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.
Small scandanavian countries like...Europe? Or Canada? Or heck even Mexico? So which large countries have tried socialized medicine and failed? Go ahead, lets look at them....
The EU, Canada (a moderately sized country) and Mexico do not have better health outcomes than the U.S.
Quote:
Originally Posted by greywar
The top 1% took in 20% of the income last year. In 1964 they took in 10% (roughly) Now go re-read what you stated and think about it.
The top 1% did not "take" anything, they created the income. You continue to act as if there is some giant pool of money that comes from no place, it just exists, and the 1% are taking from the pool. That isn't how it works.
Quote:
Originally Posted by greywar
Tell you what, if you triple my income...I have no issues about doubling the amount of money I pay in income tax.
But the reality is if you triple your income your taxes don't double or even triple, they quintuple or sextuple or more. That is the point. There comes a point when the added risk or hard work is not worth the smaller incremental gain.
Quote:
Originally Posted by HuskyMama
If the real goal was to provide a disincentive to pay executive salaries in the millions, you could deny corporations the tax deduction for compensation over however millions you think is "fair".
That has been done already. It was the Omnibus Revenue Reconciliation Act of 1993 that limited companies from deducting any salary of more than $1 million for top officers.
The law backfired of course as companies found other ways to compensate executive like options and bonuses and not only has to sent CEO earnings through the roof, it has also changed how they run their companies. Many now run for the short term and manage to stock prices to hit their incentives.
As for my "ilk" what exactly do you think my "ilk" is? Hmmmm?
Pick your term.... Marxist, socialist, far left extremist...... a rose by any other name.
Quote:
Originally Posted by greywar
And the rest of us? My tax rate exceeds Romneys as a % of my income.
Quote:
Originally Posted by greywar
Romney has a 150 yacht...maybe if he wasnt so heavily taxed he could have gotten a 160 foot yacht! Sob.
In 1991 the Democrat controlled House passed a luxury tax to punish those who wanted to buy yachts, etc. Instead of punishing the rich, it punished the middle class workers in the luxury item industry. It cost thousands of high paying jobs. By the time Congress repealed the tax, the damage was already done and the U.S. yacht manufacturing business never recovered.
Reagan was a movie star, during that period of being in the 90% tax bracket, yet he somehow managed to buy a nice home in Pacific Palisades and a ranch in the San Fernando valley, long before buying his ranch up near Santa Barbara.
Makes you wonder how he did it!!!
He did it because the Democrats didn't control CA yet and property was still cheap. You could buy a house in Newport Beach for $30,000.
Quote:
Originally Posted by petch751
Why don’t people ever stop to think about the absolute riches and modern day convenience we have in our lives?
Or how rich our poor are relative to what poverty means in the rest of the world.
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,329 posts, read 54,400,252 times
Reputation: 40736
Quote:
Originally Posted by T-310
So where does the money come from?
They just print it? That is ludicrous. Why our money needs to be on the gold standard.
Income inequality is a made up problem. This person has more money and the other doesn't have much. Why lets just take it from the person who has it and give it to those that have little. Wealth redistribution. Never going to happen.
A CEO is beholden to the shareholders. Do a good job, he gets rewarded. Yay his team. Do poorly and he is turfed out.
Don't like it...................tough, that is the society we live in.
Except many, due to their contracts, do a lousy job and still get rewarded when they're 'turfed out'. Of course we rarely if ever hear any complaints about that from the very same people who whine about union contracts. Funny how some contracts rewarding mediocrity are fine & dandy while some are pure evil, eh? Or perhaps it's just the out and out hypocrisy it appears.
Except many, due to their contracts, do a lousy job and still get rewarded when they're 'turfed out'. Of course we rarely if ever hear any complaints about that from the very same people who whine about union contracts. Funny how some contracts rewarding mediocrity are fine & dandy while some are pure evil, eh? Or perhaps it's just the out and out hypocrisy it appears.
So? It's in the contract. Blame on the board of directors and shareholders for signing such a contract. At the end of the day, they are the ones being screwed not you or me.
