LaxPower Back-Up Stick

Posted: **Tue Feb 12, 2019 10:01 am**

youthathletics wrote: ↑Tue Feb 12, 2019 9:45 am Hey, if we get there like many want, maybe all those stock market, accountants, investment bankers, etc will have to find work elsewhere....we could flip the script like in Trading Places

It is insane to want a person to be taxed on the $10,000,001th dollar more than the guy taxed on the $315,001th dollar.... particularly as the guy making $315,001 has to pay at a higher rate than the one making $165,000..... Let's see, $150,000 more in income and you pay a little bit more, but $10,000,0001 less 400,000 = $9,600,000 more and they pay at the same rate and you are defending those people? You either make $10,000,000+ a year or you are a sheep.

Posted: **Tue Feb 12, 2019 10:20 am**

What you explain below is pragmatic and clear, but what it does not account for is what cannot be measured. We have no way to actually measure how much the wealthy contribute to our global economic system. If you pull their money away from them, and most them that is all they care about, the aftermath of that has the potential to destroy small towns, donations for global charities, places of worship, food pantires, etc.

Why does everyone always want more and then when tey get a little more, they are still not happy, all that really matters is our time for others. If anyone needs help, it is already out there, period, full stop.

Posted: **Tue Feb 12, 2019 10:37 am**

youthathletics wrote: ↑Tue Feb 12, 2019 10:20 am What you explain below is pragmatic and clear, but what it does not account for is what cannot be measured. We have no way to actually measure how much the wealthy contribute to our global economic system. If you pull their money away from them, and most them that is all they care about, the aftermath of that has the potential to destroy small towns, donations for global charities, places of worship, food pantires, etc.

Why does everyone always want more and then when tey get a little more, they are still not happy, all that really matters is our time for others. If anyone needs help, it is already out there, period, full stop.

Brainwashed

Posted: **Tue Feb 12, 2019 10:48 am**

The wealth and income gap needs to be taken down, not because the super-rich are bums and avaricious aholes, they aren't, but because we have ingrained and normalized a system that says that it's OK to have this situation in lieu of a proper healthcare system, proper, safe infrastructure and a proper social safety net.

Less demonizing of individuals, more demonizing of a SYSTEM that we allow to perpetuate itself through special interest power, in all it's nefarious forms...

..

Posted: **Tue Feb 12, 2019 10:49 am**

youthathletics wrote: ↑Tue Feb 12, 2019 10:20 am What you explain below is pragmatic and clear, but what it does not account for is what cannot be measured. We have no way to actually measure how much the wealthy contribute to our global economic system. If you pull their money away from them, and most them that is all they care about, the aftermath of that has the potential to destroy small towns, donations for global charities, places of worship, food pantires, etc.

Why does everyone always want more and then when tey get a little more, they are still not happy, all that really matters is our time for others. If anyone needs help, it is already out there, period, full stop.

The thing is, we've already tried extremely high taxes on the wealthy before. Our economy was booming, income inequality was at its lowest in the past century and a half or longer, small towns weren't dying like they are today, we were doing big bold things as a nation like building the interstate system, trying to send men to the moon and more.

I'm not saying high taxes will cause us to have a perfect country, but they certainly didn't hurt us the last time we had them.

Posted: **Tue Feb 12, 2019 11:04 am**

Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Tue Feb 12, 2019 10:37 am
youthathletics wrote: ↑Tue Feb 12, 2019 10:20 am What you explain below is pragmatic and clear, but what it does not account for is what cannot be measured. We have no way to actually measure how much the wealthy contribute to our global economic system. If you pull their money away from them, and most them that is all they care about, the aftermath of that has the potential to destroy small towns, donations for global charities, places of worship, food pantires, etc.

Why does everyone always want more and then when tey get a little more, they are still not happy, all that really matters is our time for others. If anyone needs help, it is already out there, period, full stop.
Brainwashed

Do you have a link to prove that?

Posted: **Tue Feb 12, 2019 11:08 am**

youthathletics wrote: ↑Tue Feb 12, 2019 10:20 am What you explain below is pragmatic and clear, but what it does not account for is what cannot be measured. We have no way to actually measure how much the wealthy contribute to our global economic system. If you pull their money away from them, and most them that is all they care about, the aftermath of that has the potential to destroy small towns, donations for global charities, places of worship, food pantires, etc.

Why does everyone always want more and then when tey get a little more, they are still not happy, all that really matters is our time for others. If anyone needs help, it is already out there, period, full stop.

You are spot on, the very rich (most) really only care about the score...how much do they have compared to the other guy.

