It seems the conservatives hate it. Why give away the wealth someone earned via higher taxes to someone else that doesn't make much money? That's class warfare...you are punishing the rich people by raising their taxes to pay for the lower taxes of the middle class. You're redistributing wealth. That's Un-American! Oh wait a second. For the past 8 years this is exactly what has been going on! The very thing you conservatives hate is HAPPENING RIGHT NOW. The only difference is the wealth has been being distributed to the very rich class. The middle class pay much more on a percentage basis than the very rich, so effectively the middle class is paying for the tax cuts on the rich. The middle class is being punished...well...for no good reason. Don't take my word for it, look at the stats. For the past years the wealth has been trickling up to the top more and more. Class warfare? The top 5% hold 50% of all the wealth and growing, while the middle class has seen their wages stall or drop. This IS class warfare.
Some of you will say the the upper class pay the vast majority of income tax and that is true. Why? Because thats where all the money is. The middle class don't account for that much revenue. Why? Its not because they dont pay their taxes, and its because they have a low tax rate...its because they have such a small piece of the pie, their taxes don't amount to much.
Wake up, the very thing you oppose is already happening. There is a class war, and the middle class is getting dominated year after year. Redistribution of wealth? 5% holding 50% of the wealth? I would say current policy has redistributed wealth very very efficiently.
Conservatives have differing views. Take Sarah "national disgrace" Palin who gained a lot of popularity by doing this. "The key to Sarah Palin's popularity in Alaska might have something to do with the fact that this Friday, her administration will give every man, woman, and child in Alaska a $3,269 check. What did Palin do to free up this kind of money? She increased the oil tax from a 10 percent gross revenue tax to a 25 percent profits tax. The result was a massive influx of cash to state coffers. BP, for example, saw its state taxes increase by 480 percent. " http://blogs.tnr.com/tnr/blogs/the_plank/archive/2008/09/12/palin-s-oil-tax-heresy.aspx Palin lead this effort to pass a WINDFALL tax on oil companies (note to conservatives: last I read, you thought the best way to produce LESS of something was to TAX it) and then cut a checks totalling $3200 to each citizen. NO wonder she is popular. http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2008103325_alaskatax07.html ANd to top it off, this $6 billion tax had enough left over so that Ak could go on a spending spree. So Palin the alleged conservative, redistributes wealth and is a tax and spend liberal. http://www.boston.com/news/nation/a...oil_taxes_alaska_spending_soared_under_palin/ Seneca
Jon, you post shit without any links whatsoever. Please show me ten years of tax receipts broken down by income levels, and supporting data on increasing relative wealth by the top "5%". I know plenty of top 5% folks and on average they're worth 40% less than a year ago. Including Buffet and Gates. This is what I see. I see an America where a dumb broad works as a desk jockey- like most of the 2.6 million employees of the Federal government-and retires after 30 years (i.e. in her mid 50's) and makes 60k a year in pension with all inclusive health care. At the same time I see an America where she makes 3x more in guaranteed passive income than me and I'm a friggin millionaire. Meaning in this rate a self employed entrepreneur would need to be a triple millionaire to retire with what she's making. Not to mention managers and department heads who're making 10k a month in retirement on the public dole. The ruling elites who are sucking off the middle class ARE NOT the board of XOM but the retired government worker living next door....
Wow, you're a millionaire who can't make more than $20,000 a year in passive income. You need to find a different line of work.
Risk free? No sorry I can't. In case you haven't noticed this crash was due to folks taking too much risk to achieve lofty 9% returns. My income last year was 8x that 20k and through today this year is 6x btw.
We all know people dont click links. As far as the wealth itself goes: "In the United States, wealth is highly concentrated in a relatively few hands. As of 2001, the top 1% of households (the upper class) owned 33.4% of all privately held wealth, and the next 19% (the managerial, professional, and small business stratum) had 51%, which means that just 20% of the people owned a remarkable 84%, leaving only 16% of the wealth for the bottom 80% (wage and salary workers). In terms of financial wealth, the top 1% of households had an even greater share: 39.7%. Table 1 and Figure 1 present further details drawn from the careful work of economist Edward N. Wolff at New York University (2004)." <img src="http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/images/wealth/Figure_1.gif"> You asked to see the growing gap Table 6: Distribution of income in the United States, 1982-2000 Income Top 1% Next 19% Bottom 80% 1982 12.8% 39.1% 48.1% 1988 16.6% 38.9% 44.5% 1991 15.7% 40.7% 43.7% 1994 14.4% 40.8% 44.9% 1997 16.6% 39.6% 43.8% 2000 20.0% 38.7% 41.4% From Wolff (2004). <img src="http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/images/wealth/Figure_5.gif"> <img src="http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/images/wealth/Figure_7.gif">
Do you have data through today? Does your data include pensions. You're missing the larger, deeper points that only Pabst makes. A government worker on a 100k a year pension-even if he's penniless has de facto worth greater than a puny millionaire.
I'm looking for new data now. You are right, the rich ALWAYS take a hit when the stock market crashes. The top 1% (thats ONE PERCENT) own 1/3rd of all stock, while the bottom 80% owns just 1/10th. Please explain your pension point a little more, im not quite following.