patrick.net

Peter P says

I was attacking a label, not anyone in particular.

Your thesis was very clear, except I'm not sure what a psuedo rationalist is. Go back and read it.

Peter P says

But the whole idea of progressive taxation is not consistent with this view.

Wrong. It's about the governemt paying for what it spends, and possibly about one ideology which says govenrment can't do anything well versus another that says, that's not always true.

When Bush initiated his famous tax cuts, he said, "you know how to spend your money better than the government." But he was essentially taking money out of the social security surplus, and further engaging in deficit spending on unfunded wars etc.,.. Those tax cuts were skewed towrds benefitting the rich.

Someone has to pay for all that deficit spending.

This is logic, it isn't a personal "feeling" about the rich.

Somehow we need to pay more of our bills. Before we further lower the standard of living on the middle class, since the standard of living has been going up on the rich, they can afford to pay more.

Let's start there. That's all.

Peter P says

As a result, they come up with reasons to justify taxing someone just "richer" than them.

The justification is that without this redistribution from the rich, our economic system would be running on an closed-loop positive feedback without any stabilization.

The rich -- top 5% -- didn't make their $2.5T in AGI in 2010 from the Mines of Zanzibar or trading among themselves. They get their incomes largely from the 95% below them.

http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/CP/

shows our skyrocketing corporate profits are operating on a similar trend of "#Winning".

The economy we've structured for ourselves has become catastrophically unbalanced. We can see that in our rising Gini ratio:

http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/GINIALLRH

and in our reliance on consumer credit 1999-2006:

http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/graph/?g=dBV

and after that flow failed in 2008, now government debt:

http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/FGTCMDODNS

to keep the rubber side down.

The asymmetric, multiple, trillion-dollar flows from working class to parasitical wealthy is what the issue is here.

"I don't have any solution but I certainly admire the problem"

Bellingham Bill says

The asymmetric, multiple, trillion-dollar flows from working class to parasitical wealthy is what the issue is here.

So what? In the age of 12-month-old $1B companies anyone can be anything.

No one needs to be in the working class.

The important thing is, there should be no artificial barriers of social mobility.

Peter P says

No one needs to be in the working class.

LOL

Choice is the most wonderful gift from God.

When you think you have no choice, in many cases you are simply not giving yourself a choice.

To be fair, many workers are conditioned by the system to think they have "a place" in the society. Bullshit.

Peter P says

As boomers grow old, they discover that the prospect of them getting rich is now dim. Then they focus on getting hand-outs themselves. As a result, they come up with reasons to justify taxing someone just "richer" than them.

Does Peter P stand for Peter Plutocrat ?

I take it that by "Then they focus on getting hand-outs themselves" you mean boomers not wanting their social security or medicare cut?"

These are programs that people paid in to, they aren't handouts. And if it weren't for GWB,, we wouldn't be talking about raising the age that medicare kicks in.

marcus says

I take it that by "Then they focus on getting hand-outs themselves" you mean boomers not wanting their social security or medicare cut?"

They certain want to make sure the music will play on.

marcus says

These are programs that people paid in to, they aren't handouts. And if it weren't for GWB, we wouldn't be talking about raising the age that medicare kicks in.

It is either a handout program or a ponzi scheme.

Medicare should be abolished. It should be replaced by a universal healthcare system for all.

Peter P says

To be fair, many workers are conditioned by the system to think they have "a place" in the society. Bullshit.

Yes, you're right, today it's easier than ever to go from poverty to wealth in America. All it takes is a little elbow grease. Any average intelligence American who feels stuck in their hard working job, barely getting by, needs to wake up and realize that there's always lots of room at the top.

You know that intelligence is an illusion, right?

Measures of "intelligence" were created by people who VALUE having high measures of intelligence to make themselves feel better.

It is quite often a matter of focus and introspection, not a case of innate intelligence.

Drive and discipline too, of course.

One secret: there is no formula of success. Market efficiency applies here too.

Academics are not comfortable with "knowledge" that are not universal. Hence they have DECIDED that education OUGHT to be the universal key to personal success and that anything beyond what education can provide is a source of inequality.

I'm having trouble with this thread. There's no facts in the thread to support the thread. It must be an opinion piece.

My opinion is : Damn! I've been Trolled.

It is an opinion.

"Facts" are more harmful because they are presented as such.

Facts can be spun. Statistics can prove any lie.

Opinions? You just agree with them. Or you can have your own.

Peter P says

You know that intelligence is an illusion, right?

