DCUM Class warfare

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Until the 50% of America that is skating starts paying taxes the rates should stay at current levels.

Yeah, I often see the cleaning ladies and day laborers just skating by. Oh, there goes the Giant cashier.
Really, why chase after their "fair share" of less than $50,000?
Tax the uber wealthy. Warren Buffet says the rich won't mind. So I'd say $5,000,000 and above should pay at the highest tax rate. Now that would add up to something.

Indeed. We could tax the poor cleaning lady at 30% and we'd get peanuts. People who demand this are just religious, not practical. We can do it, but it won't change a thing. It will have no practical results that affect any of the problems we have. Requiring capital gains to be taxed at the same rate as other income, however, would have an effect and it is fair. Since it doesn't involve physical violence, calling it warfare is specious.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:11:57 Are you suggesting a plumber should make the same as an attorney? Yes, both provide a needed service, but the requirements to do both job are quite different.

And yet both are necessary for society to function, so it's smart for everyone to think about everyone else's welfare.

[Anonymous]

12:00 You work at DOJ. It is 12:02 and you are on DCUM. Case closed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:11:57 Are you suggesting a plumber should make the same as an attorney? Yes, both provide a needed service, but the requirements to do both job are quite different.

Not a single poster in this thread came ANYWHERE NEAR close to making this suggestion. You are either an idiot or just trying to provoke people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:11:57 Are you suggesting a plumber should make the same as an attorney? Yes, both provide a needed service, but the requirements to do both job are quite different.

And yet both are necessary for society to function, so it's smart for everyone to think about everyone else's welfare.

I went to law school. I'll be the lawyer. If you went to trade school for plumbing then you be the plumber. How's that?

[Anonymous]

12:02 Both jobs are necessary, but it doesn't mean that they have any equal economic value. Should a cardiac surgeon spends many years in school and residency make the same as a plumber or a nanny or a cashier? All are needed professions, but the cost (in terms of both time and money) are not the same.

BTW--I can and have done my own plumbing. Not everyone was born with a silver spoon. It just doesn't make economic sense for me to do my own plumbing repairs anymore.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:12:02 Both jobs are necessary, but it doesn't mean that they have any equal economic value. Should a cardiac surgeon spends many years in school and residency make the same as a plumber or a nanny or a cashier? All are needed professions, but the cost (in terms of both time and money) are not the same.

BTW--I can and have done my own plumbing. Not everyone was born with a silver spoon. It just doesn't make economic sense for me to do my own plumbing repairs anymore.

Duh! The question is not whether they should have different incomes. The question is: how different should their incomes be? Should the poor plumber (actually, the richester person in my neighborhood is a plumber, so this is actually a bad example, but anyway...) have to live in a neighborhood with no police? Should his kids have to go to schools with 40 children per class? Should he not be able to buy a home?

[Anonymous]

It isn't fair that some people can pay for Amazon prime and some cannot. Perhaps those who can afford prime should pay for those who cannot or chose not to do so.

My spouse worked for Amazon for several years and we became wealthy as a direct result of Amazon's compensation. A friend of ours made $11 million one year at Amazon, and my spouse's boss makes several million a year from Amazon stock.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:11:18, really? STFU? Seriously? I've been to Brazilian favelas and Kenyan kiberas, I've seen the wealthy barricaded behind barbed wire and cement walls. I will gladly pay more in taxes to live in a more equitable society.

And if you've really been to those societies you'll realize that only in America can some1 come from the bottom and make it to the top. Our system is built on using your own talents. In Kenya a few families have it all and the rest live like paupers, in Brazil you better be of European descent. Again America is the greatest country in the world. Look at the immigrants that show up on our shores and "make it". Year after year, check out your local university you'll see them as TAs or researchers working so hard.

I'd take Switzerland and Finland over Brazil, Kenya, *or* the United States anyday. There are other choices besides Brazil or the United States, more equitable choices.

