Millionaires to Buffet: Butt out

[alkemyst]

LOL

I realize this is 2005: According to the latest U.S. Census data, Manhattan residents have the highest average income in the country - a sweet $73,000.

http://gothamist.com/2005/08/08/manhattan_salaries_are_on_a_high.php

You do realize how those numbers work right?

 

[Slew Foot]

I find it ironic that to dumborats, someone trying to keep their own money is greedy, but someone trying to take it from them is not.

 

[Rainsford]

I find it ironic that to dumborats, someone trying to keep their own money is greedy, but someone trying to take it from them is not.

The value of observations from someone who thinks "dumborats" is the height of wit aside, commentary on rich people being evil or greedy or whatever for opposing taxes almost always seems to come from righties trying to cram words into the mouths of lefties rather than something lefties actually say. Most liberals seem to explain raising taxes on the rich in terms of a practical approach to looking at who has all the money. Taxes aren't "good", but if we have to raise taxes somewhere, raising them on a millionaire seems more reasonable than raising them on someone who's having a hard time getting by.

 

[Thegonagle]

Shoot, when I combine Federal, state, property, and sales tax, I easily hit that 50% mark and I only hit 45K this year.

Mmmmm, yeah. I'm going to have to go ahead and disagree with you.

Or else advise you to find a new accountant next year.

 

[alkemyst]

I thinks it's funny how most missed the 'heart' of this topic.

It's about capital gains really.

Warren Buffet is right, unfortunately he profited from this loophole the most.

He is willing to pay back, however; that's a lot easier once you made it.

I really find it absurd how so many here think $500k of income is rich and excessive.

I would love to be there, but I am 40 going into it. So if I can get there buy 50 I will have about 15 years of that savings and lifestyle.

that's the way most get it.

 

[Craig234]

I find it ironic that to dumborats, someone trying to keep their own money is greedy, but someone trying to take it from them is not.

People like you are the biggest threat to the US and freedom in the world.

It used to be a competition between tyrannical/dictatorial organized societies, and 'liberty' based societies who had a national spirit.

There's a third competitor now, the 'plutocracy' no one should pay taxes ideology.

Does the phrase "united we stand, divided we fall" mean anything to you? How about "Ask not what your country, but what your country can do for you"? I didn't think so.

Fact is, an organized tyranny is more effective than a Libertarian herd of cats plutocracy.

The nation the US was the founders tried to create, will cease to exist as such, nothing left but a race to the bottom among corrupt plutocracies.

The same pressures exist in every society. Some resist, some don't. We did, we don't.

The key to human liberty is well-distributed power and wealth. Not totally - but quite a bit.

But just as hardcore communists or fascists were blinded by their ideologies, people like you are blinded by one that fails to understand why to distribute concentrated gains.

Save234

 

[xj0hnx]

Does the phrase "united we stand, divided we fall" mean anything to you

Fail234

Dude, you seriously have to have "Hypocrite" tattooed across your forehead. The only thing you want united are people that believe the same as you.

 

[crownjules]

Whether you refer to these filers as "rich" or "affluent," it's clear that they are not struggling to make ends meet. Paying 10% more (or whatever) in taxes than they currently do would not remotely make them "do without." So, at a time when reducing budget deficits seems like a priority, people in these groups can best afford to contribute. Yet the far-right seems to think that the deficits must almost entirely be reduced on the backs of the middle-class and poor.

And this is the meat of the debate, IMHO. The economic crash had many factors feeding into it, but it was the insane and unchecked greed of Wall St that made it the economic calamity it became. They were the ones who conceived the exotic investment vehicles that over leveraged the banks. They deceived regulators into classifying trash investments as premium, can't fail investments. It was this that drove the machine of churning out mortgages to everyone who came remotely close to qualifying.

And when those mortgages belonging to people who rightly couldn't afford them came due the whole house of cards fell down. Everyone else in the country lost jobs, lost value on their houses, and are now being told they need to make further sacrifices by having government programs cut back. Meanwhile Wall St got bailouts, the criminals who either did this knowingly or ignorantly (I'm not sure which is worse) remain sitting comfortably on piles of cash, and one party in Congress says they don't need to help in paying for their share of the blame in this economic mess.

