Do rich people work harder?

[NorthStar]

-- ...Freedom of choice Tim, freedom of choice. :b ...In regards to Mark's 'lifestyle'.

_______________________

Yep, I was going to say liberalism and republicanism. ...Andre got to it quick. :b

 

[Mosin]

Is the far left against the 1%? The middle is just tired of carrying so much of their weight.

Tim

But, the middle isn't carrying the weight of the 1%. The middle and the 1% are carrying the weight of the 47% who want something for nothing. That's a reality, but how long can it continue? The 1% have alternatives, however. Just look at the exodus of them from places like New York City. They are leaving in droves. It is the middle that is stuck with the tab after they bail. I see your point, but you have the culprit confused with someone else who is more convenient to blame.

 

[Andre Marc]

Andre, I have a feeling that history isn't going to be kind to Mr Warren Buffet and his ilk ( can we say megalomaniacs here). BTW, did you know that he owns, among so many other things...See's candies. So next time you order the half pound box, that fact maybe something to think about, LOL

Buffet is a master of PR. He has convinced the public his "aw shucks, I'm just a down to earth guy from Omaha" is the truth. He is a ruthless, dishonest huckster who has
made a fortune.

No worries...I'm OFF sugar...the devil's white powder!

 

[NorthStar]

-- Willard Mitt Romney, is he rich? ...Rich good? ...By having done good deeds for others, and to his country, and for an honest economy?

 

[Mosin]

Don't forget about our wonderful President who spent $1,400,000,000 of taxpayer money on entertainment and vacations for himself and his immediate family last year. That's a bit more than all the heads of Europe combined. Yeah, the same guy who moved into a $1,400,000 house when he graduated college. What is it with 1.4 and him? Surely he isn't a one percenter. Say it ain't so!

I'm reminded of something Willie Nelson said, "If you say it real fast, it don't seem like so much."
The same Willie also said, "Stick with me boys, and I'll show you how to turn diamonds into horse turds."
Somehow this all applies, but I digress.

 

[Andre Marc]

Don't forget about our wonderful President who spent $1,400,000,000 of taxpayer money on entertainment and vacations for himself and his immediate family last year. That's a bit more than all the heads of Europe combined. Yeah, the same guy who moved into a $1,400,000 house when he graduated college. What is it with 1.4 and him? Surely he isn't a one percenter. Say it ain't so!

I'm reminded of something Willie Nelson said, "If you say it real fast, it don't seem like so much."
The same Willie also said, "Stick with me boys, and I'll show you how to turn diamonds into horse turds."
Somehow this all applies, but I digress.

Huh? Our president spent a 1.4 billion on vacations? Check your facts.

Also, when you check your facts, see that Bush II took MORE vacations than ANY OTHER PRESIDENT IN THE HISTORY OF THE PRESIDENCY.

To quote our duly reelected President...Please continue Sir....Lol........

 

[NorthStar]

Don't forget about our wonderful President who spent $1,400,000,000 of taxpayer money on entertainment and vacations for himself and his immediate family last year. That's a bit more than all the heads of Europe combined. Yeah, the same guy who moved into a $1,400,000 house when he graduated college. What is it with 1.4 and him? Surely he isn't a one percenter. Say it ain't so!

I'm reminded of something Willie Nelson said, "If you say it real fast, it don't seem like so much."
The same Willie also said, "Stick with me boys, and I'll show you how to turn diamonds into horse turds."
Somehow this all applies, but I digress.

---- HDMI version 1.4?

 

[Mosin]

Huh? Our president spent a 1.4 billion on vacations? Check your facts.

Also, when you check your facts, see that Bush II took MORE vacations than ANY OTHER PRESIDENT IN THE HISTORY OF THE PRESIDENCY.

To quote our duly reelected President...Please continue Sir....Lol........

No, you check yours.

 

[JackD201]

Airforce One, escort fighter planes, Secret Service, Armored Limos, Backup Vehicles

It's possible.

 

[Mark (Basspig) Weiss]

Mark, how do you keep starting businesses predicated on substantial investments in electronics, powering a 16,000 watt sound system and re-building the infrastructure of your house, beam by beam, on < $10k gross a year? And why? You could make more with no capital investment, as an employee doing repairs at an electronics shop. You could make more working at Best Buy.

Not my business and you don't need to answer, but I can't make the math work.

Tim

The sound system is 38 years old. I built it during more prosperous times (1970s).
I'm not really at liberty to discuss in a public forum how I came up with the money to buy video cameras. However, the electronics shop is simpler.. some of that gear was purchased in 1982. The more recent purchases were funded by the upgades I did for a client on some hi-fi amplifiers, plus the sale of a quarter ton of old broadcast equipment that one of my retiring friend gave me when he decided to clean out his basement. I bought Tektronix and HP test equipment for one penny on the dollar on eBay, fixed some of it up and calibrated/aligned it myself.

All the electronics jobs left the area a long time ago. Nowadays, companies don't want to hire elderly folks because of the medical insurance.

