Income gap widens between rich & poor

Discussion in 'Economics' started by peilthetraveler, Sep 28, 2009.

  1. Myth: 100% tax = progressive tax. 100% tax = 100% tax, and nothing else.

    Myth: more productivity = always more income. This means that the CEO of Lehman Brothers was very productive to have a 400 million a year salary.

    Myth: the rich are disproportionally heavy taxed. Warren Buffett, richest man in the world, had a 17% tax rate in 2008. I saw him say it himself on CNBC, so it's FACT. His secretary had a 33% tax rate, also shown in the same tape.

    Right now we have a regressive tax, not a progressive tax in the US.
     
    #31     Sep 29, 2009
  2. You are SO FULL OF SHIT! Go flush yourself down the toilet and do the world a solid.

    Buffet and a few others may get away with such "structurings", but they are not the norm. (Buffe's tax bracket likely due to the fact nearly all of his gains are derived from capital profits... while his secretary is taxed at ordinary income rates.)

    That was such at TOTALLY STUPID comment, you're going on my lonnnng list of "DUMBASS POSTERS... WITH NOTHING OF VALUE TO CONTRIBUTE".
     
    #32     Sep 29, 2009
  3. Buffett also mentioned he does his tax himself, thus not uses any so called "structurings". Sounds to me like a default regressive tax.
     
    #33     Sep 29, 2009
  4. It depends on your definition of wealth. IMHO wealth is both value of both done and future work. When goverment throw a lot of money to go to the moon, and discovered a lot of new processes and advanced materials and technologies in the effort, it created wealth (as side effect, though) because future work was more productive.
    But I'm with you if you speak of today's governments.
     
    #34     Sep 29, 2009
  5. IMHO You and Schatafagos should define "rich".

    Probably he consider itsself to be one (and pay a lot) while you consider "rich" someone with a lot greater wealth (tens of millions a year?) and capable to dodge taxes (as all really wealthy do, see tax havens).

    Please state your numbers: total wealth (assets) and year income of a "rich".
     
    #35     Sep 29, 2009
  6. M. Thatcher said "The problem with Socialism is that, sooner or later, you run out of other peoples money."
     
    #36     Sep 29, 2009
  7. Well, Obama apparently defines rich as making $250K per year. The maximum Federal income tax starts at what, $320K per year for marrieds?

    "Some" dodge taxes with "tax havens". Maybe that's temporary and illegal... maybe they haven't dodged taxes at all, only postponed... piper soon to be paid??
     
    #37     Sep 29, 2009
  8. 138k in lower NY and you`re in the poverty category...

    That about covers your mortage and tax liabilities across the board. Forget about feeding yourself.

    Another BS broad stroke article from yoohoo.
     
    #38     Sep 29, 2009
  9. A few years back, the wife of a client said to me, "just because my husband is a doctor, people think we have money"...

    They have 4 kids, pay lots in taxes. How much do you think they have left? It aint' "gobs"...
     
    #39     Sep 29, 2009
  10. That's because of massive loans they end up accruing having to pay back.
     
    #40     Sep 29, 2009