 

[Rainsford]

I thinks it's funny how most missed the 'heart' of this topic.

It's about capital gains really.

Warren Buffet is right, unfortunately he profited from this loophole the most.

He is willing to pay back, however; that's a lot easier once you made it.

It is a lot easier to advocate raising capital gains taxes if you're in Buffet's financial position, but that doesn't make him wrong. It really doesn't seem like a good idea to tax different kinds of income such that the overall tax ends up being regressive because of who earns what kind of income.

I really find it absurd how so many here think $500k of income is rich and excessive.

I don't think most people view that as "excessive", but are you really going to say with a straight face that earning 10 times the average income in the US DOESN'T qualify as rich? You might not be private jet rich at that point, but you're sure as hell a lot better off than the average Joe. Which is great, nothing at all wrong with that.

But again, if we're raising taxes on SOMEONE, raising them on the people who can afford it seems more reasonable than trying to squeeze blood from a stone. And this counter-strategy some people are using of arguing that several hundred thousand dollars a year isn't all that much money sounds, quite honestly, pretty stupid.

Part of it's a problem with Democratic rhetoric though, I'll admit. Obama (and others) always talk about "millionaires and billionaires", as if THAT'S the point at which you're way better off than the average American.

 

[bfdd]

Craig, wtf are you talking about don't pay taxes? I hate taxes, but I'm ok paying them AS LONG AS EVERYONE DOES. Dumbasses like you don't believe CERTAIN people should pay taxes because you're a bigoted asshole. Everyone should be treated equally and fairly under the law. In that respect, I believe EVERYONE should pay the same percentage of their income(money earned) as taxes. You're against that because you're a douche bag, who promotes inequality.

 

[TonyB]

for example, a 500K take home pay is barely scrapping by.

I have to agree with this comment. 500K is not nearly enough to pay for the 5000 sq feet Upper West Side apartment, BMW 750i for the wifey, BMW for the kids, Gucci Louie Fendi Prada clothes and Cristal champagne every night?

 

[her209]

Craig, wtf are you talking about don't pay taxes? I hate taxes, but I'm ok paying them AS LONG AS EVERYONE DOES. Dumbasses like you don't believe CERTAIN people should pay taxes because you're a bigoted asshole. Everyone should be treated equally and fairly under the law. In that respect, I believe EVERYONE should pay the same percentage of their income(money earned) as taxes. You're against that because you're a douche bag, who promotes inequality.

In the spirit of equality, can the government start fining people a percentage of their income as well? How about businesses charging in percentages?

 

[shadow9d9]

My father was a dentist that made about 200-300k a year. He lived frugally(not NEEDING to spend it all, like Alk suggests). He retired from Dentistry at age 43.

He is now worth a fortune from investing.

 

[alkemyst]

My father was a dentist that made about 200-300k a year. He lived frugally(not NEEDING to spend it all, like Alk suggests). He retired from Dentistry at age 43.

He is now worth a fortune from investing.

Sounds like he also got lucky during the boom years of the market too.

I am willing to bet if he just did normal savings he'd be forced to go until 65 or so (not that there is anything wrong with that).

Also the big fear many in their 40's and beyond have now is "how long will I live?"...it used to be you were damn lucky to make it to 70-73...now people are hitting late 80s and 90's pretty regularly.

Needing 5-8 years of retirement money vs 25-30years is a dramatic difference.

 

[shadow9d9]

I find it ironic that to dumborats, someone trying to keep their own money is greedy, but someone trying to take it from them is not.

Considering the US and every other civilize country in the world is BASED ON collecting taxes.. yes, fighting against the restoration of pre "temporary tax cut" levels IS greedy...

 

[shadow9d9]

Sounds like he also got lucky during the boom years of the market too.

I am willing to bet if he just did normal savings he'd be forced to go until 65 or so (not that there is anything wrong with that).

