Page 10 of 11 FirstFirst ... 891011 LastLast
Results 91 to 100 of 108
Thanks Tree95Thanks

Thread: They've got their money and so the war on the poor begins.

  1. #91
    Member
    Joined
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    2,145
    Thanks
    1101

    From
    Maryland USA
    Quote Originally Posted by orangecat View Post
    Lowering tax rates is the exact opposite of wealth redistribution.
    While I must admit that I have a tough time understanding the logic of the above statement, I do agree that income and wealth are two separate entities. I also think that income taxation, in its current form, cannot and will not achieved the perceived goal of wealth redistribution. If the perceived goal is access to the wealth of the super rich, income taxation will not do it. The target group has the ability to hide income or use accounting methods to minimize income, classic example would the hedge fund manager. Not to mention that much of their income is not taxed as ordinary income. Their incomes are determined long before hitting their personal income tax returns. The amounts reflected on their tax returns typically comes form a K-1 or a 1099, with no explanation of how the amount was determined. Moreover, the mechanics used to get those 1%er ends up only hurting the upper middle class, the AMT for example.

    Let's assume one hits the lottery for several hundred million. Yes, one will pay the tax at that time. But in the following year, let's assume one invests the remainder in tax free munis. During that time, one's wealth remains in tact and no income tax is paid.
    Last edited by TheWahoo; 16th May 2018 at 11:45 AM.

  2. #92
    Radical Centrist BigLeRoy's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    31,089
    Thanks
    26273

    From
    Colorado
    Quote Originally Posted by TheWahoo View Post
    While I must admit that I have a tough time understanding the logic of the above statement, I do agree that income and wealth are two separate entities. I also think that income taxation, in its current form, cannot and will not achieved the perceived goal of wealth redistribution. If the perceived goal is access to the wealth of the super rich, income taxation will not do it. The target group has the ability to hide income or use accounting methods to minimize income, classic example would the hedge fund manager. Not to mention that much of their income is not taxed as ordinary income. Their incomes are determined long before hitting their personal income tax returns. The amounts reflected on their tax returns typically comes form a K-1 or a 1099, with no explanation of how the amount was determined. Moreover, the mechanics used to get those 1%er ends up only hurting the upper middle class, the AMT for example.

    Let's assume one hits the lottery for several hundred million. Yes, one will pay the tax at that time. But in the following year, let's assume one invests the remainder in tax free munis. During that time, one's wealth remains in tact and no income tax is paid.
    During the campaign, Mr. Trump promised on SEVERAL occasions that he was going to get rid of the carried interest tax loophole that greatly benefits the hedge fund billionaires. But he has not done so. Hmmmm......

    But yes, income and wealth are not even the same TYPE of economic variable. Income is a FLOW variable that REQUIRES a unit of time to even be meaningful. It would make ZERO sense to ask Jeff Bezos what his income is, RIGHT THIS INSTANT. In contrast, wealth is a STOCK variable, that can be measured AT ANY POINT IN TIME. It makes perfect sense to ask how wealthy Jeff Bezos is right this instant, and I guess the answer is somewhat north of $100 billion, making him the wealthiest man in the world......unless that man happens to be Vladimir Putin.

    Putin's true wealth is VERY murky.....Might be as much as $200 billion, according to some sources....

  3. #93
    Veteran Member Pragmatist's Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    48,842
    Thanks
    14510

    Quote Originally Posted by Kallie Knoetze View Post
    Bajisima,

    Actually, no. California is by far the biggest welfare state. Next, is New York. Texas, which has a bigger population than New York, has less caseloads.

    Total Recipients > Welfare Caseloads statistics - states compared - StateMaster.
    What a load of shit! of course the big states will have bigger tabs they have more people! you want to know who is sucking up more welfare dollars per capita here it is and they practically all are the red states.



    9 of the top 10 welfare states are conservative . Or, the top 9 states with the most % of people on welfare are ALL conservative states.

