patrick.net

Call it Crazy says

Here's the TRUE view of Tat's socialist liberal utopia... If it was up to him, 100% of the population would be in the second column!!

No.

The politicians only need a simple majority to elect them. They also need the rest of us to pay off those voters.

Democrats and Republicans have that in common and just disagree over who gets the hand-outs and what minority gets squeezed.

43's middle-class tax cuts moved America's tax system from second place to most progressive (ratio of tax to income shares for the top earning decile) in the OECD 24 including Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, The Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Korea, Luxembourg, The Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, The Slovak Republic, Sweden, Switzerland, and The United Kingdom.

lostand confused says

Hating the 1% has been a major theme in the far left of our country.

See--that's where you're wrong. As others on here have pointed out, the 1% has many Dems in it. What the left hates is the current political policies that lead to increased wealth disparity.

lostand confused says

Inequality is already there-but this whole theme of the 1% has been around for too long.

Of course--there will always be inequality. But not at the current ridiculously high levels. It hasn't been this high since the late 1920s--and we all know how that ended.

lostand confused says

They are not the cause, but the symptom. When one can erect a factory in China/whatever hellhole , import goods with no barriers to entry and even get tax benefits for that-well factory owner will do just that. Once one does and undercuts the price-others will be forced to follow or shut down. The owners now are richer and the middle class former workers are now poorer-along with all the supporting industries/businesses. That is not something that the rich did-but the gubmnt -who is supposed to look out for all of us.

Of course. That's why we have to elect more liberals. Free trade is a VERY Republican ideal. Not exclusively, obviously, but if you look at who votes against the free trade deals, it's usually liberals.

So, you're basically arguing Obama isn't liberal enough.

drew_eckhardt says

43's middle-class tax cuts moved America's tax system from second place to most progressive (ratio of tax to income shares for the top earning decile) in the OECD 24 including Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, The Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Korea, Luxembourg, The Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, The Slovak Republic, Sweden, Switzerland, and The United Kingdom.

That's a symptom of income/wealth inequality--not tax structure.

When 1% of the people have 30% of the money, obviously most of the taxes MUST come from those people. You can't bleed a turnip.

lostand confused says

Hating the 1% has been a major theme in the far left of our country. That is going to spread-from 1% to the 40% is not a stretch.

YEs it is. It's an absurd stretch. IT's totally nonsensical gibberish.

The very fact that you would say something as stupid as "the far left: (that's my favorite part) "hates" the 1%, shows how out of touch you are, and paints you as a right wing defender of the unfair preferential treatment the 1% feels entitled to.

I don't hate the 1%. I just think they should be taxed more, as do some 1%ers.

Look, I guess in your warped view of reality I'm far left. But newsflash: I do not like the idea of taxing all college savings accounts. I have a big problem with it. Opening the subject for discussion though ? I don't have a problem with that. And yes, the idea that this is a slippery slope, to even consider it ? Wtf man ? Is your name Koch ?

MAybe even a far right wing defender of the interests of super-rich and corpations such as yourself can see that it's just one more tax break for some. For example, the 1% folks. They already get tax breaks on real estate, and on IRAs and 401Ks or other vehicles for which they can sock money away lowering their taxable income and which grow in value tax free. And even on their other capital gains, they are not taxed nearly as high as income.

The 529 savings accounts not only grow tax free, but the gains are not taxed when spent on college. This is quite a deal, and not something I would want to see taken away from the middle class. But the truth is, that for some, this is just another place to put money and have it grow tax free.

Within rich communities, the people that are set for life, even if they don't work ? For those people they or their parents can afford to put enough away for a child at the time of the childs birth that it will grow to more than pay for a 50K per year college funding.

THat's not who the 529 benefits were even intended for. So I think discussing taxing that growth for people with a net worth above a certain level makes a lot of sense. Maybe they could put the cut off at 1.5 million in net worth above housing equty or above 3 million including housing equity.

It's worth discussing.

marcus says

Hating the 1% has been a major theme in the far left of our country. That is going to spread-from 1% to the 40% is not a stretch.