Also the big fear many in their 40's and beyond have now is "how long will I live?"...it used to be you were damn lucky to make it to 70-73...now people are hitting late 80s and 90's pretty regularly.

Needing 5-8 years of retirement money vs 25-30years is a dramatic difference.

Luck had nothing to do with it. Just more of the typical "don't like the results, so make an assumption as use it as fact."

Ridiculous to claim that people need to spend all of their money just because they make it. No wonder no one retired early in this country. You don't NEED a million dollar house if you make 500k. Buy a 20k car... you don't NEED more than that.. bank it early and retire early.

 

[ComradeBeck]

Just curious, we all have hobbies, if one person hobby is building RC planes and racing them and the other is investing why should one hobbyist be entitled to live free off the system and retire with the blessings of a society which supposedly values hard work? Doubly so with someone who invests for their career. Seems silly to me. A hobby of corrupting the financial system and living high off the hog. lol @ the "American way" of thieves (as long as you keep it on the up and up)

 

[Jhhnn]

Craig, wtf are you talking about don't pay taxes? I hate taxes, but I'm ok paying them AS LONG AS EVERYONE DOES. Dumbasses like you don't believe CERTAIN people should pay taxes because you're a bigoted asshole. Everyone should be treated equally and fairly under the law. In that respect, I believe EVERYONE should pay the same percentage of their income(money earned) as taxes. You're against that because you're a douche bag, who promotes inequality.

You're being deliberately obtuse. Everybody who has a job and participates in the economy pays a lot of different kinds of taxes, as has been pointed out several times in this thread, and many, many times on this forum. All taxes support the govt, whether that's state, local, or federal.

Everybody should pay the same %? Really? What's fair about that? and why does your goofy definition of fair matter at all? What's fair is a level of taxation that optimizes everybody's ability to participate in the economy, and the only way to accomplish that is in a progressive manner, particularly in a mature economy. The frontier closed over 100 years ago, and there is no infinite pie. If it weren't for progressive taxes & estate taxes, we'd already have total oligarchy, which limits the opportunities of everybody who's not an oligarch in no small way. Mexico is like that, as are a lot of other countries who do thing just the way you advocate. Distribution of wealth and income is so lopsided that anybody who's not rich is poor, with damned few in between. That's what unrestrained capitalism & very low taxes at the top really accomplish.

 

[Rainsford]

Considering the US and every other civilize country in the world is BASED ON collecting taxes.. yes, fighting against the restoration of pre "temporary tax cut" levels IS greedy...

It's not really greedy so much as it's shortsighted. Sure, nobody likes takes and they'd like to keep more of their money. But that alone isn't a reasonable political ideology since the government isn't taking taxes just for grins, but because even reasonable government isn't free. And on a more practical note, the way politics works in this country, cutting government spending isn't going to get us all the way to a balanced budget.

 

[Jhhnn]

$500K is at the top end of the gently sloping line that comprises 99.4% of all incomes. While quite large, it's part of that normal progression. People half a percentage point below don't make a helluva lot less, but people half a point above make 4X as much, and the curve goes near vertical from there. People whose incomes fall consistently in that part of the curve are truly wealthy, and their income is derived largely from investment. Alkemyst just looks rich, because he has many of the visible trappings of people much better off than he is. OTOH, living large means he's just as vulnerable to the changing fortunes of employment as people making a lot less, because his income is not based on investment.

Which is where truly wealthy people have it made over the rest of us, because their net worth is enormous. A 5% return on $1M nets $50K/yr. Alkemyst would need $10M actively invested to obtain his present income from investment. People at the entry level to the top .1% would need $40M to make the $2M/yr putting them at that income level. Obviously, they'd pay a lower tax rate on capital gains & dividends than Alkemyst, who works for his money. They don't spend nearly all of what they make, either, but reinvest much of it. In a really, really bad year, they might have to liquidate some small part of the principal to maintain their lifestyles, which they'll more than make up for in good years.

They can't be financially drowned in the down side of a business cycle, at all. It's actually just a different kind of opportunity to make money. Sometimes staying on top is a simple as holding other people down.