’)National Review’s Lisa Schiffren, that’s who!
They are mostly the meritocrats who worked hard in high school and got into the better colleges and grad schools, where they studied while others partied. They pushed through grueling hours and unpleasant “up or out” policies in their twenties and thirties at top law firms, banks, hospitals, and businesses to earn salaries in the solid six figures (or low seven) today — in their peak earning years. Their work ethic is prodigious, and, as Tigerhawk points out, in their spare time they sit on the boards of most of the complex charities and arts institutions that provide aid and pay for culture in America. No group of people contribute more to their community.
Now, as John Cole noted, these poor downtrodden people with six-figure salaries (and not even the folks making $100K-$249K!) are going to be punished by the peasants in the valley. The punishment will change their tax rate from 35% to 39.6%. This piddling increase will take America back to the dark ages of the 1990s when these folks eked out an existence with… six figure salaries.
Look, I’ll give Schiffren this much credit: Usually conservatives couch their support of the wealthy not contributing their fair share in more populist terms – the usual conservative boogeyman that tells middle class Americans that they too will be taxed out of existence by the Democrats so they better vote against the slight chance a millionaire might have to pay a little more during say the gravest economic crisis the planet has faced since the Depression.
Schiffren, and the National Review is telling us we should get on our lowly knees and thank the Lord Jesus Christ himself for people who are pulling in $250K plus and who the eff do we think we are to raise their taxes a few percent to keep the country going! That’s time we should b spending kissing their alligator leather covered feet, knave!
Of course the reality is that most of the people in this tax bracket won’t even seriously notice the change in rate and as the economy improves they’ll be the first to reap the benefits of even more freaking money – and God bless them for that.
>> POOR LITTLE RICH BOY
>> There are no gimmes in Galt Golf. You have to earn it.
Of course the reality is that most of the people in this tax bracket won’t even seriously notice the change in rate and as the economy improves they’ll be the first to reap the benefits of even more freaking money – and God bless them for that. OW
Hoplessly naive statement, Oliver. Why does every argument have to be couched in the same rich, uncaring fat cats versus lowly, peasant poor people? Can you not even acknowledge that making $250,000 is not rich, and that most people making that have earned their way to getting to that point through honest hard work, that they’ve seen their net worth halved or worse in the last two years, dividends cut to near zero, and are now being asked to pay up more in taxes, more in energy costs, more in health care, college expenses. That they’ve in many cases been frugal in ways that people in lower income brackets aren’t, paid their bills on time, cut back where they could, did everything right, and now are being asked to pay for people who overstepped their budgets and took out second mortgages for home improvements? Does that not even register to you one bit, that someone who thinks that has a point? You mock those people. They contribute to society like you do, yet you feel they shouldn’t have a right to voice that opinion, or if they do, they are to be mocked and villified.
Lisa Schiffren is hardly the only person to have this view, that now is not the right time to be raising taxes on people that you view as stupid rich, that a 13% increase in their tax rate and an increase in their capital gains, lowereing their deduction allowances for mortgage payments and charitable contributions, all these things won’t be noticed. That they’ll just go merrily along their way without even noticing it.
Good grief.
“Can you not even acknowledge that making $250,000 is not rich…”
If you make $250,000 a year, your taxes are not going up.
If you are making $300,000 a year, your taxes are going up by $2300 a year, or 0.8%. If you think $2300 a year is going to kill someone making $300,000 a year, you’re nuts.
“…that they’ve seen their net worth halved or worse in the last two years, dividends cut to near zero, and are now being asked to pay up more in taxes, more in energy costs, more in health care, college expenses.”
And of course you blame the Democrats for that.
The economy has been fucked out by Bush et al and now we have to fix it. We need to raise taxes on those who can afford it the most, and that would be the rich, while helping out those who need it the most, and that would be the middle-class / poor.
In a consumer economy like the United States this is the best way to get things going again.
“Good grief.”
A statement like that deserves only one response….
Wah, wah, wah. Wah wah wah.
(And if you don’t get that joke, look up Muted Trumpet.)
If you make $250,000 a year, your taxes are not going up.
