Obama tax cuts" (which were not cuts at all), these bozos have made a bad situation even worse. Nobody in their right mind is about to invest anything without knowing what to expect in the foreseeable future. Even the IRS is screwed up due to the indecision and outright failure of Congress and this administration.

And we wonder why the economy is like it is. Oh yeah, tax the rich. That'll fix it.

A surefire way to fix the economy is to declare a guaranteed two year across-the-board Federal tax holiday. The economy would be back on its feet within a month. A spending freeze sure would be nice too.

This shows poor understanding of the history that just passed before our eyes in the last 3 years. The reason investment is flat has to do with the poison that was pumped into the 'asset bloodstream' via mortgage backed securities, credit default swaps, etc. The idea was to substitute investments in productive business with a 'can't lose, something for nothing' ' economy, based on a real estate market that was supposed to always go up in value. This was was the brain child of 'free market de-regulators' in both miserable political parties, and low-interest policies of the Fed ( typified by Chairman Alan Greenspan who was linonized in the media as the 'Maestro', before he was denounced as a moron).At this point, no one knows what trillions in 'assets' are actually worth, so big investors are sitting on cash while they play games with their books.

If taxes have anything to do with the crash and depression, it was tax-cuts for the rich, as well as corporate loopholes that helped spread the toxic assets epidemic. How? Bush administration's Secretary of Treasury Hank Paulsen promoted mortgage backed securities from the quasi-fed gov/private sector hybrids Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac as alternatives to US Treasury bonds - another way to fund the giant deficit Bush was running via tax cuts and war-borrowing.

Wall Street and their hired hands in government collapsed this economy and keep it in recession. The immediate need, IMO, is for the big bond holders to take the haircut that they deserve, and write down the values of the mortgages they hold as assets. This needs to result in lower mortgage payments across the board. Eric Jenzen of ITulip, an investment analyst, has estimated that if people paid mortgages based on the real value of their homes, it would pump 11 trillion into the real economy (instead of the banks) each YEAR, without any government spending. That, and forcing the banks to drop the userous credit card interest rates (charging 20% on money they borrow from the Fed at near 0%) would go a long way to putting our economy right. Of course, many large banking institutions would go down, but who cares, unless you are a crony-capitalist?

 

[bugeye]

Let's start here:
Who pays the most taxes in this country?
The U.S. individual income tax is "highly progressive," with a small group of higher-income taxpayers paying most of the individual income taxes each year. Did you know that?
The top 5 percent of taxpayers pay more than one-half (53.8 percent) of all individual income taxes, but report roughly one-third (30.6 percent) of income.
The top 1 percent of taxpayers paid 33.7 percent of all individual income taxes in 2002. This group of taxpayers has paid more than 30 percent of individual income taxes since 1995. Moreover, since 1990 this group’s tax share has grown faster than their income share.
(IRS)


Whom pays no taxes in this country?
47% of the population pay ZERO income taxes.
(IRS)

I do share your concern about what I call, "Runaway Capitalism".
And, this can be fixed by properly elected officials. (HA!)

Nonetheless, Socialism (Progressives) is not a sound answer. We are currently seeing Socialist forms of government falling apart at the seams worldwide.
We are also seeing the effects of too much entitlements being paid by U.S. cities to unsustainable Union contracts.
An example is Vallejo, California. They had to file bankruptcy over this very issue.

We've got a pretty good thing going here. We need to dress down our system and take care of problems, but not change our form of government.

The top 5% own 80% of the wealth, that makes them undertaxed. You do understand that? The lower 50% own just about none of the wealth, so paying nothing works out fair for them. The middle is vanishing quickly.

Properly electing officals that owe their positions to the money that bought their opportunity? You sir are a dreamer!

Asking that the wealthy pay their fair share of the taxes is not socialism. The weathly arrived at their current low tax rates via political influence that comes with the campaign contribution. I'm in favor of a representaion mitigation tax where 99% of the value of campaign contributions, including any services or media presentations designed to support one candidate over another, are divided up and returned to the people that have lost representation. After all, if 'we the people' are going to be sold down the river (and we are every minute of everyday) we should be paid for it.

 

[bugeye]

Source: United States Treasury Department


Rich Pay More Under Bush Tax Cuts

This chart is OK, but the conclusion is absurd, showing estimates without something vs. actual payments with something probably shows an error of estimates.

 

[Brown Trout]

Again, those who benefit the most from society's infrastructure, the wealthy, can pay a larger percentage taxes to support that infrastructure. They "made" their money OFF OF society, and they can pay some of it back as a cost of having society engineered to serve them.........................elsullo

A pretty good description of the many government jobs that are being "created" don't ya think? Since they are using the taxpayer's money to fund their jobs, should they pay a higher tax rate?

 

[Stomper]

What?:huh:

Gunfixx, don't confuse Buggy with hard facts and statistics... it only causes him to hunker down even more and say strange things that are inane.