YEs it is. IT's totally nonsensical gibberish.

The very fact that you would say something as stupid as "the far left: (that's my favorite part) "hates" the 1%, show how out of touch you are, and paints you as a right wing defender of the unfair preferential treatment the 1% feels entitled to.

I don't hate the 1%. I just think they should be taxed more, as do some 1%ers.

LOL, who was talking about you? But if the badge fits -LOL

WEll, there is no far left in this country, to speak of. So yes, as a typical Obama hater, who makes outlandish statements implying he is far left, and who talk about a slippery slope of what we should fear the far left doing, of course I assume you also place me in that non existent grouping.

Only a right wing moron who soaks up every stupid bit of propaganda from the far right (which very much does exist) could buy in to the idea that there even is a far left in this country (to speak of).

marcus says

WEll, there is no far left in this country, to speak of

marcus says

Only a right wing moron who soaks up every stupid bit of propaganda from the far right (which very much does exist) could buy in to the idea that there even is a far left in this country (to speak of).

Would this be you marcus??

tatupu70 says

When 1% of the people have 30% of the money, obviously most of the taxes MUST come from those people. You can't bleed a turnip.

1% of the people only have 18.7% of the income and it's not enough to make the rest of our lives better.

Increasing their effective tax rate to 90% (total, not marginal) and redistributing the excess among the rest of us wouldn't give each of us an extra $300 a month.

$1,555,701M income circa 2011 * (.9 - .235 current effective rate) / (.99 * 310M total population) = $3370 annually / 12 months = $281.

To really have an impact you have to reach much farther like they do elsewhere.

In the UK everyone pays a 20% VAT. People with over $48K USD in taxable income pay a 40% marginal tax rate, with no break for married filing jointly.

drew_eckhardt says

1% of the people only have 18.7% of the income and it's not enough to make the rest of our lives better.

What you're missing is, that it isn't a simple matter of redistributing income. It's putting the breaks on a current system that rapidly increases the gap between the obscenely wealthy and the regular working folks.

And that in turn has multiple bad affects. One of the worst is that it increases the political dysfunction in this country, as it becomes harder and harder to define what's best for us all. How do we figure out what's best for us all, and get what's best for us all, when the levers of government are controlled by an entitled super rich minority and corporations ?

lostand confused says

Would this be you marcus??

Keep in mind, I said there is no far left. I didn't say there is no constituancy for a far left if it did exist. What Bernie Sanders ? Maybe a few others.

You're doing a good job of living down to my perception of your feeble intelligence.

marcus says

drew_eckhardt says

1% of the people only have 18.7% of the income and it's not enough to make the rest of our lives better.

What you're missing is, that it isn't a simple matter of redistributing income. It's putting the breaks on a current system that rapidly increases the gap between the obscenely wealthy and the grunt workers.

I'm not missing anything, just ignoring the political spin and looking at the actual arithmetic which does not add up.

There are too few "obscenely wealthy" and too many "grunt workers" for the wealthy's share to make a real difference.

To use the common vilified CEO example -

McDonald's CEO took home $9.5M in 2013 which is a lot compared to a minimum wage worker's earnings; although divided by McDonald's 440,000 employees it's $22 a year. With half-time workers that's at most $0.02 an hour, and a 0.2% raise from the US Federal minimum wage.

It just doesn't matter.

And that in turn has multiple bad affects. One of the worst is that it increases the political dysfunction in this country, as it becomes harder and harder to define what's best for us all. How do we figure out what's best for us all, and get what's best for us all, when the levers of government are controlled by an entitled super rich majority and corporations ?

Regardless of what income share they retain, the corporations and wealthy are going to control our government as long as we have first-past-the-post elections with geographic districts making it impossible to incrementally move away from the status quo.

marcus says

lostand confused says

Would this be you marcus??

Keep in mind, I said there is no far left. I didn't say there is no constituancy for a far left if it did exist. What Bernie Sanders ? Maybe a few others.

You're doing a good job of living down to my perception of your feeble intelligence.