Yes, they are. The guy making 3 bones a year is hemorrhaging right now. He’s already cutting back where he can. He will even more with less to spend after contributing to his neighbor’s defaults on their second mortgages. JFK didn’t agree with your take on taxes in tough times. Reagan didn’t either. He lowered them and got us out of Carter’s malaise.
But I really enjoy hearing a foreigner’s opinion on whether anyone in this country is allowed to disagree with your take. It’s quite amusing. A foreign DVD reviewer telling Americans how to think. Duly noted, Strowbridge.
Keith Olbermann should have you on as a guest sometime. You can tell us how great things are in Canada and how we should run the country to your views. Evidently Obama enjoys the outside influence, at least how European countries used to be.
My husband is one of those who worked like a dog in a graduate program doing research using radioactive and carcinogenic chemicals. He worke 90 hour weeks and missed out on a lot of our kids’ childhood. And yes, it finally put us in the above 250K income bracket. But believe me, this income buys a great lifestyle. If one cannot afford the slight increase in taxes, one is doing something really wrong. My husband had an NIH grant for part of grad school. We both went to state universities. Our kids went to public school. We’re appalled at the state of our country and its infrastructure. We don’t like our taxes going for unnecessary wars, no bid corrupt govt. contracts, etc. We are more that happy to pay taxes for universal healthcare, education, green energy, basic research, etc. These things will provide for a better more secure country for our kids.
I think deep down, all of us would like to keep every penny we make but that’s a rather juvenile thought. Those of us who are this fortunate and can afford to pay, should. The only thing that makes me mad is for big corporations that don’t pay their fair share. There is no reason for all those loopholes. If they are at all profitable, they can afford to contribute to this country.
That they’ve in many cases been frugal in ways that people in lower income brackets aren’t, paid their bills on time, cut back where they could, did everything right, and now are being asked to pay for people who overstepped their budgets and took out second mortgages for home improvements?
So, you scold Oliver for couching his argument in terms of “rich, uncaring fat cats” and then turn around and couch your argument in terms of mewling, lazy poor people.
Many of us in the middle to lower classes also did everything right, paid our bills on time, and our reward for our contributions to the economy was to have our jobs disappear and then to be told by the Republican voters that we “just didn’t want to work.”
How do you suppose the “uncaring fat cat” stereotype appeared, Dennis?
You have a point, Spider J. I will concede that. Oliver has a point. But Lisa Schiffren has a point, too. And you and Oliver and Southern Strategy will not concede that.
But you did at least concede that the rich, uncaring fat cat stereotype is just that, a stereotype. And you ask me how it appeared? It appeared, and it reappears in these cases, because people can identify with it. Everyone can identify with Oliver’s depiction of the stereotype from the monopoly game.
I didn’t couch my argument in term of mewling, lazy poor people; I never have. People who take out second mortgages for home improvements are typically industrious. Because they live above their means or don’t plan well for bad times does not mean I implied they were poor, mewling or lazy. And Republican voters don’t think middle class or lower economic class people “don’t want to work”. All the ones I know want everyone to work. They want everyone to succeed.
That they’ve in many cases been frugal in ways that people in lower income brackets aren’t, paid their bills on time, cut back where they could, did everything right,
Maybe not lazy, but certainly not as responsible or wise as their more well-to-do brethren, apparently.
Man this place is nuts! Since when did government become robin hood? Do you people not understand that those people making more money are the ones who employ you! When their money gets cut, their taxes go up not just for themsleves but for their business as well (becuase we know now that Obama is treating businesses worse off then Communist China is), that you people complaining will be out of jobs?!? Tax cuts Tax cuts Tax cuts are what get the economy rolling. Hell, only 60% of you people pay taxes, and you still have the balls to get up and demand that people better off need to pay more! Im middle class, dont have much money, but righ tis right, and unfair taxation is not right.
Maybe not lazy, but certainly not as responsible or wise as their more well-to-do brethren, apparently. S. Quaker
Not sure what your point is. Everyone made mistakes. Not everyone is getting bailed out of their bad decisions. Guys who borrowed money to start a business and failed are not getting bailed out. But guys who took out a second mortgage for unnecessary and purely cosmetic home improvements in many cases are. Improvements that a lot of wealthier people might’ve passed on because the expense didn’t make sense to them.
