Fixing Inequality through Taxes

That does not explain income inequality at all. Income inequality between all income groups is rising, even between the rich and super-rich, or the rich and middle class, or the upper middle class and the rich. The image below illustrates that:


Since inequality is growing even between the rich and super-rich, then according to your explanation of growing inequality, the rich who are not super-rich also have a sense of entitlement that is stopping them from earning more money. I don't see anything to support that.

 

So what, how is this harmful to me? I am happy with what I earn, sure I would like to earn more, but I don't care what anybody else earns.

And you don't see that rich are envious of the super-rich? I can see that and I'm not rich.

 

If this is true, then why was inequality low from 1940-1980 but high from 1900-1930, and 1980-2014? Did the economy start off efficient, became inefficient around 1940 and then became efficient again around 1980? Why did wages and median wages rise more from 1940-1980 (inefficient) than they did from 1980-2014 (efficient)?

 

Well, I guess if you don't actually care about the future of the American people, then inequality is not a problem, neither is AIDS, ISIS, or government corruption as long as they don't affect you.

I am going to have kids soon, and I care about their future so for me and the vast majority of Americans, income inequality is going to be a problem.

- - - Updated - - -

Terrible idea. We need CEOs and investors just as much as engineers and scientists.

 

I was simply responding to the idea that big government causes inequality. I don't believe in bigger government. I believe we should raise taxes on the rich, lower them for the middle class and the poor, increase spending in education, science, and technology, and cut military, welfare, and social security spending.

 

Well whether I care or not is irrevelant, can you explain how income inequality is affecting AIDS, ISIS or government corruption?

 

No, its based on a sense of fairness.

Here is my source again:
http://www.stateofworkingamerica.org/who-gains/#/?start=1981&end=2007

Modify the endpoints and see if you get different results.

Not true. According to this study in 2007 on page 13:
http://eml.berkeley.edu/~saez/piketty-saezJEP07taxprog.pdf

The effective tax rate for the 99-99.5% percentile fell from 43% in 1980 to to 33% in 1990. The 99.99-100 percentile tax rates fell from 59.3% in 1980 to 35.4% in 1990. Reagan actually did cut taxes for the rich by a lot.

I never said they were. I did say that effective tax rates are affected by loopholes.

Yet, the rich pay lower tax rates than they did in the 50's and 60's. The reason a larger share of total income taxes are paid by them is because they have gotten richer faster than the rest of us. From my source on page 13, the poor pay about the same rates. They contribute a smaller share because their incomes have either stagnated or fallen. Also, you are only factoring income taxes which are highly progressive. Social security taxes hit the middle class and the poor more.

Because this will greatly improve our economy and if we can do it, then we should.

 

I never said it did. It does affect our incomes and economic growth. Of course those things are not important to you.

 

Please explain how it affects my income and econimic growth.

 

Well two fallacies here.

Government creates policies that "allow" money to made at the top, a lot of money? It is NO business of the governments, nowhere does our Constitution say government is supposed to allow or disallow the flow of capital or limit the earnings of some for the benefit of others.

The money the highest earners have does not just sit there idle, that's one the the things high earners do that lower earners to not, keep their money working to the highest efficiency in highly profitable endeavors. What is spend directly is invested where it is spent in a variety of ways.

But do tell me of these laws that "allow" people to make a lot of money.

 

They are the factories of wealth CREATION and thus income. Business don't simply distribute wealth or income.

Ahhh they give the profits to the owners/shareholders, wages and incomes are expenses before profit.

 

It is certainly a function of it, but what is driving the increase in the gap is the failure of the current administrations economy policy to get the economy into a full recovery and millions dropping out of the workforce and the FED's policy of free money to Wall Street and the banks. Put people back to work, get the middle class economy going again the the rate gap will fall or at least not grow as much.

But the fact is it WILL grow and if it doesn't that means the economy is doing well as even the most successful are not increasing their wealth and income. We'll always have those at the bottom and the bottom is the bottom but the top is unlimited.

 

Why what's the problem?

They can affect me but how does how much Bill Gates earns affect me?

Why is it going to be a problem, they have the same opportunity to get wealthy as anyone else if they apply themselves or just live a very nice middle class life style. Now that does mean they will have to take responsbility for themselves and apply themselves and not expect government to do it for them or to take money from someone else and give it to them because they are envious of them.

 

Why? What are you trying to accomplish by doing so? The top 25% pay for virtually ALL of government now how much of it are they supposed to pay for?

They hardly pay any taxes as it is and in fact those at the bottom MAKE money off the tax system.

 

Who said life was fair? What is fair about taking someone's money and giving it to someone else? And where does the Consitution say the government is supposed to make it "fair".

Tell me if whatever it is that is not fair was fair how would that manifest itself? What would be different?

I don't need your source it engages in folly trying to compare disparate times over long spans. The economy goes in cycles there are ups and downs and when you compare a previous up period to a current down period it skews the data. But again who cares that some people make a LOT of money?

Yes true

Yes you did

Not effective rates, there were HUGE deductions and credits then that do not exist now. The fact is the "rich", the successful high earners pay the largest share of the tax burden now than ever and pay HUGELY more in taxes than they ever had, we just hit record tax revenues and it isn't the middle class and the poor paying those taxes.

Yes even in a bad economy there will be people who make a LOT of money but the best way to help those at the bottom and in the middle is to pass policies that will grow the economy, give incentives for business and job creation and then get out of the way. You won't decrease the gap by trying to tax it from the wealthy and give it to the poor.

See the chart above.

They don't contribute to the government they take from the government and the actual people who DO pay taxes.

Ever heard of the EITC?

So the Constitution and liberty and freedom be damned, if we can to it we should.

 

Income inequality is a myth. Depending on your wits, experience and ability, you earn what you earn. If you have a problem with your earnings, stop comparing yourself to others, stop whining about what others have, stop the envy, and get real with yourself. If you are a loser, you have only yourself to blame.

 

>>>MOD EDIT Off Topic Removed<<<

What we need them for? All we need is the working class, not those who ordering people around making arrangements. Oh, and you don't by any chance, think CEOs and investors should be rewarded more than railroad engineers and machinists do ya?

 

Sometimes inefficiency is a good thing and sometimes it is not.

 

Inequality has nothing to do with envy and it shows you know absoultiely nothing about the problem it has.

BTW, I will remember this the next time you rant against big business, big banks, glablaism, and so forth.

 

Laws that make exception for some industries to create monopolies. Health Care, Health Insurance business is a good example Government creates artificial barriers, licenses and regulations that allows big companies merge into cartels excluding small companies from business at the same time.
Or take mobile phone industry. How it is possible that government allows companies to lock cellular phones to their network and create a monopoly between phone manufacturers and cellular providers.
How about bailouts to the big banks, that effectively kills small banks?
There are millions examples like this, that make rich richer and poor poorer.

 

You have failed to demonstrate how inequality causes harm. Get it?

 

They have no right to demand a share of the profits.

All you have done with this post is explain in depth what you do not like and why you do not like it.

Once again you fail to show how inequality causes any harm.

 

It is impossible for one person or even a few to accumulate all wealth because economic activity would cease before they accumulated it all.

And because wealth is not a static commodity it is made and generated.

So for the tenth time show some evidence that inequality causes any harm. So far you have failed to do so. Comic strips are entertainment not reality.