Bill O on taxing the rich

[CID1990]

This government's annual operating budget is obscene. Even more so given the poormouthing we hear from departments such as mine as not having enough funding. Runaway waste and poor stewardship of public funds are the norm.

New tax revenues only make the problem worse. Go to a flat or a national sales tax. Cap borrowing at a reasonable percentage of GDP, and then force this government to live within its means. Our grandchildren will thank us.

All this talk about fairness in the tax system is just neo Bolshevism, repackaged for soft headed millenials and nostalgic boomers

You do realize that Reich was responding to O'reilly whining about the fairness of the tax system, right? "Taxes are through the roof on affluent Americans and business profits" and something about it "crashing the economy" - like it did when taxes were actually much higher.

Government is massive and wasteful. You'll get no argument from me there. Then again, depending on which study you look at it, we're at worst par for the course in revenue as a percentage of GDP among OECD countries



Sycophancy of the wealth creators and their tax "burden" is just neo Ancien Regimeism.

I'm not responding to either of them - just making a common sense statement.

Pushing for a flat tax has nothing to do with defending the rich, but I love to see the socialist left contradict themselves by saying it does.

Wealth envy drives this useless debate.

[kalm]

You do realize that Reich was responding to O'reilly whining about the fairness of the tax system, right? "Taxes are through the roof on affluent Americans and business profits" and something about it "crashing the economy" - like it did when taxes were actually much higher.

Government is massive and wasteful. You'll get no argument from me there. Then again, depending on which study you look at it, we're at worst par for the course in revenue as a percentage of GDP among OECD countries



Sycophancy of the wealth creators and their tax "burden" is just neo Ancien Regimeism.

I'm not responding to either of them - just making a common sense statement.

Pushing for a flat tax has nothing to do with defending the rich, but I love to see the socialist left contradict themselves by saying it does.

Wealth envy drives this useless debate.

For some. Just like wealth worship drives the other side of the debate for some. The whole achievement fantasy of hard work and smarts...

I think everyone needs to have skin in the game. With all of the social benefits available through state governments and the federal government, it's ridiculous that impoverished and working poor don't get to see at least a little of their money go the system that's propping them up.

That said, wages are an issue, and we need the takers to be making enough to pay their "fair" share.

“Doctor, here is the problem with the flat tax in the real world,” Wallace noted. “According to the Tax Policy Center, to raise the same amount of revenue we do now, the tax rate would have to be in the low to mid 20 percent range. Low and middle income families would get a big tax hike while wealthy families would actually get a big tax cut.”

“That’s actually not — I don’t agree with that assessment,” Carson insisted. “Because I’ve been in contact with many economists. And in fact, if you eliminate the loopholes and the deductions then you’re really talking about a rate somewhere between 10 and 15 percent.”

Wallace pressed: “I’ve got to tell you that outside experts we talked to, you’re talking in the 20s… For instance, you talked about low-income families. Not only don’t they pay, they actually get an earned income tax credit. Now, you’re going to have them paying 10 to 15 percent of whatever income they have or 20 percent if my experts are right.”

“I’ve got to tell you, a lot of independent studies say that the people who make out like bandits in this are the wealthy,” the Fox News host added.

http://www.rawstory.com/2015/05/billion ... -flat-tax/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Grizalltheway]

You do realize that Reich was responding to O'reilly whining about the fairness of the tax system, right? "Taxes are through the roof on affluent Americans and business profits" and something about it "crashing the economy" - like it did when taxes were actually much higher.

Government is massive and wasteful. You'll get no argument from me there. Then again, depending on which study you look at it, we're at worst par for the course in revenue as a percentage of GDP among OECD countries



Sycophancy of the wealth creators and their tax "burden" is just neo Ancien Regimeism.

Pushing for a flat tax has nothing to do with defending the rich

Maybe not, but it's no more realistic than lefties saying the top 1% should pay a 75% rate or whatever.

[CID1990]

Pushing for a flat tax has nothing to do with defending the rich

Maybe not, but it's no more realistic than lefties saying the top 1% should pay a 75% rate or whatever.

I never claimed it was realistic - no more so than getting this government's annual operating budget under 2 trillion dollars.

[ALPHAGRIZ1]

I would settle for under 800 billion.....................

[houndawg]

I would settle for under 800 billion.....................

Your mom said to tell you you better call today

[Skjellyfetti]

You do realize that Reich was responding to O'reilly whining about the fairness of the tax system, right? "Taxes are through the roof on affluent Americans and business profits" and something about it "crashing the economy" - like it did when taxes were actually much higher.

Government is massive and wasteful. You'll get no argument from me there. Then again, depending on which study you look at it, we're at worst par for the course in revenue as a percentage of GDP among OECD countries



Sycophancy of the wealth creators and their tax "burden" is just neo Ancien Regimeism.

I'm not responding to either of them - just making a common sense statement.

Pushing for a flat tax has nothing to do with defending the rich, but I love to see the socialist left contradict themselves by saying it does.