You should read ‘The Millionaire Next Door’, Southern Quaker. Everyone here should. Surprising statistics, even if now a bit dated. But you find a lot of people who are in very good shape with large new worths are in many cases the people you’d never suspect, due to their frugality. And in a lot of cases the people you’d think are in great shape because of their cars, houses, private schools, clothes, country club memebershios, are not.
That’s the reference I was making.
Tax cuts Tax cuts Tax cuts are what get the economy rolling.
Right, because that’s worked so well for us the last eight years.
The real problem isn’t that some radiologist may wind up paying an extra $40/week in federal taxes or conversely needs a tax cut in the same amount. The problem is that the entire financial sector is littered with dying assets, bogus assets and companies on life support. So consumer and investment spending is down, because everybody knows that we are in a pit. The Dow certainly does. Scared money hires no workers, finances no houses, buys no big-screen TVs and builds no retail or warehouse space.
Thanks Bush. Glad your finance people did such a heckuva job for 8 years, 6 of them with a conservative Congress and 2 of them with a neutral, near-supine one under Harry Reid the Appeaser. Republicans are supposed to be good at not sodomizing the economy, except that’s in fact what they seem to do every time. I’d take the Clinton tax rates to get the Clinton economy back, big time.
Do you people not understand that those people making more money are the ones who employ you!
What I understand is that a large number of corporations, without the specter of regulation to keep them honest, decided that if they could make more money by cutting corners, sending jobs to India, and a number of other strategies, that they would simply do so.
So no, the people making more money do not want to employ me. I have a college degree, a strong work ethic, and a decent resume, but it’s more cost-effective to hire cheap and give that cheap labor a crap health plan. One makes more money by neglecting safety standards and turning the peanuts on the floor into money. One makes more money by cutting jobs and giving oneself a bigger bonus instead.
The Republicans Dennis seems to know, who want “everyone” to succeed, aren’t so naive as to think everyone “can” succeed. So what you really mean is that you want “everyone” to succeed, as long as certain people succeed more and the others learn to accept their lesser success as satisfactory.
BTW. Yes, if you make more than 97% of the rest of the nation, you’re rich.
Rich people will either be taxed at a higher rate or angry mobs will kill them and take all their stuff.
It’s funny reading fawning impoverished conservatives here defending the fat cats, but we all know there are just two kinds of Republicans: millionaires and fools.
I for one am not ready to casually concede the latter half of this, depending on the value of “most”. While I think there are many such (like doctors, and some advanced engineers – but speaking as an engineer I know no one personally making that much) that make this much while providing a valuable service, there are also many such who provide society almost nothing of value. I speak primarily of the financial sector. I am trained in physics, and attended an Ivy League school with one of the most prestigious business schools in the nation — a key manufacturing plant for future masters of the universe. I took a look at some of the business classes these people who are supposed to be my betters were taking and had to laugh — compared to the partial differential equations and quantum mechanics I was taking, that stuff was a walk in the park. And talking with these guys in the dorm showed me what a bunch of self-absorbed assholes many of them were, believing utterly it was their right and due to make salaries of this scale simply for getting their degree, which guaranteed them a ticket to Wall Street.
And look what these sterling examples of Homo Sapiens Superior have given us. Trillions of dollars in fantasy paper CDOs which have made many of the biggest banks insolvent. Deceptive accounting practices to hide the fact. And on and on. I do not believe for a second that these people are smarter than me, worked harder than me, or deserve even a fraction of the outrageous salaries they get. This country and the world would be better off if we turned Wall Street upside down, shook, and swept up the dross. Anyone could do the job that these people do. All you need is a fancy suit and the ability to yell a lot. These people do NOT deserve their astronomical compensation, especially given this track record.
I am proud to be one of those “lucky duckies” making less than 100k a year- oh how lucky I am not to be the poor downtrodden that will pay an extra 5k on their 400k salaries.
I don’t begrudge them their living, but at the same time if you are to balance the budget, you can’t do it on the backs of the poor- they are tapped, that is why they are poor. Not to mention that the wealthy are wealthy in large part because of the society that we have here, paid for with your tax dollars. They benefit disproportionately, they should pay disproportionately. At what level can be argued but I’m not interested in reading screeds like Ms. Shifrin’s when there are people being put out of their homes and left to starve.