Best Buy? There's a thing called quality of life. I hate working alongside fools and stupid kids. It's not worth the commute. I won't set foot in those kinds of establishments for that reason. I remember my employment years were the most miserable of my entire life. Since I retired, I have never been happier. The only problem is I've got these people called 'tax collectors' bothering me for thousands of dollars that I don't have. I don't drive much anymore. Too many corrupt cops and it's too dangerous with all the distracted motorists. I was rear-ended five times from 2003-2007. That last time was a real bad one--landed me in the hospital and on rehab for six months. I'd just as soon stay out of the public roads. Too dangerous. Don't really need a car anyway. I have everything I need right here.. firewood, my own vegetable garden where I grow potatoes, carrots, tomatoes, etc. Electricity's getting rather expensive, but those property taxes are the main problem.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Ahh...didn't realize you were retired. That explains much. I hope to squeeze by on very little new money someday myself. Someplace small, close to the mountains. With much lower property taxes. Good luck with the amp repair. There are guys out there who do a pretty good business restoring/repairing vintage tube gear.

Tim

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

But, the middle isn't carrying the weight of the 1%. The middle and the 1% are carrying the weight of the 47% who want something for nothing. That's a reality, but how long can it continue? The 1% have alternatives, however. Just look at the exodus of them from places like New York City. They are leaving in droves. It is the middle that is stuck with the tab after they bail. I see your point, but you have the culprit confused with someone else who is more convenient to blame.

I'm not looking for a culprit; I'm just doing the math.

Our country is run on income and payroll taxes. The investment class is paying 15% on investment income, and little or no payroll taxes because such a small % of their income is from salary.The salaried classes are paying 25, 30% and more, with substantially fewer tax reduction opportunities. So yes, the people who go to jobs every day are pulling much of the weight of the people whose income comes from investments. Now, America can re-think the progressive system, fantasize about squeezing significant revenue out of the bottom; we can even discuss alternatives to the income tax-based system. But as long as we've got that system, based on % of income, and one type of income, work, is taxed at twice the rate of other type, capital gains, then the middle is pulling the weight of the top.

Personally, I think progressive income tax is the simplest, best method for getting the revenue, and I think an argument can be made that it comes closest to charging proportionately for services rendered. That's a rather nuanced discussion, but let's let it suffice to say that we don't spend billions every year on wars, nation-building and diplomacy around the world protecting the economic interests of Wal Mart greeters. But it really doesn't matter if you buy into the argument or not. We can't fund the country without a progressive tax system. Personally, I think we need a system of 3 or 4 brackets from around 25% down, with no shelters or deductions. None. Not even mortgage interest. A simple progressive tax system.

It'll never happen, though. It would render far too many lawyers, consultants, brokers, bankers, lobbyists and accountants obsolete. And that sentence just broke down the demographics of the influential in Washington.

And don't worry so much about the 42%. That number will shrink substantially as the economy and job market recovers, like water seeking its own level. It will get back to where it came from -- the working poor, often giving up a higher % of their income in payroll, state, local, sales taxes and fees than we do, simply because they have so little in the first place. Google the salary of the old guy who bagged your groceries last Saturday. Calculate his payroll taxes. Apply the local sales tax to every dime left because he spends it all and its still not enough. Now see what % of his income he's paying in taxes. Life will seem much fairer when you're finished. Or you'll feel fortunate as hell. One of the two.

Tim

 

[edorr]

No, you check yours.

Obama takes less than 20 days vacation a year, so 1.4Bn in 2011 would add up to more than 70 million per day. Surprised Fox news has not picked up this yet. Could have been a gamechanger for the Romney campaign too. Interesting facts you pick up on these internet forums. Thanks for sharing this with us. Can you give us a line item break down? I'm really curious now.

 

[edorr]

I'm not looking for a culprit; I'm just doing the math.

Our country is run on income and payroll taxes. The investment class is paying 15% on investment income, and little or no payroll taxes because such a small % of their income is from salary.The salaried classes are paying 25, 30% and more, with substantially fewer tax reduction opportunities. So yes, the people who go to jobs every day are pulling much of the weight of the people whose income comes from investments. Now, America can re-think the progressive system, fantasize about squeezing significant revenue out of the bottom; we can even discuss alternatives to the income tax-based system. But as long as we've got that system, based on % of income, and one type of income, work, is taxed at twice the rate of other type, capital gains, then the middle is pulling the weight of the top.

Personally, I think progressive income tax is the simplest, best method for getting the revenue, and I think an argument can be made that it comes closest to charging proportionately for services rendered. That's a rather nuanced discussion, but let's let it suffice to say that we don't spend billions every year on wars, nation-building and diplomacy around the world protecting the economic interests of Wal Mart greeters. But it really doesn't matter if you buy into the argument or not. We can't fund the country without a progressive tax system. Personally, I think we need a system of 3 or 4 brackets from around 25% down, with no shelters or deductions. None. Not even mortgage interest. A simple progressive tax system.

It'll never happen, though. It would render far too many lawyers, consultants, brokers, bankers, lobbyists and accountants obsolete. And that sentence just broke down the demographics of the influential in Washington.