I really feel sorry for the kids you teach. This is why teachers and professors should have no tenure. Kids need people who can challenge them and allow them to think-not one dimensional automatons like you. A broken record will work just fine.

There should be hate crimes laws against criticizing the wealthy - they deserve our sympathy and prayers.

drew_eckhardt says

1% of the people only have 18.7% of the income and it's not enough to make the rest of our lives better.

I was talking wealth, not income. And please post your source because many of them don't include passive income.

drew_eckhardt says

There are too few "obscenely wealthy" and too many "grunt workers" for the wealthy's share to make a real difference.

You don't need "many" when they are so incredibly wealthy. I'm not sure you grasp how much wealth the 1% really controls or you wouldn't make that statement.

drew_eckhardt says

McDonald's CEO took home $9.5M in 2013 which is a lot compared to a minimum wage worker's earnings; although divided by McDonald's 440,000 employees it's $22 a year. With half-time workers that's at most $0.02 an hour, and a 0.2% raise from the US Federal minimum wage.

Funny you should mention Mr. Thompson-he took a pay cut of 4.5MM last year. And how much did he pay in taxes on that $9.5MM? In any event, do the same analysis using all the top executives and you'll get a different result.

lostand confused says

I really feel sorry for the kids you teach

Another sorry ass excuse for a republican asshole who says he feels sorry for the kids I teach. So, that's the best way you can think to express your hatred for me, and what a low level excuse for a human you are ? Why ? Simply because I have a hard time dealing with this kind of disgusting slippery slope nonsense ?

marcus says

lostand confused says

Hating the 1% has been a major theme in the far left of our country. That is going to spread-from 1% to the 40% is not a stretch.

What ? You didn't think your asshole credentials had been validated yet ? OR you feared that there were still people on this forum that thought you had an IQ over 85 ?

I teach Mathematics. Mathematics is about logic and truth (given certain primitive axioms, and definitions we accept). You want to suggest that I'm not capable of helping students progress with their Math or point them towards interesting insights, just because I"m not an extremist right wing asshole ?

If I make a mistake with my teaching, it could be a simple arithmetic mistake, or an error writing down one thing wrong, but that would show itself quickly. And it's Math. I don't hold on to being wrong with Math. I can't. In fact, when it happens, I have to set an example of being wrong gracefully. It's usually over a silly error. But sometimes over something bigger, like making incorrect assumptions or taking a less than optimal or elegant approach to a problem that students want me to do. I have to admit I'm wrong very quickly when I am. And it happens occasionally, usually over silly sort of syntactical mistakes. But in those situations, I'm only modeling for kids what it is to do Mathematics. Occasionally one is barking up the wrong tree and it's okay to be wrong. That's part of problem solving. As long as one figures that out and finds a correct, or in some cases just nicer approach.

(I"m talking about high level (AP) courses - not Algebra, or Geometry)

In Math, just like in my previous life as a trader in the pits in Chicago, I have to admit when I'm wrong. One can't afford to let their ego attached when they are wrong, because that would just make it worse. Besides, as a matter of pride, I always want students to know that I found a nicer way to show them. OR in the case of trading, there's money on the lines. One can not afford the luxury of allowing their pride or ego attach them to a wrong position.

A more likely mistake I can make, with my teaching, large classes, with compressed pacing plans relative to every thing I am supposed to cover, is that I don't do a good enough job of getting students involved in discovering things, and problem solving practices, and talking to each other, explaining things to each other, because I'm too rushed, driven to keep the pace I have to follow to cover everything. But these are the trials and tribulations of being a teacher.

You assholes who want to say you feel sorry for my students ? That's the ultimate expression of hatred and inhumanity you can throw at me. Sadly you don't understand that. But you understand it well enough to almost know the degree to which it's hitting below the belt. I will assume that you either don't fully comprehend what it's like to have a job that is service to others, or that you do know, and are envious.

Rather than saying any more of what I want to say, I'll just say this. Fuck you. And welcome to ignore. Have fun spouting all your right wing bullshit. I hope your getting paid well by the Koch brothers. Not that that makes you any less of a scumbag.

