Tax the Super Rich now or face a revolution

[RLLD 4,232]

Blow me

 

There you are, lover.....

[Blitzen 0]

You talk about greed...But...

 

1.) greed created unions which is basically a system of concentrating the wealth of workers into the fewer union subscribed hands.

 

 

I totally agree with you: if business owners hadn't been driven by greed to exploit workers, there would have been no use for unions. Is there still a use for unions? Even with unions now, companies simply threaten to close plants if demands are too high (or not low enough as has been the case lately) so unions have been de-balled anyway. So the continued need of unions in the west can certainly be debated. But you cannot debate that unions weren't originally needed to help workers get at least decent working conditions from greedy owners.

 

Now will there be a full-blown revolution? I think the standard of living for most of the population will have to fall quite a bit more for that to happen. I would think that people would first look at local governments and maybe have minor revolts there for starters. As pointed out by others, the problem will be what people will ask for. If governments default left and right and people go in expecting to be handed $100K a year on a platter, then they'll be mightily disappointed. A revolution would likely result in a lowering of the standard of living for quite a while and I think wealth would become concentrated again in the hands of a few in short order anyway. I guess one question is whether you would want it to become concentrated in the hands of the people with the most guns or the most brains.

 

I would imagine that, to be enticed into a revolution, most of the people would need to be at the point of perceiving that the likely post-revolution standard of living would be better than what they have now.

 

 

[RLLD 4,232]

I totally agree with you: if business owners hadn't been driven by greed to exploit workers, there would have been no use for unions. Is there still a use for unions? Even with unions now, companies simply threaten to close plants if demands are too high (or not low enough as has been the case lately) so unions have been de-balled anyway. So the continued need of unions in the west can certainly be debated. But you cannot debate that unions weren't originally needed to help workers get at least decent working conditions from greedy owners.

 

Now will there be a full-blown revolution? I think the standard of living for most of the population will have to fall quite a bit more for that to happen. I would think that people would first look at local governments and maybe have minor revolts there for starters. As pointed out by others, the problem will be what people will ask for. If governments default left and right and people go in expecting to be handed $100K a year on a platter, then they'll be mightily disappointed. A revolution would likely result in a lowering of the standard of living for quite a while and I think wealth would become concentrated again in the hands of a few in short order anyway. I would imagine that, to be enticed into a revolution, most of the people would need to be at the point of perceiving that the likely post-revolution standard of living would be better than what they have now.

 

 

 

Good post.

[MDC 7,440]

Most Politians are lawyers that weren't smart enough to make it in the real world. So the tax lawyers that are hired by businesses are a lot smarter so they find ways around the laws. That said both parties are sell outs to the lobbyists and this plays a role as well. That is the reason I support across the board term limits.

 

I'm not sure I buy the idea that it's impossible to close tax loopholes. I don't think either party wants to inconvenience their campaign contributors.

 

Tariffs in a global economy are a scary scenario. We put tariffs on products coming in, other countries do the same and then we have no exports. If there is no corporate income tax most of the games, the deductions, sourcing income, etc. are gone. I would also eliminate all deductions on the personal income tax side. Every person gets a $35,000 standard deduction then all your income is taxed at a 10% rate. No games, no bullsh!t.

 

The US imports far, far more goods than we export so I don't see this as a real major issue. My whole point is that the global economy has benefitted the upper class by giving them access to cheap labor and weak labor regulations all over the world, but it's crushed the US middle class by forcing our workers to compete with cheap labor everywhere else. The trend is toward a super-rich class that controls a greater and greater proportion of the overall wealth and a shrinking middle class that gets poorer every year. That's not speculation, it's actually happening. Whether you think that's a problem is the only question.

 

Anyway, thanks for at least being polite.

[RLLD 4,232]

I'm not sure I buy the idea that it's impossible to close tax loopholes. I don't think either party wants to inconvenience their campaign contributors.

 

 

 

The US imports far, far more goods than we export so I don't see this as a real major issue. My whole point is that the global economy has benefitted the upper class by giving them access to cheap labor and weak labor regulations all over the world, but it's crushed the US middle class by forcing our workers to compete with cheap labor everywhere else. The trend is toward a super-rich class that controls a greater and greater proportion of the overall wealth and a shrinking middle class that gets poorer every year. That's not speculation, it's actually happening. Whether you think that's a problem is the only question.

