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 01-06-2012, 02:13 PM
 
Location: West Coast of Europe
25,947 posts, read 24,745,361 times
Reputation: 9728

Advertisements

Rich people own way too much, no matter where they are from or how they got their wealth.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-06-2012, 02:39 PM
 
20,718 posts, read 19,363,240 times
Reputation: 8288
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neuling View Post
Rich people own way too much, no matter where they are from or how they got their wealth.

Not the way I look at it. There are a few producers that reinvested their wealth. How they got it is all important. If you tax Tesla, Ford, Pullman, Edison etc. its going to reduce standard of living. Income and taxes on capital are ruinous. The problem with capital gains taxes is that it is really 95% resource rent income which should be the source of all taxation. So instead of lowering taxes on producers with low capital gains taxes we lower taxes on leeches and bed wetters for the most part.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-06-2012, 02:49 PM
 
Location: West Coast of Europe
25,947 posts, read 24,745,361 times
Reputation: 9728
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwynedd1 View Post
Not the way I look at it. There are a few producers that reinvested their wealth. How they got it is all important. If you tax Tesla, Ford, Pullman, Edison etc. its going to reduce standard of living. Income and taxes on capital are ruinous. The problem with capital gains taxes is that it is really 95% resource rent income which should be the source of all taxation. So instead of lowering taxes on producers with low capital gains taxes we lower taxes on leeches and bed wetters for the most part.
To me this question goes way beyond redistribution, it is about the bigger picture, the purpose of life, wisdom, etc.
I think as long as humans are so stupid and unwise as to want to be rich (who becomes and stays rich against their will?), we will have to deal with all the negative consequences...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-06-2012, 03:01 PM
 
20,718 posts, read 19,363,240 times
Reputation: 8288
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neuling View Post
To me this question goes way beyond redistribution, it is about the bigger picture, the purpose of life, wisdom, etc.
I think as long as humans are so stupid and unwise as to want to be rich (who becomes and stays rich against their will?), we will have to deal with all the negative consequences...

No doubt about that since I tend to be a Utilitarian. However you can tax wealth without having any impact on production at all. Its counter intuitive but quite simple.
2. A tax on rent falls wholly on the landlord. There are no
means by which he can shift the burthen upon any one else. It
does not affect the value or price of agricultural produce, for
this is determined by the cost of production in the most
unfavourable circumstances, and in those circumstances, as we
have so often demonstrated, no rent is paid. A tax on rent,
therefore, has no effect, other than its obvious one. It merely
takes so much from the landlord, and transfers it to the state.
This, however, is, in strict exactness, only true of the rent
which is the result either of natural causes, or of improvements
made by tenants. When the landlord makes improvements which
increase the productive power of his land, he is remunerated for
them by an extra payment from the tenant; and this payment, which
to the landlord is properly a profit on capital, is blended and
confounded with rent;

JS Mill

Its simply tax price discrimination that also maximizes production.

The monopolist knows this but they removed it from tax policy and only teach it in MBA school when you want to rape the customer.

Microeconomics - Price Discrimination


Most businesses charge different prices to different groups of consumers for what is more or less the same good or service! This is price discrimination and it has become widespread in nearly every market. This note looks at variations of price discrimination and evaluates who gains and who loses?
What is price discrimination?
Price discrimination or yield management occurs when a firm charges a different price to different groups of consumers for an identical good or service, for reasons not associated with costs.



Kind of strange businesses across the country know this concept, but its not applied to tax policy on rich leeches.

The typical conservative who is so "smart" thinks he knows this cost will be passed on. This is why the typical conservative who "knows" this is an idiot. The tax cannot be shifted to the consumer.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-06-2012, 04:35 PM
 
Location: Southern California
15,080 posts, read 20,474,184 times
Reputation: 10343
Quote:
Originally Posted by AeroGuyDC View Post
That poor bloke in Australia needs a bailout because that rich guy in America was successful.

I don't put it past Angry Liberals to think of something like this in their incessant attempt to penalize America's successful people.
About as stupid as nation-building a country like Iraq.

[wealth transfer]
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-06-2012, 10:32 PM
 
Location: Too far from home.
8,732 posts, read 6,782,122 times
Reputation: 2374
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neuling View Post
Rich people own way too much, no matter where they are from or how they got their wealth.
Key word: own. If you read my earlier post you would see that many "millionaries" don't OWN, but they do OWE, it all depends on what formula is used to determine what constitutes a millionaire. Many so-called "millionaires" look good on paper and have $10 in disposable cash, but in reality they are not a millionaire. A millionaire has at least or more than $1 million in disposable cash that they can write a bank check against that will clear. You can't write a check against a house worth $400,000 and expect it to clear. Disposable cash.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-06-2012, 10:44 PM
 
29,939 posts, read 39,464,356 times
Reputation: 4799
Quote:
Originally Posted by emcee squared View Post
Only 29 million people in the US make more than $34,000 after taxes? That really doesn't seem like that many.
Probably because that's a false fact.

There's 29,000,000+ that make between $50,000 - $100,000 alone.

That doesn't count the ones who make above that or the ones that make up to the $34,000 figure.

There's at least, at a quick glance 60 million that make more than $40,000/year.

http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/09in11si.xls
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-07-2012, 06:34 AM
 
Location: Dallas
31,290 posts, read 20,740,494 times
Reputation: 9325
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwynedd1 View Post
Its not taxes. Its rents and mortgages. Housing takes 40% of our income. Don't know a tax that does that.

Taxes take more than 40% of my income.... when you add all taxes including FIT, FICA, Medicare, Sales tax, property tax, gas tax, phone tax, airline tax, etc, etc.

And if you included the hidden taxes (taxes paid by consumers through higher prices to cover corporate FIT), the total would be way over 40%.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-07-2012, 06:37 AM
 
Location: Dallas
31,290 posts, read 20,740,494 times
Reputation: 9325
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neuling View Post
To me this question goes way beyond redistribution, it is about the bigger picture, the purpose of life, wisdom, etc.
I think as long as humans are so stupid and unwise as to want to be rich (who becomes and stays rich against their will?), we will have to deal with all the negative consequences...

I don't know any negative consequences of becoming rich.

I know a lot of negative consequences of being foolish and greedy.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-07-2012, 06:41 AM
 
Location: Dallas
31,290 posts, read 20,740,494 times
Reputation: 9325
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neuling View Post
Rich people own way too much, no matter where they are from or how they got their wealth.

Wow! That's a bizarre statement. How about talented people? Do they also have too much? Too much talent?

Shall we break the fingers of the top basketball players to keep them from being better than anyone else?
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

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