60% approve of 70% top tax rate - Lets do it !

You know that the skilled labor market is desperate for union members right? Electricians, plumbers, carpenters. There is a massive shortfall in employees who START at 75k or more.

They cant show up to work reliably. Cant pass a drug test, or cant pass the basic examination or have a GED.

We are talking hundreds of thousands of jobs.

https://www.google.com/search?q=ski...droid-verizon&sourceid=chrome-mobile&ie=UTF-8

Sorry... not everything is the result of "greedy executives".

How many other jobs are being taken or wages Surpressed by illegal immigrants?

People are entitled, and expect to make $75k with little personal responsibility or marketability

 

So you too believe that you have some right to my wealth and the fruits of my labor. Please explain to me what gives you that right... without all the personal insults screaming of desperation.

 

Bollocks. I don't have to relate "income to labor". It is there for the eye to see in the data analytics of GDP.

Moreover, Picketty's info-graphic is demonstrably clear:

The top 10% are obtaining almost half of the total Income generated in the US. Anyone who does not think that is a humongous "rip-off" is a damn fool ...

 

So, the end goal is what? Everybody makes the same amount? Everybody is only able to gain a certain level of wealth?

 

The "end-goal" we live every day as is.

What must be changed is upper-income taxation that is vastly unfair. Nobody should be allowed to obtain such amounts and then pass it on effortlessly to whomever who never worked a day in their lives to earn it.

It is a matter of "proportions", that is, "who gets how much". And the upper-income taxation should be prohibitive at above the 90% level (where it once was in the 1950s - see here) before Reckless Ronnie did away with those rates.

Nobody saw the the monstrous tidal wave of Wealth that would be obtained by a select few as a result? How amazing for a country where 40 million men, women and children must live daily below the poverty-threshold ... !

 

You are telling me that when the majority approve of something, we should do it? Glad our founders didn't set up a democracy in this country to allow for the oppression of the majority over the minority. Wonder if you would be ok if the majority said we should have slavery or Jim Crow laws or stripping the sufferage ability of a minority group of people?

 

So the person who earned money shouldn't be allowed to pass it along to their kids, even if the kids have worked hard in education and knowledge of running a company to keep that company going because "reasons"? Vast wealth can be lost in the family if the kids are ill prepared to handle and manage the wealth. Its not a guarantee like with the monarchs who were also passed down an army to which they could use to go confiscate more wealth if they depleted what was passed down. Just cause your parents didn't work or invent something that they could give you an inheritance, doesn't mean your jealousy should factor into stealing from families where they improved the lives of thousands, if not millions of people.

A number in which no one actually paid those rates.

Because of choices they made themselves. Do you think everyone born into wealth stays wealthy their whole lives? Do you think everyone born poor stays below poverty earnings their whole lives? Doing just the minimum raises 92% of people out of poverty. The minimum is graduating high school. Working full time, at any job. And not having kids out of wedlock.

That is the minimum because everyone is provided high school education. Full time jobs is a very minimal standard to meet, sorry but you will be poor if you don't work as much as most of the rest of the population. And Kids are expensive, NOT having one will save you money and time that you can focus back into yourself to get a head at your job. And it makes it easier to raise a kid if you have a spouse who can help out as well instead of being the sole person to provide income to the house AND taking off work when the kid gets sick.

 

So what's the point? You aren't interested in solving any problems, or addressing poverty. What you desire is punitive tax policies on the rich for no other reason that you simply think they shouldn't have so much.

That's it.

Your entire premise and agenda is driven by fairness, in that you think somebody shouldn't have something?

Seriously?

Why? Because you didn't have somebody to hand off wealth to you? I have a news flash, most people work to provide for their kids. Be that in the present, like food and shelter, in the near future like college, or long term.

Some people are born into wealth. Some have higher IQs. Some are natural athletes. None of which affects you and your life.

Your entire motivation is driven by jealousy and envy. You want to instill your version of fairness because simply you are jealous of what they have even though it doesn't impact you.

Nobody is living below the poverty line because somebody else is wealthy.

You ARE expressing a goal here. Solving poverty by confiscation of wealth.

That is the end game. You know it, I know it, everybody knows it.

Let's start being honest about your intentions.

 

Bonuses are taxed.

 

Why do you deserve to pay less of a percentage?
Are you special?
Do you use the roads to a lesser percentage?
Do your kids get fewer hours with their teachers?
Does the fire department put out a smaller percentage of your house fire?

 

Wrong again.

My recipe for the US is that it STOP NOW wasting nearly half the Discretionary Budget on the DoD, when there is no real apparent or immediate external threat to the US. The real threat is "internal".

The Discretionary Budget should be spent - as it is in Europe - on two essential life-support items:
*A National Healthcare System* for all and sundry, as well as
*Free post-secondary education**, just as there is today free secondary-schooling across the nation.

Let's implement both of the above programs (along with aggressive income-taxation of the super-rich to fund them) and we shall see - having made the necessary investments - in the short period of about a decade how much better a place the US can be ...

*I live in France and pay a modest $28 to visit a doctor, which is reimbursed to me. If further intervention is necessary, the French National Health System repays 85% of the cost and other private insurance ($75 per month) pays the rest.
**My children went to both to university for a tuition-fee (in euros) of around $1000 per school-year, compared to the prohibitive $11K in a typical US state-funded post-secondary institution.