You should read `The Millionaire Next Door’, Southern Quaker.
It’s a good book. Especially if you consider the fact that these people made their fortunes during eras of relatively high taxes and when a focus was on improving the lives and livelihoods of the middle class.
We’ve spent a long time cutting taxes in lieu of improving middle class incomes. We’ve gotten to the point where we’re tapped out and have to pay our bills. I have no idea why these supposedly “smart” high-earners had no idea that they should have saved their money and managed their assets wisely in an era in which taxes were artificially low but now are facing economic destruction because of a slight rise in tax rates back to 1990s levels. there are plenty of us willing and able to take their place if they’re going to buckle under the strain.
Tyro – exactly, mate. The real income of the middle class has been falling since (IIRC) the seventies.
I’ll tell you who is concerned, US colleges and universities. Endowments are way down. I wonder why?
Endowments are way down. I wonder why?
Because endowment performance is tied to the performance of capital markets and hedge funds, both of which have imploded and the economy has collapsed.
Hope I helped educate you and broadened your horizons.
And let’s not forget to add that this occurred through the naked greed and stupidity of he masters of the Universe and that we’d be infinitely better off if these creatures had “gone Galt” years ago.
“I’ll tell you who is concerned, US colleges and universities. Endowments are way down. I wonder why?”
The downward spiral of the investment markets, where traditionally endowment funds are housed, fuckstick. It’s not from the new crop of phony John Galts who are spurning those hive-minded liberal institutions just so they can screw the socialist overlord’s new tax bill.
OK, this says basically the same thing I said a little over an hour ago, but approximately three orders of magnitude better.
According to The Cornell Alumni Magazine, Cornell’s endowment, which was valued at $6.1 billion on June 30, 2008, fell 27 percent during the second half of 2008.
Returns on Dartmouth’s endowment had dropped by 18 percent, or $700 million, as of Dec. 31, College officials disclosed on Thursday. The loss will require the College to implement staff layoffs, according to vice president of finance and administration Adam Keller.
Santa Clara University: As former President Paul Locatelli, S.J., prepared to leave for a working sabbatical, he had one last announcement to make to the campus community, and it wasn’t a pleasant one.
In a letter addressed to students and parents, Locatelli explained that the university’s endowment has been in a state of decline over the past year.
In a letter to students, faculty and staff, Princeton President Shirley M. Tilghman said university officials will seek to cut $50 million in spending for the 2009-10 academic year because of a rapidly-shrinking endowment.
Harvard endowment recently reported a 22% drop in the funds value from a year ago. The 22% drop does not include the drop in assets which are managed by external managers. Those numbers have not come in yet and they are expected to add to the decline. 22% may be a conservative estimate.
A report to the UNC-Chapel Hill Board of Trustees on Thursday revealed that the endowment, worth $2.5 billion in July, had lost 13 percent of its value, or about $320 million.
“It’s certainly the toughest time I’ve experienced,” Jon King, president of the UNC Investment Fund, said Thursday at a meeting of UNC-CH trustees. The fund manages private money donated to UNC-Chapel Hill.
Sure! Keep hammering Wall St. NO PROBLEM!
Can you not even acknowledge that making $250,000 is not rich
Um, no. Someone making 5X the median household income of $50,000 is pretty well off.
and that most people making that have earned their way to getting to that point through honest hard work
Nobody said they hadn’t.
that they’ve seen their net worth halved or worse in the last two years, dividends cut to near zero
Join the club, we’ve all taken it in the pooper.
and are now being asked to pay up more in taxes
When the country is in trouble, we need to step up.
more in energy costs, more in health care, college expenses
And so has everyone else. The difference is many in the upper income brackets can far more easily absorb these hits.
That they’ve in many cases been frugal in ways that people in lower income brackets aren’t
First of all – some have, some haven’t. And for this class frugality is a choice it isn’t for the regular person.
and now are being asked to pay for people who overstepped their budgets and took out second mortgages for home improvements?