Wealth envy drives this useless debate.

Wish that chart included Russia for comparison's sake since they have a flat tax.

[Chizzang]

This government's annual operating budget is obscene. Even more so given the poormouthing we hear from departments such as mine as not having enough funding. Runaway waste and poor stewardship of public funds are the norm.

New tax revenues only make the problem worse. Go to a flat or a national sales tax. Cap borrowing at a reasonable percentage of GDP, and then force this government to live within its means. Our grandchildren will thank us.

All this talk about fairness in the tax system is just neo Bolshevism, repackaged for soft headed millenials and nostalgic boomers

Its sad...
O'Reilly and his gang of FOX numb skulls ask for lower taxes on the struggling millionaire
A category which he falls under neatly (Gee really O'Reilly) I bet life is hard on you

Then:
MSNBC screams
And the Bizzaro World Left tells us we need to tax the rich MORE
without any thought about the consequences of such actions

All the while: Its really NOT about taxes
Out Federal Government generates a staggering amount of Tax Revenue - its crazy
Adding more taxes is like adding wood to a house fire (and our federal government is the fire)

They don't need more money to burn...
there's no shortage of money available to our Federal Government

[CID1990]

This government's annual operating budget is obscene. Even more so given the poormouthing we hear from departments such as mine as not having enough funding. Runaway waste and poor stewardship of public funds are the norm.

New tax revenues only make the problem worse. Go to a flat or a national sales tax. Cap borrowing at a reasonable percentage of GDP, and then force this government to live within its means. Our grandchildren will thank us.

All this talk about fairness in the tax system is just neo Bolshevism, repackaged for soft headed millenials and nostalgic boomers

Its sad...
O'Reilly and his gang of FOX numb skulls ask for lower taxes on the struggling millionaire
A category which he falls under neatly (Gee really O'Reilly) I bet life is hard on you

Then:
MSNBC screams
And the Bizzaro World Left tells us we need to tax the rich MORE
without any thought about the consequences of such actions

All the while: Its really NOT about taxes
Out Federal Government generates a staggering amount of Tax Revenue - its crazy
Adding more taxes is like adding wood to a house fire (and our federal government is the fire)

They don't need more money to burn...
there's no shortage of money available to our Federal Government

But it isn't FAIR, Cleets!!

Filthy nasssty hobbitses who pay 60% of what they earn still have millions of dollars in their pocketses!

It isn't fair to us, Precious!

[kalm]

This government's annual operating budget is obscene. Even more so given the poormouthing we hear from departments such as mine as not having enough funding. Runaway waste and poor stewardship of public funds are the norm.

New tax revenues only make the problem worse. Go to a flat or a national sales tax. Cap borrowing at a reasonable percentage of GDP, and then force this government to live within its means. Our grandchildren will thank us.

All this talk about fairness in the tax system is just neo Bolshevism, repackaged for soft headed millenials and nostalgic boomers

Its sad...
O'Reilly and his gang of FOX numb skulls ask for lower taxes on the struggling millionaire
A category which he falls under neatly (Gee really O'Reilly) I bet life is hard on you

Then:
MSNBC screams
And the Bizzaro World Left tells us we need to tax the rich MORE
without any thought about the consequences of such actions

All the while: Its really NOT about taxes
Out Federal Government generates a staggering amount of Tax Revenue - its crazy
Adding more taxes is like adding wood to a house fire (and our federal government is the fire)

They don't need more money to burn...
there's no shortage of money available to our Federal Government

But didn't you put forth the notion awhile back that all governments do is grow? Something about that inevitability?

Our federal government generates a staggering amount of expenses. Then again, we're a really rich and populous country. I'd say both the wealthy and the poor have a pretty good deal here.

[Skjellyfetti]

Who the fuck has a 60% rate?

[CID1990]

Who the **** has a 60% rate?

Well, Trotsky, the top income tax rate is right at 40%. That's before SSA taxes. Then you have the estate and trust taxes that run at 40% over 12,300 dollars. Factor in capital gains along wi the mandatory safety net taxes, and the top 1% are paying around 55% after deductions and shelters.

Unless they follow the Al Sharpton/Willie Nelson model.

So I rounded up a little for a clean number. I could have rounded down to 50% and it would still be ridiculous.

Does that help your (predictable argument that we don't tax the rich enough?

[Chizzang]

But didn't you put forth the notion awhile back that all governments do is grow? Something about that inevitability?

Our federal government generates a staggering amount of expenses. Then again, we're a really rich and populous country. I'd say both the wealthy and the poor have a pretty good deal here.

Never quote me... it makes me look bad

[Skjellyfetti]

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tvLbss-qlhg[/youtube]

[CID1990]

But didn't you put forth the notion awhile back that all governments do is grow? Something about that inevitability?

Our federal government generates a staggering amount of expenses. Then again, we're a really rich and populous country. I'd say both the wealthy and the poor have a pretty good deal here.