 

Anyway, thanks for at least being polite.

 

Your post has merit.

 

I just wanted to note that the idea behind global expansion was to also benefit the middle class, though it was acknolwedged that the more immediate effects would be negative. By creating a more global middle class, that is by allowing the less affluent countries of the world to begin growing their economies the far reaching effect is expected to benefit the middle class. In essence, take the image of the American class structure and then globalize it. The potential for the eventual growth of the American middle class then exists. The thought being that "we" as Americans have a competitive advantage in technology, education, and ingenuity as well as decades of experience within a capitalistic market.

 

Competitively, the expectation is that America can flourish through access to a more expansive market due to its natural advantages. In practice, the financially elite have perverted the markets at every turn through political and insider influences and negated the natural development of markets.

[NewbieJr 541]

you should become a ceo

I just had some #6 THHN and some pull lube delivered to your jobsite. Now go pull some wire, grunt.

[Recliner Pilot 61]

I just had some #6 THHN and some pull lube delivered to your jobsite. Now go pull some wire, grunt.

 

 

How very "grown up" of you.......

[NewbieJr 541]

How very "grown up" of you.......

Awwwwwww, did wittle RP have his feelings hurt yesterday? ROFL. Now please go away. This thread has rebounded a little since you were sleeping. Shoo.

[drobeski 3,061]

I just had some #6 THHN and some pull lube delivered to your jobsite. Now go pull some wire, grunt.

Unless im working for myself I dont pull wire, I solve problems with highly complex automation systems. Your company hires engineering firms for my kind of expertise

[RLLD 4,232]

Unless im working for myself I dont pull wire, I solve problems with highly complex automation systems. Your company hires engineering firms for my kind of expertise

 

Who can they hire to fix the mistakes?

[Recliner Pilot 61]

Replace the current tax code with the Fair Tax. Proponents of the Fair Tax estimate there are Trillions of dollars parked overseas because of the tax liability if it is brought into the USA. The Fair Tax would let every dime of that be infused into our economy.

 

That would be a real stimulus, not just some slush fund for Obama.

[Frank M 181]

Replace the current tax code with the Fair Tax. Proponents of the Fair Tax estimate there are Trillions of dollars parked overseas because of the tax liability if it is brought into the USA. The Fair Tax would let every dime of that be infused into our economy.

 

That would be a real stimulus, not just some slush fund for Obama.

 

Even a liberal Democrat like me can get on board with this.

[Bert 1,128]

The US imports far, far more goods than we export so I don't see this as a real major issue. My whole point is that the global economy has benefitted the upper class by giving them access to cheap labor and weak labor regulations all over the world, but it's crushed the US middle class by forcing our workers to compete with cheap labor everywhere else. The trend is toward a super-rich class that controls a greater and greater proportion of the overall wealth and a shrinking middle class that gets poorer every year. That's not speculation, it's actually happening. Whether you think that's a problem is the only question.

 

Anyway, thanks for at least being polite.

 

I'm not saying that isn't happening. What is your solution to become an isolationist or manage to the lowest common denominator by redistributing wealth?

 

I believe restructuring the US tax structure would help the middle class problem. We can't compete with the labor rates of emerging countries that is a fact. So we need to take advantage of the assets we do have. We still are the largest consuming country with the highest standard of living in the world. Why not leverage this to make our companies more competitive. A consumption based tax does that very thing. With no income tax companies may pay lower labor rates in other countries but they will also have to pay higher income tax.

[drobeski 3,061]

Who can they hire to fix the mistakes?

Im sure any old secretary can fix newbies fock ups

[Recliner Pilot 61]

Even a liberal Democrat like me can get on board with this.

 

 

Beyond massive infusion of capital into the economy there are other advantages:

 

1. No IRS

 

2. No need to keep records or ever file a tax return.

 

3 Anyone who operates on a cash basis ans is currently scamming the system (like a certain poster here) can no longer evade taxes.

 

4. The Federal Gubmint can't micromanage your life by punishing certain activities with higher taxes, and rewarding certain activities with tax breaks.

 

There may be more.

[Bert 1,128]

Beyond massive infusion of capital into the economy there are other advantages:

 

1. No IRS

 

2. No need to keep records or ever file a tax return.

 

3 Anyone who operates on a cash basis ans is currently scamming the system (like a certain poster here) can no longer evade taxes.

 

4. The Federal Gubmint can't micromanage your life by punishing certain activities with higher taxes, and rewarding certain activities with tax breaks.

 

There may be more.

 

1 is an absolute falsehood.

[Recliner Pilot 61]

1 is an absolute falsehood.

 

You would need a mechanism for overseeing that collection is complied with. But that wouldn't require much, thus the IRS as currently constructed would not be needed

[RLLD 4,232]

You would need a mechanism for overseeing that collection is complied with. But that wouldn't require much, thus the IRS as currently constructed would not be needed

 

Then you have the issue that all those IRS employee's will be left without jobs, no real skills, and then organized crime has access to a swath of well-prepared goons....

[Blitzen 0]

In essence, take the image of the American class structure and then globalize it.

 

Although a lot of countries would love this, I don't think it'll happen. I think you are more likely to see the equilibrium being at a lower standard than the current North American one. World resources would not be able to cope with the Japanese standard of living, nevermind the American one (unless new resources are found). I know I'll be called a Malthusian alarmist but I don't care. Just look at the amount of resources currently going into China, a country that is nowhere near the US standard of living and you'll see that if you extrapolate, it makes zero sense. Prices will absolutely go through the roof and that will stall development. If I remember correctly, the current thinking is that if China gets to the Japanese standard of living, they would annually consume all of the oil currently used worldwide. I guess they could go nuclear and will likely have to but that has significant issues too and I think Uranium will become scarce too.

 

The brightest thing for humanity to do right now would be to find/use alternatives to oil whenever possible so that oil can still be available in sufficient amounts for long enough to support uses with no current practical energy alternatives, like air travel, until we find alternatives.

[RLLD 4,232]

Although a lot of countries would love this, I don't think it'll happen. I think you are more likely to see the equilibrium being at a lower standard than the current North American one. World resources would not be able to cope with the Japanese standard of living, nevermind the American one (unless new resources are found). I know I'll be called a Malthusian alarmist but I don't care. Just look at the amount of resources currently going into China, a country that is nowhere near the US standard of living and you'll see that if you extrapolate, it makes zero sense. Prices will absolutely go through the roof and that will stall development. If I remember correctly, the current thinking is that if China gets to the Japanese standard of living, they would annually consume all of the oil currently used worldwide. I guess they could go nuclear and will likely have to but that has significant issues too and I think Uranium will become scarce too.

 

I agree. I think its a pipe dream. You look at the corruption that exists in the world and its really unrealistic to expect that capitalism can exist outside of rather strict controls and regulation.

[MDC 7,440]

I'm not saying that isn't happening. What is your solution to become an isolationist or manage to the lowest common denominator by redistributing wealth?

 

I'm not sure there are any easy solutions. I'd like to close tax loopholes that allow US companies to set up offseas shelters, for starters. But the problem is so big that I don't think it's going to get fixed until the middle class is stretched so much that there's a real populist backlash.

 

I believe restructuring the US tax structure would help the middle class problem. We can't compete with the labor rates of emerging countries that is a fact. So we need to take advantage of the assets we do have. We still are the largest consuming country with the highest standard of living in the world. Why not leverage this to make our companies more competitive. A consumption based tax does that very thing. With no income tax companies may pay lower labor rates in other countries but they will also have to pay higher income tax.

 

My understanding is that consumption based taxation is broad and can take many different forms (VAT, sales tax, etc.) and it's mostly regressive. I'd have to give that some thought but on first glance I don't see how that puts a stop to class stratification, which is the big problem we're talking about here. I'm open to any new ideas.

