Tax the Rich?

I want a tax on the rich of 97%.

So not a fair share at all.

Like I said, you have no interest in fairness, you're just envious of those who have more than you and want to see them destroyed.

Haters gonna hate :cool:
 
Last edited:
Really?

Let's see...

To "have > $750k in mortgage debt," your house is probably worth well over $800,000.00.

To "pay > $10k in SALT," you probably have an income of at least $200,000.00.

You do not think those are the people Hypoxia and her ilk want to pay more in taxes?

I have no opinion Hypoxia's thoughts.

I am telling you that "the very rich" are not categorized by a home worth $800K
 
I have no opinion Hypoxia's thoughts.

I am telling you that "the very rich" are not categorized by a home worth $800K

No? The lefties seem pretty pissed at those people and seem to want to devastate them economically so that they only get min/wage too! Equality!!



You don't get to live in an 800,000 dollar home, hocking up well over the average US income just to cover the mortgage even if it's just an interest only payment unless you're making top levels of income in the top 5% category. And if you don't want to be house broke on it you probably need to be a 1%'er for several years as you diligently pay the silly thing off.

Which makes you a 0.1%'er on a global scale.

SOoooo.... if that's not "very rich" then what exactly the fuck are you talking about?
 
Last edited:
Good luck on your first home purchase in North Korea...

So not a fair share at all.

triggered-meme.jpg


Let's make it 98% for the right wing snowflakes.
 


"Americans’ monthly paychecks have increased by an average of $130.76 in February due to the new 2018 tax plan changes, according to LendEDU’s newest survey. As a result, Americans are largely supportive of the plan and more financially confident."


J. Gitlen, Monthly Paychecks Rise $130.76 After Tax Plan Changes | Survey & Report, LendEDU (Feb. 14, 2018).

Let's see: 12 x $130.76 = $1569.12.

I think most people can use that extra money.

For a good analysis of the survey above, see this editorial in Investor's Business Daily.
 
Trump’s Tax Cuts in Hand, Companies Spend More on Themselves Than on Wages

Remember how Ryan and McConnell said it was going to create unbelievable job growth, rising wages and investment? That it would "pay for itself?" Yeah. Not happening.

President Trump promised that his tax cut would encourage companies to invest in factories, workers and wages, setting off a spending spree that would reinvigorate the American economy.

Companies have announced plans for some of those investments. But so far, companies are using much of the money for something with a more narrow benefit: buying their own shares.
Those so-called buybacks are good for shareholders, including the senior executives who tend to be big owners of their companies’ stock. A company purchasing its own shares is a time-tested way to bolster its stock price.

But the purchases can come at the expense of investments in things like hiring, research and development and building new plants — the sort of investments that directly help the overall economy. The buybacks are also most likely to worsen economic inequality because the benefits of stocks purchases flow disproportionately to the richest Americans.

Surging Stock Buybacks Raise Concerns About U.S. Tax Cut Beneficiaries

New Tax Law Benefiting Shareholders More Than Workers So Far

“Stock buybacks are windfalls that drive up the value of investment portfolios for CEOs and high-flyers,” Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) said in a Senate floor speech this week. “And they’re coming in at a rate 30 times greater than worker bonuses — 30 to one! They’re on pace to double the amount from the first quarter of last year.
 
Trump’s Tax Cuts in Hand, Companies Spend More on Themselves Than on Wages

Remember how Ryan and McConnell said it was going to create unbelievable job growth, rising wages and investment? That it would "pay for itself?" Yeah. Not happening....

Actually, it is. Unemployment is at historic lows. Meanwhile, here is a partial list of the hundreds of companies raising wages, bonuses, and 401k contributions. (Try looking more at raw data, rather than filtered news articles and editorials.)

As for the companies that "spend more on themselves than on wages," that also includes the cost of expanding, refurbishing, and updating facilities to allow them to add more employees. That you do not realize this is another example of your lack of understanding of basic economics on which I have commented before.

In regard to that increased "spending" that includes stock buy-backs, who does that harm? If it is mostly the smaller investors selling their shares, helping the portfolios of directors, "CEOs and high-flyers," no one is making them sell. They are selling because stock values are at historic highs, and those small investors are making big returns on their relatively small investments (on which they pay capital gains taxes, after all). The "high flyers" who benefit include people's 401k and other investment accounts.

