Wealth distribution in the US

[Spexxvet]

I've got a pitch fork and a torch. I'm ready to rise up.

[Shawnee123]

Originally Posted by Spexxvet

I've got a pitch fork and a torch. I'm ready to rise up.

Well now I know where my pitchfork went. Mr Gothic is very angry.

[classicman]

I'm not wealthy by any financial measure, but those who came from modest lives and earned their own wealth are the ones with the "do it yourself" attitude. The fuckers who inherited their wealth and/or have had it all their lives and know nothing other than that insane lifestyle have no clue about how the rest of us live.

The problem is the group that makes say $250,000 to $500,000. They are not in that insanely wealthy group. I don't thing its fair to lump them in with the multi-multi millionaires and billionaires.

This is just another reason for some type of tax reform.

[xoxoxoBruce]

$250,000 to $500,000 income or gross adjusted income?

[classicman]

for the sake of the argument - income

[spudcon]

Bruce, do you only keep 36% of what you earn?

[xoxoxoBruce]

I wish I could keep 36% of my income, but since I'm not rich I have to use it to survive.

If you're still feeling sorry for poor Ben, he doesn't keep 36%, he pays 36%, and that's only on adjusted gross income after he invokes all the tricks and loopholes afforded the wealthy.

Why can't you get it though your fucking head everything he pays over that is his choice? The feds don't force him to pay an agent, but if he does it's deductible business expense. The feds don't force him to buy several multi-million properties, so he has to pay property taxes on them... at the same rate as everyone else in that town. The fed doesn't force him to buy lots of expensive shit, which incurs sales tax. Choices, rich people have lots of them.

[spudcon]

Oh, lucky Ben. He gets to pay for his business expenses and his investments. I bet he even got to pay for his college loan. Why can't you get it thru your fucking head that it's his money, not yours, Obama's or anyone else's. When the government takes money or liberty from anyone, it is taking from us all. No wonder you can't keep enough for anything but expenses.

[Clodfobble]

But spud, why is your tax money not yours then? Ben pays a lower percentage of taxes than you do. The question here is not "should we take money" from the rich or anyone else, it's "why do we take proportionally MORE money" from spudcon instead of Ben Stein?

[spudcon]

I haven't had that proven to me. The original post was that Ben was whining about only being able to keep 31% of his income. I keep a larger percentage. The question still stands, What does someone else do for that 69%? I have no problem if he pays the same percentage as a person making less than him.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Originally Posted by spudcon

Oh, lucky Ben. He gets to pay for his business expenses and his investments.

Which are deductions, non taxed.

I bet he even got to pay for his college loan.

Uh, like everyone else?

Why can't you get it thru your fucking head that it's his money, not yours, Obama's or anyone else's. When the government takes money or liberty from anyone, it is taking from us all.

Yes they are, through a graduated system most feel is the fairest way, for the last hundred years.

Now what exactly are you bitching about? What do you want to happen? Do you want Ben to pay less than 36% (on part of his income), so you can pay more? A flat rate rather than graduated system?
Or do you want to do away with taxes entirely, don't let the government collect anything. What?

As far a Ben goes, he went on the air and whined about the feds, while totally lying through his teeth with misinformation and distorted numbers, in an attempt to make people feel sorry for him (and his rich buddies), and ultimately fool people into supporting a tax break for him.
He's a lousy actor and proved it Sunday morning.

Now if your real bitch, is where and how the government spends tax revenues, that's a whole different kettle of fish, and has nothing to do with whether they raise Ben's taxes 3% or not.
If starting tomorrow, the government could only spend money on things you approve of, they should still raise Ben's taxes 3%, because they still has to pay for that trillion dollar Iraq war, and 2 or 3 hundred billion for the savings&Loan fiasco, and 9 years in Afghanistan, and bailing out Wall street, and, and, and... plus interest.

[spudcon]

I would love to see the graduated income tax and the IRS abolished. I wouldn't mind a flat tax, or a sales tax, as long as the said taxes weren't above 18%, and no other hidden taxes added to it. I would also like to see the Feds spending money on what they have the constitutional right to spend, and leave the states and the people to do the rest. But if it's 18% for you, it is only fair that it's 18% for everyone, millionaires, union workers, drug dealers, illegal aliens.

[xoxoxoBruce]

I would have loved to pay only 18%, it would have given me a huge raise over the years, but the states would have upped their taxes so I probably would have paid more. And much of that more would have been in property taxes that Ben feels are so unjust.

So you'd do away with Social Security, medicaid, medicare, and federal contributions to welfare, education and unemployment, first off. Then the Interstate Highway Fund, all those power dams, flood control projects, river & harbor dredging, and air traffic controllers.
Oh yes, and definitely OSHA, the EPA, FDA, and all of those busy bodies.

Boy we sure could make the country a great place to live without all that federal meddling. Yup, you'll be a lot healthier, if you put on your coonskin caps, and hunt your dinner.

C'mon Spud, we both know the federal government spends a ton on stupid shit, and wastes more than we can count, but your solution is a ridiculous over reaction, borne of frustration. It's not Obama's fault, nor was it Bush's. It's the dirty motherfuckers that we allow to run the government, the congress critters and the lobbyists/corporations. But replacing them with fools like Christine O'Donnell and Rand Paul, who have both sold out to Karl Rove, is stupid beyond belief.

The Republicans have promised small government and lower taxes, forever. But when they were in power, they did exactly the opposite... they lied.
The Democrats lied too, they're all liars. They promised more federal help to the states/people, and while they did give us a federal surplus, they immediately started bickering how they were going to spend it, instead of paying down debt and saving us interest.
They both give us more government, but the Republicans take care of the wealthy, and the Democrats do better by the rest of us. Either way smaller government is a pipe dream, we're not getting rid of them, so the best we can do is hold their feet to the fire, pressure them to do more good.

There was a poster recently, only made one post. He was collecting a huge government pension, I don't remember exactly how much. Well I checked him out on the net, as I do for all the new members I can. He was in two other forums trying to find out how he could screw his credit card company out of thirty odd thousand dollars, and get away with it.
The world is fucked up I tell ya, but don't throw out the baby with the bath water.

[spudcon]

Bruce, I agree with you about Republicans and Democrats both being irresponsible jerks, but voting the good old boys out of office has to be a good thing. I'd rather have someone in office who has at least had a real job, or owned their own business than a career politician from any party. Those career pols have no idea about the real world.

[morethanpretty]

I'd rather have someone in office who knows how the process works and is knowledgeable about laws. Who has gotten the education necessary to be a leader and write/read the bills that go through congress and be able to understand them at least fundamentally. Yes, I know they have staff for that, and realistically I understand that not all congress members can be 100% proficient in interpreting the laws. The biggest problem with our political system (as it is) is that only the wealthy can usually afford to run for office. I'd like to see that changed so that there are either limits on what can be spent to campaign or money for campaigning comes from a public fund that is evenly distributed. That is the real way to take control of our government from the wealthy, lobbyists and corporations. That makes the campaigners/politicians completely responsible to only the normal taxpayers and voters - us.