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.
Nonsense, tax units can be "grouped" in any statistical manner, just depends of what being analysed.
Not by wealth. There is no indication of accumulated wealth in tax data.
Quote:
one percent of households and one percent of tax units are interchangeable terms.
No, they are not. The top 1% of income earners is not the same group as the top 1% of wealth owners. It's not a hard concept. Not sure why you don't understand that.
Quote:
The top 1% of the households, based on wealth, have $20 trillion in weath.
Have as in own? No. Control in some way? Yes. Control does NOT mean the same thing as own. Another simple concept that I'm not sure why you don't understand.
Not by wealth. There is no indication of accumulated wealth in tax data.
No, they are not. The top 1% of income earners is not the same group as the top 1% of wealth owners. It's not a hard concept. Not sure why you don't understand that.
Have as in own? No. Control in some way? Yes. Control does NOT mean the same thing as own. Another simple concept that I'm not sure why you don't understand.
I asked you to quit wasting my time, I am well aware of the difference between income and wealth. We were not discussing income, drop the references to it.
As I said before you took the discussion into the ditch, the TOP 1% (HOUSEHOLDS) OWN $20T PLUS and that wealth could easily pay off the us government public debt (and the intergovernmental debt).
I'm not play this childish game with you any more.
I asked you to quit wasting my time, I am well aware of the difference between income and wealth. We were not discussing income, drop the references to it.
YOU referenced it:
Quote:
Originally Posted by buzzards27
Don't be stupid. The top 1% to most THINKING PERSONS means the top 1% of the tax unit (households)
Quote:
Originally Posted by buzzards27
As I said before you took the discussion into the ditch, the TOP 1% (HOUSEHOLDS) OWN $20T PLUS and that wealth could easily pay off the us government public debt (and the intergovernmental debt).
No, they don't. They may control it in some way, but they don't own it. Control and own are not the same thing.
Quote:
I'm not play this childish game with you any more.
Reading over some of the messages in this thread, I am astonished by the ideological box people on several sides of the political fence work from.
It is better, I think, to talk about actual people who are rich or who are poor than to talk about economic categories of wealth and income. First, anyone, whether officially rich or officially poor, who envies or even wishes they were like someone who has more than they have, is poor.
Let me tell a true story about a man here in Vietnam that I had the pleasure of helping a little (I paid for his training -- a very small amount to me but a great deal to him). His father is an alcoholic, and so did little work, and his mother lived elsewhere. He lived with several others in a Saigon slum (the toilet was the nearest canal). He paid a woman to teach him to do hair and makeup. In the meantime he also studied on his own films from Korea demonstrating the same things.
I am not sure what happened in detail, but he seems to have brought Korean styles to Ho Chi Minh City, and they were a hit. Now he owns several houses (for his family) and is generally seen as wealthy (by Vietnamese standards -- by U.S. standards we would call him seriously upper middle class).
What has it gotten him? Some admire him, but many talk behind his back with envy and spite, calling him greedy and selfish (in spite of much generosity) or referring to him as lucky, not giving him credit for what he has achieved. I have heard all this many times, and it is all I can do to keep from losing my temper. He is fortunate that he understands all this and is unperturbed.
Ok, Frank, get to the point. The point is that the ideological resentment of wealth, that we see reflected in political demands for heavy taxation, is largely a consequence of resentment and envy, even though people manage to fool themselves into thinking otherwise.
Taxing wealth is economically foolish. Economic leveling devices are needed in any society, but that should be the end of it. Taxes should not be measured by how "fair" they are (a totally subjective matter anyway) but by how efficiently they can raise revenue with a minimum of harm.
Reading over some of the messages in this thread, I am astonished by the ideological box people on several sides of the political fence work from.
It is better, I think, to talk about actual people who are rich or who are poor than to talk about economic categories of wealth and income. First, anyone, whether officially rich or officially poor, who envies or even wishes they were like someone who has more than they have, is poor.
Let me tell a true story about a man here in Vietnam that I had the pleasure of helping a little (I paid for his training -- a very small amount to me but a great deal to him). His father is an alcoholic, and so did little work, and his mother lived elsewhere. He lived with several others in a Saigon slum (the toilet was the nearest canal). He paid a woman to teach him to do hair and makeup. In the meantime he also studied on his own films from Korea demonstrating the same things.
I am not sure what happened in detail, but he seems to have brought Korean styles to Ho Chi Minh City, and they were a hit. Now he owns several houses (for his family) and is generally seen as wealthy (by Vietnamese standards -- by U.S. standards we would call him seriously upper middle class).
What has it gotten him? Some admire him, but many talk behind his back with envy and spite, calling him greedy and selfish (in spite of much generosity) or referring to him as lucky, not giving him credit for what he has achieved. I have heard all this many times, and it is all I can do to keep from losing my temper. He is fortunate that he understands all this and is unperturbed.
Ok, Frank, get to the point. The point is that the ideological resentment of wealth, that we see reflected in political demands for heavy taxation, is largely a consequence of resentment and envy, even though people manage to fool themselves into thinking otherwise.
Taxing wealth is economically foolish. Economic leveling devices are needed in any society, but that should be the end of it. Taxes should not be measured by how "fair" they are (a totally subjective matter anyway) but by how efficiently they can raise revenue with a minimum of harm.
Good post Frank.
I don't necessarily think that the rich should pay more in income taxes. (Though my posts definitely sound like I do, I admit) I guess what I am really asking for is fairer taxation on investments, capital gains etc.
Fairness is an element in society and we should definitely take that into account. As I've said before, not everyone has a Frank in their lives to give them a hand up. I feel we, as an advanced society, should offer that option to people. It is frustrating for me to see tax breaks on really silly things Hollywood filmmaking, show horses and businesses being able to write off damages brought on from lawsuits. This is ridiculous IMO.
I don't think "wah, wah, wah". I think, "How can I help even things out for others who have not had the same upbringing/luck/opportunities as I have?" Terrible, I know.
Wait a minute, didn't you just say:
Quote:
If I, as someone who could be classified as poor but self identify as middle class,
So is it "luck" that you can "self identify as middle class" but are considered "poor" by the government so you can get hand-outs?
Why am I not surprised an Obamabot doesn't know who Julia is?
I don't necessarily think that the rich should pay more in income taxes. (Though my posts definitely sound like I do, I admit) I guess what I am really asking for is fairer taxation on investments, capital gains etc.
Fairness is an element in society and we should definitely take that into account. As I've said before, not everyone has a Frank in their lives to give them a hand up. I feel we, as an advanced society, should offer that option to people. It is frustrating for me to see tax breaks on really silly things Hollywood filmmaking, show horses and businesses being able to write off damages brought on from lawsuits. This is ridiculous IMO.
ROTFLMAO! You mean like the left-wing hypocrite Michael Moore?
So is it "luck" that you can "self identify as middle class" but are considered "poor" by the government so you can get hand-outs?
Why am I not surprised an Obamabot doesn't know who Julia is?
Keep calling names. People who have a leg to stand on during a discussion needn't do so. Your constant attacks continually show that you don't.
As far as:
Quote:
If I, as someone who could be classified as poor but self identify as middle class,
By income level, I can be considered poor but knowing what I know of real poverty, working with actual poor people, etc I don't feel poor. I feel very blessed. Part of the reason I feel this way is because of what we have, where we are in our lives and the amount I can contribute to others.
So yes, I DO feel lucky.
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.