 

[Bert 1,128]

You would need a mechanism for overseeing that collection is complied with. But that wouldn't require much, thus the IRS as currently constructed would not be needed

 

Most fair tax proponents miss two things in the fair tax. They over estimate how simple the tax would be to administer and they forget about all of the other non-income taxes the IRS handles that will not be going away. Look at the structure and size of the States Sales and Use tax divisions. You will still have compliance processors, people to handle registration, auditors, supervisors, attorneys to deal with protests and appeals, etc. The IRS will be different but eliminated.

[Recliner Pilot 61]

Most fair tax proponents miss two things in the fair tax. They over estimate how simple the tax would be to administer and they forget about all of the other non-income taxes the IRS handles that will not be going away. Look at the structure and size of the States Sales and Use tax divisions. You will still have compliance processors, people to handle registration, auditors, supervisors, attorneys to deal with protests and appeals, etc. The IRS will be different but eliminated.

 

 

Administering one tax at the point of sale would be light years easier and cheaper than the current clusterfuck

[Bert 1,128]

I'm not sure there are any easy solutions. I'd like to close tax loopholes that allow US companies to set up offseas shelters, for starters. But the problem is so big that I don't think it's going to get fixed until the middle class is stretched so much that there's a real populist backlash.

 

 

 

My understanding is that consumption based taxation is broad and can take many different forms (VAT, sales tax, etc.) and it's mostly regressive. I'd have to give that some thought but on first glance I don't see how that puts a stop to class stratification, which is the big problem we're talking about here. I'm open to any new ideas.

 

 

You're right there are no easy solutions. The way I see it helping is no income tax helps balance the labor rate desparity which will keep some companies from moving. Also fixing the personal income tax and eliminate the corporate income tax helps minimize the lobbyists and poloitians from legally gaming the system.

 

The regressive thing cuts both ways. I mentioned before the services the government provides are also regressive. Low income individuals receive a much greater benefit than high income individuals when calculated as a percentage of earnings.

[Bert 1,128]

Administering one tax at the point of sale would be light years easier and cheaper than the current clusterfuck

 

It would be easier but you said NO IRS and that is completely wrong. Also what about all the excise and severience taxes and fees that IRS administers. My undestanding is the fairtax is designed to replace the income tax not these other taxes and fees.

[parrot 789]

Bert, I gotta ask, what's with "politians"?

[Recliner Pilot 61]

It would be easier but you said NO IRS and that is completely wrong. Also what about all the excise and severience taxes and fees that IRS administers. My undestanding is the fairtax is designed to replace the income tax not these other taxes and fees.

 

 

It's been a long time since I got into the nuts and bolts of it, by my understanding is that it would replace the entire tax code, not just the income tax. They want to set it at a level so it funds the entire govt. At least that's how I recall it. If it doesn't, it needs to.

 

I'm on the iPhone today, so I'm not gonna try to research it.

 

Fairtax.org

 

If you are interested.

[Bert 1,128]

Bert, I gotta ask, what's with "politians"?

 

It's a word I made up to replace politicians.

[Phurfur 70]

Just heard on the news this morning that CEO's earned, on average, a 27% wage increase over the last three years. Hourly workers- 2%.

 

 

 

Do you think that this has anything to do with the fact that anyone can be a "worker bee" but only a small fraction has what it takes to be a CEO? It is called supply and demand.

[Bert 1,128]

It's been a long time since I got into the nuts and bolts of it, by my understanding is that it would replace the entire tax code, not just the income tax. They want to set it at a level so it funds the entire govt. At least that's how I recall it. If it doesn't, it needs to.

 

I'm on the iPhone today, so I'm not gonna try to research it.

 

Fairtax.org

 

If you are interested.

 

Same here but I seem to remember it didn't include or there was not a clear understanding that it would replace the entire code.

[parrot 789]

It's a word I made up to replace politicians.

 

Okay. Not trying to be a jerk, I just noticed that you always write it that way so I didn't know if it meant something.

[Bert 1,128]

Okay. Not trying to be a jerk, I just noticed that you always write it that way so I didn't know if it meant something.

 

No worries.

[parrot 789]

Fairtax replaces the federal income tax, it doesn't replace the whole taxcode. Things like fuel excise taxes will remain in place.

[Bert 1,128]

Fairtax replaces the federal income tax, it doesn't replace the whole taxcode. Things like fuel excise taxes will remain in place.

 

Can you imagine the support the fairtax would get if we could get rid of the damn fuel and severance taxes?

[Blitzen 0]

I agree. I think its a pipe dream. You look at the corruption that exists in the world and its really unrealistic to expect that capitalism can exist outside of rather strict controls and regulation.

 

I think it's a pipe dream, even without corruption. I remember doing an article a couple of years ago on China for the forestry sector up here and I spoke to an economist who told me that a few short years before, he would have been laughed at by his peers if he had said that resources were becoming limiting, but that his peers weren't laughing anymore after watching China go for a bit.

[NewbieJr 541]

Do you think that this has anything to do with the fact that anyone can be a "worker bee" but only a small fraction has what it takes to be a CEO? It is called supply and demand.

It's not about what their salary is. Everyone knows the machinist makes more than the janitor. And the foreman makes more than the machinist. And the plant supervisor makes more than the foreman. And the CEO makes more than the plant supervisor.

 

But weren't they already making much more three years ago?

 

The problem here is that the 'workers' are being asked to make salary concessions and just be happy toi have a job because times are tough, but the CEO's are still getting ridiculous increases.

 

That's the basic definition of class separation. No one has a valid argument (nor have I ever heard one attempted) that the grunts should earn as much as the big wigs.

[parrot 789]

Can you imagine the support the fairtax would get if we could get rid of the damn fuel and severance taxes?

 

I could, except that once you had to program those lost revenues back in, the Fairtax rate would shoot up dramatically.

 

My biggest problem with the Fairtax proposal is that it would put so much of the onus for enforcement and compliance oversight on private businesses. And before anyone interjects that "It's just like the sales tax 40 odd states have right now!"; it's not like the sales tax 40 odd states have right now. It has an exemption for business use that makes it much more complex.

 

It's also kind of funny to me that Fairtax is such a darling of conservatives. It would immediately create, by far the biggest entitlement program we've ever seen. I mean, they're going to issue a check to every American household every month. That doesn't give people any pause?

[Bert 1,128]

I could, except that once you had to program those lost revenues back in, the Fairtax rate would shoot up dramatically.

 

My biggest problem with the Fairtax proposal is that it would put so much of the onus for enforcement and compliance oversight on private businesses. And before anyone interjects that "It's just like the sales tax 40 odd states have right now!"; it's not like the sales tax 40 odd states have right now. It has an exemption for business use that makes it much more complex.

 

It's also kind of funny to me that Fairtax is such a darling of conservatives. It would immediately create, by far the biggest entitlement program we've ever seen. I mean, they're going to issue a check to every American household every month. That doesn't give people any pause?

[Phurfur 70]

It's not about what their salary is. Everyone knows the machinist makes more than the janitor. And the foreman makes more than the machinist. And the plant supervisor makes more than the foreman. And the CEO makes more than the plant supervisor.

 

But weren't they already making much more three years ago?

 

The problem here is that the 'workers' are being asked to make salary concessions and just be happy toi have a job because times are tough, but the CEO's are still getting ridiculous increases.

 

That's the basic definition of class separation. No one has a valid argument (nor have I ever heard one attempted) that the grunts should earn as much as the big wigs.

 

When you have 10% unemployment you have too many "worker bees" chasing too few jobs this is not the case with CEOs. Supply and demand. HTH

[pimptastic69 0]

I could, except that once you had to program those lost revenues back in, the Fairtax rate would shoot up dramatically.

 

My biggest problem with the Fairtax proposal is that it would put so much of the onus for enforcement and compliance oversight on private businesses. And before anyone interjects that "It's just like the sales tax 40 odd states have right now!"; it's not like the sales tax 40 odd states have right now. It has an exemption for business use that makes it much more complex.

 

It's also kind of funny to me that Fairtax is such a darling of conservatives. It would immediately create, by far the biggest entitlement program we've ever seen. I mean, they're going to issue a check to every American household every month. That doesn't give people any pause?

 

I'm a big fan of the FairTax, except for that.