Why Are We Afraid to Tax the Super-Rich?

[lawrocket 3]

Answer:

Because the super-rich have the ability and resources to leave.

Let's say that in the future I have $10 billion. And then the government says they want half of it.

I'll just move to Turks & Caicos or something. Just like the super rich do.

Check out U2. Ireland increased taxes. U2 left.

Duh. It matters not HOW publicly liberal a person or group is. They want to keep what the earned.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[pirana 0]

Nice cut and paste, and I certainly agree with that expert's summation. My main criticism was your characterization of surpluses as sudden. On a geologic time scale, yes, they were sudden. On the scale of recorded human history, nothing sudden about them.

" . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

[dreamdancer 0]

i'll concede that then
'with intensive farming and the emergence of cities we suddenly have huge suplus's' - better?

i put time and effort into my cut and pastes - so thankyou for the compliment
(beer rations as money - could work)

stay away from moving propellers - they bite
blue skies from thai sky adventures
good solid response-provoking keyboarding

[dreamdancer 0]

and notice who did the taxing back then - the king and his super rich buddies
(same as it ever was)

stay away from moving propellers - they bite
blue skies from thai sky adventures
good solid response-provoking keyboarding

[billvon 3,118]

>and notice who did the taxing back then - the king and his super rich
>buddies (same as it ever was)

I've got some super rich buddies. They don't tax anyone. (Indeed, they seem to pay more tax than anyone else.)

[rhys 0]

Quote

I've got some super rich buddies. They don't tax anyone. (Indeed, they seem to pay more tax than anyone else.)

Define 'super rich', and do they pay more proportionally or simply in total?

you desciptions are becomeing increasingly more vague.

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix

[billvon 3,118]

>Define 'super rich'

Net worth of between 10 million and 1.9 billion.

>and do they pay more proportionally or simply in total?

Both. One of the above is retired and is no longer paying taxes on direct income, just on the interest on his investments and the dividends of his shares. He still pays far, far more than me tho.

[kallend 2,148]

Quote

>Define 'super rich'

Net worth of between 10 million and 1.9 billion.

>and do they pay more proportionally or simply in total?

Both. One of the above is retired and is no longer paying taxes on direct income, just on the interest on his investments and the dividends of his shares. He still pays far, far more than me tho.

$10 mil is pretty average these days, certainly not "super".

I'd put "super" at $100 mil or above.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[billvon 3,118]

>10 mil is pretty average these days, certainly not "super".

Well, pick your own threshold. The $10 million mark is a level at which anyone in the US can live a pretty opulent lifestyle without working. 9.4% average ROI from an average portfolio in the stock market minus 3.4% for inflation gives you an average yearly income of about $600,000, which is a pretty good income for doing very little. Half a million for doing nothing would fit my definition of super-rich, but everyone's different I guess.

[turtlespeed 226]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Reagan's policies tripled the National Debt.

and Obama's policies make Reagan look like a fiscal conservative.

And what would YOU have done differently? We know Bush threw borrowed money at the problem once he came out of denial, and most likely McCain would have done the same. The 2009 deficit turned out to be almost exactly where it was predicted to be while Bush was in office, so blaming Obama is like blaming a rape victim.

with the exception of the fact that Obama and his change, along with Pilosi and Reid are doing the gang rape - with comments like "Shove it down their throat"

So the blame still sticks in your analogy.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[dreamdancer 0]

Quote

>and notice who did the taxing back then - the king and his super rich
>buddies (same as it ever was)

I've got some super rich buddies. They don't tax anyone. (Indeed, they seem to pay more tax than anyone else.)

indeed, magicians seem to cut their volunteers in half
(one would have to be a bit simple to think that was what happened though)

stay away from moving propellers - they bite
blue skies from thai sky adventures
good solid response-provoking keyboarding

[kallend 2,148]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Reagan's policies tripled the National Debt.

and Obama's policies make Reagan look like a fiscal conservative.

And what would YOU have done differently? We know Bush threw borrowed money at the problem once he came out of denial, and most likely McCain would have done the same. The 2009 deficit turned out to be almost exactly where it was predicted to be while Bush was in office, so blaming Obama is like blaming a rape victim.

with the exception of the fact that Obama and his change, along with Pilosi and Reid are doing the gang rape - with comments like "Shove it down their throat"

So the blame still sticks in your analogy.

Nice non-sequitur.

So what would YOU have done differently?

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[rhaig 0]

Quote

Quote

>and notice who did the taxing back then - the king and his super rich
>buddies (same as it ever was)

I've got some super rich buddies. They don't tax anyone. (Indeed, they seem to pay more tax than anyone else.)

indeed, magicians seem to cut their volunteers in half
(one would have to be a bit simple to think that was what happened though)

did you just call bill simple?

--
Rob

[dreamdancer 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

>and notice who did the taxing back then - the king and his super rich
>buddies (same as it ever was)

I've got some super rich buddies. They don't tax anyone. (Indeed, they seem to pay more tax than anyone else.)

indeed, magicians seem to cut their volunteers in half
(one would have to be a bit simple to think that was what happened though)

did you just call bill simple?

are you saying he's fooled by a magic trick

Quote

The Billionaire Brothers

Charles and David Koch, who control this family-owned empire, are tied for a spot as the 19th-richest billionaire in the world, according to a 2009 ranking by Forbes. Each brother has a net worth of $14 billion, just below the wealth held by four heirs to the Wal-Mart fortune. Charles, 73, and David, 68, boast of being "self-made" billionaires. Actually, that's a fib, for they had a little help from Daddy. Fred Koch, who died in 1967, started his name-sake business after inventing a method of turning heavy oil into gasoline, and his sons got a leg up on their climb to billionairedom by inheriting Fred's company.

They also inherited something else: a burning ideological commitment to right-wing politics. How right wing? In 1958, Daddy Fred helped found the John Birch Society.

Following in those footsteps, Charles and David have used the wealth they draw from Koch Industries to fuel a network of three Koch Family Foundations. During the past three decades, these "charitable" foundations have set up and financed a secretive army of political operatives dedicated to achieving the brothers' antigovernment, corporate-controlled vision for America. This stealth force includes national and state-level think tanks, Astroturf front groups, academic shills, university centers, political-training programs, fundraising clearinghouses, publications, lobbyists, and various other units useful to Charles and David's ideological cause.

http://www.alternet.org/investigations/146094/hightower%3A_two_right-wing_billionaire_brothers_are_remaking_america_for_their_own_benefit/?page=entire

stay away from moving propellers - they bite
blue skies from thai sky adventures
good solid response-provoking keyboarding

[rhys 0]

Quote

>10 mil is pretty average these days, certainly not "super".

Well, pick your own threshold. The $10 million mark is a level at which anyone in the US can live a pretty opulent lifestyle without working. 9.4% average ROI from an average portfolio in the stock market minus 3.4% for inflation gives you an average yearly income of about $600,000, which is a pretty good income for doing very little. Half a million for doing nothing would fit my definition of super-rich, but everyone's different I guess.

These guys are not the problem with the economy, it is then the 'super duper' rich that will pay in one instance $10 million to allow them to make almost unfathomable amounts of wealth.

Military contractors would make hundreds of millions or billions, what sort of tax breaks do you think they would get, especially when thay are 'securing' and rebuilding other countries? Do they pay tax?#Who profits financially from them? How are they contributing to the American economy.

They sure take alot from it.

That is super rich, 10 million is alot by our standards but in the great scheme of things, 10 million is pretty petty.

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix