Some Animals Are More Equal Than Others but Some Girls Are Bigger Than Others...

sleepy jack · 06-19-2009, 01:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JayJamJah

It's a satirical statement but I think it's basically true that America has the richest poor people in the world.

I feel like the United States has the smallest division between it's wealthy and it's poor, yes there are a small percentage of the population with a disproportionate amount of wealth, but so many are so generous. Bill Gates, Warren Buffet, the unimaginable fortunes they've amassed in America have allowed them to make the lives of millions of people better. Socialist nations do not have the doctors, scientists, engineers and inventors that America has, because here you can be the best or at least compete with the best at anything.

Locally there is a gentleman in our town who has built a recreation center for senior citizens and youth as well as a hall for parties and weddings and it is essentially free for people who live in the community. Kids can use computers get tutoring or just hang out and play games or watch Tv with friends in a safe, comfortable environment. Senior citizens can get car service to go to appointments or run errands. The list goes on, this is a realization of the American Dream that makes so many people's lives better.

I can't speak to you or anyone else's position, but I can sympathize. I've been struggling, I've been poor, but it was in a different time before the extra amenities like cell phones, cable, the internet were all part of the average person's budget. I can relate to feeling like the world was against me and I can only wish that your continuing life experience will be filled with as much good fortune as reward for hard work as mine was.

I love generosity and the spirit of community. I donate a lot of money (relative to my income) to charitable causes because I'd rather give it to them then to the government whose track record is less impressive. That's the problem with taxes, you have to pay them no matter what and that means the government is not accountable.

Personal and societal accountability are the cornerstones of my belief because in my professional and personal experience if you do or don't hold someone accountable you will or will not get the desired results.

I'd raise a few points here though. That sounds all nice and great though but what about ghettos and communities that are completely broken? They don't have good education, medical care, or any of that. There are many families who don't have a good strong community rely on and as a result only have themselves. If they're living in a ghetto in Los Angeles then themselves simply isn't enough and they can't break out of that cage. They don't have the means to do it alone.

I don't believe the United States is as progressive as it once was either.The United States isn't number one in anything anymore. Education, energy, health - hell it isn't even the most free country in the world. That's Holland. I don't think it's at the forefront like it once was. I think it's lagging behind and I think inequity has quite a bit to do with it.

In regards to wealthy philanthropists - what they do is great and completely commendable but do you think other rich people in society (everyone in Hollywood for instance) donate as much to charity? I think the minority of the rich do - when they do it's great but more often they're buying giant houses and a fleet of cars and grills made of diamonds. They could be doing more with their money that has meaning but they don't.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JayJamJah

So is sort of an invisible division however and they also pay something like 98% of the taxes (charitable donations included) collectively so they're not all bad.

Not so much true anymore though. The Bush tax cuts for instance shifted the burden to the middle class, which is why the poverty rate has grown over the past eight years. They're also reaping all the benefits of society and never have to worry about their own problems. They keep most of their wealth and spend it frivolously while every one else is left to eat dirt. This is what I mean when I say there's welfare for the rich and capitalism for the poor.

TheBig3 · 06-19-2009, 08:35 AM

As for this wealth distribution thing, it appears imbalanced from the PoV of the instance of taxing, not the long run. Its easier explained when its not money but I'll do my best.

If I have 500,000 of taxable income and you have 50,000 and for the hell of it, lets say we're all paying 10%, I end up paying 50,000 where are you pay 5,000.

At that point, yes, I "got screwed", my work apparently wasn't rewarded and the government was sapping my lively hood. I paid 10 times the amount you did.

But thats where it ends, because I'm left with 450,000 and you've got 45,000. I've still got 10 times the amount of money you do. And when I go to the grocery store, butters still $3.19, Bread costs the same, gas didn't go up and our electric bills fluctuate the same depending on usage.

I've still got plenty more options with my income level, so i'm not sure how the wealthy are punished. I don't generally watch Countdown with Keith Olberman but he had a figure that under one of the Roosevelt presidencies, the top tax bracket paid 50%.

