Wealth distribution in the US

[TheMercenary]

Zero Liability Voters will always support income redistribution. As long as someone else is paying your way why should anyone care. The slate article only reinforces wealth envy and supports wealth redistribution.

[Pete Zicato]

Yeah, because it would be unfair to ask 20% of the population to pay 80% of the taxes just because they have 80% of the money. Riiiiight.

[tw]

Originally Posted by Pete Zicato

Yeah, because it would be unfair to ask 20% of the population to pay 80% of the taxes just because they have 80% of the money. Riiiiight.

With so many extremists hyping myths, it becomes difficult to learn reality.

Taxes as a percentage of income increases as annual incomes increase to $250,000. Then something strange happens. As incoming increase further, the taxes drop dramatically.

Warren Buffet was quite blunt about this. He paid less taxes than his receptionist. And said so repeatedly including to Ted Koppel, live on Nightline. If you are a politician bought and paid for by certain people, then will say anything to avoid that reality.

Economies that have serious fundamental problems have most of their wealth in among the 2%. In America, such destructive wealth distribution has only existed once previously - just before the 1929 stock market crash. So much wealth among so few results in realties such as less job creation. Welcome to an economy advocated and achieved over the past decade. A problem that, ironically, America's richest people (Gates, Buffet, Turner, Soros, etc) have spoken out strongly against. Why would the richest of the rich speak about things against their own interests? Because this unequal wealth distribution is a serious part of America's problem - and is a source of massive campaign contributions to the most wacko extremists in government today.

Same people who wanted corporations to buy elections. Same people who took liberties with the Constitution to subvert American power to that advantage of the richest - at the expense of all others. Ironic. Those who complain about liberal judges are the same wacko extremist conservation who promoted liberal interpretation of the Constitution - to increase this unhealthy wealth distribution.

[DanaC]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

Zero Liability Voters will always support income redistribution. As long as someone else is paying your way why should anyone care. The slate article only reinforces wealth envy and supports wealth redistribution.

Yup. And wealthy fucks will always support their right to pay an insignificant drop from their ocean of wealth as taxes. As long as the rest of us are prepared to pay substantial chunks of our meagre earnings to keep the country running why would they care?

The slate article 'reinforces' wealth envy, but that envy is alreayd there to begin with, and frankly, I think that envy is justified. The obscene extremes of wealth and privelege that provoke that envy in the first place: that's unjustifiable.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by DanaC

Yup. And wealthy fucks will always support their right to pay an insignificant drop from their ocean of wealth as taxes. As long as the rest of us are prepared to pay substantial chunks of our meagre earnings to keep the country running why would they care?

The slate article 'reinforces' wealth envy, but that envy is alreayd there to begin with, and frankly, I think that envy is justified. The obscene extremes of wealth and privelege that provoke that envy in the first place: that's unjustifiable.

If everyone pays the same percent of income there is no substantial difference in the chunks of what you earned.