In my opinion, these would be the two biggest benefits of higher taxes on the rich and corporations. Nobody has explianed to me why this is wrong.

1) With more skin in the game (taxes paid) the powerful, who usually have substantial wealth, have more incentive to fight corruption. In other words if some other rich interest is seeking government largess, they will want to fight it, rather than simply saying "it's cool, as long as I get taken care of too."

When all the rich powerful folks are paying low taxes, they are perfectly happy to see borrow and spend policies that enrich them and their friends.
With higher taxes, the entire model is turned upsde down. It's one of the reasons things worked so well back in 1955 - 198?.

2) The other thing is slightly higher corporate rates, that all corporation actually have to pay, makes spending on pretax items such as employees and research less costly. This actually encourages corporations to invest here in themselves and or other AMerican companies.

I will grant you that I'm not a corporate finance or accounting person, so I might be a little naive about #2, but if so, I have yet to hear a legitimate argument as to why, other than "we can't have higher taxes and compete well with the rest of the world." But I'm only suggesting a small inrease, and that corposations actually pay their taxes.

marcus says

I understand your point about redistribution of all the income of the rich not solving anything, relative to the wealth of the rest of us.

Actually, his point is incorrect. There is plenty of wealth.

marcus says

Another sorry ass excuse for a republican asshole who says he feels sorry for the kids I teach. So, that's the best way you can think to express your hatred for me, and what a low level excuse for a human you are ? Why ? Simply because I have a hard time dealing with this kind of disgusting slippery slope nonsense ?

Dude-are you drunk?? I really feel sorry for your kids. if this is how you handle debate with people who have a different view-with no ability to have a decent conversation without resorting to acting like a 5 yr old girl having a hissy fit.

Sigh what a fool -this kind of attitude can only be brought on by tenure-with no ability to fire, despite performance and a pension to boot. Go on have another hissy fit.

marcus says

Rather than saying any more of what I want to say, I'll just say this. Fuck you. And welcome to ignore. Have fun spouting all your right wing bullshit. I hope your getting paid well by the Koch brothers. Not that that makes you any less of a scumbag

LOL.
marcus says

You assholes who want to say you feel sorry for my students ? That's the ultimate expression of hatred and inhumanity you can throw at me. Sadly you don't understand that. But you understand it well enough to almost know the degree to which it's hitting below the belt. I will assume that you either don't fully comprehend what it's like to have a job that is service to others, or that you do know, and are envious.

Nope, just feel sorry. You seem a little off at times -could just be you are drunk. I do feel sorry for the kids-because if this is how you respond to someone who has a different worldview-kids don't need this. Their views are being shaped by the people around them. Last thing they need is a bullying fool who explodes when anyone expresses a different view.

Good, judging by the number of people you have an ignore-you need that to stop going off the rails. Hint, if you carry on a decent conversation, most people will not throw things back at you and will try and remain decent. if you throw crap at people, people will respond in kind. Just because you slink off into a corner with a pouty puff-doesn't mean the same cycle will not repeat with another person. Which is why I feel sorry for the kids-this is an online forums, where you can retreat and act the fool. But a kid in your class, with a different worldview is stuck with you and you control his grades/punishment etc etc-that poor, poor kid... I hope you don't act this way IRL-but people are not that different.

Obama never saw a tax increase that he didn't like.

I'm with Patrick and his land tax idea. Make a land tax for funding the government and make it impossible to avoid. This will screw the mass land owners/parasites who hog the real estate for purposes of charging a buttload for rent, and keeping property values high. They have something like this in Texas, and that state is a model for home ownership at reasonable prices.

You seem to me to be a limited partnership kind of guy...

marcus says

MAybe even a far right wing defender of the interests of super-rich and corpations such as yourself

marcus says

But I'm only suggesting a small inrease, and that corposations actually pay their taxes.

drew_eckhardt says

There are too few "obscenely wealthy" and too many "grunt workers" for the wealthy's share to make a real difference.