 

Okay France did this awhile ago, the ones affected largely left the country many repatriating in French Speaking Monaco which has no personal income taxes and if I was wealthy enough to have say a investments bringing in a good income in dividends say $15 million I would repatriate to a tax haven buying citizenship to an island nation and with low personal income taxes expected. So what is going to happen if the wealthy affected who are mobile and have their income in investments in offshore brokerage houses just decide to go? You go up to income taxes of 90% if you're a billionaire then just popping off to Monaco makes a lot of sense and become a citizen there as an example.

 

You want the wrong thing taxed.

https://fairtax.org/about/how-fairt...0QozgYH0036g-PMg6FByu1_zmQzxsPfEaAi-hEALw_wcB

 

That sums up a major reason why taxing incomes is wrong, the path to forcing away humans and companies.
https://fairtax.org/about/how-fairt...0QozgYH0036g-PMg6FByu1_zmQzxsPfEaAi-hEALw_wcB

 

Yet another good reason why post-secondary state-schooling should be available free, gratis and for nothing!

What the minimum should be - and which you patently fail to understand - is that tertiary-education should be EXACTLY LIKE secondary-schooling. FREE, GRATIS & FOR NOTHING.

We have left the Industrial Age and are well within the Information Age that will require of all citizens a higher-level of education that should be funded by the US government. (Instead of wasting nearly 50% of the Discretionary Budget on the DoD!*)

*And if you do not believe that fact, then see it here: US Discretionary Spending Pie-chart

 

Yes! THAT is (right or wrong) the foundational rock upon which any solid democracy is constructed!

The only secondary condition that prevails is that a people know how the government should spend its budget - and not waste half of it on the DoD at a time of relative world-peace ... !

 

Taxing incomes in order to fund various services of a national government is VERY COMMON throughout the world. Only the US dumps nearly half its Federal Discretionary Budget into Defense Expenditures!

It is done to assure that a maximum of people enjoy basic services, like a National Healthcare System and National Tertiary Education. In both instances, of health and education, by most standards the US is behind Europe. (For instance, my life span in France with its National Health Care System is four years longer than yours in the US. And, France spends less than 2% of its GDP on the French military whilst the US is almost twice as much.)

Both Healthcare and Tertiary Education are the cornerstone expenditures of any truly advanced nation on earth ...

 

France expatriated French-nationals (along with Algerian-arabs who fought it its army) when Algeria became a nation. Most were not the least bit wealthy and the rich in Monaco are mostly not French but other nationalities.)

All the rest above is blah, blah, blah. Offshore held income - if you are a EU national - is taxable! Try avoiding taxation of wealth held abroad and see for yourself. (Unless of course you are not an EU citizen.) And Americans living in Europe and earn above $100K a year must pay DUAL TAXATION, first in their country of residence and then in the US!)

 

If you are a French-national living in Monaco, you can bet-your-bippy that you will be paying French income-taxation.

From here:

 

You need a quick course in English to rebut in this Debate Forum.

I have stipulated amply in this forum that what America needs is to copy two key features of National Investment:
*A National Healthcare Insurance scheme to increase life-span of its constituents, and
*Free Tertiary Education to all students graduating from High-School.

Those two provisions would enhance greatly the American standard-of-living ...

 

Most "kids" whose parents own companies here in Europe end-up either running the company or selling their ownership. In either circumstance, they are very rich indeed.

The only difference with the US is that taxation eats far more Income in Europe (and therefore less per-capita Wealth occurs) than in the US ...

 

Why should wealthy people or small businesses pay 70% when so many don't even pay $1.00 in income tax?

 

Out of a sense of common fairness.

Or perhaps you don't understand what "fairness" means?

The US has become besotted with the notion of Wealth Accumulation, and IT DOES NOT UNDERSTAND that such happens despite the fact that 14% of the population is incarcerated below the Poverty Threshold. And the only way out is to remain alive by obtaining adequate Healthcare and a Tertiary Education with which to find a decent job.

Otherwise one is condemned to a miserable existence in the US.

The 40 million of men, women and children eking out a living below the Poverty Threshold are far more important than the 10-percenters who have benefited from ultra-low taxation in order to hoard millions (if not billions) of dollars.

And if the 40-million ever were to get their "political act" together, the 10-percenters will be a lot less wealthy.

Yes! An inheritance tax of 85% would do wonders for the American people in general ... !

 

Do you live in America?

 

It's even more ludicrous that you need to lie to make your points? There is NO "100s trillions of dollars of YOUR money in offshore accounts". That amount does not exist! It is NOT your money!

How can you be so naive to believe you can force 'others' to pay exorbitant tax rates and they will simply do what you wish? You need to read about 'diminishing returns'!

You whine about offshore accounts, which those that exist are there to avoid taxes, then you want to demand even more taxes?

Our government does not need more money from any taxpayer! Our government has a spending problem which you ignore here. Why don't you care about the 100+ million American citizens who pay little to no federal taxes? They make huge demands on government but don't pay? Why are you fixated on 70%...what's wrong with 30% or 40% or 50%...all these amounts chosen solely for political purposes!

I think wealthier people can pay more but not like this linch-mob mentality. How about asking those above a certain amount of income to pay 5% directly to public education, 5% directly to infrastructure, 5% directly to ping-pong tables...the point being don't give more money to the federal government to squander on stuff that does not directly benefit a majority of Americans.