Peter P says

Measures of "intelligence" were created by people who VALUE having high measures of intelligence to make themselves feel better.

I think I'm seeing a pattern here.

Peter P says

they try to invent reasons to explain why wealth beyond a certain point (i.e. a level attainable by their professions) should be re-distributed away.

The consequence of accepting that some people "deserve" their "excess" wealth is too severe for their egos to bear.

Peter P says

Measures of "intelligence" were created by people who VALUE having high measures of intelligence to make themselves feel better.

Peter P says

"Facts" are more harmful because they are presented as such.

Facts can be spun. Statistics can prove any lie.

Opinions? You just agree with them. Or you can have your own.

HEY YOU says

My opinion is : Damn! I've been Trolled.

Funny.

Enlighten me.

Peter P says

Enlighten me.

"If you lose your job, your marriage and your mind all in one week, try to lose your mind first, because then the other stuff won't matter that much."

Jack Handy (deep thoughts)

“I hope some animal never bores a hole in my head and lays its eggs in my brain, because later you might think you're having a good idea but it's just eggs hatching.”

Jack Handy

I guess the universe does not exist without the Mind.

“If a kid asks where rain comes from, I think a cute thing to tell him is "God is crying." And if he asks why God is crying, another cute thing to tell him is "Probably because of something you did."”

Jack Handy

marcus says

And if he asks why God is crying, another cute thing to tell him is "Probably because of something you did."

I get it.

It is about self-empowerment. If you can make God cry, you can be anything.

More: http://www.angelfire.com/empire/dragonskeep/quote/jh.html

marcus says

you mean boomers not wanting their social security or medicare cut?"

the boomers (with some help from Gen X 1989-2009) completely pre-paid the social security (to the extent the system is not a weird quasi-paygo wealth transfer from young to old) thanks the $2.6T in the SSA "trust fund". This total is about $1.5T in FICA contributions + accrued interest.

Medicare is another story, alas.

http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/graph/?g=dC0

blue is medicare outgo, red is payroll x 2.9% (the tax was raised to 2.9% in 1986).

The society needs a universal healthcare system as much as it needs an army. Medicare is just something for the special interests.

Peter P says

Medicare is just something for the special interests.

I hope if dogs ever take over the world and they choose a king, they don't just go by size because I bet there are some Chihuahuas with some good ideas.

Jack Handy

Moderation in all things.

One of the most boring and useful truisms my parents ever taught me.

Here is the problem with extreme wealth of which I believe you are speaking: It buys things that make getting even richer at the expense of the working class too easy.

So the solution is simple: Level the playing field by redistribution through taxation. And guess what? The rich are still rich and the society is more balanced as a whole.

Federal taxes are lower than they have been in a LONG TIME. Why not just try the tax rates of the 90s for 10 years like we tried Bush's "temporary" tax cuts of the last 10? The rich will survive. The economy will survive.

Greed is not good. Moderation in all things.

The sad thing, though, is about $1T of the SSTF is just FICA payments from illegal aliens over the decades.

Our nation's finances are actually pretty parlous from every angle.

Except our ~1% .

Corporations kinda suck though:

pretty debt-ridden since the 1980s.

Peter P says

Medicare is just something for the special interests.

Medicare was a compromise because conservatives successfully fought off universal health care for decades.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Coffee_Cup

80% of our problems today stem from conservatives not getting with the program, or worse, being allowed to implement their own programs of mass wealth destruction.

rooemoore says

Greed is not good. Moderation in all things.

Greed is at worst morally neutral. I think Greed is the only source of true progress.

I agree that rent-seeking needs to be looked at. High barrier of entrance (usually in the form of regulatory compliance) is a drag on the entrepreneurial spirit.

The problem with moderation is that it tends to reduce everything to a linear spectrum.

Even though your avatar is not animated, it is still quite something. LOL.

Bellingham Bill says

Medicare was a compromise because conservatives successfully fought off universal health care for decades.

I call on conservatives to fight FOR universal healthcare. Any reliance on employer-provided plans is bad for entrepreneurs.

Besides, health insurance does not make sense. There is too much moral hazards.

Nowadays many "conservatives" are religious fanatics. They are trying to fight economic collectivism with behavioral collectivism. It sucks either way.

Ppl, I'm running a hedge fund and let me tell you ... we mint money and thus, I'm on a train which reads "1% - Here I Come".

Now, as a former engineer (& ITer), I was nowhere near that level of earnings potential and at the same time, my technical work was controlled by MBA types. Do I resent those folks above me? Absolutely, they were living off the fruits of my labor, paying me ordinary wages.