Except many, due to their contracts, do a lousy job and still get rewarded when they're 'turfed out'. Of course we rarely if ever hear any complaints about that from the very same people who whine about union contracts. Funny how some contracts rewarding mediocrity are fine & dandy while some are pure evil, eh? Or perhaps it's just the out and out hypocrisy it appears.
If you started a company, shouldn't you be allowed to hire who you want to run your company and how much you pay that person?
That has been done already. It was the Omnibus Revenue Reconciliation Act of 1993 that limited companies from deducting any salary of more than $1 million for top officers.
The law backfired of course as companies found other ways to compensate executive like options and bonuses and not only has to sent CEO earnings through the roof, it has also changed how they run their companies. Many now run for the short term and manage to stock prices to hit their incentives.
Good point, if it were to be done again, it would need to be based on total compensation, not just salaries.
I'm not a fan of the idea, personally. But if the real issue is "overpaid" executives, then addressing it through corporate tax law would narrow the impact to those evil greedy CEOs.
But I think we know that CEOs are just a convenient straw man, and the object is to punish all of the wealthy.
Reagan was a movie star, during that period of being in the 90% tax bracket, yet he somehow managed to buy a nice home in Pacific Palisades and a ranch in the San Fernando valley, long before buying his ranch up near Santa Barbara.
Makes you wonder how he did it!!!
Even though the 90% tax rate existed on paper, the wealthy were able to find loads of loopholes, tax shelters, etc. etc. Very little revenue was actually collected by the government at that rate, and if it was, you can bet there was a lot more income that escaped taxation due to loopholes and shelters.
Closing loopholes and shelters and reducing rates resulted in the wealthy paying a greater share of income taxes overall.
Even though the 90% tax rate existed on paper, the wealthy were able to find loads of loopholes, tax shelters, etc. etc. Very little revenue was actually collected by the government at that rate, and if it was, you can bet there was a lot more income that escaped taxation due to loopholes and shelters.
Closing loopholes and shelters and reducing rates resulted in the wealthy paying a greater share of income taxes overall.
Simply move to the Fair Tax system, it would be all solved.
The EU, Canada (a moderately sized country) and Mexico do not have better health outcomes than the U.S.
10% of united states citizens have no health care whatsoever. And of the healthcare they do have its very limited. yes if you have money we have better outcomes. Let me tell you what tis like for everyone else.
My mother? No healthcare. Died from a easily detectable cancer that can be treated when caught early. That was pre obamacare.
Now what about today? Literally yesterday someone I know died from cancer. When was it discovered? 7 days ago. Why did it take too long? Cause no one is going to spend the money to look into her constant complaints about chest pain. First she was told it was a cold. Then a month later it was Pneumonia.
Yeah. wonderful outcomes. I know, this is anecdotal. But when you look online, you know how the BS "better outcomes" data is created? They cherry pick specific things. In general? I've been sick here, and I have been sick overseas. I'd rather be sick overseas.
Quote:
The top 1% did not "take" anything, they created the income. You continue to act as if there is some giant pool of money that comes from no place, it just exists, and the 1% are taking from the pool. That isn't how it works.
You can wordsmith it any way you like. The ever increasing % going to (and I shouldn't be lazy and say the 1%, I should be more specific and say the .1 or .01%) the top is not sustainable. Deep down you know this, you just refuse to admit it.
Quote:
But the reality is if you triple your income your taxes don't double or even triple, they quintuple or sextuple or more. That is the point. There comes a point when the added risk or hard work is not worth the smaller incremental gain.
No...they don't. This is one of the most foolish things I hear. When you have enough money you shelter it all in various ways. Mitt Romney has over 100 million in his 401k. Think about that. And remember that 401K's have a 16K/year limit on money going in. Loopholes my friend.
Quote:
Pick your term.... Marxist, socialist, far left extremist...... a rose by any other name.
In other words its just childish name calling by people unable to argue their point. Stay classy.
Quote:
In 1991 the Democrat controlled House passed a luxury tax to punish those who wanted to buy yachts, etc. Instead of punishing the rich, it punished the middle class workers in the luxury item industry. It cost thousands of high paying jobs. By the time Congress repealed the tax, the damage was already done and the U.S. yacht manufacturing business never recovered.
And I can show where taxes have had benefits too. Cherry picking data is not the way to make a point either.
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.
