Discussion:
Hey kids Remember a time when the rich paid their fair share?
Add Reply
wolfbat359
2018-04-07 00:34:56 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Loading Image...
El Castor
2018-04-07 06:57:37 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Fri, 6 Apr 2018 17:34:56 -0700 (PDT), wolfbat359
Post by wolfbat359
https://scontent-dfw5-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/30221770_2367484649929166_2476067583042815952_n.jpg?_nc_cat=0&oh=528a98a7379c0d49742f1c39c7d973a5&oe=5B657A5F
Tax year 2015 -- Percentage of Federal Personal Income Tax Paid
Top 1% 39.04%
Top 5% 59.58%
Top 10% 70.59%
Top 25% 86.62%
Top 50% 97.17%
Bottom 50% 2.83%

In 1980 when Tiedrich was in his 20's ...
Top 1% Paid 19.29%
Bottom 50% Paid 7.02%
https://www.ntu.org/foundation/page/who-pays-income-taxes
wolfbat359
2018-04-07 15:22:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by El Castor
On Fri, 6 Apr 2018 17:34:56 -0700 (PDT), wolfbat359
Post by wolfbat359
https://scontent-dfw5-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/30221770_2367484649929166_2476067583042815952_n.jpg?_nc_cat=0&oh=528a98a7379c0d49742f1c39c7d973a5&oe=5B657A5F
Tax year 2015 -- Percentage of Federal Personal Income Tax Paid
Top 1% 39.04%
Top 5% 59.58%
Top 10% 70.59%
Top 25% 86.62%
Top 50% 97.17%
Bottom 50% 2.83%
In 1980 when Tiedrich was in his 20's ...
Top 1% Paid 19.29%
Bottom 50% Paid 7.02%
https://www.ntu.org/foundation/page/who-pays-income-taxes
Shows how wages have become flat while productivity per worker has increased!
El Castor
2018-04-07 16:45:26 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sat, 7 Apr 2018 08:22:01 -0700 (PDT), wolfbat359
Post by wolfbat359
Post by El Castor
On Fri, 6 Apr 2018 17:34:56 -0700 (PDT), wolfbat359
Post by wolfbat359
https://scontent-dfw5-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/30221770_2367484649929166_2476067583042815952_n.jpg?_nc_cat=0&oh=528a98a7379c0d49742f1c39c7d973a5&oe=5B657A5F
Tax year 2015 -- Percentage of Federal Personal Income Tax Paid
Top 1% 39.04%
Top 5% 59.58%
Top 10% 70.59%
Top 25% 86.62%
Top 50% 97.17%
Bottom 50% 2.83%
In 1980 when Tiedrich was in his 20's ...
Top 1% Paid 19.29%
Bottom 50% Paid 7.02%
https://www.ntu.org/foundation/page/who-pays-income-taxes
Shows how wages have become flat while productivity per worker has increased!
So the rich were paying their fair share in 1980 when Tiedrich was in
his 20's, but they aren't paying their fair share now?
GLOBALIST
2018-04-07 09:46:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by wolfbat359
https://scontent-dfw5-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/30221770_2367484649929166_2476067583042815952_n.jpg?_nc_cat=0&oh=528a98a7379c0d49742f1c39c7d973a5&oe=5B657A5F
OMG had no idea that rich people did all those things?
Jack Fate
2018-04-07 10:00:42 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by GLOBALIST
Post by wolfbat359
https://scontent-dfw5-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/30221770_2367484649929166_2476067583042815952_n.jpg?_nc_cat=0&oh=528a98a7379c0d49742f1c39c7d973a5&oe=5B657A5F
OMG had no idea that rich people did all those things?
They didn't, stupid. The post went right over your stupid head.
GLOBALIST
2018-04-07 10:00:55 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by GLOBALIST
Post by wolfbat359
https://scontent-dfw5-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/30221770_2367484649929166_2476067583042815952_n.jpg?_nc_cat=0&oh=528a98a7379c0d49742f1c39c7d973a5&oe=5B657A5F
OMG had no idea that rich people did all those things?
================================
Not one word about rich people building our public schools

