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)
 
Old 05-20-2014, 03:57 PM
 
Location: London
4,336 posts, read 3,628,376 times
Reputation: 1977

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by hoffdano View Post
They don't "lose" their homes. They sell them, for an enormous appreciation, when that happens.

Gentrification causes this too. But what would you do about it? It is at minimum unpleasant for the home owners. But they will make a lot of money and move to some place they can afford.
With change in the bank.
Quote:
Nothing stays the same over the long term. It isn't reasonable for government to try to protect people from all economic changes.
Yep.

 
Old 05-20-2014, 03:59 PM
 
29,740 posts, read 34,764,641 times
Reputation: 11631
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grandpa Pipes View Post
Boy do I agree with this thought! "How rich people can stop whining about the deficit and start paying their taxes. "

10 Ways to Force the Stinking Rich to Share Their Wealth | Economy | AlterNet
City’s 1 percent pay larger income tax share than rest of US | New York Post

Quote:
New York City’s 1 percent are paying a much larger share of the city’s income tax than the wealthiest 1 percent nationally are coughing up to Washington, data released Monday reveal.

The Big Apple’s top 35,400 filers — those with incomes of $598,000 or more — accounted for 45.7 percent of the $7.2 billion in income taxes that NYC collected in 2011, according to the city’s Independent Budget Office.

“The city has a large number of very wealthy people and a very large number of low-income residents. So the different spread of rich and poor in New York City compared with the country as a whole translates into the city’s richest paying a larger share of income taxes here than the wealthy pay on a national basis,” said Independent Budget Office spokesman Doug Turetsky.
Experts attributed the difference to the concentration of wealth and poverty here.

“The city has a large number of very wealthy people and a very large number of low-income residents. So the different spread of rich and poor in New York City compared with the country as a whole translates into the city’s richest paying a larger share of income taxes here than the wealthy pay on a national basis,” said Independent Budget Office spokesman Doug Turetsky.
Who isn't paying their fair share?
 
Old 05-20-2014, 04:44 PM
 
5,574 posts, read 3,642,639 times
Reputation: 5393
Quote:
Originally Posted by hoffdano View Post
They don't "lose" their homes. They sell them, for an enormous appreciation, when that happens.

Gentrification causes this too. But what would you do about it? It is at minimum unpleasant for the home owners. But they will make a lot of money and move to some place they can afford.

Nothing stays the same over the long term. It isn't reasonable for government to try to protect people from all economic changes.
When they're forced to sell, they lose.

Many of the families I reference are from little old towns on the water, who also make their living off the water.

This is why of all the taxes, I consider property to be the least "fair" if you will. Income tax is defined by what you make, sales by what you spend, property is beyond the individuals control.

Quote:
Originally Posted by John-UK View Post
The figure show the top few percent are stinking rich which is not down to luck. Study some economics and social/politocal history.

There is still a hint of a hope for the Swiss. A Citizens dividend paid for by commonly created wealth will work.
Normally you make sense, but not today.

Grab a cup of coffee.
 
Old 05-20-2014, 06:51 PM
 
460 posts, read 407,442 times
Reputation: 1111
Quote:
Originally Posted by pokeable View Post
This argument makes no sense to me. What infrastructure do the rich benefit more from? Police/fire? Lower rates of crime/fire in wealthier areas. Social services? Again, less utilization in wealthier areas. Food stamps/Medicaid/Children's Health Initiative insurance? Likewise.

The wealthy may utilize roads more, but they pay for it in gas taxes. Public transportation, if anything, has more subsidies than roads.

Finally; the wealthy pay a much higher tax rate than the poor, so they pay for their utilization of services. People who gets refunds back through the child tax credit, etc, pay much less of a % of their income for the services they receive.
No, I'm saying without the foundational infrastructure and society they utilized in becoming rich, they would be nowhere. It's not about what they use AFTER they've become rich, it's the fact that without the foundational infrastructure of our society, they would never have had a chance to rise that far. Everything that benefits society as a whole allows the wealthy holders of capital to become wealthy. That's EXACTLY (and I'm shocked I need to repeat this) why I used the Bangladesh/Liberia example. If you dropped 99% of the wealthy folks into a situation in which they had no fingerprints or capital and had to rely on the degraded infrastructure of a poor country, you can guarantee most of them would end up as dirt poor as everyone else in those nations. The marginal value of the infrastructure that allows a society to function is MUCH, MUCH higher as regards those who become wealthy.

Indeed, that's why the impact of the "rentier economy" has become so well-debated; the value of rent is based primarily on the value of infrastructure and yet the proceeds of that rent accrue to the holders of capital who inherited the value of those social investments. Taxes pay for the next generation, each generation is benefiting (at least initially) from investments they did not make. And those benefits and social structures are not equally distributed; the infrastructure (and I mean schools as well as roads and power and such) forming the background of a Detroit kid's life is far different than somebody even in the middle of the middle class.

