Anonymous wrote:Why should I pay 39.5% of my income because, well, I have it? 50% of Americans pay no federal income tax at all.
If the feds want the dual income professionals to have one spouse SAH, raising taxes is an awesome way to do it.
Anonymous wrote:Why should I pay 39.5% of my income because, well, I have it? 50% of Americans pay no federal income tax at all.
If the feds want the dual income professionals to have one spouse SAH, raising taxes is an awesome way to do it.
Anonymous wrote:I think there is class warfare against the rich and ultimately it is going to stifle productivity. If you are constantly vilified for your success and there is a constant cry for your wealth to be redistributed, what is the incentive to succeed--so that someone who chose differently can reap the fruits of your labor?
Anonymous wrote:
I just saw this in the other S/O thread.
I posted there, but my plumber charges over $100/hour. That might be on the pricey side, but I'd be hard pressed to find a plumber (a good one) who charges less than $75/hour. That is definitely more than what I make, with my graduate degree.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote: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?
NP. I agree. Although the plumber/trash collector/teacher has less schooling and should make less, its an issue of how much of a difference.
From wikipedia...
Just about every socio-economic indicator shows that the distribution of income in the United States is becoming increasingly unequal. In 2010, the top 20% of Americans earned 49.4% of the nation’s income, compared with the 3.4% earned by the roughly 15% of the population living below the poverty line. This earnings ratio of 14.5 to 1 was an increase from the 13.6 to 1 ratio in 2008 and a significant rise from the historic low of 7.69 to 1 in 1968. Looking back even further to 1915, an era in which the Rockefellers and Carnegies dominated American industry, the richest 1% of Americans earned roughly 18% of all income. Today, the top 1% account for 24% of all income.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_inequality_in_the_United_States
Anonymous wrote:Teachers, plumbers and trash collectors have less schooling . . . And they're all in the same category.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote: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?
NP. I agree. Although the plumber/trash collector/teacher has less schooling and should make less, its an issue of how much of a difference.
From wikipedia...
Just about every socio-economic indicator shows that the distribution of income in the United States is becoming increasingly unequal. In 2010, the top 20% of Americans earned 49.4% of the nation’s income, compared with the 3.4% earned by the roughly 15% of the population living below the poverty line. This earnings ratio of 14.5 to 1 was an increase from the 13.6 to 1 ratio in 2008 and a significant rise from the historic low of 7.69 to 1 in 1968. Looking back even further to 1915, an era in which the Rockefellers and Carnegies dominated American industry, the richest 1% of Americans earned roughly 18% of all income. Today, the top 1% account for 24% of all income.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_inequality_in_the_United_States
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote: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?
NP. I agree. Although the plumber/trash collector/teacher has less schooling and should make less, its an issue of how much of a difference.
From wikipedia...
Just about every socio-economic indicator shows that the distribution of income in the United States is becoming increasingly unequal. In 2010, the top 20% of Americans earned 49.4% of the nation’s income, compared with the 3.4% earned by the roughly 15% of the population living below the poverty line. This earnings ratio of 14.5 to 1 was an increase from the 13.6 to 1 ratio in 2008 and a significant rise from the historic low of 7.69 to 1 in 1968. Looking back even further to 1915, an era in which the Rockefellers and Carnegies dominated American industry, the richest 1% of Americans earned roughly 18% of all income. Today, the top 1% account for 24% of all income.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_inequality_in_the_United_States
Anonymous wrote:NP. I agree. Although the plumber/trash collector/teacher has less schooling and should make less, its an issue of how much of a difference.
From wikipedia...
Just about every socio-economic indicator shows that the distribution of income in the United States is becoming increasingly unequal. In 2010, the top 20% of Americans earned 49.4% of the nation’s income, compared with the 3.4% earned by the roughly 15% of the population living below the poverty line. This earnings ratio of 14.5 to 1 was an increase from the 13.6 to 1 ratio in 2008 and a significant rise from the historic low of 7.69 to 1 in 1968. Looking back even further to 1915, an era in which the Rockefellers and Carnegies dominated American industry, the richest 1% of Americans earned roughly 18% of all income. Today, the top 1% account for 24% of all income.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_inequality_in_the_United_States
Anonymous wrote:10:06 I have worked in the private sector and for the federal government. From my experience, the vast majority of federal workers (at least in my prior agency) were grossly overpaid. The work habits and work product would never cut it in the private sector. Our tax dollars used to "create jobs" that would be unsustainable in the private sector.
Anonymous wrote: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 wrote:Where is the million dollar home thread, OP? Pleaze post.