This is just stupid. No one is suggesting the 1%'s wealth be confiscated and redistributed to everyone else. However, if they paid a larger percentage of their ill-gotten gains in taxes, everyone would be better off with better schools, better infrastructure, better research, etc.

How about tax rates based off physical work?
Anything earned without direct countable hours attached is taxed @ 50%
Anything earned with direct countable hours attached is taxed at 10%

finehoe says

However, if they paid a larger percentage of their ill-gotten gains in taxes, everyone would be better off with better schools, better infrastructure, better research, etc.

SoftShell says

How about tax rates based off physical work?

Anything earned without direct countable hours attached is taxed @ 50%

Anything earned with direct countable hours attached is taxed at 10%

Easier just to raise capital gains rates, right?

finehoe says

drew_eckhardt says

There are too few "obscenely wealthy" and too many "grunt workers" for the wealthy's share to make a real difference.

This is just stupid. No one is suggesting the 1%'s wealth be confiscated and redistributed to everyone else. However, if they paid a larger percentage of their ill-gotten gains in taxes, everyone would be better off with better schools, better infrastructure, better research, etc.

Why do you think they are ill gotten gains?? Lipstick on a pig-so you are saying just confiscate some of their gains. You may not believe it, but if this attitude becomes acceptable, then someday, some 300+ critter is going to be gunning for you. To them, a nice house in a nice suburb or a mansion in Malibu is not going to make a difference -as long as they get their welfare check -as long as it is socially acceptable to bash the givers.

There are other ways, like maybe not this much free trade-if you want higher taxes-slap it on imports or on say call center folks or IT support in other countries that take our jobs.

tatupu70 says

SoftShell says

How about tax rates based off physical work?

Anything earned without direct countable hours attached is taxed @ 50%

Anything earned with direct countable hours attached is taxed at 10%

Easier just to raise capital gains rates, right?

Obama already raised that by close to 8%. How much is enough, when are people going to want to stand on their own two feet??

For a lot of people-say like me-I have already paid taxes through payroll. When I invest in stock or other instruments , I am now paying taxes over and over and over. yet if I make losses, they won't let me deduct more than 3k a year. How much is enough-why is success penalized. That is my point, by making it seem like the 1%-more and more people are penalized. Like the AMT-originally meant for the 1% equivalent-it snares a huge amount of folks.

Once these things become enacted, it is the middle that pays. The 1% will have an army of accountants to ensure they don't pay-it is the rungs below that end up paying the price.

lostand confused says

Why do you think they are ill gotten gains??

"Behind every great fortune there is a great crime" - Honoré de Balzac

finehoe says

Honoré de Balzac

A novelist??

lostand confused says

Obama already raised that by close to 8%. How much is enough, when are people going to want to stand on their own two feet??

I'd say 50% is enough.

lostand confused says

For a lot of people-say like me-I have already paid taxes through payroll. When I invest in stock or other instruments , I am now paying taxes over and over and over. yet if I make losses, they won't let me deduct more than 3k a year. How much is enough-why is success penalized. That is my point, by making it seem like the 1%-more and more people are penalized. Like the AMT-originally meant for the 1% equivalent-it snares a huge amount of folks.

The goal would be to reduce payroll taxes and increase capital gains.

lostand confused says

Once these things become enacted, it is the middle that pays. The 1% will have an army of accountants to ensure they don't pay-it is the rungs below that end up paying the price.

Yes, you'd have to eliminate whatever loopholes exist.

tatupu70 says

The goal would be to reduce payroll taxes and increase capital gains.

Not going to work. Judging by history-you will end up with both. If you look at Europe, they have every tax imaginable and VAT on top of that. Now before I was in favor of a national sales tax-VAT-but now being a bit more realistic-we will just end up with both.

tatupu70 says

Yes, you'd have to eliminate whatever loopholes exist

In an idealistic world yes. But in reality-ain't gonna work. Look at the TPP, being negotiated in secret by Obozo. Who is driving it-the corporations and lobbyists. Any tax law changes will be built with the lobbyists, who will make sure they have even better loopholes-it is just current reality.