And what about the people who didn’t do any of that but had their mortgage rates skyrocket? And the people who live paycheck to paycheck and have been fired? And without the golden parachutes of some of the Wall Street titans who made and profited from this crisis in the first place?
The economy sucks for everyone. The rich are being asked to pay what amounts to a nominal increase for them in order to help get us out of the mess. Somehow they lived in the exact same tax brackets during the Clinton era and were able to eke out massive wealth.
Why the Obama Tax Hikes Won’t Kill Charity
No, not everyone is taking it in the pooper. If you live off of the Gov. you’re fine. If you pay no taxes, you’re fine.
“When the country is in trouble we need to step up”
By we, you mean working taxpayers, right? Everyone else gets to ’skate’
Keep hammering Wall St
Wall St. has been hammered by the dishonest hedge funders trading worthless CDOs, dishonest CEOs looting their companies and fudging earnings, and dishonest I-Bankers convincing their marks to do bad deals. You have an impressive case of Stockholm Syndrome, joaquin… these guys screwed you over, and you’re taking the side of your captors. As well as ignoring all the points of the other commenters in favor of mindless trolling and non-sequiturs.
I’ve no sympathy for those who supported Bush’s stupid budget policies for the past 8 years who are now whining. They were collaborators in one of the most destructive administrations in my lifetime. If they’re having problems now, it’s obviously because they were too stupid to support decent policies over the past 8 years, and they’re just reaping what they’ve sown. The sad part is that a lot of working people who were shut out of the system over the past 8 years while right-wingers called them “traitors” are suffering right now.
So who are these people who are never charged tax? Oh, right, they don’t exist.
*PFFFFT* Silly little head-fake, Willis. Shame nobody bit! Ha!
joaquin noted:
“If you live off of the Gov. you’re fine. If you pay no taxes, you’re fine.”
First off, if you life off the Gov. you’re decidedly NOT FINE. It means that you’re so poor that what little remains of our tattered social net can help you out. Don’t forget, Clinton reformed welfare. So those people who are “fine” have a very limited clock to raise their situation in an environment where it seems like everyone is racing toward the bottom.
Secondly, who doesn’t pay taxes? I’ve heard the assertion from conservatives again and again that there is a huge population of people that don’t pay taxes. Let me clue you in on a fact of the US tax code. There are income taxes, and there are lots of other taxes. The poorest are exempted from paying income taxes. (BTW, the poverty line has not exactly kept up with inflation and a higher cost of living over the last 25 years.) Those same poor will be taxed on things they purchase like food, fuel, etc.
EVERYONE who spends money pays taxes.
There are income taxes, and there are lots of other taxes.
Locus, don’t bother. People have been over this with him, but his Hannity track is stuck on repeat.
you find a lot of people who are in very good shape with large ne[t] worths are in many cases the people you’d never suspect, due to their frugality.
What, like the lady down the street who has 47 cats and never leaves the house?
FINE = Not affected by the Obama Recession. DUH?
My apologies!
It’s not the Obama Recession it’s the Obama Bear Market.
I’ve heard the assertion from conservatives again and again that there is a huge population of people that don’t pay taxes.
Fucking deadbeat minor children. Grumble, grumble.
Joaquin, are you a professional douchenozzle or is it just a hobby?
Ugh, at least drop the Orwellian doublespeak. The rich, as you have defined them, aren’t going to be “asked” to do anything. They are going to be told. You guys think they have extra money that they don’t need, and you’re going to go take it. Simple as that.
You guys think they have extra money that they don’t need, and you’re going to go take it.
0.08%
Seriously, get off the fainting couch already.
Huh? What is 0×08%? It certainly isn’t the difference between 39.6% and 35%.. It’s just funny to watch you guys parrot politician speak – the rich are being “asked” to pay their “fair” share. As if “asked” and “fair” have anything to do with it.
Can you not even acknowledge that making $250,000 is not rich …
Can we first acknowledge that the median income in the US is somewhere around $45,000?
Guys who borrowed money to start a business and failed are not getting bailed out. But guys who took out a second mortgage for unnecessary and purely cosmetic home improvements in many cases are.
First of all, the “Homeowner Affordability and Stability Plan” only applies to loans “held or securitized by Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac.”
