myiW Current Conditions and Forecasts Community Forums Buy and Sell Services
 
Hi guest · myAccount · Log in
 SearchSearch   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   RegisterRegister 
The pope on income re-distribution
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 15, 16, 17 ... 29, 30, 31  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Politics, Off-Topic, Opinions
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
feuser



Joined: 29 Oct 2002
Posts: 1508

PostPosted: Mon May 05, 2014 11:02 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

NW and Iso have articulated their ideological opposition to addressing income disparity.

You could argue with this on an ideological and moral basis, whether a CEO really puts in 354 times the effort or talent of the average worker, as their argument suggests.

On the other hand, literally every modern economist agrees that this accumulation of wealth is simply bad for the economy. People who sit on mountains of cash do not spend it, if they don't have to. The more the economy needs infusions of cash, the more capital is extracted from it by risk-averse investors.

Economically, the most effective way for getting capital back to flow into the economy is having an expiration date for capital: Use to or lose it. Of course, that's not going to happen, nor is it particularly desirable, since it would bring us back 200 years, to a barter economy, essentially.

There are only two legal ways to do achieve the same thing without doing too much damage: inflation and income taxation (not taxation of transactions, like the fair-taxers suggest - that would blow up in our faces). Both are at an all-time low, yet the mis-informed populist right keeps screaming how they're certain signs of impending doom.

_________________
florian - ny22

http://www.windsurfing.kasail.com/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mrgybe



Joined: 01 Jul 2008
Posts: 5181

PostPosted: Mon May 05, 2014 12:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

In 1980 the top 10% paid 47.6% of all income taxes. Today the top 10% pays 71% of all income taxes. How is that an all time low?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 17751
Location: Berkeley, California

PostPosted: Mon May 05, 2014 12:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The Christian and Catholic righties, who are quick to be righteous about minding everyone else's sexual behavior, seem to have forgotten this line of scripture, from Matthew:

Quote:
Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.


I think it is pretty much a sign of hypocrisy when they get so unnerved when the new Pope reminds them.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
swchandler



Joined: 08 Nov 1993
Posts: 10588

PostPosted: Mon May 05, 2014 1:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

No doubt boggsman, an interesting article. It agrees very much with what I see going on. In a desirable place like Santa Barbara, there's lots of action. High valued property, fancy cars and expensive luxuries. Prices are huge. Super strong rental market that's done nothing but benefit since the meltdown. Even the bottom of the home market here in SB is pricey, so you have to be doing pretty well to buy.

You have to ask yourself, what will be the nature of the jobs in the future as the global economy continues to devastate the manufacturing sector and other sources of middle class jobs. Also, although not mentioned in the article, there is the whole thing about illegal immigrants and their effect on everything. I can see why the folks with the power and the money don't want to change anything. Just look at the circus being conducted by the Republican party, and not a moment spent on anything productive for the nation.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
boggsman1



Joined: 24 Jun 2002
Posts: 9122
Location: at a computer

PostPosted: Mon May 05, 2014 1:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mrgybe wrote:
In 1980 the top 10% paid 47.6% of all income taxes. Today the top 10% pays 71% of all income taxes. How is that an all time low?

% of income paid in taxes, not total slice of the obligations. The reason that it is high (71%) is because the rich have ALL the money. PM of Jana just paid $147MM for pad in Hamptons. This certainly helps me, but not the overall population.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
pueno



Joined: 03 Mar 2007
Posts: 2807

PostPosted: Mon May 05, 2014 1:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mrgybe wrote:
In 1980 the top 10% paid 47.6% of all income taxes. Today the top 10% pays 71% of all income taxes. How is that an all time low?

That means that the income level of the top 10% has risen faster than the income of the bottom 90%, so they pay more in taxes, on a percentage basis than the bottom 90%.

But it also means that the top 10% are saving/banking a SH*TLOAD more than bottom 90% both in actual dollars and as a percentage.

Maybe it's accurate to say that it is an ethical low.


mac wrote:
The Christian and Catholic righties, who are quick to be righteous about minding everyone else's sexual behavior, seem to have forgotten this line of scripture, from Matthew:

Quote:
Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.


I think it is pretty much a sign of hypocrisy when they get so unnerved when the new Pope reminds them.

But..... can they make it to Kolob with their money and dancing horses?
.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mrgybe



Joined: 01 Jul 2008
Posts: 5181

PostPosted: Mon May 05, 2014 2:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

boggsman1 wrote:
% of income paid in taxes, not total slice of the obligations. The reason that it is high (71%) is because the rich have ALL the money. PM of Jana just paid $147MM for pad in Hamptons. This certainly helps me, but not the overall population.

The statement was made that income taxes at the upper income levels are at an all time low. That is not true on an absolute dollar basis or on a percentage of total taxes paid. Neither is it true to state that the payment of over 70% of income taxes by the top 10% does not help the general population. Of course it does.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
boggsman1



Joined: 24 Jun 2002
Posts: 9122
Location: at a computer

PostPosted: Mon May 05, 2014 2:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mr G , you're right, I've got to stop complaining, things couldnt better, I think I'll go buy another Audi with my Fed return......
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
pueno



Joined: 03 Mar 2007
Posts: 2807

PostPosted: Mon May 05, 2014 3:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mrgybe wrote:

The statement was made that income taxes at the upper income levels are at an all time low. That is not true on an absolute dollar basis or on a percentage of total taxes paid.

Which is why Mitt said that he thought he paid around "14, 14.5 percent," or so.

Yes indeed, he pays a far higher percentage rate than my 28%.

Must be that new math.
.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
nw30



Joined: 21 Dec 2008
Posts: 6485
Location: The eye of the universe, Cen. Cal. coast

PostPosted: Mon May 05, 2014 5:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

feuser wrote:


On the other hand, literally every modern economist agrees that this accumulation of wealth is simply bad for the economy. People who sit on mountains of cash do not spend it, if they don't have to.


"Literally every liberal modern economist agrees" is what you mean.

Why would the wealthy sit on their cash? That makes no sense.
Then they'd be living in one small modest house, and driving cheap cars.

But they don't do that, they have large mansions built, I said "built", they don't just appear or grow up out of the dirt. They have to employ many people to built those things and buy boat loads of materials in the process, all of which helps the economy. Same goes for their fleet of cars, somebody has to make them, and then the rich buy them, using money, lots of money.
They spend, and spend, spending is good, and it doesn't matter what they spend it on, spending is the life blood of the economy. So the more rich people we have spending on whatever, the better it is for everybody.
And it is not a zero sum game, where there is only a limited amount of money to go around. Growth produces new money.

That is what most conservative modern economist agrees on.
Economists are like climatologists, you have liberal ones, and conservative ones, and they both see things quite differently.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Politics, Off-Topic, Opinions All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 15, 16, 17 ... 29, 30, 31  Next
Page 16 of 31

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum

myiW | Weather | Community | Membership | Support | Log in
like us on facebook
© Copyright 1999-2007 WeatherFlow, Inc Contact Us Ad Marketplace

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group