They Don’t Pay Their Fair Share

#152
#152
luthervol said:
Wealth Inequality by Country 2021
Top 10 Countries with the Highest Wealth Inequality (World Bank Gini index):
  1. South Africa - 63.0%
  2. Namibia - 59.1%
  3. Suriname - 57.9%
  4. Zambia - 57.1%
  5. Sao Tome and Principe - 56.3%
  6. Central African Republic - 56.2%
  7. Eswatini - 54.6%
  8. Mozambique - 54.0%
  9. Brazil - 53.4%
  10. Botswana - 53.3%
We are in some mighty fine company. I don't see Sweden anywhere on there. Can you name another country where the top 1% controls as much of the wealth?
A progressive tax is one which limits that inequality.
Click to expand...

You post a top ten list that doesn’t include America in order to proclaim America has horrible inequality?

You seem to be all over the map here. You jumped from income taxes to wealth taxes and now inequality.

So are you saying we should have less progressive taxes like Sweden? Or are you admitting progressive taxes are unrelated to inequality given South Africa has very progressive taxes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SpaceCoastVol
#153
#153
Vol8188 said:
You post a top ten list that doesn’t include America in order to proclaim America has horrible inequality?

You seem to be all over the map here. You jumped from income taxes to wealth taxes and now inequality.

So are you saying we should have less progressive taxes like Sweden? Or are you admitting progressive taxes are unrelated to inequality given South Africa has very progressive taxes.
Click to expand...
My bad.
Here are the 10 countries with the highest wealth inequality:

  1. Russia (0.879)
  2. Sweden (0.867)
  3. United States (0.852)
  4. Brazil (0.849)
  5. Thailand (0.846)
  6. Denmark (0.838)
  7. Philippines (0.837)
  8. Saudi Arabia (0.834)
  9. Indonesia (0.833)
  10. India (0.832)
Sweden is on there.
Same link.......just without the Gini index.
 
#154
#154
luthervol said:
What?
You said his question was about where the myth comes from.
My question is, what myth?
It seems pretty relevant.
Just trying to let you define what is being debated and what is worthy of discussion.
Is the "myth" now the red herring? Hard to keep up.
Click to expand...
It isn't difficult to keep up for the rest of us. Perhaps the issue is you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dovervolz
#155
#155
VolStrom said:
Maybe I lost track, but we don't have a federal wealth tax other than a graduated income tax scale of which no rich asshat pays. People that are middle to upper "middle class" are the ones that get F'd every year. The really rich like some pilots on here get away with paying little to no taxes.
Click to expand...
Thread started with income tax. Luther dropped a distraction about wealth.
 
#156
#156
Vol8188 said:
You post a top ten list that doesn’t include America in order to proclaim America has horrible inequality?

You seem to be all over the map here. You jumped from income taxes to wealth taxes and now inequality.

So are you saying we should have less progressive taxes like Sweden? Or are you admitting progressive taxes are unrelated to inequality given South Africa has very progressive taxes.
Click to expand...
Posted the wrong top ten.
I didn't make any jump from income taxes to wealth taxes.
You referenced the top 1% in the OP. That's opening the door to inequality wide open.
I'm saying we should have a higher top end % like Sweden. Sweden should have a more graduated scale like us.
South Africa's inequality would be worse without the progressive taxes.
 
#157
#157
McDad said:
It isn't difficult to keep up for the rest of us. Perhaps the issue is you.
Click to expand...
Wasn't it you (we know it was) who made it a point to repost the OP highlighting the question about the myth of the rich not paying taxes?

Maybe you and 8188 can just admit there is no such myth and we can remove that from the discussion.
 
#158
#158
McDad said:
@Vol8188 this is your discussion point:
Where does this myth that the wealthy don’t pay taxes come from? Especially given that we have the most progressive taxes in the world. Can anyone back it up with data?

Luther posted nothing related to your point. He is using a red herring to alter the discussion. And, he is succeeding. Stay on your topic. It is far more interesting than what Luther is bringing.
Click to expand...
Just so we can all remain on the same page.

I provided the bolding but not the italics.

Is that, or is it not, still the discussion point as you claimed?
Perhaps the issue is you.
 
#159
#159
#160
#160
Vol8188 said:
Lol so Sweden which you were defending is worse than America? What’re you even trying to say at this point? Just give up and admit you’re wrong
Click to expand...
I'm saying what I've always said. That the wealth inequality in our country is obscene and the wealthiest need to shoulder their FAIR SHARE of the burden.
 
#161
#161
luthervol said:
Wasn't it you (we know it was) who made it a point to repost the OP highlighting the question about the myth of the rich not paying taxes?

Maybe you and 8188 can just admit there is no such myth and we can remove that from the discussion.
Click to expand...
The context of the OP shaped the premise. The stats were given just before the quoted section.

No one is discussing the "myth" except you. Frankly I don't want to play with you tonight. And I don't want to watch you play with yourself, either.

Start a new thread if it's so important to you.
 
#163
#163
luthervol said:
I'm saying what I've always said. That the wealth inequality in our country is obscene and the wealthiest need to shoulder their FAIR SHARE of the burden.
Click to expand...

Twice as much as their earnings isn’t fair? What’s fair?

Your argument has continually fell apart and all you’ve done is continually run and move the goal post. It’s sad
 
  • Like
Reactions: SpaceCoastVol and Rickyvol77
#165
#165
McDad said:
I'm not so sure about that. I would like to see if people sell assets more rapidly at lower rates. It might be true that lowering the percentage would actually increase the revenue produced from cap gains.
Click to expand...

You're talking about the lock-in effect of capital gains if rates are too high. The higher the rate, the fewer transactions (as a capital gain is voluntary), the lower the tax revenue. I'm sitting on capital gains in stocks because I loaded into them in 1999-2000 after the dot.com bust. If I sold them, the tax would be 23.8% (20% max cap gain rate, plus 3.8% obamacare net investment income tax). I have thought about selling plenty of times but don't want to pay that tax. If the rates were 10% or less, I might sell some stock, pay the tax and buy some other things. Of course the dems' warped solution is to increase the cap gains rates to increase cap gains tax revenue. They never recognize that .......tax rate x 0 = 0. So, zero is what they get.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SpaceCoastVol, GroverCleveland, McDad and 1 other person
#166
#166
McDad said:
The context of the OP shaped the premise. The stats were given just before the quoted section.

No one is discussing the "myth" except you. Frankly I don't want to play with you tonight. And I don't want to watch you play with yourself, either.

Start a new thread if it's so important to you.
Click to expand...
lol...........
Only you can feel justified in claiming to be the arbiter of what the essential question of the thread is while also claiming that I'm just deriding it with red herrings. And then claim that the question you framed was really not the question after all.
You do you.
and
Happy New Year by the way.
 
#167
#167
volinbham said:
what's included in "burden"?

assuming it's government spending we've already established they pay the vast majority of that burden.
Click to expand...
He is baiting you with "wealth", not "income". While they are related it isnt the same.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SpaceCoastVol
#168
#168
luthervol said:
lol...........
Only you can feel justified in claiming to be the arbiter of what the essential question of the thread is while also claiming that I'm just deriding it with red herrings. And then claim that the question you framed was really not the question after all.
You do you.
and
Happy New Year by the way.
Click to expand...

Are you ever going to address why wealth should be taxed by the federal government? What good is wealth without income?
 
#171
#171
luthervol said:
lol...........
Only you can feel justified in claiming to be the arbiter of what the essential question of the thread is while also claiming that I'm just deriding it with red herrings. And then claim that the question you framed was really not the question after all.
You do you.
and
Happy New Year by the way.
Click to expand...
Start your thread then. I'm sure it'll be a hum-dinger.
 
#174
#174
volinbham said:
i'm not sure if it's baiting or confusion.
Click to expand...

I agree. I think he doesn’t fully understand. You either have to openly lie about what wealth is or falsely believe they’re the same. That’s the only reason to make the claims that they don’t pay their fair share, is if you see wealth as income
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols
#175
#175
Growing wealth inequality is pretty simple math. When everybody’s wealth goes up 10%, those with wealth of $1,000,000 will have $1,100,000. Those that choose to spend everything they earn and save nothing will have nothing after adding 10%. Those that make sacrifices and invest wisely over decades by doing without should never have anything redistributed to anybody that chooses to not live within their means.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SpaceCoastVol and Vol423
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top