Never quote me... it makes me look bad

I don't see how what you're saying here and what you said before are incongruent.

Maybe you were using one o them thar nuances that only appear on klam's radar

[Chizzang]

Never quote me... it makes me look bad

I don't see how what you're saying here and what you said before are incongruent.

Maybe you were using one o them thar nuances that only appear on klam's radar

I'm just be a smart ass...
The only way to slow down a federally funded entity - which grows needlessly - is to strangle its funding
If government agencies are left t their own devices they ONLY GROW

[LeadBolt]

It is easy to cure income inequality by bringing down the top earners with more progressive tax rates, but this does nothing to raise the standard of living for the poor, which should be the focus, imho.

I tend to agree that raising tax revenues to balance a budget is akin to putting a fire out with kerosene, but given the Federal governments propensity for deficit spending, I'm no longer sure, beyond the fact that increasing tax revenue without increasing income brings the whole house of cards down.

We need to do more to spur economic growth and provide jobs, rather than re-distributing wealth, imho. The economic pie is not static and this is not a zero sum game, or progressive arguments would make more sense.

Raising transfer payments to the poor, instead of creating jobs and providing effective training to them to get into better paying jobs, i have come to believe is just a cynical ploy to keep them enslaved to the status quo and a certain political philosophy.

I have recently done some study on FDR and JFK and I'm struck by how we have abandoned their philosophies for improving the lot of the economically disadvantaged through government jobs programs, training, cutting tax rates, and equal opportunity as opposed to increased government dependance and handouts.

I am much more in favor of the increase of self worth and pride among the economically disadvantaged by offering them opportunity to pull them selves up, as opposed to increased maintenance programs which lead to decreased self worth and pride that comes through increased government dependance.

[Skjellyfetti]

great post, leadbolt.

[Chizzang]

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tvLbss-qlhg[/youtube]

If that ^ incredibly stupid human being is an accomplished Doctor...
Then I'm world renowned physicist Erwin Schrodinger

[Ivytalk]

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tvLbss-qlhg[/youtube]

If that ^ incredibly stupid human being is an accomplished Doctor...
Then I'm world renowned physicist Erwin Schrodinger

Hi, Schrodes! Chizzy, that's beneath you. You can disagree with Dr. Carson's stance on the flat tax, and you may think that he's not qualified to be President for whatever reason. But the guy's medical career was stellar.

[Ivytalk]

great post, leadbolt.

OMFG, I actually agree with an Analjelly post!

[SDHornet]

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tvLbss-qlhg[/youtube]

If that ^ incredibly stupid human being is an accomplished Doctor...
Then I'm world renowned physicist Erwin Schrodinger

Racist.

[Chizzang]

If that ^ incredibly stupid human being is an accomplished Doctor...
Then I'm world renowned physicist Erwin Schrodinger

Hi, Schrodes! Chizzy, that's beneath you. You can disagree with Dr. Carson's stance on the flat tax, and you may think that he's not qualified to be President for whatever reason. But the guy's medical career was stellar.

Did you get your idea from the bible too..?



And who said he wasn't qualified to be President..?
Based on the last two presidents this dumb ass is perfect for the job

[CID1990]

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tvLbss-qlhg[/youtube]

If that ^ incredibly stupid human being is an accomplished Doctor...
Then I'm world renowned physicist Erwin Schrodinger

he is a brilliant brain surgeon by all accounts

I think that could be his only bailiwick, though

[kalm]

It is easy to cure income inequality by bringing down the top earners with more progressive tax rates, but this does nothing to raise the standard of living for the poor, which should be the focus, imho.

I tend to agree that raising tax revenues to balance a budget is akin to putting a fire out with kerosene, but given the Federal governments propensity for deficit spending, I'm no longer sure, beyond the fact that increasing tax revenue without increasing income brings the whole house of cards down.

We need to do more to spur economic growth and provide jobs, rather than re-distributing wealth, imho. The economic pie is not static and this is not a zero sum game, or progressive arguments would make more sense.

Raising transfer payments to the poor, instead of creating jobs and providing effective training to them to get into better paying jobs, i have come to believe is just a cynical ploy to keep them enslaved to the status quo and a certain political philosophy.

I have recently done some study on FDR and JFK and I'm struck by how we have abandoned their philosophies for improving the lot of the economically disadvantaged through government jobs programs, training, cutting tax rates, and equal opportunity as opposed to increased government dependance and handouts.

I am much more in favor of the increase of self worth and pride among the economically disadvantaged by offering them opportunity to pull them selves up, as opposed to increased maintenance programs which lead to decreased self worth and pride that comes through increased government dependance.

Good post and I agree with much of it. A couple of questions...

If this is not a zero sum game, why are wages limited or off-shored?

I know it's the new "liberal", but why do you think progressive arguments are contrary to what you've suggested? I hear many progressives chiming the same bells.

What are the leading causes of income inequality?