The poll I cite shows most people now believe, because it's true, that they have benefited from the 2017 tax reform. The survey found that 55% feel more confident about their financial situation as a result of the tax cuts. A full 70% say they are either very or somewhat happy about the tax reforms, with 61% saying the tax cuts will strengthen the economy. The survey also found that 66% of blacks are either very or somewhat happy with the tax cuts, as are 68% of Hispanics

And not a single Democrat in either house voted for this popular measure.

Lastly, I'll note that, as a share of income, the biggest winners from the individual income tax cuts are blacks, Hispanics and women. While the overall average increase in take-home pay was 3.5%, it was 3.64% among blacks and Hispanics, and 3.61% among women. The increase was even higher for black women (4.26%), and Hispanic women (3.86%).

Your rabid opposition to a reform that most benefits women and people of color shows everyone that deep down, you, Carnal Flower, are a sexist and racist. I hold little regard for the opinions of bigots. Go sell your hate elsewhere.
 
By not wanting a fair and equal tax you yourself become right wing in your tax policy stance.

Congratulations high speed. ;)

Who said you can’t argue with success, Democrats do so on a daily level with snarling disregard for either success or the successful. To them, success is something that makes their goal of human ant farm collectivism further unobtainable, and therefore to be avoided.
 
LOL

Did something touch a nerve, Dawnie?

1. You want to talk racist? The birther-in-chief continually taking credit for a black man's economic stats like unemployment while constantly trashing that black man makes me very mad. Don't even try with the "but but unemployment is down" bullshit.

2. It's not the VOLUME of companies making token gestures to employees and "investment in the company", it's the SCALE compared to the enrichment of the owners.

i.e.

Disney bonuses to employees totaled something like $165 million compared to a $1.3 billion tax cut for ONE year. but but but we got a bonus!

3. Blah blah self-rationalizing blah blah blah

Actually, it is. Unemployment is at historic lows. Meanwhile, here is a partial list of the hundreds of companies raising wages, bonuses, and 401k contributions. (Try looking more at raw data, rather than filtered news articles and editorials.)

As for the companies that "spend more on themselves than on wages," that also includes the cost of expanding, refurbishing, and updating facilities to allow them to add more employees. That you do not realize this is another example of your lack of understanding of basic economics on which I have commented before.

In regard to that increased "spending" that includes stock buy-backs, who does that harm? If it is mostly the smaller investors selling their shares, helping the portfolios of directors, "CEOs and high-flyers," no one is making them sell. They are selling because stock values are at historic highs, and those small investors are making big returns on their relatively small investments (on which they pay capital gains taxes, after all). The "high flyers" who benefit include people's 401k and other investment accounts.

The poll I cite shows most people now believe, because it's true, that they have benefited from the 2017 tax reform. The survey found that 55% feel more confident about their financial situation as a result of the tax cuts. A full 70% say they are either very or somewhat happy about the tax reforms, with 61% saying the tax cuts will strengthen the economy. The survey also found that 66% of blacks are either very or somewhat happy with the tax cuts, as are 68% of Hispanics

And not a single Democrat in either house voted for this popular measure.

Lastly, I'll note that, as a share of income, the biggest winners from the individual income tax cuts are blacks, Hispanics and women. While the overall average increase in take-home pay was 3.5%, it was 3.64% among blacks and Hispanics, and 3.61% among women. The increase was even higher for black women (4.26%), and Hispanic women (3.86%).

Your rabid opposition to a reform that most benefits women and people of color shows everyone that deep down, you, Carnal Flower, are a sexist and racist. I hold little regard for the opinions of bigots. Go sell your hate elsewhere.
 
Another way of saying ‘tax the rich’ is ‘From each according to his abilities, to each according to his need’, which of course worked so well in Cuba, North Korea, East Germany, Soviet Union, etc etc etc
 
Another way of saying ‘tax the rich’ is ‘From each according to his abilities, to each according to his need’, which of course worked so well in Cuba, North Korea, East Germany, Soviet Union, etc etc etc

You forgot Venezuela, which was not long ago showcased by the Left as the epitome of socialism. They were so right!

That's cute but it worked in the US and Europe just fine.

Has it? In Europe, ‘from each according to his abilities, to each according to his need’ bankrupt the Eastern Bloc during the Cold War. The Western European (in Cold War terms) nations with the traditionally most socialist governments (Portugal, Italy, Greece, & Spain) remain economically stunted by that evil philosophy.