https://www.newamerica.org/education-policy/policy-explainers/early-ed-prek-12/school-funding/
Jack Fate
2018-04-07 10:03:44 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by GLOBALIST
Post by GLOBALIST
Post by wolfbat359
https://scontent-dfw5-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/30221770_2367484649929166_2476067583042815952_n.jpg?_nc_cat=0&oh=528a98a7379c0d49742f1c39c7d973a5&oe=5B657A5F
OMG had no idea that rich people did all those things?
================================
Not one word about rich people building our public schools
https://www.newamerica.org/education-policy/policy-explainers/early-ed-prek-12/school-funding/
You didn't get it. By taxing the rich, those things got done. The rich
didn't do it, stupid.
me
2018-04-07 15:19:53 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
The politically relevant fact of the matter is - Plunder is more popular than liberty.
http://www.endit.info/Reality.shtml
http://www.endit.info/Costs.shtml
rumpelstiltskin
2018-04-07 17:20:17 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Fri, 6 Apr 2018 17:34:56 -0700 (PDT), wolfbat359
Post by wolfbat359
https://scontent-dfw5-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/30221770_2367484649929166_2476067583042815952_n.jpg?_nc_cat=0&oh=528a98a7379c0d49742f1c39c7d973a5&oe=5B657A5F
Where did "fair share" of taxes come from? There's no such
thing! That's just phony propaganda trying to set an artificial
maximum for taxes on the rich. "The people" should decide,
in a dynamic way, what's the best way to distribute taxes
so that some people aren't starving while others are living
in luxury, IMV, and how much of a tradeoff is worth it to
"encourage innovation", assuming that monster profits really
have that much effect on innovation at all. If "the rich" start
talking about "fair share", that should be a red flag to
everybody else that they're trying to protect their own assets
by fleecing other people into thinking, incorrectly, that there's
a "natural" limit on how much everybody should pay. There's
nothing "natural" at all about that.