Built on a scaling platform, taxes still favor those who work harder, the idea of wealth distribution is a little bizzare to me, but Republicans tend to win the image game more often. I don't know how though, they give out free calculators at the bank.

Son of JayJamJah · 06-19-2009, 05:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheBig3KilledMyRainDog

As for this wealth distribution thing, it appears imbalanced from the PoV of the instance of taxing, not the long run. Its easier explained when its not money but I'll do my best.

If I have 500,000 of taxable income and you have 50,000 and for the hell of it, lets say we're all paying 10%, I end up paying 50,000 where are you pay 5,000.

At that point, yes, I "got screwed", my work apparently wasn't rewarded and the government was sapping my lively hood. I paid 10 times the amount you did.

But thats where it ends, because I'm left with 450,000 and you've got 45,000. I've still got 10 times the amount of money you do. And when I go to the grocery store, butters still $3.19, Bread costs the same, gas didn't go up and our electric bills fluctuate the same depending on usage.

I've still got plenty more options with my income level, so i'm not sure how the wealthy are punished. I don't generally watch Countdown with Keith Olberman but he had a figure that under one of the Roosevelt presidencies, the top tax bracket paid 50%.

Built on a scaling platform, taxes still favor those who work harder, the idea of wealth distribution is a little bizzare to me, but Republicans tend to win the image game more often. I don't know how though, they give out free calculators at the bank.

Your example is what most wealthy people have often called for. A flat tax. The problem is this when I made 25K a year I was being taxed around 30% If I were to make 250K I'd be taxed at nearly 42%. That's the unfair part when the more money you make the heavy the tax burden on each dollar becomes.

It's counter intuitive in my opinion. In the regular working world when you exceed your expected time of labor you are often eligible for over-time or time and a half pay, meaning the value of your time is greatly increased. Yet the tax system takes a higher and higher percentage of each dollar you make. Suggesting you've exceeded optimal income.

All I want is to be taxed at the same rate as everyone else. I pay the same sales tax, property tax, vice taxes as anyone else why should my income taxes be higher or lower because of my income.

@ Ethan

I do think you are under estimating the generosity of people. Most people I know who can afford to do so donate heavily and would even more so if they had more disposable income.

To your question about the Ghetto's and run down neighborhoods. Again I'd trust people more then the government to fix this problem. In Detroit there is a growing charter school program. They are like private schools in a sense but have a lot more flexibility with who they can admit including limited or no tuition for lower income families. The best of these schools are graduating over 85% while the public schools are the nations worst at less then 40%.

To help those without reliable transportation a local businessman has started a free busing program for students and even offered jobs to the unemployed parents of the schools children.

I thing that may be the crux of our disagreement.

More later perhaps on IM, I have to run 311 concert tonight. My fathers day gift which is weird cause I'd never have bought the tickets for myself, but time with my daughter will be great.

TheBig3 · 06-19-2009, 05:10 PM

I was under the assumption a flat tax was a flat amount.

Still if I'm wrong, the wealthier the people have been lately, the less they've been taxed. How's that fair?

sleepy jack · 06-19-2009, 05:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JayJamJah

I do think you are under estimating the generosity of people. Most people I know who can afford to do so donate heavily and would even more so if they had more disposable income.

To your question about the Ghetto's and run down neighborhoods. Again I'd trust people more then the government to fix this problem. In Detroit there is a growing charter school program. They are like private schools in a sense but have a lot more flexibility with who they can admit including limited or no tuition for lower income families. The best of these schools are graduating over 85% while the public schools are the nations worst at less then 40%.

To help those without reliable transportation a local businessman has started a free busing program for students and even offered jobs to the unemployed parents of the schools children.

I thing that may be the crux of our disagreement.

Yeah we can talk this to bits later on IM. I want to state for everyone else though I don't think people are necessarily selfish by nature I just don't think everyone is universally generous. There are great people who do great things with the money they have but there also people who hoard it away. Look at all those soulless cash whores on Wall Street.

sleepy jack · 06-19-2009, 05:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheBig3KilledMyRainDog

I was under the assumption a flat tax was a flat amount.