Posted: **Tue Feb 12, 2019 11:22 am**

youthathletics wrote: ↑Tue Feb 12, 2019 11:04 am
Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Tue Feb 12, 2019 10:37 am
youthathletics wrote: ↑Tue Feb 12, 2019 10:20 am What you explain below is pragmatic and clear, but what it does not account for is what cannot be measured. We have no way to actually measure how much the wealthy contribute to our global economic system. If you pull their money away from them, and most them that is all they care about, the aftermath of that has the potential to destroy small towns, donations for global charities, places of worship, food pantires, etc.

Why does everyone always want more and then when tey get a little more, they are still not happy, all that really matters is our time for others. If anyone needs help, it is already out there, period, full stop.
Brainwashed
Do you have a link to prove that?

Even better....a quote!

What you explain below is pragmatic and clear, but what it does not account for is what cannot be measured. We have no way to actually measure how much the wealthy contribute to our global economic system. If you pull their money away from them, and most them that is all they care about, the aftermath of that has the potential to destroy small towns, donations for global charities, places of worship, food pantires, etc.

Change of topic.....I heard your team looks good. Drexel parent told me.

Posted: **Tue Feb 12, 2019 11:24 am**

That we glorify these people, that they have somehow become gods of capitalism, is near the heart of the problem. Good for them. Chances are they took advantage of SOME sort of lever or mechanism not available to the roughhewn regular Joes out here, to break out above the clouds into the realm of the hyper-rich. Again, it's not so much about the individuals, or demonizing them, it's more about (or perhaps SHOULD be more about) how we as a society deify these people and make it OK to be hyper-rich at the expense of 99% of the rest of us.

"You Didn't Build That"

..

Posted: **Tue Feb 12, 2019 11:37 am**

Nice reply TLD.

Posted: **Tue Feb 12, 2019 11:38 am**

youthathletics wrote: ↑Tue Feb 12, 2019 11:37 am Nice reply TLD.

Posted: **Tue Feb 12, 2019 11:46 am**

foreverlax wrote: ↑Tue Feb 12, 2019 9:24 am Wonder what that number would be if you didn't cap FICA taxes in the mid $120's? Why should 90% of the working population have to pay FICA on 100% of their income, while the Gary Cohen's of the world don't?

Average American makes $62k and pays $3800 in FICA = 6.2%

Gary makes $22,000,000 and pays $8k n FICA = .0366%

Talk about socialism and welfare.

Because FICA are insurance premiums, not income taxes.

They're capped so that (on average) the insured gets back approx what they paid in.

Posted: **Tue Feb 12, 2019 12:03 pm**

old salt wrote: ↑Tue Feb 12, 2019 11:46 am
foreverlax wrote: ↑Tue Feb 12, 2019 9:24 am Wonder what that number would be if you didn't cap FICA taxes in the mid $120's? Why should 90% of the working population have to pay FICA on 100% of their income, while the Gary Cohen's of the world don't?

Average American makes $62k and pays $3800 in FICA = 6.2%

Gary makes $22,000,000 and pays $8k n FICA = .0366%

Talk about socialism and welfare.
Because FICA are insurance premiums, not income taxes.

They're capped so that (on average) the insured gets back approx what they paid in.

Then means test S.S.....it was never intended for guys like GC.

Posted: **Tue Feb 12, 2019 12:04 pm**

dislaxxic wrote: ↑Tue Feb 12, 2019 10:48 am The wealth and income gap needs to be taken down, not because the super-rich are bums and avaricious aholes, they aren't, but because we have ingrained and normalized a system that says that it's OK to have this situation in lieu of a proper healthcare system, proper, safe infrastructure and a proper social safety net.

Less demonizing of individuals, more demonizing of a SYSTEM that we allow to perpetuate itself through special interest power, in all it's nefarious forms...

..

Let us reform that system for the better by eliminating all foreign tax havens and by returning that capital back where it belongs - here in the USA. That will spur the economy, eliminate the debt, and finance all the reforms we need.

Posted: **Tue Feb 12, 2019 1:25 pm**

foreverlax wrote: ↑Tue Feb 12, 2019 12:03 pm
old salt wrote: ↑Tue Feb 12, 2019 11:46 am
foreverlax wrote: ↑Tue Feb 12, 2019 9:24 am Wonder what that number would be if you didn't cap FICA taxes in the mid $120's? Why should 90% of the working population have to pay FICA on 100% of their income, while the Gary Cohen's of the world don't?