I'm disgusted by all the crap that gets laid on people, and
that people are so gullible as to allow themselves to get
suckered into it. Maybe we need to develop brain steroids,
so as to cut down on the number of microcephalics in the
general population, since there are obviously too many, and
they vote!
islander
2018-04-07 18:32:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by El Castor
On Fri, 6 Apr 2018 17:34:56 -0700 (PDT), wolfbat359
Post by wolfbat359
https://scontent-dfw5-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/30221770_2367484649929166_2476067583042815952_n.jpg?_nc_cat=0&oh=528a98a7379c0d49742f1c39c7d973a5&oe=5B657A5F
Where did "fair share" of taxes come from? There's no such
thing! That's just phony propaganda trying to set an artificial
maximum for taxes on the rich. "The people" should decide,
in a dynamic way, what's the best way to distribute taxes
so that some people aren't starving while others are living
in luxury, IMV, and how much of a tradeoff is worth it to
"encourage innovation", assuming that monster profits really
have that much effect on innovation at all. If "the rich" start
talking about "fair share", that should be a red flag to
everybody else that they're trying to protect their own assets
by fleecing other people into thinking, incorrectly, that there's
a "natural" limit on how much everybody should pay. There's
nothing "natural" at all about that.
I'm disgusted by all the crap that gets laid on people, and
that people are so gullible as to allow themselves to get
suckered into it. Maybe we need to develop brain steroids,
so as to cut down on the number of microcephalics in the
general population, since there are obviously too many, and
they vote!
There didn't seem to be any lack of innovation in the '40s and '50s when
the top marginal income tax rate was 92%! Then, the Democrats made the
mistake of reducing the top marginal rate to 70% in '66. Republicans
have been claiming ever since that this was the primary reason that the
economy improved. Never mind that LBJ put a lot of money into the
economy to run the Vietnam war!
me
2018-04-07 18:41:15 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
On Fri, 6 Apr 2018 17:34:56 -0700 (PDT), wolfbat359
Post by wolfbat359
https://scontent-dfw5-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/30221770_2367484649929166_2476067583042815952_n.jpg?_nc_cat=0&oh=528a98a7379c0d49742f1c39c7d973a5&oe=5B657A5F
Where did "fair share" of taxes come from? There's no such
thing! That's just phony propaganda trying to set an artificial
maximum for taxes on the rich. "The people" should decide,
in a dynamic way, what's the best way to distribute taxes
so that some people aren't starving while others are living
in luxury, IMV, and how much of a tradeoff is worth it to
"encourage innovation", assuming that monster profits really
have that much effect on innovation at all. If "the rich" start
talking about "fair share", that should be a red flag to
everybody else that they're trying to protect their own assets
by fleecing other people into thinking, incorrectly, that there's
a "natural" limit on how much everybody should pay. There's
nothing "natural" at all about that.
I'm disgusted by all the crap that gets laid on people, and
that people are so gullible as to allow themselves to get
suckered into it. Maybe we need to develop brain steroids,
so as to cut down on the number of microcephalics in the
general population, since there are obviously too many, and
they vote!
There didn't seem to be any lack of innovation in the '40s and '50s when
the top marginal income tax rate was 92%! Then, the Democrats made the
mistake of reducing the top marginal rate to 70% in '66. Republicans
have been claiming ever since that this was the primary reason that the
economy improved. Never mind that LBJ put a lot of money into the
economy to run the Vietnam war!
see
https://www.mercatus.org/publication/tax-rates-vs-tax-revenues
islander
2018-04-07 21:07:23 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by me
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
On Fri, 6 Apr 2018 17:34:56 -0700 (PDT), wolfbat359
Post by wolfbat359
https://scontent-dfw5-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/30221770_2367484649929166_2476067583042815952_n.jpg?_nc_cat=0&oh=528a98a7379c0d49742f1c39c7d973a5&oe=5B657A5F
Where did "fair share" of taxes come from? There's no such
thing! That's just phony propaganda trying to set an artificial
maximum for taxes on the rich. "The people" should decide,
in a dynamic way, what's the best way to distribute taxes
so that some people aren't starving while others are living
in luxury, IMV, and how much of a tradeoff is worth it to
"encourage innovation", assuming that monster profits really
have that much effect on innovation at all. If "the rich" start
talking about "fair share", that should be a red flag to
everybody else that they're trying to protect their own assets
by fleecing other people into thinking, incorrectly, that there's
a "natural" limit on how much everybody should pay. There's
nothing "natural" at all about that.
I'm disgusted by all the crap that gets laid on people, and
that people are so gullible as to allow themselves to get
suckered into it. Maybe we need to develop brain steroids,
so as to cut down on the number of microcephalics in the
general population, since there are obviously too many, and
they vote!
There didn't seem to be any lack of innovation in the '40s and '50s when
the top marginal income tax rate was 92%! Then, the Democrats made the
mistake of reducing the top marginal rate to 70% in '66. Republicans
have been claiming ever since that this was the primary reason that the
economy improved. Never mind that LBJ put a lot of money into the
economy to run the Vietnam war!
see
https://www.mercatus.org/publication/tax-rates-vs-tax-revenues
I'm surprised to see this from the Mercatus Center, a Libertarian think
tank. Basically, it refutes the Laffer curve and essentially says that,
as a percentage of GDP, the government take is independent of tax rate.
One can only conclude that a progressive tax rate has no effect on the
economy.
me
2018-04-08 03:01:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
I don’t see it your way. You will have to explain your contention so a simpleton like me understands your reasoning.
rumpelstiltskin
2018-04-08 06:10:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sat, 7 Apr 2018 14:07:23 -0700, islander <***@priracy.com> wrote:

<snip>
Post by islander
I'm surprised to see this from the Mercatus Center, a Libertarian think
tank. Basically, it refutes the Laffer curve and essentially says that,
as a percentage of GDP, the government take is independent of tax rate.
One can only conclude that a progressive tax rate has no effect on the
economy.
George Orwell would have enjoyed the term "think tank"!
mg
2018-04-08 02:14:25 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Fri, 6 Apr 2018 17:34:56 -0700 (PDT), wolfbat359
Post by wolfbat359
https://scontent-dfw5-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/30221770_2367484649929166_2476067583042815952_n.jpg?_nc_cat=0&oh=528a98a7379c0d49742f1c39c7d973a5&oe=5B657A5F
The tax rate for the 0.01% of taxpayers fell from about 70% to about
35%
http://www.mymoneyblog.com/historical-federal-tax-rates-by-income-group.html
b***@gmail.com
2018-04-08 03:58:58 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by El Castor
On Fri, 6 Apr 2018 17:34:56 -0700 (PDT), wolfbat359
Post by wolfbat359
https://scontent-dfw5-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/30221770_2367484649929166_2476067583042815952_n.jpg?_nc_cat=0&oh=528a98a7379c0d49742f1c39c7d973a5&oe=5B657A5F
The tax rate for the 0.01% of taxpayers fell from about 70% to about
35%
http://www.mymoneyblog.com/historical-federal-tax-rates-by-income-group.html
Nobody ever paid 70% or 92%. I read somewhere that there were only about 1000 tax returns ever filed that had any income in the top brackets. Why would anybody work if the government was going to take it all?
mg
2018-04-08 06:17:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by b***@gmail.com
Post by El Castor
On Fri, 6 Apr 2018 17:34:56 -0700 (PDT), wolfbat359
Post by wolfbat359
https://scontent-dfw5-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/30221770_2367484649929166_2476067583042815952_n.jpg?_nc_cat=0&oh=528a98a7379c0d49742f1c39c7d973a5&oe=5B657A5F
The tax rate for the 0.01% of taxpayers fell from about 70% to about
35%
http://www.mymoneyblog.com/historical-federal-tax-rates-by-income-group.html
Nobody ever paid 70% or 92%. I read somewhere that there were only about 1000 tax returns ever filed that had any income in the top brackets. Why would anybody work if the government was going to take it all?
I really don't know. There's an article on that general subject at the
following website, though:
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/22/economists-tax-rich_n_6024430.html
b***@gmail.com
2018-04-08 11:39:48 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by mg
Post by b***@gmail.com
Post by El Castor
On Fri, 6 Apr 2018 17:34:56 -0700 (PDT), wolfbat359
Post by wolfbat359
https://scontent-dfw5-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/30221770_2367484649929166_2476067583042815952_n.jpg?_nc_cat=0&oh=528a98a7379c0d49742f1c39c7d973a5&oe=5B657A5F
The tax rate for the 0.01% of taxpayers fell from about 70% to about
35%
http://www.mymoneyblog.com/historical-federal-tax-rates-by-income-group.html
Nobody ever paid 70% or 92%. I read somewhere that there were only about 1000 tax returns ever filed that had any income in the top brackets. Why would anybody work if the government was going to take it all?
I really don't know. There's an article on that general subject at the
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/22/economists-tax-rich_n_6024430.html
Here's a list of retired public educators who should be taxed at 92% I wouldn't lose any sleep over it. Nice work if you can get it.

"Here are the top five pensions in the state:

Rodney Erickson – Penn State – $477,591
Stephen Benkovic – Penn State – $443,880
William Kingsley – Shippensburg University – $385,819
Leonard Jefferson – Penn State – $371,994
Irene Mitchel – East Stroudsburg University – $332,017

Former Penn State vice president Gary Schultz, who pleaded guilty in the Jerry Sandusky scandal, ranks near the top of the pension list with $330,699.
mg
2018-04-09 00:50:38 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by b***@gmail.com
Post by mg
Post by b***@gmail.com
Post by El Castor
On Fri, 6 Apr 2018 17:34:56 -0700 (PDT), wolfbat359
Post by wolfbat359
https://scontent-dfw5-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/30221770_2367484649929166_2476067583042815952_n.jpg?_nc_cat=0&oh=528a98a7379c0d49742f1c39c7d973a5&oe=5B657A5F
The tax rate for the 0.01% of taxpayers fell from about 70% to about
35%
http://www.mymoneyblog.com/historical-federal-tax-rates-by-income-group.html
Nobody ever paid 70% or 92%. I read somewhere that there were only about 1000 tax returns ever filed that had any income in the top brackets. Why would anybody work if the government was going to take it all?
I really don't know. There's an article on that general subject at the
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/22/economists-tax-rich_n_6024430.html
Here's a list of retired public educators who should be taxed at 92% I wouldn't lose any sleep over it. Nice work if you can get it.
Rodney Erickson – Penn State – $477,591
Stephen Benkovic – Penn State – $443,880
William Kingsley – Shippensburg University – $385,819
Leonard Jefferson – Penn State – $371,994
Irene Mitchel – East Stroudsburg University – $332,017
Former Penn State vice president Gary Schultz, who pleaded guilty in the Jerry Sandusky scandal, ranks near the top of the pension list with $330,699.
It's absolutely outrageous the way the education industry is milking
students for all the traffic will bear, and then some. Here in Utah,
though, tuition costs seem to be reasonable. The price of tuition in
some other states, like California, appear to me to be totally
outrageous, though.

Loading...