And don't worry so much about the 42%. That number will shrink substantially as the economy and job market recovers, like water seeking its own level. It will get back to where it came from -- the working poor, often giving up a higher % of their income in payroll, state, local, sales taxes and fees than we do, simply because they have so little in the first place. Google the salary of the old guy who bagged your groceries last Saturday. Calculate his payroll taxes. Apply the local sales tax to every dime left because he spends it all and its still not enough. Now see what % of his income he's paying in taxes. Life will seem much fairer when you're finished. Or you'll feel fortunate as hell. One of the two.

Tim

Well said. Don't hold your breath about guys subscribing to the "47% are takers" worldview ever thinking of life as more fair after inspection of facts. They tend to see theymselves as victims, and no amount of millions in the bank is going to changs that.

 

[JackD201]

Obama takes less than 20 days vacation a year, so 1.4Bn in 2011 would add up to more than 70 million per day. Surprised Fox news has not picked up this yet. Could have been a gamechanger for the Romney campaign too. Interesting facts you pick up on these internet forums. Thanks for sharing this with us. Can you give us a line item break down? I'm really curious now.

I believe that is the sum of his total travel expenses for the last year. If I'm not mistaken the bigger issue was that the last year was an election year.

 

[Andre Marc]

No, you check yours.

I did. Total right wing fabrication. Take from a right wing nut job's book with and parroted
by the usual idiots. Zero basis in facts.

 

[Andre Marc]

I believe that is the sum of his total travel expenses for the last year. If I'm not mistaken the bigger issue was that the last year was an election year.

This is completely unsubstantiated nonsense from an old senile right wing GOP activist named Robert Keith Gray.
He is known as a loon even in right wing circles.

Screw him. EVEN if it this nonsense WERE true..we spent 1 billion A WEEK in Iraq for 8 years.

Where was his book then. Where was his outrage?

Yeh, exactly.

 

[JackD201]

I was just sayin' man. Don't have a dog in this fight.

The number is believable if you think about what it takes to shuttle POTUS all over the place. I'm not saying he should fly commercial just that the numbers are believable.

 

[jazdoc]

I'm not looking for a culprit; I'm just doing the math.

Our country is run on income and payroll taxes. The investment class is paying 15% on investment income, and little or no payroll taxes because such a small % of their income is from salary.The salaried classes are paying 25, 30% and more, with substantially fewer tax reduction opportunities. So yes, the people who go to jobs every day are pulling much of the weight of the people whose income comes from investments. Now, America can re-think the progressive system, fantasize about squeezing significant revenue out of the bottom; we can even discuss alternatives to the income tax-based system. But as long as we've got that system, based on % of income, and one type of income, work, is taxed at twice the rate of other type, capital gains, then the middle is pulling the weight of the top.

Personally, I think progressive income tax is the simplest, best method for getting the revenue, and I think an argument can be made that it comes closest to charging proportionately for services rendered. That's a rather nuanced discussion, but let's let it suffice to say that we don't spend billions every year on wars, nation-building and diplomacy around the world protecting the economic interests of Wal Mart greeters. But it really doesn't matter if you buy into the argument or not. We can't fund the country without a progressive tax system. Personally, I think we need a system of 3 or 4 brackets from around 25% down, with no shelters or deductions. None. Not even mortgage interest. A simple progressive tax system.

Hey Tim,

Kudos for the thoughtful post and putting real numbers to paper. A couple observations...

1. In one critical way, your approach mirrors mine: start with how much revenue you are willing to raise, then spend only that amount. Politicians have an unfortunate tendency to tell us all the goodies they are going to 'give' us but are somewhat less forthcoming about how to pay for it.

2. Unfortunately, those rates would in no way cover current spending, let alone future obligations. The Congressional Research Service estimates "average effective individual income tax rates would need to be increased by 76% under the CBO baseline or 110% under the Administration’s budget." (www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA521231).

3. You bring up a valid point about regressive nature of payroll taxes. Unfortunately, this was a deliberate decision which FDR acknowledged "Those taxes aren't a matter of economics, they're straight politics." FDR understood that the program would not fly unless it was sold as a form of insurance or pension that everyone paid into and therefore was entitled to a return. This limits the amount you can reasonably take from the top 50% and keep the illusion that everyone can be net importers of Social Security dollars. Social Security continues to be misrepresented to this day. It is a pay as you go program; the dollars deducted from your paycheck immediately go out the door to current beneficiaries. It is not 'insurance' despite the government's euphemistic name (FICA) and there is no account in Washington with your name on it accumulating your contributions. All you have is a promise that future taxpayers will do the same for you despite the fact that Congress has the authority to reduce or eliminate your benefit (Fleming v. Nestor). Just for fun, take your annual benefit statement and estimate what your expected benefits will be for a reasonable life expectancy. Then compare to your accumulated lifetime contributions...

 

[edorr]

I believe that is the sum of his total travel expenses for the last year. If I'm not mistaken the bigger issue was that the last year was an election year.

If so and the number includes fully loaded cost all his election year travel, Mosin quote "Don't forget about our wonderful President who spent $1,400,000,000 of taxpayer money on entertainment and vacations for himself and his immediate family last year." is of course total BS.