Not even in the ballpark

[Tunnelcat]

Americans can't even guess how unequal incomes have gotten. They need to get a dose of reality. The middle class isn't too far from poverty and poverty is looking like a third world country. Welcome to the New Gilded Age in America.

http://www.upworthy.com/9-out-of-10-ame ... ing-fact-2

[Spidey]

Well, stop complaining and do something about it.

And I’m not talking about pulling some lever because that’s not going to help, I’m talking about really doing something about it.

We all go and pull the lever or write a check, then we can sleep at night.

[Will Robinson]

Two words that need to be properly defined in context from that video. "Distributed" and "fair".

How to fairly distribute the wealth. That concept is an oxymoron.

I think it makes more sense to reject investing your faith, and the authority to attempt that distribution, in the same body, one with relatively unlimited resources and yet one that can't provide health care service to a group they promised it to, and instead focus on establishing a minimum standard of living that is acceptable and trying to get that inept body of corrupt liars and thieves to meet that more manageable and less destructive task.

And here is a helpful step to get it done. The authority can not be allowed to give exemptions from the process to ANYONE, including themselves.

That last part is critical and it's absence is the root of most of the problem. When the video showed how the top percentile has gone from paying a small percentage of their income relative to the middle class to an even much smaller percentage recently....well you must know they could only accomplish that feat with the assistance of the authority!

So any talk of giving those in charge more revenue, more authority, etc. without truly reforming the process is ludicrous. And anyone who tries to disrupt the conversation by dividing us into R and D camps is only fighting to perpetuate the problem whether they know it or not.

[Tunnelcat]

Well, stop complaining and do something about it.

And I’m not talking about pulling some lever because that’s not going to help, I’m talking about really doing something about it.

We all go and pull the lever or write a check, then we can sleep at night.

Write a check........Haaaaaaaaa, haa, haa, haa! Fat chance. I haven't got the money to even come close to making a difference. SCOTUS saw to that. My vote? Pfffffft! Worthless! Don't you get it? The wealthy are already in control. We have no chance. Our votes are meaningless, even if we vote for a third, forth or fifth party. Most of the politicians, of either party, are bought off and in the pockets of the lobbyists for the plutocrats and the rest are nutcases. The smart ones know not to even try. It's going to take either another huge depression, or a massive revolt. The revolt won't happen until more Americans wake up to the fact they've been pwned!

[Sergeant Thorne]

Americans can't even guess how unequal incomes have gotten. They need to get a dose of reality. The middle class isn't too far from poverty and poverty is looking like a third world country. Welcome to the New Gilded Age in America.

http://www.upworthy.com/9-out-of-10-ame ... ing-fact-2

I'm sorry, TC, but I recently learned in another thread that poverty is at an all-time low because the world as we know it is "totally kick ass", so I really can't take your negative whining seriously. [/sarcasm]

Honestly, I think it's a good discussion, but I don't think it's the whole discussion. Something I came across in the recent internet topic is the fact that what we are dealing with is a business reality. On a certain level it's just too bad if you don't like it, because that's the way things are, and there's a reason for it, and can you prove there is any reason to the nice idea that wages should be more even? What makes the ideal balance of wages anything more than fantasy--where does it connect to the real business world, and can it actually work?

I'm going to go out on a bit of a limb and suggest that the way this is being put forward in this video is irresponsible and politically thuggish, and that's not because I have another horse in this ideological race at this point. Why is the video reducing complex things to such simple terms in order to sway the ignorant with emotional propaganda, when a real solution would need to deal in the more complex arena of what these 1% may have done which was not equitable to preserve and enlarge their share while reducing our standard of living--things that we should deal with by law so that power and wealth cannot be used to hurt the rest of us. If this is going to change in a positive way in this country that is where it needs to be handled, and it frankly may be an argument or crusade that is out of the league of the average American which this ad is meant to target.

[vision]

I'm sorry, TC, but I recently learned in another thread that poverty is at an all-time low because the world as we know it is "totally kick ass", so I really can't take your negative whining seriously.

