Who pays for government?

[Jimmy Higgins]

Well apples to apples, of course.

In 2009, the top quintile made 51% of all the available income and paid about 68% of the taxes (which turned out to be an effective tax rate of 23.2%). Yes, they are contributing more than the percentage of national income they collected, but it isn't a wildly higher percentage more.

Recall the whole point of this thread is that net of transfers they are the only ones who pay taxes at all.

The net transfers are not applicable to people, just a statistical rendering of the population. Plenty of people in the third quintile are paying more in taxes than receiving. Probably in the second as well.

 

[dismal]

Recall the whole point of this thread is that net of transfers they are the only ones who pay taxes at all.

The net transfers are not applicable to people, just a statistical rendering of the population. Plenty of people in the third quintile are paying more in taxes than receiving. Probably in the second as well.

When you talk about taxes paid by quintiles -- like you did when you said the top quintile paid 68% of taxes -- that's what you do.

 

[ksen]

Well apples to apples, of course.

In 2009, the top quintile made 51% of all the available income and paid about 68% of the taxes (which turned out to be an effective tax rate of 23.2%). Yes, they are contributing more than the percentage of national income they collected, but it isn't a wildly higher percentage more.

Recall the whole point of this thread is that net of transfers they are the only ones who pay taxes at all.

Actually, the point of the OP was asking if our very progressive tax system was what the oligarchs wanted.

 

[Canard DuJour]

Well apples to apples, of course.

In 2009, the top quintile made 51% of all the available income and paid about 68% of the taxes (which turned out to be an effective tax rate of 23.2%). Yes, they are contributing more than the percentage of national income they collected, but it isn't a wildly higher percentage more.

Recall the whole point of this thread is that net of transfers they are the only ones who pay taxes at all.

Fine. As long as it wasn't trying to downplay economic inequality. Because it's a truly shocking indicator of economic inequality.

Which is saying something these days.

 

[dismal]

Recall the whole point of this thread is that net of transfers they are the only ones who pay taxes at all.

Actually, the point of the OP was asking if our very progressive tax system was what the oligarchs wanted.

So, wait does that mean we're the oligarchs? Up to now I've been suspicious about the oligarchs existing because I've never been invited to the meetings.

 

[ksen]

Actually, the point of the OP was asking if our very progressive tax system was what the oligarchs wanted.

So, wait does that mean we're the oligarchs? Up to now I've been suspicious about the oligarchs existing because I've never been invited to the meetings.

You need to up your screwed-over-little-guy count before you get an invite.

 

[bilby]

The net transfers are not applicable to people, just a statistical rendering of the population. Plenty of people in the third quintile are paying more in taxes than receiving. Probably in the second as well.

When you talk about taxes paid by quintiles -- like you did when you said the top quintile paid 68% of taxes -- that's what you do.

Indeed. And as a result, conclusions drawn from such aggregated data are not applicable to the disaggregated components.

So statements such as "Those in the top quintile are the only ones who pay any taxes at all" are simply wrong.

If your methodology leads to demonstrably incorrect conclusions, then it is time to look for a new methodology.

 

[dismal]

When you talk about taxes paid by quintiles -- like you did when you said the top quintile paid 68% of taxes -- that's what you do.

Indeed. And as a result, conclusions drawn from such aggregated data are not applicable to the disaggregated components.

So statements such as "Those in the top quintile are the only ones who pay any taxes at all" are simply wrong.

If your methodology leads to demonstrably incorrect conclusions, then it is time to look for a new methodology.

Nonsense. It is a true statement about the group. The top quintile is the only quintile that pays net taxes. Well, technically the second quintile pays a drib.

 

[untermensche]

Nonsense. It is a true statement about the group. The top quintile is the only quintile that pays net taxes. Well, technically the second quintile pays a drib.

What horseshit!!!

Taxes are paid by individuals, not "quintiles".

Millions of people in the lower "quintiles" pay net taxes.

 

[bilby]

Indeed. And as a result, conclusions drawn from such aggregated data are not applicable to the disaggregated components.

So statements such as "Those in the top quintile are the only ones who pay any taxes at all" are simply wrong.

If your methodology leads to demonstrably incorrect conclusions, then it is time to look for a new methodology.

Nonsense. It is a true statement about the group. The top quintile is the only quintile that pays net taxes. Well, technically the second quintile pays a drib.

It is a fallacy of composition. Quintiles don't pay taxes at all.

Groups don't pay taxes. People pay taxes.

 

[dismal]

Nonsense. It is a true statement about the group. The top quintile is the only quintile that pays net taxes. Well, technically the second quintile pays a drib.