Also, yes, police and fire benefit the rich far more precisely because they have so much more to lose. The fact that crime is much lower in wealthy areas is precisely because funding for police and such is so much better (and there are geographical boundaries keeping the poor away). Even if the cost is not high, the marginal VALUE of police protection is much higher. I lived on the "wealthy" boundary of Grosse Pointe Park at one point in time, and the patrol cars going around the perimeter of the boundary of the city were nonstop. They also (quite literally) walled off most of the side-streets going into Detroit. Look at South Africa for an example of the insane (and justified) fear that the wealthy live in.
 
Old 05-20-2014, 06:53 PM
 
24,503 posts, read 35,336,300 times
Reputation: 12818
The best way to get rich people to share their wealth with you is to work smart and hard just like they did.
 
Old 05-20-2014, 06:53 PM
 
460 posts, read 407,442 times
Reputation: 1111
Quote:
Originally Posted by hoffdano View Post
Not sure I agree property taxes are regressive at all. They are paid by property owners, which are not lower income people in general. Property taxes are typically deductive for itemizers, but deductible just means a reduction in income taxes on a marginal basis. People of even upper middle incomes lose the ability to deduct these items anyway.
Almost all of the assets of the lower two quintiles of the population is in housing. The wealthy have their assets primarily in equities, stocks, bonds, etc... So, yes, it is very regressive.
 
Old 05-20-2014, 06:55 PM
 
460 posts, read 407,442 times
Reputation: 1111
Quote:
Originally Posted by NJBest View Post
The best way to get rich people to share their wealth with you is to work smart and hard just like they did.
As long as people believe insane just-world-fallacy bullspit like this, we will get the government nobody deserves.
 
Old 05-20-2014, 07:03 PM
 
24,503 posts, read 35,336,300 times
Reputation: 12818
Quote:
Originally Posted by kwhitegocubs View Post
As long as people believe insane just-world-fallacy bullspit like this, we will get the government nobody deserves.
Well, yes... there exists people like you who don't believe in hard work. It's the biggest reason that our country is going downhill. It's a real shame what you've let this country become.
 
Old 05-20-2014, 07:45 PM
 
460 posts, read 407,442 times
Reputation: 1111
Quote:
Originally Posted by NJBest View Post
Well, yes... there exists people like you who don't believe in hard work. It's the biggest reason that our country is going downhill. It's a real shame what you've let this country become.
Utter bunk and you know it. We work longer hours than almost any industrialized nation, and still have the highest per-hour productivity rate of any nation in the developed world, excepting Norway. It's disgusting that we drive ourselves, like Jurgis Rudkus, to always "work harder", when the benefits of all that hard work accrue to a tiny portion of the population.

It's equally disgusting that hard work is seen as an end in and of itself. Go back to the 1950s and 1960s; economists across the board saw our increasing wealth as containing the possibility of ending overwrought toil. We could finally share in the benefits of an industrialized society and have more time to pursue our interests! Well, we have the wealth, but not the benefits, and our gross and needless inequality is to blame.
 
Old 05-20-2014, 08:23 PM
 
Location: Northern NJ
7,947 posts, read 7,876,468 times
Reputation: 11164
Quote:
Originally Posted by kwhitegocubs View Post
Utter bunk and you know it. We work longer hours than almost any industrialized nation, and still have the highest per-hour productivity rate of any nation in the developed world, excepting Norway. It's disgusting that we drive ourselves, like Jurgis Rudkus, to always "work harder", when the benefits of all that hard work accrue to a tiny portion of the population.

It's equally disgusting that hard work is seen as an end in and of itself. Go back to the 1950s and 1960s; economists across the board saw our increasing wealth as containing the possibility of ending overwrought toil. We could finally share in the benefits of an industrialized society and have more time to pursue our interests! Well, we have the wealth, but not the benefits, and our gross and needless inequality is to blame.
Hard work is an end in and of itself. It is fun. It is good for you. It keeps you alive. It also builds character. And if you work really hard, you get the opportunity to schedule your down time as you see fit. You collectivists should really give hard work a chance. It's the single fastest way to reduce income inequality!

Red robins and buzzing bumblebees and squirrels and deer are dumb animals, but they are not stupid enough to complain and moan that daily hard work is necessary for survival and success. But collectivists sure are.

And yes, we do live in a just world. There is some luck, good and bad, but it's minor. Probability shows us that in general, if you really work hard and make yourself valuable to others, the overwhelming odds are that you will move up and be well paid and well respected. That's just a fact. Yes, the collectivists will roll out the anecdotes about pediatric cancer and unavoidable unemployment, but these are the small and infrequent exceptions to the rule. The rule is: Learn what is valuable in society, become one of a million possible versions of that, add some value of your own, and get paid.

Success is a choice.
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.


Closed Thread


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
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - 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 - Top