ITT: Thorne doesn't understand the difference between global poverty and wealth inequality within a country.

[Sergeant Thorne]

Global poverty is basically a metric for China's economy... right?

[snoopy]

I really kinda like the idea of dealing with this inequity by means of inheritances. If one of those 1%ers is a self-made millionaire who got there by his/her own work and skill, then more power to him/her. (Assuming, of course, that it was done legally and ethically.) What gets under my skin are the worthless schmucks who never worked a day of their lives but have a ticket to permanent wealth simply by merit of their wealth. I'd do a "5%er" inheritance tax - where the top 5% all get to pass on the same amount of money (whatever mr. 5% passes on for the year) and all of the rest of the inheritance goes to taxes. In a sense, you hit the "reset" button on the "old money" thing.

[Sergeant Thorne]

I've always felt it is a terrible thing to tax inheritance. I think if there is a problem with inequality of income it needs to be dealt with in a straight-forward manner. Parents laying up for the children is a Biblical concept, and it doesn't seem right to me to go there.

[Will Robinson]

Snoopy, the problem with an inheritance tax designed to confiscate all the old money is it doesn't 'reset' it back into the economy/population at large...it puts it in the hands of the most elite fraction of a percent group in America.

Before we give the congress any more authority and/or revenue we should reform the rules they reign over us with.

Do you remember the tobacco tax and law suit that was designed to confiscate billions in the name of victims of tobacco? I don't think the congress can show you the money today...where it went to compensate for the effects of caring for the victims, etc.
I bet they could show you their lavish royal life styles though....if you were worthy of such a treat.

[Will Robinson]

Here is another idea for everyone to ponder. You have heard the expression 'Think global, act local'. Well it is easier to act locally in an effective way if you get some assistance financially from a 'global' source...

Since the two party federal government is far too corrupt and self serving to efficiently 'distribute' 'wealth', let each county in America set up a small board of elected officials to handle the distribution of revenue collected in the name of whatever injustice the Fed decides to collect it.

No political campaign or candidates pet projects can be donated to from the revenue....no 'wealth' being collected for redistribution can be used for any purpose other than the declared reason for creating the tax.

If you cite lacking education then the total collected by the Fed in the name of improving education is divided by the number of States and 100% of the collected revenue is sent to the states where they can allocate 100% of it to their x number of counties based on a logically relevant criteria...population...number of students....etc. per county.

In the case of just generally confiscating inheritance in the name of 'fairness' the money is divided evenly to the States where they distribute evenly by population per county into the boards budget to improve the quality of life for the county residents.
Yes, this part does distribute a larger percentage of the inheritance tax to lesser populated states, by design. It takes the 'reset' line of thinking a little further outside the box...too much 'fairness' can be unfair but have a silver lining creating attractive locations for population redistribution....

If, at any point in the distribution chain a politician or beauracrat lackey siphons off any of the revenue for any purpose they get mandatory 10 years in prison.

[vision]

Global poverty is basically a metric for China's economy... right?

Feel free to educate yourself about the different definitions.

[Tunnelcat]

I really kinda like the idea of dealing with this inequity by means of inheritances. If one of those 1%ers is a self-made millionaire who got there by his/her own work and skill, then more power to him/her. (Assuming, of course, that it was done legally and ethically.) What gets under my skin are the worthless schmucks who never worked a day of their lives but have a ticket to permanent wealth simply by merit of their wealth. I'd do a "5%er" inheritance tax - where the top 5% all get to pass on the same amount of money (whatever mr. 5% passes on for the year) and all of the rest of the inheritance goes to taxes. In a sense, you hit the "reset" button on the "old money" thing.

Dynasties of the Ne'er-Do-Wells.

[callmeslick]

that inheritance tax goes back to Andrew Carnegie, who shared the reasoning. He proposed 90% or more.

[Tunnelcat]

The highest estate tax rates were around 77% from 1941 to 1976.



It was the marginal tax rates that went over 90% during that same time period.