Today, in contrast, I'm living in a world of zero worries about the future. My home was paid off, within 2 years of this HF work, and in a short time, I'll never have to worry about cash again. Do I feel that this work is meaningful and worthy? Absolutely not, it's simply about money now, not on one's contributions to society et al.

With the above stated, do I want to soak the rich? No. And the reason for that is that I intend to become one of them and be able to do my own science/engineering work (plus medical school), unimpeded unlike when I was working under corporate America. However, can I say that the average heir to Kobe Bryant's or Julia Robert's fortune will have the same motivation? Probably not, but whose business is that anyways?

Bellingham Bill says

The asymmetric, multiple, trillion-dollar flows from working class to parasitical wealthy is what the issue is here.

this country needs a revolution.

This thread should be called

"Why pseudo-rationalists hate the POOR"

rather than

"Why pseudo-rationalists hate the rich"

It is very useful for rich people to have people believe that poor people all are poor because they deserve to be poor. It is one of the cornerstones of right-wing theology.

Peter P says

Because they think they are the greatest, yet they are rarely rich. Therefore, they try to invent reasons to explain why wealth beyond a certain point (i.e. a level attainable by their professions) should be re-distributed away.

The consequence of accepting that some people "deserve" their "excess" wealth is too severe for their egos to bear.

People are just begrudging. Pure simple old jealousy.

Bellingham Bill says

The rich -- top 5% -- didn't make their $2.5T in AGI in 2010 from the Mines of Zanzibar or trading among themselves. They get their incomes largely from the 95% below them.

This is incorrect right there. You are implying that the rich are making their money on the backs of the rest of the people. You are implying that they gouge them, steal from them. That's Marxism my friend.

Most rich make their money in honest demand/supply transactions with willing customers. It is employee/employer at will relationship. It is contract between two parties where money for services for goods are exchanged. There is no one pie to divide and share, wealth is creation of separate pies.

Peter P says

No one needs to be in the working class.

Peter, I agree with you but don't use their language. There are no
classes. The term was coined by Karl Marx in 19 century. It is only to imply "social struggle". There is no social struggle right now. Upward mobility is possible in the modern time unless the administration is going to freeze people in their current predicament forever just to get more votes for the future.

Bill, you can torture any data any way you want. These graphs you are showing to prove your point that rich get richer because of the poor, they just acknowledge that we have had dot-com boom and the bust and real estate boom and the bust. Fortunes were made and the bubble popped. End of story.

The FIRE sector is largely responsible for wealth inequality. If you took the salaries and bonuses of NYC banksters, hedge fund managers, speculators and all the other parasitic paper pushing, gambling professions out of the equation then you would find it much less skewed. Having said that, the only thing that allowed this sector to flourish is the US Federal Government vis a vie huge budget deficits, loan guarantees for mortgages and student loans, regulatory capture, allowing the currency to be managed by a the banking cartel, legal tender laws and a currency that is not backed by gold and silver (which is a violation of the Constitution).

The current relationship between Wall Street and Washington DC is parasitic. One cannot survive without the other. Washington with its deficit spending and indirect taxation through money printing and Wall Street with its parasitic tentacles spread out to suck the wealth out of the world economies (every one of the world's central bank's top governors came from Goldman Sachs). This "partnership" has been carefully nurtured through revolving door bureaucrats and the "legalized bribery" emanating from "K" street. The political class is more culpable if you ask me because they are public serpents who turned their backs on the people they had a duty to serve.

If you took deficit spending out of the equation then the FIRE industry would be toast and revert back to its rightful and intended purpose ... to allocate scarce capital to the most profitable ventures instead of hedging massive currency and debt flows needed to feed the government beast. That would require massive layoffs in NYC and Washington DC. It won't happen until there is a financial Armageddon because both know that they are dependent on each other and will protect their power and position at all costs (regardless of how many people they impoverish).

Meanwhile, statist "Progressives" are the useful idiots who, blinded by their own fear, greed and ignorance, back the Chicago gangsters who have recently taken up residency in DC promising to "protect them" -- if they only help them further the shakedown of evil, gasp wealthy! producers. The jig is just about up because the economy has reached its limit in terms of its ability to service the enormous debt pyramid scheme. IMHO, something evil this way comes because people don't get what they want ... they get what they deserve. This is a tragedy of epic, Shakespearean proportions. Enjoy.

btw: There is not one original thought in this story line. It has been played out through the ages. Empires rise and fall the same way. As Mark Twain once said, "History does not repeat itself, but it does rhyme."