Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 02-17-2016, 09:25 AM
 
Location: North America
19,784 posts, read 15,061,373 times
Reputation: 8527

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by lifeexplorer View Post
I mean seriously why should they be paid so much money? What do they produce? No technology, products, services? Nothing. This is income inequality at the finest.

What an unbelievable system!

Why mad at CEOs? Hell at least they lead companies that produce something. Let's apply the income equality across the board, starting with Hollywood.

--
The Highest Paid Actresses And Actors Of 2015

Jennifer Lawrence: $52,000,000
Scarlett Johansson: $35,500,000
Melissa McCarthy: $23,000,000
Bingbing Fan: $21,000,000
Jennifer Aniston: $16,500,000
Julia Roberts: $16,000,000
Angelina Jolie: $15,000,000
Reese Witherspoon: $15,000,000
Anne Hathaway: $12,000,000
Kristen Stewart: $12,000,000
What, no list of male actors' salaries? You're only bothered by women actors?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-17-2016, 09:28 AM
 
1,431 posts, read 907,701 times
Reputation: 1316
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregW View Post
I am supporting Sen. Sanders. I expect he will raise taxes on income like taking the upper limit of Social Security taxes. I would tax all income from all sources with a base deductible at the 90th percentile. The top tax rates would be set at an exponential rate from 30 to 90%. That way an income of $50,000,000 would result in a after tax income of $5,000,000. That should be enough to be able to eat, drink or drug yourself to death.
So you would tax someone 90% of their income? I hope this is a joke.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-17-2016, 09:31 AM
 
Location: NH
4,188 posts, read 3,723,576 times
Reputation: 6714
WHy do people complain about this stuff? They earned it. I am a hard worker, if I chose to be in entertainment I perhaps too could be making that much money. So what a small percentage of people make tons of money, how does that affect you? It doesn't. Many of these wealthy people live at work, they aren't just sitting at home watching tv. If someone is going to complain about this stuff perhaps they just aren't happy with their own situation.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-17-2016, 09:33 AM
 
Location: Londonderry, NH
41,478 posts, read 59,608,382 times
Reputation: 24858
I am not kidding. We had 90% top rates during the 1950's and the country did quite well.

Tax all income from all sources over the 90th percentile with a top rate of 90%. This will force the people that own the country pay for operating it.

Last edited by GregW; 02-17-2016 at 10:00 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-17-2016, 09:55 AM
 
Location: Boston, MA
14,460 posts, read 11,226,024 times
Reputation: 8975
Quote:
Originally Posted by whogo View Post
Who is Bingbing Fan? Guess I will google.
You'll be glad you did.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-17-2016, 10:00 AM
 
4,899 posts, read 3,537,103 times
Reputation: 4471
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregW View Post
We had 90% top rates during the 51950's and the country did quite well. I am not kidding.


Tax all income from all sources over the 90th percentile with a top rate of 90%.
yeah, that'll keep them in the US
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-17-2016, 11:53 AM
 
1,431 posts, read 907,701 times
Reputation: 1316
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregW View Post
I am not kidding. We had 90% top rates during the 1950's and the country did quite well.

Tax all income from all sources over the 90th percentile with a top rate of 90%. This will force the people that own the country pay for operating it.
So what happens when they pick up and move their operations to another country because the taxes are outta control? Who gets taxed at 90% then?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Northeastah View Post
yeah, that'll keep them in the US
Pretty much what I'm getting at.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-17-2016, 12:03 PM
 
Location: Madison, WI
5,298 posts, read 2,337,616 times
Reputation: 1227
Quote:
Originally Posted by STWR View Post
Some people would consider this to be 'defending freedom', but personally I think the less we demand from others (and ourselves), the worse things will get.

An enlightened society would seek to elevate humanity, not cater to its basest impulses in the name of profit.

Too many people have made too much money giving us things we don't actually need-- things that don't improve our lives, the environment, or society in the slightest. They isolate us from everything around us while making everyone stupider, angrier, more distracted, more entitled, etc.

But of course, now someone will just interject with the whole 'who are you to decide what's good for people?', 'everything's subjective', 'why are you trying to take my junk food and iPhone away from me?' etc... as if consumer choice is paramount, even though it's actually an illusion and is more determined by social pressures than free will.

At some point everyone is going to be forced to admit that the advertisers and marketers understand us better than we understand ourselves, that they have an arsenal of tactics that are highly effective at overriding our free will, and for which most people are not as prepared as they think. Our vision of ourselves as dignified, capable, freethinking individuals isn't as true to reality as we want to believe it is.

I don't want to take away anyone's freedom... I just want people to recognize the difference between being empowered and being manipulated.
I understand that, and it's tempting, but I don't think anyone has the right (much less the ability) to engineer society. People like to think that society can be centrally planned, but nobody is so wise as to determine what is best for everyone else.

Marketers definitely understand people better than those people understand themselves, but I don't see that as a reason to step in and determine people's choices for them for their own good. It's mostly a moral thing for me, but I also don't think it works practically either. As I said, it's tempting to want your plan implemented, but best to get out of the way, IMO.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-17-2016, 12:21 PM
 
17,273 posts, read 9,502,897 times
Reputation: 16468
Quote:
Originally Posted by lifeexplorer View Post
Don't be mad at me. I am just trying the liberal ideology.
As others have mentioned, if you're seriously mad which I doubt, then do not go to the movies, buy movies, pay for cable, buy game tickets, buy any product that uses a celebrity or athlete to endorse said product, don't buy music, nothing. Until you do that, then I suggest you no more complaints.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-17-2016, 12:24 PM
 
17,273 posts, read 9,502,897 times
Reputation: 16468
Quote:
Originally Posted by RyogaH View Post
Yup. When i was younger, I loved watching the Oscars. Once I became an adult and realized its a party thrown by famous millionaires to give awards to other famous millionaires, to praise each other and to make left-wing political statements, and they take over network TV for a whole evening to broadcast it to us little people, I started to despise the Oscars.

Are some CEOs overpaid? Yes. But those are typically CEOs of companies that provide vital services like food, medicine, financial services and housing. Nobody needs TV or movies to survive.

And with all those screams of income inequality, nobody seems to care that someone like Jon Stewart was making 300 times more money than the staff that produces his show. He gets a pass. Its absolute hypocrisy -- only criticize people on the other side, while giving a pass to people on our side that do the same things we hate.
The Oscars is one night on one tv station for about 4 hours. The Oscars does not take over network tv, you have PLENTY of other viewing options.

I assume you sneer at the ESPY's, Tony's, the PEN awards, etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. then too?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top