Tax increases on the 1% can eliminate the deficit, pay for social programs

[PC2]

Tax the rich. Feed the poor. 'Till there are no rich no more.

So they can breed a lot and continue the cycle of mediocrity?

[Fugus]

So they can breed a lot and continue the cycle of mediocrity?

We are not asking for the rich to breed either.

[PC2]

We are not asking for the rich to breed either.

Why not? Poor people should have about 2 kids, to replace themselves. The rich should have many, so wealth doesn't concentrate as much.

[Fugus]

Why not? Poor people should have about 2 kids, to replace themselves. The rich should have many, so wealth doesn't concentrate as much.

Actually, the poor in this nation are contracting as well, immigration is literally the only thing keeping our population growing or even stable.

But I would rather NOT have the same families spreading that wealth between them and I would rather have that wealth spreading between more families due to higher social mobility and chances to succeed.

But I wouldn't mind the current families reproducing at the same rate as the poor though, that isn't an issue. But saying they need to breed to keep the cycle of mediocrity going isn't helping any.

[Sir Andy]

Tax the rich. Feed the poor. 'Till there are no rich no more.

Expected nothing less from a guy with a Guy Fawkes mask.

[Daelak]

This is the primary reason I see to promote some decrease in wealth inequality. I don't care much at all about hard to define concepts like fairness, but I do care about stability and order, and those things are not well served by having a permanent underclass that's desperate enough to get violent.

Which is why, the wealthiest of the wealthy, should be in full support of programs that bring people out of poverty, like free college education, maternity leave, universal healthcare, not only because it is the right thing to do, but also because it will help their investment proftfolios and wealth when you have a healthier, smarter, and more productive national workforce.

[Gmollster11]

Completely pointless when the Government is spending $1 trillion more than they take in. And that's without adding more expenses like the progressives want.

[Daelak]

This is all phenomenal in theory. The reality is that government tax revenue stays between 15-20% of GDP. It's been like this for decades and decades. So while we can take a snap shot of the world and say, if only we tweak this and tweak that everything will be great! What we actually see is the wealthy coming up with other ways to avoid taxes.

Taxes do not bring prosperity. The government destroy wealth because it pays to redistribute it. The government does not create prosperity, it is, by definition, impossible.

That is a fallacy. The multiplier effect of public investment and spending, based off historical records in the modern era shows that public ROI is actually higher and has a more apparent ripple affect IN ALL SECTORS than a targeted private investor or a group of investors ever would.

- - - Updated - - -

Not true, when I am living in CA and my taxes (federal ones) are paying for a statue in a park in ...oh ...lets say TN(it is called pork...it is wrong no matter how you cut it) because it was a member of some politicians family and they wanted a statue for them ...that's a waste.

Maybe we need to figure out what the Govt should and should not pay for, then stick to it first, before we stick it to the 1%.

The general welfare of the country is a good start. Historically the ROI of public investment by the federal government is a lot higher and has changed more industries, let alone created new ones, that the private sector either doesn't have the risk absorbtion or the resources to do. The entire computer/technological revolution in our lives were created through public investment, which created ripples through our post WW-2 economy more than any private venture ever has.

- - - Updated - - -

Completely pointless when the Government is spending $1 trillion more than they take in. And that's without adding more expenses like the progressives want.

That's due to the reduction of taxation in the early 21st century.

[Yvaelle]

It's pretty embarrassing to see an NYT post that assumes the top 1% actually pay their marginal tax rate... throws all the rest of the math out the window when they start from a bad assumption like that.

[Daelak]

It's pretty embarrassing to see an NYT post that assumes the top 1% actually pay their marginal tax rate... throws all the rest of the math out the window when they start from a bad assumption like that.

But it is still useful seeing the ballpark estimates if future tax policy is changed to reflect these projections.

[Yvaelle]

But it is still useful seeing the ballpark estimates if future tax policy is changed to reflect these projections.

If we work from the % change then the post is interesting, but despite that they exist under a ~37% marginal income tax rate, in practice they pay ~17% or less. That doesn't include that they a) have more existing wealth, and b) earn almost all of their money from investments and capital gains - which are effectively taxed at less than 10% for this same top 1% of Americans.

So for the NYT to base their math off the assumption that they actually pay like ~37% effective income tax is colossally misleading. It probably does more harm in that one bad assumption, being read and assumed correct by many of their readers, than any benefit the article could have created by raising awareness.

[araine]

Fuck no, no reason to punish people for being smart and successful. As flat tax is what we need.

i have a solution to the flat tax that you will hate, make all income up to 50k tax free for everyone. and all income over 50k is taxed at 95% for everyone it is flat tax same rates same rules for everyone yet you will not accept it since it isnt giving freebies to the ultra rich anymore

- - - Updated - - -

Right wingers and conservatives in general dont understand that top earners in general dont pay the 37% or whatever is the top marginal tax rate, with loopholes carved into the taxcode to only benefit the rich and greed they frequently pay half or in many many cases even less of that in taxes. remember Romney had years where his tax rate supposedly where down into the low single digits and perhaps even as low as ZERO as in no fucking tax paid at all.


Really with these things happening we cant seriously trust any right winger or conservative that cries we have to high taxes on the rich. really paying less in taxes than a janitor is to high for this greedy bunch?

If anything it proves we have a lot of room to greatly increase the taxes on the top earner and we can add a couple more brackets in the system as well 1 million 5 million and 10 million with increased taxation at each breakpoint.

We start doing fair taxes we can fix the deficit and expand healthcare to be free for everyone and free college etc etc just need the will power to shutdown the GREED nothing more nothing less

[Orlong]

This is totally false, we are approaching 20 trillion in debt. You could take every penny the top 1% own and it wouldnt pay off the debt. Additionally that is THEIR money, who are you to force them to give up more just because you dont think they need it

[Daelak]

This is totally false, we are approaching 20 trillion in debt. You could take every penny the top 1% own and it wouldnt pay off the debt. Additionally that is THEIR money, who are you to force them to give up more just because you dont think they need it

The deficit isn't the debt. Besides the national debt can be paid off over a 100 years and creditors wouldn't bat an eye, because we are the USA, not Orlong's grandmother's QVC balance.

[Annoying]

The deficit isn't the debt. Besides the national debt can be paid off over a 100 years and creditors wouldn't bat an eye, because we are the USA, not Orlong's grandmother's QVC balance.

We could explode the debt by like 10 times and pay it off over 200 years and they wouldn't bat an eye. Some huge portion of the debt is debt we owe ourselves. I can't stand when people compare the national debt to personal debt.