Questions for capitalists.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
20-10-2013, 08:28 PM
Questions for capitalists.
(20-10-2013 08:24 PM)earmuffs Wrote:  
(20-10-2013 08:07 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  You're overcomplicating and otherwise obscuring simple shit. A 90% tax bracket over and above your first billion means you only get to keep $100 million on your next billions. Boo hoo hoo.

That's fucking stupid.
90% tax? Are you a fucking retard?

You just walked into a trap. In the U.S. In the 50's there was a 90 percent tax for the rich, and this is when the economy was rising as well.

Thanks for playing.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes I and I's post
20-10-2013, 08:29 PM
RE: Questions for capitalists.
(20-10-2013 08:28 PM)I and I Wrote:  
(20-10-2013 08:24 PM)earmuffs Wrote:  That's fucking stupid.
90% tax? Are you a fucking retard?

You just walked into a trap. In the U.S. In the 50's there was a 90 percent tax for the rich, and this is when the economy was rising as well.

Thanks for playing.

I didn't ask you, everyone already knows you're a retard.

[Image: 3cdac7eec8f6b059070d9df56f50a7ae.jpg]
Now with 40% more awesome.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-10-2013, 08:42 PM
RE: Questions for capitalists.
(20-10-2013 08:20 PM)frankksj Wrote:  But you proposed the opposite system--where they're discouraged from investing, and encouraged to spend all their money on extravagant living position?

We're gonna invest it for them collectively in our public infrastructure. That's kinda like what taxes are for. Tongue

(20-10-2013 08:20 PM)frankksj Wrote:  How many people make over $1 billion?

Fair enough. Lower it to $1 million and I will present the same argument.

(20-10-2013 07:42 PM)frankksj Wrote:  Assuming you're not a 1%'er, ..

No at $155,500 US/annum I'm apparently a 10% not a 1%. And therein lies the problem. The difference between me and and the 50% is 2-3x. The difference between the ten-percenters and the top 1% is 10-1000x. That's the problem.
Tongue

As it was in the beginning is now and ever shall be, world without end. Amen.
And I will show you something different from either
Your shadow at morning striding behind you
Or your shadow at evening rising to meet you;
I will show you fear in a handful of dust.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-10-2013, 08:58 PM
RE: Questions for capitalists.
(20-10-2013 08:42 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  No at $155,500 US/annum I'm apparently a 10% not a 1%. And therein lies the problem. The difference between me and and the 50% is 2-3x. The difference between the ten-percenters and the top 1% is 10-1000x. That's the problem.
Tongue

Thank you for sharing that. It demonstrates why the US will never fix the problem. To the average American _YOU_ are one of the rich guys they want to see taxed at 90%. But, if the 90% tax rate applied to all income over $155,500, guess what?! You're not going to be putting in any overtime or trying to climb the ladder any higher since you've already hit the glass ceiling.

Ironically, to you, you're not rich, even though you make 3x as the average guy, so you think the tax needs to apply to OTHER people are richer than you. And if your income increased to $1 million/year, you'd similarly be arguing that you're still not rich and the 90% tax should only apply to those making over $10 million. Until you get to $10 million, and move the bar up again.

This is why the US has such a problem. If ALL of us were willing to pay half our income in taxes, like Sweden, we could have the Swedish system. But American liberals want the Swedish system, they just don't want to pay the taxes themselves--they want somebody else to foot the bill. Sadly, that doesn't work.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes frankksj's post
20-10-2013, 09:07 PM (This post was last modified: 20-10-2013 09:25 PM by GirlyMan.)
RE: Questions for capitalists.
(20-10-2013 08:58 PM)frankksj Wrote:  Ironically, to you, you're not rich, even though you make 3x as the average guy, so you think the tax needs to apply to OTHER people are richer than you.

