They Don’t Pay Their Fair Share

#301
#301
Vol8188 said:
I think in your mind you’ve made a point, and honestly it’s cute. Really.

But a higher tax rate in general (Sweden, the example you continually brought up, not me) is not the same as progressive. And you’ve still yet to show me who has a more progressive system.

Honestly, why the childish behavior?
Click to expand...
It most certainly is one element of a progressive tax structure.
I've stated several times in this thread that I believe Sweden should have a more graduated scale like the US and that the US should have a higher top end rate like Sweden.

It's really not that hard to follow - absent a sever head injury or some other mental issue.
 
#302
#302
luthervol said:
It most certainly is one element of a progressive tax structure.
I've stated several times in this thread that I believe Sweden should have a more graduated scale like the US and that the US should have a higher top end rate like Sweden.

It's really not that hard to follow - absent a sever head injury or some other mental issue.
Click to expand...

So…you’ve still yet to name anyone with a more progressive tax structure than our own?
 
#304
#304
Vol8188 said:
Lol maybe I did. Clarify for those of us with previous TBI’s. When you stated that Sweden wasn’t on the list and america was, what did you mean by that? It was a list of inequality you were talking about.

It seems you were incorrectly claiming they had less inequality….yet you hide like a child and refuse to admit it.
Click to expand...
I'm reluctantly forced to conclude that you are far more dense than I had imagined.
I mistakenly posted the wrong list. I quickly (10 minutes) posted the list I had planned to post and admitted that Sweden was in fact on the list.
 
#305
#305
luthervol said:
I'm reluctantly forced to conclude that you are far more dense than I had imagined.
I mistakenly posted the wrong list. I quickly (10 minutes) posted the list I had planned to post and admitted that Sweden was in fact on the list.
Click to expand...

So your example of both a more progressive tax system and a society with less inequity was wrong on both accounts.

Do you intend on giving me an example of a more progressive system?
 
#306
#306
In 1990, the top 1% had 6x the wealth as the bottom 50% of Americans. First quarter this year the 1% held 16x the wealth of the bottom 50%.
 
#307
#307
luthervol said:
Certainly not, just shoulder their equitable portion of the burden required to maintain a country that allows them to accumulate such wealth.
Click to expand...

Vol8188 said:
Here’s a serious question what good is wealth if it does not generate income? It seems the only real issue should be that, the income.

If I had a lot of wealth and no money for example, what example, what benefit is that (other than the enjoyment of people like yourself hating on me)?
Click to expand...

Never got a reply on this one either. @luthervol
 
#308
#308
ClearwaterVol said:
In 1990, the top 1% had 6x the wealth as the bottom 50% of Americans. First quarter this year the 1% held 16x the wealth of the bottom 50%.
Click to expand...

Okay…some people have a lot of wealth? What about it?

Vol8188 said:
Here’s a serious question what good is wealth if it does not generate income? It seems the only real issue should be that, the income.

If I had a lot of wealth and no money for example, what example, what benefit is that (other than the enjoyment of people like yourself hating on me)?
Click to expand...
 
#309
#309
Vol8188 said:
So…you’ve still yet to name anyone with a more progressive tax structure than our own?
Click to expand...
From the article.........
Sweden, often cited as the most progressive tax regime in the OECD, maintains a top statutory income tax rate of 57.1 percent.
 
#312
#312
ClearwaterVol said:
It is not a sustainable model as that gap continues to grow exponentially.
Click to expand...

You’ve also yet to explain how wealth without income helps me or why it’s unsustainable to have a large gap between those doing nothing and those running multiple businesses
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rickyvol77
#313
#313
utvolpj said:
But that's how math and compound interest work. It can't/won't stop unless money is forcibly removed from accounts
Click to expand...

Especially given inflation. That’s likely the largest driver of the wealth gap and no one on the left seems to care. They proclaim it’s only the rich who are upset about it
 
#315
#315
Vol8188 said:
You’ve also yet to explain how wealth without income helps me or why it’s unsustainable to have a large gap between those doing nothing and those running multiple businesses
Click to expand...

I haven't commented on that situation what I have said is that throughout history when wealth is held by the very few... eventually the serfs will get pissed and start killing off the few.
 
Last edited:
#316
#316
utvolpj said:
But that's how math and compound interest work. It can't/won't stop unless money is forcibly removed from accounts
Click to expand...
Extrapolate that trend and in 25 years the top 1% will hold 50 times the wealth of the bottom 50%.
 
#318
#318
ClearwaterVol said:
I haven't commented on that situation what I have said is that throughout history when wealth is held by the very few... eventually the serfs getting pissed and start killing off the few.
Click to expand...

And then the few start re-accumulating the majority of the wealth.
 
#319
#319
Vol8188 said:
So…you’ve still yet to name anyone with a more progressive tax structure than our own?
Click to expand...

luthervol said:
From the article.........
Sweden, often cited as the most progressive tax regime in the OECD, maintains a top statutory income tax rate of 57.1 percent.
Click to expand...


You mean the country you agreed with me below had a less progressive tax system because they tax people making 70k and 700k the same rate?

So once again, we are back at square one. With you claiming they have a more progressive system, falsely.

luthervol said:
I don't think it would be.
Click to expand...


Vol8188 said:
I’ve replied to you about three times without any response.

You stated Sweden’s highest income bracket is equal to $70,000k here.

How is that a more progressive income tax system? If we taxed people making 70k the same as those making 700k like they do in Sweden, how would that be more progressive?
Click to expand...
 
#320
#320
ClearwaterVol said:
I haven't commented on that situation what I have said is that throughout history when wealth is held by the very few... eventually the serfs getting fu#cking pissed and start killing off the few.
Click to expand...

I think it’s cute that you’ve read Marx. You should try reading some of the newer stuff, the NeoMarxist.

If you do you’ll see them disagreeing with you. Because what you’re not seeing is how well our poor and middle class live. They openly refer to the prosperity of the middle and lower classes as one of the things that holds American culture together.

But to be sure I understand your argument, in spite of the fact that the poor and middle class continue to do better than they have in previous decades, you believe they will rebel? Why? Why would a group of people who live better year after year than they did the previous year rebel?
 
#322
#322
luthervol said:
Extrapolate that trend and in 25 years the top 1% will hold 50 times the wealth of the bottom 50%.
Click to expand...

And? I’m not sure I’m seeing the issue. 1 I’m not sure it’ll continue at the same rate as you’re claiming, nor are you. 2, what if it does? Where’s the issue
 
#323
#323
Vol8188 said:
I think it’s cute that you’ve read Marx. You should try reading some of the newer stuff, the NeoMarxist.

If you do you’ll see them disagreeing with you. Because what you’re not seeing is how well our poor and middle class live. They openly refer to the prosperity of the middle and lower classes as one of the things that holds American culture together.

But to be sure I understand your argument, in spite of the fact that the poor and middle class continue to do better than they have in previous decades, you believe they will rebel? Why? Why would a group of people who live better year after year than they did the previous year rebel?
Click to expand...


Never read or at least I don't remember reading Marx. I simply look at history. Certainly don't believe in communism, but pure capitalism ain't the answer either.

Because better is a relative term. The wealthy are taking a larger and larger percentage of the pie each year. It becomes unacceptable after a period of time.
 
#325
#325
ClearwaterVol said:
Never read or at least I don't remember reading Marx. I simply look at history. Certainly don't believe in communism, but pure capitalism ain't the answer either.

Because better is a relative term. The wealthy are taking a larger and larger percentage of the pie each year. It becomes unacceptable after a period of time.
Click to expand...

The idea of the poor rising up against the rich is a Marxist idea. Perhaps you didn’t get it from Marx, but that doesn’t really change anything.

Sure better is a relative term but we can quantify it. They have more purchasing power than before, they have more amenities, etc.

What’s the advantage of all this wealth without income that you seem upset about? If I have a ton of wealth and no income, what have I gained?
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top