Switzerland huh? Only for the white. See you may enjoy Switzerland , but its a small closed homogeneous society that doesn't allow immigration. Have a great time. I'll take Jupiter Fl.

Do you really think our society's inequality stems from our diversity or our immigration laws? It is impossible to prevent greedy powerful people in a diverse country from stealing all the wealth for themselves (and making sure to only study in school things that will allow them to steal ... Harvard used to have a much much smaller fraction of its graduates go into investment banking) (and I'm not denying that stealing is hard work. It is very hard work and often in this country requires a fancy degree and long hours. But that doesn't mean it is not stealing). You think investment bankers and others in this country feel free to steal and look down on people who do labor for a living because most of these people are of a different race? and those in Switzerland do not feel this freedom because the people that actually assemble their watches and chocolate look like them?

PLease follow your own logic. You said you'd rather take CH over the USA. And I said I'd rather take the US because we're a large open society (the most open in the world) and one where I know that I don't have to grow up white to achieve even a middle class status. The only people who say "I'd rather live in ..." are middle to upper class whites that don't realize that for all its faults America is the best country in the world for people of all colors not just one color. ANd if you don't believe me ask a black child in your beloved France how it feels to grow up there.

[TheManWithAUsername]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Exactly. So this business of calling the $250k+ rich and taxing at the top brackets does not have historical basis, is a relatively new phenomenon, and has never been adjusted for today's dollars from the $1M in the 1930's, as is so often chirped in news bites or scribbled in op eds. That's my point: raise the top tax bracket through the roof, but go after the Buffet rich (Warren said they wouldn't mind the tax hike), not today's new "working wealthy."
I'm delighted that we're moving toward agreement. I would propose an increase in tax rates at $250K--not necessarily to 1982 levels (50%, $100K threshold), but steeper than for families that make only $100K (and another step to make the $50K rate yet smaller). But I'm with you on putting in an extra top rate for folks who are unbelievably wealthy.

Wow. That never happens on DCUM. Do you think we could arrange a beerfest with Barack and share our views? Let's add usernameman, too. He tries really hard (or he's smart but lazy; either way, he usually comes up with a point and his posts are grammatically correct).

I'm in. I'm of the tradition of buying drinks for anyone willing to pay me a little attention.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

It isn't fair that some people can pay for Amazon prime and some cannot. Perhaps those who can afford prime should pay for those who cannot or chose not to do so.

My spouse worked for Amazon for several years and we became wealthy as a direct result of Amazon's compensation. A friend of ours made $11 million one year at Amazon, and my spouse's boss makes several million a year from Amazon stock.

man! I'm jealous! I hope you paid your taxes

[Anonymous]

12:08 Ummmmm, I think the post you quoted was a joke.....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Until the 50% of America that is skating starts paying taxes the rates should stay at current levels.

Yeah, I often see the cleaning ladies and day laborers just skating by. Oh, there goes the Giant cashier.
Really, why chase after their "fair share" of less than $50,000?
Tax the uber wealthy. Warren Buffet says the rich won't mind. So I'd say $5,000,000 and above should pay at the highest tax rate. Now that would add up to something.

Indeed. We could tax the poor cleaning lady at 30% and we'd get peanuts. People who demand this are just religious, not practical. We can do it, but it won't change a thing. It will have no practical results that affect any of the problems we have. Requiring capital gains to be taxed at the same rate as other income, however, would have an effect and it is fair. Since it doesn't involve physical violence, calling it warfare is specious.

OK..so lets flesh this out. YOu now admit that most people don't pay any tax, and that the wealthy pay most of the tax in this country in income, they pay taxes in terms of investments, and they by virtue of employing people pay unemployment tax etc. SO they already pay the most but you want them to pay more.

[Anonymous]

12:08 Ummmmm, I think the post you quoted was a joke.....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:11:54 It isn't fair that some people can pay for Amazon prime and some cannot. Perhaps those who can afford prime should pay for those who cannot or chose not to do so.

I just did--I told you how to game the system, and help our good hosts out at the same time.