Meanwhile, in the USA, the Obama administration, the most socialist-like one so far, created the lowest labor participation rate in the modern era (i.e., since women became a significant part of the workforce) while bragging about how it expanded the number of people receiving government benefits, all of which contributed to doubling an already burdensome national debt.

It does not seem to me that its worked except to the detriment of the working class.
 
SO SAYETH THE BIGOT:

LOL

Did something touch a nerve, Dawnie?

1. You want to talk racist? The birther-in-chief continually taking credit for a black man's economic stats like unemployment while constantly trashing that black man makes me very mad. Don't even try with the "but but unemployment is down" bullshit.

2. It's not the VOLUME of companies making token gestures to employees and "investment in the company", it's the SCALE compared to the enrichment of the owners.

i.e.

Disney bonuses to employees totaled something like $165 million compared to a $1.3 billion tax cut for ONE year. but but but we got a bonus!

3. Blah blah self-rationalizing blah blah blah

*yawn*
 
(Try looking more at raw data, rather than filtered news articles and editorials.)

Wow, a thousand bucks from a guy who made over $2 million. What a generous guy! Considering he paid himself a bonus of $350k in 2016 AND pledged $50 million Montana State University in 2014 I'm guessing he could spare a cool G.

And that was one I picked at random. I could only imagine the gaping asshole destruction I'd leave of Grover boy's shitty list if I bothered to go through the whole thing.

Let's tax rich people at 115%.
 
....

It's not the VOLUME of companies making token gestures to employees and "investment in the company", it's the SCALE compared to the enrichment of the owners.

i.e.

Disney bonuses to employees totaled something like $165 million compared to a $1.3 billion tax cut for ONE year. but but but we got a bonus!

....

Wow, a thousand bucks from a guy who made over $2 million. What a generous guy! Considering he paid himself a bonus of $350k in 2016 AND pledged $50 million Montana State University in 2014 I'm guessing he could spare a cool G.

....

Let's tax rich people at 115%.

What's wrong with "enrichment of the owners"? They are the ones who risk their capital and provide jobs. Should they not benefit?

Besides, who are the "owners" of most of these large corporations? Tell us, Carnal_Flower, do you have any mutual funds? (I realize dan_c00000 probably doesn't; he'll need to get a job first.) If you have a 401k or invest in other ways, you are one of the owners benefiting from tax reform.

So you're bothered by the fact that those who'd have paid a lot more in taxes save a lot more when they are lowered? Really, Gentlemen, you're class envy and resentment of successful people tells us a lot more about you than you probably wanted to reveal.
 
2. It's not the VOLUME of companies making token gestures to employees and "investment in the company", it's the SCALE compared to the enrichment of the owners.


Is that some kind of problem?

Why do you hate people making money?

And that was one I picked at random. I could only imagine the gaping asshole destruction I'd leave of Grover boy's shitty list if I bothered to go through the whole thing.

Only thing you would show is your envy.

So you're bothered by the fact that those who'd have paid a lot more in taxes save a lot more when they are lowered? Really, Gentlemen, you're class envy and resentment of successful people tells us a lot more about you than you probably wanted to reveal.

Nah, they are proud socialist who want to tear everyone down to their level so they can feel better about themselves.
 
So much triggering!

Let's tax rich people at 167%!

Ho-hum.

Your nonsense "triggers" no one and clearly confirms you have no actual basis for your position (other than envy for those who actually succeed in life).

Check the scoreboard. Your team lost.
 
So much triggering!

Let's tax rich people at 167%!

LOL the only one triggered is you...chump.

All you do is cry about how others have more than you, need to stop worrying about what others got and get your own paper up.
 
LOL the only one triggered is you...chump.

All you do is cry about how others have more than you, need to stop worrying about what others got and get your own paper up.

If they tax his mommies basement at 167%, he'll have no place to whack off!
 
All you do is cry about how others have more than you, need to stop worrying about what others got and get your own paper up.

I do have my own paper it's called the "Bot Gets Triggered like the Special Racist Snowflake that He is Gazette-Journal".

Ruined!

Tax the rich at 213%!
 
I do have my own paper it's called the "Bot Gets Triggered like the Special Racist Snowflake that He is Gazette-Journal".

Ruined!

Tax the rich at 213%!

Wrong kinda paper dummy.

Probably why you're so fuckin poor and desperate. :)
 
Back
Top