From the White House website:
Also, if your at risk of foreclosure and have two mortgages, the plan only covers the first mortgage.
So if you took a second mortgage to build a pool you are not automatically guaranteed to get assistance. indeed, you may be totally shit out of luck.
Second, as to the small business comment, it’s neat how you can so readily point to fraud and irresponsibility on the part of home owners while, apparently, “guys who borrowed money to start a small business and failed” are not subject to the same scrutiny.
So all you have to do is borrow money to start a company that rents artificial snow making machines in Alaska and you’re a golden saint of the economy — unlike all those greedy middle class homeowners? Just borrow money and fail and you should get government money. Do you not care about the business model? Whether the company was run responsibly?
But there’s also the fact that Obama plans to:
Eliminate capital gains taxes for small businesses and create a new Small Business Health Tax Credit to help small businesses provide affordable health insurance to their employees.
Dennis, before you start spewing talking points, please do try to look this shit up first.
“Joaquin, are you a professional douchenozzle or is it just a hobby?”
Douchenozzle eh? Kinda tells me where your head’s at.
No, actually I’m a very successful guppy fisherman, but my hobby is R E development.
fafaroo – Talking business, capital gains, depreciation, second mortgages, property values and business models with these guys is like talking about molecular biology with toddlers. It’s cute and they make funny faces, but at the end of the day……………………………
None of us should be getting tax increases. Neither of the candidates would have given my taxes back, but at least with Obama my taxes are going to good stuff like roads and schools and not as much environmental destruction. Republicans like to talk about pulling yourself up and being self reliant, and that’s fine. I wholeheartedly agree. Give me my taxes back and I’ll go buy my own benefits. You can’t take my taxes and then talk about how times are tough. I want something for my money, or stop taking my money.
IN THE YOU JUST CAN’T MAKE THIS UP DEPARTMENT:
Twitter cofounder and CEO Ev Williams is headed to the White House today.
The administration invited him to join a “young business leaders” summit to discuss the economic crises.
As Ev himself puts it — in a Twitter message, of course — “[this] must mean they’re *really* out of ideas.”
BWAAAAA HAAAA HAAA!
Will somebody please take the training wheels off this administration!!!
They invited a young technology innovator to join the conversation?
The horror!
As Ev himself puts it — in a Twitter message, of course — “[this] must mean they’re *really* out of ideas.”
Another one for the “conservatives have no sense of humor” file, sub-filed under “tone deaf to self-deprecative jokes”.
I dunno if I can do this anymore. Reading the absolute shit that idiots like joaquin post… frankly, it’s too goddamn aggravating, and it’s causing me psychological stress. Which, in turn, pisses me off, because I’m letting a tiny-brained cockstain of a human being affect me. It’s a vicious cycle.
I think I need a break.
I find it very difficult to be insulted by one that goes by mambochicken23. Maybe it’s me…………..
So, jokein, let me get this straight:
Republicans sitting around twittering IN THE MIDDLE OF A PRESIDENTIAL SPEECH TO CONGRESS = a brilliant new innovation that will make the R’s seem funky fresh to the young voters and recapture the policy high ground
Obama inviting the founder of Twitter to talk with a young business leaders summit = EPIC FAIL
Got it.
In powerlifting, the natural advantage within each weight class usually goes to the shortest competitors within that weight class. This is because of the way things like strength of materials and leverage works.
In money earning, the natural advantage within each educational class usually goes to the most ruthless competitors within that educational class. This is because of the way things like human power politics works.
Not sure what your point is.
That’s a shocker.
Not everyone is getting bailed out of their bad decisions. Guys who borrowed money to start a business and failed are not getting bailed out. But guys who took out a second mortgage for unnecessary and purely cosmetic home improvements in many cases are. Improvements that a lot of wealthier people might’ve passed on because the expense didn’t make sense to them.
That’s because the new bankruptcy laws (pushed by the ultra cons in congress, mind you) protect the former, but not the latter.
Tax cuts Tax cuts Tax cuts are what get the economy rolling.
Tried it, and it didn’t take.