Average American makes $62k and pays $3800 in FICA = 6.2%

Gary makes $22,000,000 and pays $8k n FICA = .0366%

Talk about socialism and welfare.
Because FICA are insurance premiums, not income taxes.

They're capped so that (on average) the insured gets back approx what they paid in.
Then means test S.S.....it was never intended for guys like GC.

There aren't enough guys like GC to matter. Need to go for a larger pool of SS recipients.

Come up with an incentive to defer receiving SS benefits unless/until actually needed, carried forward w/interest as a personal rainy day fund.

Posted: **Tue Feb 12, 2019 1:53 pm**

You guys do realize that the money from "the rich" already goes into our economy, right? They spend, invest, give it away, whatever, but it already goes into the cycle. Taxing it only changes what is done with it and who decides what is done with it. It doesn't make the proverbial pie any bigger. It will buy votes though, and that is what the pols are after.

Posted: **Tue Feb 12, 2019 1:56 pm**

old salt wrote: ↑Tue Feb 12, 2019 1:25 pm
foreverlax wrote: ↑Tue Feb 12, 2019 12:03 pm
old salt wrote: ↑Tue Feb 12, 2019 11:46 am
foreverlax wrote: ↑Tue Feb 12, 2019 9:24 am Wonder what that number would be if you didn't cap FICA taxes in the mid $120's? Why should 90% of the working population have to pay FICA on 100% of their income, while the Gary Cohen's of the world don't?

Average American makes $62k and pays $3800 in FICA = 6.2%

Gary makes $22,000,000 and pays $8k n FICA = .0366%

Talk about socialism and welfare.
Because FICA are insurance premiums, not income taxes.

They're capped so that (on average) the insured gets back approx what they paid in.
Then means test S.S.....it was never intended for guys like GC.
There aren't enough guys like GC to matter. Need to go for a larger pool of SS recipients.

Come up with an incentive to defer receiving SS benefits unless/until actually needed, carried forward w/interest as a personal rainy day fund.

GC was to make the point....the top 10% of income earners are getting are getting a free ride, which back in '16 was over 14 million tax returns.

https://taxfoundation.org/summary-lates ... 16-update/

Posted: **Tue Feb 12, 2019 2:07 pm**

frmanfan wrote: ↑Tue Feb 12, 2019 1:53 pm You guys do realize that the money from "the rich" already goes into our economy, right? They spend, invest, give it away, whatever, but it already goes into the cycle. Taxing it only changes what is done with it and who decides what is done with it. It doesn't make the proverbial pie any bigger. It will buy votes though, and that is what the pols are after.

You're just fine with the wealth and income gap we have today then, no problem there...?

..

Posted: **Tue Feb 12, 2019 2:26 pm**

6ftstick wrote: ↑Tue Feb 12, 2019 7:33 am Heres a couple definitions of socialism MOST people use
1—any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods

2—a system of society or group living in which there is no private property

Libraries? Parks?

Yes. Libraries and parks. Owned and managed by the government. As per your first definition----distribution of goods (books).

As per definition two----buying land and using it for a public park.

But if you're telling me that these two things aren't socialism, and Medicare, State Universities, etc. aren't socialism.

So either way, what's the problem? No one is calling for getting rid of private property. And you don't seem to think what we are doing now is socialism.

So you're all set!!

Posted: **Tue Feb 12, 2019 2:32 pm**

frmanfan wrote: ↑Tue Feb 12, 2019 1:53 pm You guys do realize that the money from "the rich" already goes into our economy, right? They spend, invest, give it away, whatever, but it already goes into the cycle. Taxing it only changes what is done with it and who decides what is done with it. It doesn't make the proverbial pie any bigger. It will buy votes though, and that is what the pols are after.

a 2% increase to the marginal tax rate on a guy making $5,000,000+ dollars a year and another 2% on the $10,000,0001st dollar should not make or break anyone. Seems "fair" given the what the people pay on their first $500,000 in income.

LaxPower Back-Up Stick

Progressive Ideology

Re: Progressive Ideology

Re: Progressive Ideology

Re: Progressive Ideology

Re: Progressive Ideology

Re: Progressive Ideology

Re: Progressive Ideology

Re: Progressive Ideology

Re: Progressive Ideology

Re: Progressive Ideology

Re: Progressive Ideology

Re: Progressive Ideology

Re: Progressive Ideology

Re: Progressive Ideology

Re: Progressive Ideology

Re: Progressive Ideology

Re: Progressive Ideology

Re: Progressive Ideology

Re: Progressive Ideology

Re: Progressive Ideology

Re: Progressive Ideology