  4. #94
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    12,503
    Thanks
    3062

    From
    California
    Quote Originally Posted by Pragmatist View Post
    What a load of shit! of course the big states will have bigger tabs they have more people! you want to know who is sucking up more welfare dollars per capita here it is and they practically all are the red states.



    9 of the top 10 welfare states are conservative . Or, the top 9 states with the most % of people on welfare are ALL conservative states.
    Mr. Pragmatist,

    Interesting, but why the irrelevancy. We are talking about welfare, not upkeep of the national infrastructure.

  5. #95
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    12,503
    Thanks
    3062

    From
    California
    Quote Originally Posted by BigLeRoy View Post
    The Social Security Administration themselves describe how they are funded via TAXES, Kallie. Here, look and see:

    https://www.ssa.gov/OACT/ProgData/taxRates.html
    Mr. Leroy,

    Hmmm, taxes you get back when you retire....

    And while I appreciate that you liberals want bums to get all the free shit they can give them, SS and Medicare are "taxes" targeted for retirement supplemental income.

    Sounds like a pension to me.

    But, bottom line, not income taxes.
    Last edited by Kallie Knoetze; 17th May 2018 at 09:17 AM.

  6. #96
    Newm' Embre orangecat's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    971
    Thanks
    202

    From
    oregon
    Quote Originally Posted by namvet69 View Post
    You just don't get it, do you?
    I totally get it. That's why I posted this truth: Lowering tax rates is the exact opposite of wealth redistribution.
    I also totally get that you follow the marxist creed of from each/to each.

  7. #97
    Radical Centrist BigLeRoy's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    31,089
    Thanks
    26273

    From
    Colorado
    Quote Originally Posted by orangecat View Post
    I totally get it. That's why I posted this truth: Lowering tax rates is the exact opposite of wealth redistribution.
    I also totally get that you follow the marxist creed of from each/to each.
    Adam Smith believed in progressive taxation.

    You just called Adam Smith a Marxist.

    Funny stuff.
    Thanks from Ian Jeffrey

  8. #98
    Newm' Embre orangecat's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    971
    Thanks
    202

    From
    oregon
    Quote Originally Posted by OldGaffer View Post
    I think Orangecat knows exactly, he just does not give a shit and in fact welcomes any cuts to food stamps, welfare, etc. They follow the ideology of "greed is good" and "devil take the hindmost".
    I do think food stamps and welfare should be cut. Along with military spending and numerous other federal expenditures that contribute to the yearly deficits and overall national debt.

  9. #99
    Veteran Member Dr Sampson Simpson's Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    21,831
    Thanks
    12079

    Quote Originally Posted by Blues63 View Post
    No, I ignored your prosaic bilge as it had nothing to do with my post, as I pointed out. Your projections and silliness are of no merit and 'Magoo' games are off my table.

    Will this take the usual eight pages to sink in? Let me know in advance so I can ignore any further exchange.
    It will never sink in, the person is a troll, will keep going on and on and on, each post dumber than the last

  10. #100
    Newm' Embre orangecat's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    971
    Thanks
    202

    From
    oregon
    Quote Originally Posted by TheWahoo View Post
    While I must admit that I have a tough time understanding the logic of the above statement,
    This is not difficult to understand: Lowering tax rates is the exact opposite of wealth redistribution.
    To redistribute wealth, one must first confiscate it from those who have or have earned it. If the government lowers taxes, it has less wealth at its disposal to redistribute. Therefore, tax cuts run counter to the implementation of wealth redistribution.

Page 10 of 11 FirstFirst ... 891011 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 67
    Last Post: 2nd May 2016, 08:00 PM
  2. Replies: 19
    Last Post: 9th March 2014, 09:00 AM
  3. Replies: 17
    Last Post: 7th July 2008, 01:20 PM
  4. Conservatives donate more money to the poor.
    By RonaldReaganRocks in forum Current Events
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 9th January 2007, 11:46 AM
  5. Liberals are trying to take money away from poor people.
    By RonaldReaganRocks in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 118
    Last Post: 9th November 2006, 12:18 AM

Tags for this Thread


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed