In the real world, America has one of the best economies on Earth

[Earl]

"As a rule, the top 20% of earners pay more income taxes than the rest of the tax-paying population put together."
https://smartasset.com/taxes/who-pays-the-most-taxes-in-the-u-s

 

[T. A. Gardner]

You don't know what "ad hominem" means.

literally, it is Latin for "at the man." It is a fallacy used when the person directs their comments to the person or source rather than the content of what was said or written.

An insult by comparison, is simply that. The person using it insults someone without ever involving content. The difference is sometimes subtle.

 

[BartenderElite]

literally, it is Latin for "at the man." It is a fallacy used when the person directs their comments to the person or source rather than the content of what was said or written.

An insult by comparison, is simply that. The person using it insults someone without ever involving content. The difference is sometimes subtle.

It sure is. And you do both on here, quite frequently.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

Well, it hasn't been tanked now by WWII.

Taxes were higher on the rich back then...and we were okay. The taxes on the rich should be much higher right now.

Right now, TA, the top 10% own 66.6% of the wealth of the nation...while the bottom 50% own 2.6% of the nation's wealth. Do you honestly think that the low 50% just are lazy and do not contribute to a better degree than their share of the wealth? Do you honestly think the top 10% do so much work that they rightly own 2/3's of the wealth?

When will you become concerned about the disparity? When the top 10% own 90% of the wealth? 99%? When the top 10 people own 75% of the wealth?

When, TA?

That's just an argument for class envy. Taxing the rich isn't the solution. Removing barriers to entry into the economy is. You want to fix that disparity, then remove unnecessary regulations, licensing, and other barriers to entry into the market. That creates competition and in turn makes people who are entry level more capable of gaining wealth.

More government = more concentration of wealth at the top. More taxes doesn't change that. You are a fool if you think the government is going to take a pile of money from the rich and simply hand it over to the poor.

 

[LurchAddams]

literally, it is Latin for "at the man." It is a fallacy used when the person directs their comments to the person or source rather than the content of what was said or written.

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/de/83/b5/de83b59ce22aae2d74cdfcd64c93e1a1.p/mg]

An insult by comparison, is simply that. The person using it insults someone without ever involving content. The difference is sometimes subtle.[/QUOTE]

My post contained no ad hominem attack. So, if you actually know what it means, you're just lying. What I did was point out that libertarian and right-wing think tanks and web sites are going to be anti-tax. It's not an attack, it's my opinion based on years of observation.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

So is your “incompatible people are being forced to co-exist” imply that the US is no longer a cohesive entity? That we are no longer a unified nation of different peoples?

I would say that's increasingly true. In the past, the US was largely mono-lingual with English being spoken. Today the US is increasingly multi-lingual and that trend is increasing not decreasing. That's in large part due to government (mostly from the Left btw) bowing to "inclusiveness." It is possible today to not speak English and function quite well in the US. Documents are printed in multiple languages. The economy runs in multiple languages--that is, packaging comes that way, stores and other entities have accommodations for it, etc.

Even our ballots come in multiple languages now. So, the incentive to learn English is diminishing rather than being reinforced.

https://archive.org/details/bowlingalone00robe

It isn't new. This is one of the earliest academic works on how social cohesion in the US is collapsing. Civic engagement is falling apart.

Incompatible people in the US, whether it be culturally, linguistically, socially, or religiously, are increasingly allowed to co-exist with no social pressure to conform to those norms in society as they already exist. Groups calling for Shria law for example. In Europe, this trend is far worse than in the US, but it's coming here too at an increasing rate.

That Biden has for all intents opened the borders, he's letting in a flood of completely unvetted, often dangerous, people into the US without even the slightest supervision. It is going to cause a cultural disaster on its own. Yes, many will assimilate, but a good portion won't. They have little or no reason to bother doing so with the way things are here in terms of government.

 

[Ross Dolan]

That's just an argument for class envy. Taxing the rich isn't the solution. Removing barriers to entry into the economy is. You want to fix that disparity, then remove unnecessary regulations, licensing, and other barriers to entry into the market. That creates competition and in turn makes people who are entry level more capable of gaining wealth.

More government = more concentration of wealth at the top. More taxes doesn't change that. You are a fool if you think the government is going to take a pile of money from the rich and simply hand it over to the poor.

You did not answer my question. It was not rhetorical. Would you please answer it. It is an iimportant thing to know to determine if you are serious.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

You did not answer my question. It was not rhetorical. Would you please answer it. It is an iimportant thing to know to determine if you are serious.

I did. We are no longer a unified nation of people. We've come to a point where we have a new version of what was happening before the last civil war.

 

[Ross Dolan]

I did.

You most assuredly did not.

Here is my question, including its predicate, in full:

Right now, TA, the top 10% own 66.6% of the wealth of the nation...while the bottom 50% own 2.6% of the nation's wealth. Do you honestly think that the low 50% just are lazy and do not contribute to a better degree than their share of the wealth? Do you honestly think the top 10% do so much work that they rightly own 2/3's of the wealth?

When will you become concerned about the disparity? When the top 10% own 90% of the wealth? 99%? When the top 10 people own 75% of the wealth?

When, TA?

So...when, TA?

It is a difficult question, my friend. Very difficult for people who speak as you do on the topic.

But actually attempt to give an answer.

When will the growing disparity finally become so acute that you see it as a problem?

 

[Earl]

Altogether, the top 50 percent of filers earned 90 percent of all income and were responsible for 98 percent of all income taxes paid in 2021. The other half of earners, those with incomes below $46,637, collectively paid 2.3 percent of all income taxes in 2021.
Google search

How much is enough?

A 90% tax bracket?

 

[T. A. Gardner]

You most assuredly did not.

Here is my question, including its predicate, in full:

Right now, TA, the top 10% own 66.6% of the wealth of the nation...while the bottom 50% own 2.6% of the nation's wealth. Do you honestly think that the low 50% just are lazy and do not contribute to a better degree than their share of the wealth? Do you honestly think the top 10% do so much work that they rightly own 2/3's of the wealth?

When will you become concerned about the disparity? When the top 10% own 90% of the wealth? 99%? When the top 10 people own 75% of the wealth?

When, TA?

So...when, TA?

It is a difficult question, my friend. Very difficult for people who speak as you do on the topic.

But actually attempt to give an answer.

When will the growing disparity finally become so acute that you see it as a problem?

I won't become concerned with the disparity so long as it isn't done by force. That is, those who are rich getting so by forcibly taking wealth from others--sort of like the government and taxation.

 

[Ross Dolan]

I won't become concerned with the disparity so long as it isn't done by force. That is, those who are rich getting so by forcibly taking wealth from others--sort of like the government and taxation.

So you are saying that if the top richest 10 people in America managed to gain ownershiip[ of 75% of the nation's wealth...you would not be concerned with it as long as it was not done by force.

TA...it is thinking like that that makes the notion of a purely capitalistic society a suicide pact rather than a rational economic choice.

I will assume you are simply stuck with your position and unwilling to see (or acknowledge) what an abomination it is.

 

[Earl]

I won't become concerned with the disparity so long as it isn't done by force. That is, those who are rich getting so by forcibly taking wealth from others--sort of like the government and taxation.

Indeed.

The poor will always be with you.

Capitalism weeds out the slugs who are too lazy to compete.

Thus the income disparity.

 

[tigerred59]

UK and Japan are shrinking. China is at best unstable. It might be as good as America, but that is doubtful. Europe is going slow.

America's economy is strong. India is growing faster, but that is from an absolutely sad per capita rate. It is basically impossible to find an economy with as much absolute growth as the USA.

https://www.wsj.com/economy/global/...r-economy-shrinks-more-than-expected-30407624

Yes, we do, but also in this real world and why Trump numbers remain competitive to Grandpa's....in our world, bread is 4 bucks, orange Juice is 7 bucks, property taxes in states have all gone up, insurance has gone up and we're sending billions to other countries, while we tell tax payers we can't do anything to help you. Wall Street is doing great, but mainstreet is not...then compound that with 1.8 million undocumented welfare babies we gotta feed and house and educate....and round up for committed crimes...fuck the economy, get real with reality, Joe

 

[tigerred59]

Indeed.

The poor will always be with you.

Capitalism weeds out the slugs who are too lazy to compete.

Thus the income disparity.

Yall need to stop with this poor will always be beholding to Democrats....if anybody but Trump was running on the right, democrats like myself would come a running, but nothing on this earth will give my vote to a monster or white woman lunatic that thinks slavery wasn't real....the GOP is so lost. If ever there was a time to bring in a 3rd party, minus a Kennedy, now is the time

 

[Nordberg]

The wealthy and corporations use the political system and make changes to it that make them richer and more powerful. They use lobbying power to control the politicians. They have time. The wealthy always do. They just keep chamfering the corners and after a while, the country has a new shape. It is not what we once had. The wealthy have slowly taken over the Supreme Court and the justice system. You do not need a revolution to take over a country. Just time and money.
The wealth gap is obscene, worse than during the Gilded age. Money=power. It is not hard to see who is winning.
The wealthy pit the citizens against each other. They bought up TV and radio stations that tell people that they are being robbed by poor people. They teach you to hate minorities and other poor people while the rich are picking your pockets at an astronomical rate.
You know who will be on your side? A billionaire. They know how you live and what your problems are. You have to flush your toilet 15 times. You need ID in a super market. What you need is gaudy 400 dollar tennis shoes.
The reason for right-wing vitriol is they are taught that the left are enemies. Rush and the other right wingers have made you look past who is running your lives and picking your pockets and teaching you to hate people who are like you and share your problems.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

So you are saying that if the top richest 10 people in America managed to gain ownershiip[ of 75% of the nation's wealth...you would not be concerned with it as long as it was not done by force.

TA...it is thinking like that that makes the notion of a purely capitalistic society a suicide pact rather than a rational economic choice.

I will assume you are simply stuck with your position and unwilling to see (or acknowledge) what an abomination it is.

Not particularly, because should that happen it will for one of two reasons:

It was done in cooperation with government by force--eg., regulation and laws that let it happen regardless of the tax rate.

Or

Society as a whole became increasingly unwilling or unable to generate wealth through work.

No society is purely capitalistic, and any society that tries to be purely socialistic will fail horribly (like N. Korea for example).

 

[Ross Dolan]

Indeed.

The poor will always be with you.

Capitalism weeds out the slugs who are too lazy to compete.

Thus the income disparity.

This comment of yours...is the thinking of a slug. A slug that would probably be just as ugly to other slugs as slugs in general are to us.

My mother was a workaholic...but, as the daughter of a recent imigrant, not especially educated (taken out of school after the first grade in order to work)...nor was she particularly street intelligent. But she was a hard worker...not a slacker. Worked dilligently for several employers...then when she had me and my bothers...worked as women in her day did, as a caretaker. Even then, she took in curtains to wash, starch, and stretch...for a bit of extra money. She was not a fucking slug...nor too lazy to compete. She was not able to compete, by circumstances, with what you apparently think are competitors earning an honest living by hard, diligent work.

Capitalism, as we Americans have polluted it, is an abomination.

Be that as it may, I am a capitalist. Free enterprise still works best, in my opinion. But just as some socialistic nations have learned from capitalism (and borrowed parts of it to help their systems)...capitalism should be borrowing more freely from socialism.

In any case, if you agree with TA that you would not be bothered by 10 individuals gaining ownership of 75% of all the nations wealth...you are as wrong-headed as he.

 

[Ross Dolan]

Not particularly, because should that happen it will for one of two reasons:

It was done in cooperation with government by force--eg., regulation and laws that let it happen regardless of the tax rate.

Or

Society as a whole became increasingly unwilling or unable to generate wealth through work.

No society is purely capitalistic, and any society that tries to be purely socialistic will fail horribly (like N. Korea for example).

BUT NO MATTER HOW THEY DID IT...so long as it was legal, you would not be bothered by it happening.

I don't know what to say except that I would expect better from you.

My bad.