It is a fallacy of composition. Quintiles don't pay taxes at all.

Groups don't pay taxes. People pay taxes.

Yes individual people pay taxes, and groups of people can be averaged and/or totaled.

I can, for example, accurately say "the New York Yankees are hitting .270" even though individual Yankees are hitting .311 or .247 etc.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

Indeed. And as a result, conclusions drawn from such aggregated data are not applicable to the disaggregated components.

So statements such as "Those in the top quintile are the only ones who pay any taxes at all" are simply wrong.

If your methodology leads to demonstrably incorrect conclusions, then it is time to look for a new methodology.

Nonsense. It is a true statement about the group. The top quintile is the only quintile that pays net taxes. Well, technically the second quintile pays a drib.

Sure is nice to know I didn't pay any federal income taxes last year, or any of the people I work with, or any of the people I dance with, or any of the people I drink with, or any of the people I shop with, or any of my family, or my cousins, or, well you get the point dis, your assertion is full of shit.

I'll have to go look for the guy who got a few hundred thousand of that transfer you talk about and evened it all out for everybody because it sure as hell seems to me I know a lot of people who aren't in those quintiles you claim paid all the taxes, but nevertheless still had to pay lots of taxes. It's probably the guy up the street who put a new roof on his house. That's it. He's a transfer moocher. That's where he got the money.

 

[Tristan Scott]

Everyone pays taxes-every penny you spend has taxes attached to it-not just sales tax but all the taxes that are paid throughout the product chain are actually paid by the consumer.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I don't see the coerced governments you're referring to. Where we have intervened has been in cases of the criminal seizure of US-owned assets.

Why don't you pay for your own protection? No cops will respond to your address for any reason.

None of those assets were "US-owned".

They were privately owned and the US government spends trillions protecting those risky private investments.

And puts it's citizens in harms way to do it.

Yeah, US-citizen owed. I note that you didn't respond to the parallel I drew--I take it you feel you should still get police protection while you deny it to the well-to-do.

- - - Updated - - -

Check out the Forbes list. Most are either self-made or the immediate family of the self-made.

And that doesn't change the destructive nature of wealth taxes. Wealth taxes are about eating the rich, not about revenue. When you finish eating the rich the society dies.

More and more have their wealth through inheritance.

Very soon most will have their wealth through inheritance.

Society does not rely on the rich. They are mainly parasites that take much more than they give.

Get rid of them and we will all do fine.

We need an economy. We do not need the filthy rich. They are a strain on the economy, an inefficiency.

We would all be better off if wealth was more spread around instead of concentrated into fewer and fewer hands.

[Citation needed]

Furthermore, the richer people are the higher the percentage of their wealth that is invested rather than spent. Thus when you redistribute down the ladder you increase consumer spending and lower investment. That's a bad thing for society.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

They're are not expecting much recovered taxes because there is clear evidence that the criminal tax evaders have already withdrawn their funds due to the law changes and put those funds elsewhere, including foreign banks in countries with no interest in cooperating with FATCA. Back in 2009 when the Swiss agreed to give account info to the US in cases where there was provided evidence of criminality, deposits to Swiss Banks dropped 30% in the 10 months leading up to that policy change. There are similar finding of massive drops in Swiss Bank holdings caused by other policy changes in the EU and elsewhere. Nothing in my argument presumes that FATCA will be effective in generating tax revenue in the short term, and its effectiveness at catching tax evaders isn't relevant to the thread. It is the mere existence of FATCA and other recent changes to account secrecy policies combined with clear evidence of their causal impact on the transfer of funds to other countries retaining strict secrecy that shows there are likely many many billions in unpaid taxes by the rich due to secret foreign accounts, which is just one of the ways the rich hide their true income.

The Swiss bank holdings weren't due to FATCA, but rather a Swiss banker that got caught and sung.

You're still not proving that the estimates of the take from FATCA are wrong.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Lots of people are advocates for greater public transit systems. They envision everyone else using those systems, reducing the crowding on the roads for those advocating for those systems.

I envision myself using public transit if we got it upgraded. I'd sell my car in a heartbeat. But I got to experience decent public transit while living in Europe for 2 years so I know how effective it can be.

I wouldn't sell our car because too often we are hauling things that wouldn't be easy to haul on public transit. It certainly would cut down on the driving, though.

- - - Updated - - -

It fits Uttermenche's definition of moocher perfectly. Sometimes it helps to read the thread...

The greatest taking that is occurring is the taking from workers of the fruits of their labor.

