The Big Fib about the Rich and Taxes (insurance, capitalism, millionaires)
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.
According to a just released analysis by Berkeley economists Gabriel Zucman and Emmanuel Saez, the bottom 50 percent of earners in the United States now pay a higher overall tax rate than multimillionaires. Last week, Left Wing news outlets such as The New York Times and Washington Post trumpeted this claim as if it was settled fact, even though the study it was based upon has yet to go through any scholarly peer review.
Saez and Zucman’s numbers immediately came under intense scrutiny — including from high quarters in the economics profession. Their overall depicted trend in tax rates conflict with better-established estimates from the Congressional Budget Office (for federal rates) and the Institute on Taxation and Policy (for state and local rates) — which, when combined, reveal an unambiguously progressive distribution of the tax burden.
So... are Saez & Zucman just lying?
Saez and Zucman’s supporters insisted that their, uh, alternative estimates would be vindicated with the release of their new book, The Triumph of Injustice. After an unconventional rollout that included providing selected journalists with privileged access to once-again completely unvetted statistics, the Saez-Zucman data files are finally available. Far from demonstrating the superiority of their new estimates, the statistical release points pretty much to GIGO: garbage in, garbage out.
Actually, it is worse than GIGO. When compared to the high profile & widely discredited work of Saez, Zucman & their frequent collaborator Thomas Piketty from a few years ago, the current work of Saez & Zuckman show they've (a) chosen a political narrative, (b) massaged their methodology solely to support their chosen political narrative, and (c) massaged data - even made it up - in order fit their political narrative.
It is a sad day when scholarship at the once-prestigious economics department of UC Berkeley has declined this much. Rather than a book about their research, their research is now merely a PR campaign to sell more copies of their book. I guess Capitalism is working for them. Indeed, their efforts are to blur the lines between academic scholarship and political electioneering. Well - maybe their political electioneering is also intended to sell their dubious book.
**********
Phillip Magness pretty much destroys the Saez & Zucman here.
Location: Was Midvalley Oregon; Now Eastside Seattle area
13,053 posts, read 7,485,436 times
Reputation: 9782
Alternative numbers.
However, we pay ~2% of gross. Federal. I haven't examined the return for 2018. I just picked up from CPA and filed/paid 10/15. I was traveling the last few of days. Should review it today. 10/17.
According to a just released analysis by Berkeley economists Gabriel Zucman and Emmanuel Saez, the bottom 50 percent of earners in the United States now pay a higher overall tax rate than multimillionaires. Last week, Left Wing news outlets such as The New York Times and Washington Post trumpeted this claim as if it was settled fact, even though the study it was based upon has yet to go through any scholarly peer review.
Saez and Zucman’s numbers immediately came under intense scrutiny — including from high quarters in the economics profession. Their overall depicted trend in tax rates conflict with better-established estimates from the Congressional Budget Office (for federal rates) and the Institute on Taxation and Policy (for state and local rates) — which, when combined, reveal an unambiguously progressive distribution of the tax burden.
So... are Saez & Zucman just lying?
Saez and Zucman’s supporters insisted that their, uh, alternative estimates would be vindicated with the release of their new book, The Triumph of Injustice. After an unconventional rollout that included providing selected journalists with privileged access to once-again completely unvetted statistics, the Saez-Zucman data files are finally available. Far from demonstrating the superiority of their new estimates, the statistical release points pretty much to GIGO: garbage in, garbage out.
Actually, it is worse than GIGO. When compared to the high profile & widely discredited work of Saez, Zucman & their frequent collaborator Thomas Piketty from a few years ago, the current work of Saez & Zuckman show they've (a) chosen a political narrative, (b) massaged their methodology solely to support their chosen political narrative, and (c) massaged data - even made it up - in order fit their political narrative.
It is a sad day when scholarship at the once-prestigious economics department of UC Berkeley has declined this much. Rather than a book about their research, their research is now merely a PR campaign to sell more copies of their book. I guess Capitalism is working for them. Indeed, their efforts are to blur the lines between academic scholarship and political electioneering. Well - maybe their political electioneering is also intended to sell their dubious book.
**********
Phillip Magness pretty much destroys the Saez & Zucman here.
... Berkeley .... The New York Times and Washington Post ... The Triumph of Injustice ...
Why do you pay attention to ideological drivel?
Ideology is like insurance, better to sell it than to buy it.
Ask Warren Buffet, or any politician, or any academic selling to consumers of ideological drivel or their captive students who will be forced to pay $250 for their mandatory textbook.
"All our people are businessmen, their loyalty is based on that. On that basis, anything is possible."
Location: Was Midvalley Oregon; Now Eastside Seattle area
13,053 posts, read 7,485,436 times
Reputation: 9782
Quote:
Originally Posted by leastprime
Alternative numbers.
However, we pay ~2% of gross. Federal. I haven't examined the return for 2018. I just picked up from CPA and filed/paid 10/15. I was traveling the last few of days. Should review it today. 10/17.
Correction: Federal taxes ~3.5% of AGI (ln 7), 12% marginal, 9.4% nominal.
The wealthy pay less taxes or even no taxes. Gee, why aren't I surprised? I'm a conservative, but even I say this kind of crap never ends well.
Before the French Revolution, the nobles (their equivalent of our 1%-ers) didn't pay taxes, either, while consuming much of France's resources. Well, guess what happened to Marie Antoinette when she said "let them eat cake".
The wealthy pay less taxes or even no taxes. Gee, why aren't I surprised? I'm a conservative, but even I say this kind of crap never ends well.
Before the French Revolution, the nobles (their equivalent of our 1%-ers) didn't pay taxes, either, while consuming much of France's resources. Well, guess what happened to Marie Antoinette when she said "let them eat cake".
You should stop commenting on things you don’t understand. The lowest 50% or so don’t pay income taxes. The “rich” generally have effective tax rates above zero. So, what you said is basically not only false, but the exact opposite scenario.
You even throw in the stupid French Revolution comment because you’re a caricature of ignorance.
You should stop commenting on things you don’t understand.
Good idea! You should take your own advice.
btw. "taxes" isn't limited to the Fed Income portion alone... in life or in the article.
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.
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.