As an added bonus, a thought experiment:
You have 11 citizens in your country, and a $50,000 tax bill to pay. You must decide between taxing:
A. the 1 who makes $500,000 a year (all $50,000 tax)
B. the 10 who make $50,000 ($5000 each tax) a year.
Those are the rules. Now the breakdown:
A. If taxed, the one $500,000 earner will have to lay off one of the other ten.
B. If taxed, the ten $50,000 earners will purchase $5000 less product from the big earner, resulting in one of them getting laid off.
It
Maybe it’s me…………..
It is, trust me.
It is obvious that less taxes is a good thing for everybody. But regarding taxing the rich vs. taxing the poor, and how it impacts the economy, it
You have 11 citizens in your country, and a $50,000 tax bill to pay. You must decide between taxing:
Easy. You give a tax cut to the 1 who makes $500,000, increase the taxes of the other ten and pass the deficit onto the next ten when you get booted out.
I give up.
Talk slower, freD.
Damned thing displays my preview but cuts me off.
Either way, the ten lose. The one with the power wins.
So it all becomes a matter of taxing 1 or taxing 10.
Except, as has been pointed out, we had this tax rate before and it didn’t cause chaos.
A. If taxed, the one $500,000 earner will have to lay off one of the other ten.
Which is the funny thing: the $500,000 earner would not have to lay off one of the other ten, he’d just have to accept that this year he’s only making $475,000.
As Dennis tells me, such people want “everybody” to succeed, which seems to go against the idea of deciding that one of these people must fail.
In your thought experiment, the big earner is perfectly willing to watch 10% of his neighbors starve rather than give up even a fraction of their surplus wealth.
But remember, there’s no such thing as a rich, uncaring fat cat.
In your thought experiment, the big earner is perfectly willing to watch 10% of his neighbors starve rather than give up even a fraction of their surplus wealth.
Dude, did you see the 2010 Bentley? Totally getting one.
I forgot: Your little country has to compete in an ultra competitive global economy.
Some say that if the rich are richer they will be more likely to buy complex assemblies (such as the 2010 Bentley) which makes for an economic trickle down effect with all those parts suppliers, lunch counters, etc..
But others say that if the rich are richer many of them will put their money into speculative investments, like real estate, mortgage backed securities, and commodities like oil, which winds up destabilizing the economy.
Po folks usually spend on daily necessities, like toothpaste, gas, medical checkups, school supplies.. much of it classified as domestic spending.
Where’d all the conservatives go? Oh.. It’s past work time and they’ve all gone home. My bad.
joaquin says, March 6, 2009 at 10:59 am
I’ll tell you who is concerned, US colleges and universities. Endowments are way down. I wonder why?
You mean trickle down doesn’t work so good in tough times like now, and all the fat cats who wrote off their university donations suddenly don’t need (or can’t get) all those tax deductions anymore? And of course this is all Obama’s fault, as is every single frelling event in world history since he took over the clusterCheney the Republican’t junta left him? Do tell…
It’s not just that the useless and hypocritical lies being told by the Rush Limbaugh Brigade have been proven so wrong for so long (and yet still keep being parroted here as if they are some sort of rational justification for their idiocy) – it’s that they just keep on driving off the cliff, oblivious to their lunacy.
But it is funny to see the Republican’ts still blaming the liberals for their own mistakes, and hammering them when they still try and rescue Republican’ts from disasters. A cinservative version of the odious liberal characters from the Young Ones (if anyone else remembers that short lived show).
I guess it’s okay if we laugh – as long as we don’t point…
Haplo9 says: “Huh? What is 0×08%? It certainly isn’t the difference between 39.6% and 35%..”
Wow. Haplo9 can’t do basic math. Colour me surprised.
$2300 is roughly 0.8% of $300,000.
How did all these John Galts make it through the 90’s anyways? Because all Obama is going to do is restore tax levels to those levels.
Seriously, how do these fucktards make it through the day, let alone a decade when supposedly things were so horrible? Fact is, nine out of ten of them made a lot more money under Clinton than they ever did under a Republican presidency.
“Fact is, nine out of ten of them made a lot more money under Clinton than they ever did under a Republican presidency.”
The top 10% do much better under Republicans when compared to the bottom 90% on average.
However, the EVERYONE does better under Democrats when compared to Republicans on average.