That is how the rich get rich.

They take from many people the fruits of their labor.

Workers are the people suffering from the greatest taking.

The moochers are the people stealing the fruits of labor from workers. The unneeded dead wood that takes from labor in the form of dividends and profits.

Marxian propaganda != reality.

The road to getting rich is to do something better and extract a portion of the value thus created.

 

[untermensche]

I envision myself using public transit if we got it upgraded. I'd sell my car in a heartbeat. But I got to experience decent public transit while living in Europe for 2 years so I know how effective it can be.

I wouldn't sell our car because too often we are hauling things that wouldn't be easy to haul on public transit. It certainly would cut down on the driving, though.

- - - Updated - - -

It fits Uttermenche's definition of moocher perfectly. Sometimes it helps to read the thread...

The greatest taking that is occurring is the taking from workers of the fruits of their labor.

That is how the rich get rich.

They take from many people the fruits of their labor.

Workers are the people suffering from the greatest taking.

The moochers are the people stealing the fruits of labor from workers. The unneeded dead wood that takes from labor in the form of dividends and profits.

Marxian propaganda != reality.

The road to getting rich is to do something better and extract a portion of the value thus created.

You seem to be under some delusion that the things Marx said about capitalism were wrong. They have been shown to be true time and time again.

Today the road to being rich is to be born rich. Otherwise it is very unlikely you will become rich.

And of course the desire to be rich is the desire of a greedy child.

Nobody really gives a shit about the rich except that they are making life more and more miserable for everyone else. Great wealth causes great poverty.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I wouldn't sell our car because too often we are hauling things that wouldn't be easy to haul on public transit. It certainly would cut down on the driving, though.

- - - Updated - - -

It fits Uttermenche's definition of moocher perfectly. Sometimes it helps to read the thread...

The greatest taking that is occurring is the taking from workers of the fruits of their labor.

That is how the rich get rich.

They take from many people the fruits of their labor.

Workers are the people suffering from the greatest taking.

The moochers are the people stealing the fruits of labor from workers. The unneeded dead wood that takes from labor in the form of dividends and profits.

Marxian propaganda != reality.

The road to getting rich is to do something better and extract a portion of the value thus created.

You seem to be under some delusion that the things Marx said about capitalism were wrong. They have been shown to be true time and time again.

Yup, it's true that it has been repeatedly shown that Marx is wrong.

Today the road to being rich is to be born rich. Otherwise it is very unlikely you will become rich.

The last time someone presented data it was about a 10% of going from the bottom quintile to the top. Perfect mobility only yields 20%. It certainly seems to me that you can climb. Climbing to the very top is another matter--everything has to go right to get there, people with a poor start don't have much of a chance. This is inevitable, though.

Nobody really gives a shit about the rich except that they are making life more and more miserable for everyone else. Great wealth causes great poverty.

Only because it lets us measure it. A lack of wealth means everyone is very poor.

 

[untermensche]

You seem to be under some delusion that the things Marx said about capitalism were wrong. They have been shown to be true time and time again.

Yup, it's true that it has been repeatedly shown that Marx is wrong.

You're one of those who doesn't even need to read an author to know they are wrong.

You couldn't tell me one thing Marx said off the top of your head.

And you see no reason to read him.

Willful ignorance.

The last time someone presented data it was about a 10% of going from the bottom quintile to the top. Perfect mobility only yields 20%. It certainly seems to me that you can climb. Climbing to the very top is another matter--everything has to go right to get there, people with a poor start don't have much of a chance. This is inevitable, though.

You are living in some fantasy world.

The world has dramatically changed in the last 30 years.

Today inherited wealth dominates. Very soon, if we keep moving in our present direction, it will totally dominate.

Nobody really gives a shit about the rich except that they are making life more and more miserable for everyone else. Great wealth causes great poverty.

Only because it lets us measure it. A lack of wealth means everyone is very poor.

True. But a few hoarding all the wealth, because of institutional theft not brains, is not a lack of wealth.

When workers are creating wealth, the more you take from them, the richer some can be, as we see, but also the greater the poverty.

Great wealth creates great poverty. We have seen it over and over all through history.

Plenty of wealth to go around but because a few control so much, great poverty exists.

 

[arkirk]

Untermensche: If we don't start "climbing" soon and quit arguing with the world bosses, Loren will simply go into conniptions. The truth is the world bosses could give a shit what any of us think. Loren should wake up to that fact too and quit trying to convince us the great Market Pumpkin will solve all problems and punish the evil communists...probably including you and me!