Still if I'm wrong, the wealthier the people have been lately, the less they've been taxed. How's that fair?

That's basically been the Bush tax policy. It shifted too much of the burden from the upper class to the middle class. I believe in a progressive tax system and I don't think the United States has really had one for a long time.

IamAlejo · 06-19-2009, 05:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sleepy jack

That's basically been the Bush tax policy. It shifted too much of the burden from the upper class to the middle class. I believe in a progressive tax system and I don't think the United States has really had one for a long time.

Roughly 5% of the population pays over 90% of the taxes. Please explain how that is putting the burden on the middle class.

IamAlejo · 06-19-2009, 05:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheBig3KilledMyRainDog

I was under the assumption a flat tax was a flat amount.

Still if I'm wrong, the wealthier the people have been lately, the less they've been taxed. How's that fair?

You are wrong on both counts.

sleepy jack · 06-19-2009, 06:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IamAlejo

Roughly 5% of the population pays over 90% of the taxes. Please explain how that is putting the burden on the middle class.

I don't really know what you're talking about here. The top percentage of the population received a tax cut that was over forty times that of people in the middle of the income scale and under those tax cuts they received a larger share of after-tax income, whereas again, the people below them received a a much smaller share then they would have without the tax cuts. Not to mention the top 2% of the population also controls over 90% of the wealth as well so treating it like they aren't seeing the benefits of the taxation (and only they are really) is sort of silly. Meanwhile over the past eight years the middle class shrunk and began to slip below poverty line. The correlation isn't that hard to see.

Brent-on-the-Run · 06-19-2009, 06:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wayfarer

I like how you concede that the playing field is slanted and then change the subject as though it's immaterial. There's nothing "fair" at all about inequality of opportunity. Also, it's, in fact, socialism that emphasizes and rewards a strong work ethic, not capitalism.

Seems like the vast majority of those opposed to socialism are those who don't even know what it is.

How does socialism reward a strong work ethic? You work harder so the Man can take more of it? That makes no sense to me. People have a lot less incentive to work hard if they do not get to keep what they've worked for. It's human nature. That said, do you think the USA would be as great as it is if it's always stuck to socialistic policies?

I'm surprised you take this position on socialism as well, since nearly all of the people I have heard or read about from Canada do not believe the expediency of health care in particular is that great. In fact not at all. Is that false?

This country was founded on capitalism. It is as strong and as prosperous as it is because of capitalism. To change it is incomprehensible.

06-19-2009, 08:35 AM	#12 (permalink)
TheBig3 killedmyraindog Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Boston, Massachusetts Posts: 11,172	As for this wealth distribution thing, it appears imbalanced from the PoV of the instance of taxing, not the long run. Its easier explained when its not money but I'll do my best. If I have 500,000 of taxable income and you have 50,000 and for the hell of it, lets say we're all paying 10%, I end up paying 50,000 where are you pay 5,000. At that point, yes, I "got screwed", my work apparently wasn't rewarded and the government was sapping my lively hood. I paid 10 times the amount you did. But thats where it ends, because I'm left with 450,000 and you've got 45,000. I've still got 10 times the amount of money you do. And when I go to the grocery store, butters still $3.19, Bread costs the same, gas didn't go up and our electric bills fluctuate the same depending on usage. I've still got plenty more options with my income level, so i'm not sure how the wealthy are punished. I don't generally watch Countdown with Keith Olberman but he had a figure that under one of the Roosevelt presidencies, the top tax bracket paid 50%. Built on a scaling platform, taxes still favor those who work harder, the idea of wealth distribution is a little bizzare to me, but Republicans tend to win the image game more often. I don't know how though, they give out free calculators at the bank. __________________ I've moved to a new address

06-19-2009, 05:10 PM	#14 (permalink)
TheBig3 killedmyraindog Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Boston, Massachusetts Posts: 11,172	I was under the assumption a flat tax was a flat amount. Still if I'm wrong, the wealthier the people have been lately, the less they've been taxed. How's that fair? __________________ I've moved to a new address