Now I would like for something to change and maybe hope for politicians who actually care about the majority-but until that happens-it will be the middle that will be hurt. Take Obozocare, anyone making an above decent wage will not get a subsidy. But if they get a very good plan from their employer-well I think it is a 40% tax now on the plan?? It won't affect any 1% er, but it will affect a ton of folks who are above average . Same as this 529 plan-to a 1% er, it is peanuts. To upper middle class, it is great savings for your kids-he is showing a pattern here.

Why a land tax over a consumption tax? Not that either one will happen...

I'm a big supporter of the President. This plan is absolutely ridiculous. Im not sure who developed it in the Administration, but it will never pass, and it feeds in to the Republican narrative. Too many blue state Dems and the financial industry would be pissed about this.

It's hard enough saving for college for my two younguns without the tax break of savings growing. Why even have a 529? I can invest some other way and my earnings will be taxed at capital gains rates rather than ordinary income.

Can't they find another place to make ALL public college free or low cost? How about trimming 10% off the bloated defense budget?

We have a better chance from implosion within than some foreign power taking us over, especially when the defense budget is 2 x the next 19 countries...combined.

lostand confused says

tatupu70 says

Does it make you feel better to imagine that the folks who can't afford to go to community college are 300# lazy critters?

How much is enough? Sec 8, food stamps, free medical, free cell phones, free everything. Everybody does not have to go to college-the poor merit kids already get scholarships. The so-so kids can go and pick up a trade and all they need to be is taught a good work ethic. being given something for nothing all their lives is not going to make somebody a productive citizen.

Welfare cases should not be allowed to vote. Felons are not-so why should lazy bums who do nothing and live off others for generations be allowed to shape this country's future.

So the average poor kid who can't get a merit scholarship doesn't deserve chance to go to college?
Don't be upset when a life of crime is the only other alternative.

Diva24 says

So the average poor kid who can't get a merit scholarship doesn't deserve chance to go to college?

Don't be upset when a life of crime is the only other alternative

That is life. I think I deserve a beach house in Malibu. if I don't get it, do I go on a crime spree??

lostand confused says

That is life. I think I deserve a beach house in Malibu. if I don't get it, do I go on a crime spree??

So you're equating the opportunity to go to college and better oneself with buying a beach house in Malibu?

Do you think the effect on society is the same in each case?

The chances of 529 plans becoming taxable any time soon are probably less than 1%. In the event that they became taxable as ordinary income, I would expect that people would save for college in regular taxable accounts where long term cap gains and qualified dividends still receive preferrential treatment vs ordinary income.

tatupu70 says

lostand confused says

That is life. I think I deserve a beach house in Malibu. if I don't get it, do I go on a crime spree??

So you're equating the opportunity to go to college and better oneself with buying a beach house in Malibu?

Do you think the effect on society is the same in each case?

It depends on what you want in life. Bill gates is a college dropout who provided jobs to millions of highly educated folks. Didn't need any handouts. merit kids get scholarships. The rest can take a trade, do continuing education and build a life. There is dignity in labor-why is it ok for a Mexican to work the fields and why is it that an American needs tax money to support him??
Where there is a will, there is a way. All you are doing is providing a reason for failure. There are millions of law abiding people who did not go to college-just because one makes less money-does not make them less of a human.

lostand confused says

Bill gates is a college dropout who provided jobs to millions of highly educated folks. Didn't need any handouts.

Yes, it's nice to born into a wealthy family, isn't it? If your point is that only those folks who win the lottery at birth are allowed to go to college, then congrats.

lostand confused says

The rest can take a trade, do continuing education and build a life

Learning a trade costs money too. How do you propose folks with no money do that?

lostand confused says

Where there is a will, there is a way. All you are doing is providing a reason for failure. There are millions of law abiding people who did not go to college-just because one makes less money-does not make them less of a human.

If only life were so simple. I'm trying to improve the opportunity for folks who weren't as fortunate at birth.