Nope. I got no problem with taxes. You want to make Social Security solvent forever? Stop giving me a $700/month bonus in August when I hit the Social Security income limit. Helll, I've already budgeted for it. Tongue

(20-10-2013 08:58 PM)frankksj Wrote:  ... you'd similarly be arguing that you're still not rich ...

Girly knows when enough is enough. I ain't as stupid as I look. Tongue

As it was in the beginning is now and ever shall be, world without end. Amen.
And I will show you something different from either
Your shadow at morning striding behind you
Or your shadow at evening rising to meet you;
I will show you fear in a handful of dust.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-10-2013, 09:40 PM
RE: Questions for capitalists.
(20-10-2013 08:58 PM)frankksj Wrote:  This is why the US has such a problem. If ALL of us were willing to pay half our income in taxes, like Sweden, we could have the Swedish system. But American liberals want the Swedish system, they just don't want to pay the taxes themselves--they want somebody else to foot the bill. Sadly, that doesn't work.

Yes, that's got it. Thumbsup

As it was in the beginning is now and ever shall be, world without end. Amen.
And I will show you something different from either
Your shadow at morning striding behind you
Or your shadow at evening rising to meet you;
I will show you fear in a handful of dust.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-10-2013, 09:51 PM
RE: Questions for capitalists.
(20-10-2013 09:40 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  Girly knows when enough is enough. I ain't as stupid as I look.

I imagine that's a joke. "Enough" is always defined as at least twice what I have. I'm sure when you were making $30k/year, you thought $100k would be "enough", but now that you're at $150k, the bar just keeps going higher. Smile
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-10-2013, 09:58 PM
RE: Questions for capitalists.
@I and I (et al),

What I don't get is why you guys focus exclusively on money. There are so many other kinds of 'wealth' that are, frankly, more valuable. Compare a healthy, but poor, 20 year old to a dying, 85 year old billionaire. Which one is "wealthier overall?" Well, if a genie granted them each a wish, the 85 year old would gladly trade shoes, giving up all his money for youth and health. And the 20 year old is never going to trade places with the 85 year old, since he too knows youth and health is worth more than money.

So, the reality is everybody knows the young, poor guy is 'wealthier' overall, if you're willing to consider the bigger picture, and not focus just on money. You said that you have no sympathy for billionaires, and think they should be dealt with violently to strip them of their assets because it's unfair they have so much. So what about the young guy? Since he's wealthier than the billionaire, I suppose he too should be dealt with violently, and stripped of his assets (his health), because inequality is so unjust, and it's so unfair that he has so much, while other people are suffering with disease and misery.

But, it seems the ONLY thing you ever think about is money, and you ignore all the other assets and wealth people have. And yet you accuse capitalists of being greedy and obsessed with money. Go figure.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-10-2013, 11:44 PM
RE: Questions for capitalists.
It's just jealousy.

People that earn 30K a year look like millionaires to some African barely scrapping a living.
Yet I don't see the 30k year American giving up 90% of his income to the African.
Just sayin.

[Image: 3cdac7eec8f6b059070d9df56f50a7ae.jpg]
Now with 40% more awesome.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-10-2013, 12:10 PM
RE: Questions for capitalists.
Quote:You just walked into a trap. In the U.S. In the 50's there was a 90 percent tax for the rich, and this is when the economy was rising as well.

Actually, no. Look at the amount of tax revenue the government collected from the rich in the booming 50's and 60's. It's LESS. Government actually had a smaller percent of the nation's gdp. This is because the 90% tax rate was purely symbolic--nobody actually had to pay it. There was no FATCA, no 'controlled foreign corporation' laws, no 'foreign bank account reporting', no restrictions on emigration, etc. So the rich moved all their assets offshore.

IMO, it was actually a bad policy because today it's estimated that the rich are holding $21 trillion offshore: Forbes link That's MORE than the entire economy of the US and Japan combined. Imagine how much better off we'd be if that $21 trillion was still here, in the economy, building factories, creating jobs, inventing new products, and not parked in the Cayman Islands.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: