Do you live in SF and wonder where all your taxes go? (San Francisco: credit, construction)

[Larry Siegel]

Originally Posted by zombocom

The top .3% aren't doing jack, they're overpaid CEOs of gigantic (pre-existing corporations). They more often than not do more harm than good, and they're too busy getting out of paying taxes and figuring out ways to lay off thousands of employees despite record profits to be doing anything particularly good for this country.

Don't get me wrong, there are plenty of intelligent, job creating individuals in this nation who deserve the success they have, but let's not pretend that huge corporations have any regard for anything other than profit - they can't, they are legally obligated to maximize profit above all else - no matter the detriment to society.

You don't have much business experience, do you?

There are about 150 million people in the U.S. labor force so the top 0.3% is the top 500,000. There aren't 500,000 companies to be CEO of. There are a lot of corporate executives (not just CEOs) among the top 500,000 earners, but many are partners in law and consulting firms, owners of small and medium-sized businesses, doctors, accountants, inventors, writers, actors, and so forth. There are a lot in the financial field, where I work. Most of the people in this income bracket work 55+ hour weeks and some work 100. It typically requires a couple of decades of training, specialization, and risk taking to get to that income level and most of the people who try to, don't.

Until recently I worked for a big corporation. My boss created billions of dollars in value and was paid a million or two a year for that; basically she got a fraction of one percent of the value she and her team created. I believe she'd be in the top 0.3%. We employed (as outside contractors) mutual fund managers, hedge fund managers, private equity managers, and other people who definitely made millions a year, yet every one of them - by contract - was getting only a percentage of the value they created for their investors, and they were constantly at risk of being fired in favor of some new manager whose strategy was more promising or appeared to be.

If you want to earn the big bucks, you have to either create a lot of value or provide the appearance of it. It's easier just to create the value. There are, of course, a few outright dishonest executives and a larger number who are just lucky, seeming to create value when in fact they're running a company poorly. That's the way the world works. Life's not fair. But we'd be in deep trouble if there were no incentives for people to try to create value in business and the professions.

By the way, you can't really avoid taxes on income from working. You can avoid taxes on certain types of investment income, but that's double taxation that shouldn't have occurred in the first place. Rich people pay much more than their fair share of taxes.

[Lost Leaf]

Originally Posted by zombocom

The top .3% aren't doing jack, they're overpaid CEOs of gigantic (pre-existing corporations). They more often than not do more harm than good, and they're too busy getting out of paying taxes and figuring out ways to lay off thousands of employees despite record profits to be doing anything particularly good for this country.

Don't get me wrong, there are plenty of intelligent, job creating individuals in this nation who deserve the success they have, but let's not pretend that huge corporations have any regard for anything other than profit - they can't, they are legally obligated to maximize profit above all else - no matter the detriment to society.

Why are you comparing CEO's to government workers. My taxes are going to pay CEO's salaries, nor are they going to professional sports players, or celebrities. I couldn't care less what people make in the private sector make, I'm not forced to pay them.

[bmw335xi]

Originally Posted by Lost Leaf

Why are you comparing CEO's to government workers. My taxes are going to pay CEO's salaries, nor are they going to professional sports players, or celebrities. I couldn't care less what people make in the private sector make, I'm not forced to pay them.

People seem to think there is no difference between the public sector and private sectors lol.

Many of these same people don't understand that most of the tax revenue the government receives is from the top 10%... which roughly makes up 70% of the federal income tax revenue.

So what do they want? They want higher pay and better benefits for government employees, yet they want to prevent Google workers from going to work, which essentially cuts of the income line for the government to give funding to pay for government employees.

They are rather... living in a dream world.

[Sam I Am]

Although I see how it all joins up, let's hold this thread to city/county/local taxes as it pertains to San Francisco, please. There's room for arguments on federal taxes over in P & OC. Thanks.

[zombocom]

Originally Posted by Lost Leaf

Why are you comparing CEO's to government workers. My taxes are going to pay CEO's salaries, nor are they going to professional sports players, or celebrities. I couldn't care less what people make in the private sector make, I'm not forced to pay them.

I was responding to someone who was comparing the two, so that question should be directed at him.

[HappyinCali]

Seems like public workers are driving up our rents.

[HappyinCali]

Originally Posted by zombocom

I was responding to someone who was comparing the two, so that question should be directed at him.

I like how you ignored the fact that Suhr is the highest paid police chief in the country while running the 14th police force.

[zombocom]

Originally Posted by HappyinCali

I like how you ignored the fact that Suhr is the highest paid police chief in the country while running the 14th police force.

I don't know why you'd like it, but I'm flattered.

Why is it relevant? Do you have some grand scheme for computing every government employee salary in the nation? I'm interested to hear it.

[zombocom]

Originally Posted by Larry Siegel

You don't have much business experience, do you?

There are about 150 million people in the U.S. labor force so the top 0.3% is the top 500,000. There aren't 500,000 companies to be CEO of. There are a lot of corporate executives (not just CEOs) among the top 500,000 earners, but many are partners in law and consulting firms, owners of small and medium-sized businesses, doctors, accountants, inventors, writers, actors, and so forth. There are a lot in the financial field, where I work. Most of the people in this income bracket work 55+ hour weeks and some work 100. It typically requires a couple of decades of training, specialization, and risk taking to get to that income level and most of the people who try to, don't.

Until recently I worked for a big corporation. My boss created billions of dollars in value and was paid a million or two a year for that; basically she got a fraction of one percent of the value she and her team created. I believe she'd be in the top 0.3%. We employed (as outside contractors) mutual fund managers, hedge fund managers, private equity managers, and other people who definitely made millions a year, yet every one of them - by contract - was getting only a percentage of the value they created for their investors, and they were constantly at risk of being fired in favor of some new manager whose strategy was more promising or appeared to be.

If you want to earn the big bucks, you have to either create a lot of value or provide the appearance of it. It's easier just to create the value. There are, of course, a few outright dishonest executives and a larger number who are just lucky, seeming to create value when in fact they're running a company poorly. That's the way the world works. Life's not fair. But we'd be in deep trouble if there were no incentives for people to try to create value in business and the professions.

By the way, you can't really avoid taxes on income from working. You can avoid taxes on certain types of investment income, but that's double taxation that shouldn't have occurred in the first place. Rich people pay much more than their fair share of taxes.

I think I made it pretty clear who I was referring to in my post. I specifically distinguished between job creators and certain CEOs (corporations) or (pretty much every) large banks. Cisco had record profits and laid off 4,000 people. Google manages a 2.4% tax rate by engaging in tax law trickery. That's just the way it is, these corporations are beholden (by law via corporate charter) to maximize shareholder value, so let's not put them up on a pedestal.

The fact remains that earning 100k a year in San Francisco is not that much money, and that since 1970, salaries for men have actually declined by 19%. So yeah, the rich are going to be shouldering a larger and larger share of the tax burden as the economy stratifies and jobs become fewer and worse paying.

As for double taxes, that's the trade off of a corporation - you only risk what you put in. However, as I'm sure you're aware, small businesses and partnerships can enjoy the same limited liability while not being double taxed at this point. Further, the true corporate tax rate is pretty low. While people may like to talk about how we have a high corporate tax rate in the U.S, the effective rate is actually only 12%, or 1/3 of the on paper tax rate.

[pch1013]

Originally Posted by HappyinCali

Seems like public workers are driving up our rents.

I doubt it. Most SF firefighters and police officers live outside the city.