When a Million Dollars Just Won't Cut it

Catawba · Mar 18, 2011

iamitter said:
The really really rich pay less because they get more of their income through capital gains.

Why do we continue to let that happen?

I didn't say they are "no less progressive" I said they are still progressive. When the upper income bracket has a higher tax rate, that's a progressive rate.

Less progressive is what I mean, except for the very rich who are paying less than their secretaries.

My mother was a teacher in both the private and public sector and she fully supports what they wanted to do in DC. Let teachers earn a lot more, but take away tenure. Teaching is a great profession and I actually hope to someday become one (when I'm 50 maybe - I just don't want to be bored and I certainly don't still want to be in finance).
However, our current system is broken and needs to change. Compensate teachers NOW for their work. If they're great teachers, pay them well. If they're not, don't. The whole system is screwed up when you can't fire a teacher and most of their money comes in at the end from a pension. This leads to unmotivated teachers, which we absolutely do not need. If someone is burned out from teaching by 45, let them quit, knowing they extracted their wages. If they have to work another 20 years, something they don't want to do, to receive their real compensation, a great pension, they're not going to be very good teachers. Our kids don't need these kinds of teachers.

My wife was a LD teacher in an elementary school in a non-union state. They experience worse problems, pay, and benefits than in the union states. Except instead of being near the top in academic excellence like the Northern Unionized states, we are 44th in the country. There are problems that need to be addressed in public schools just as their are problems that need to be addressed for the socio-economic conditions that account for lower testing levels. We also need to look at the inclusion requirements that force schools to include special needs kids into the regular classroom.

hazlnut · Mar 18, 2011

TurtleDude said:
buffett proved no such thing
he proved a few megabillionaires who can structure their own compensation paid less a percentage than the very wealthy but he didn't disprove the fact that he pays more income tax than millions of americans combined

No links or facts to back that up?

Catawba · Mar 18, 2011

hazlnut said:
No links or facts to back that up?

Turtledude with facts???? Its why I just ignored his post. He never does. The sheer weight of his esteemed opinion he says should be enough.

iamitter · Mar 18, 2011

Catawba said:
Why do we continue to let that happen?

Capital gains aren't wages or income. It's return on investment. If you have an investment, you have that tax rate for that, too.

Less progressive is what I mean, except for the very rich who are paying less than their secretaries.

That's just lies. Nobody is paying LESS than a secretary. The difference is that they may pay a smaller percentage, as more of their income comes from capital gains. If you think a secretary is paying more in taxes than a billionaire, I can't help you. They are not.
Also, the only people who have most of their income in capital gains and pay a lot are a couple hundred, maybe a couple thousand people at most.

My wife was a LD teacher in an elementary school in a non-union state. They experience worse problems, pay, and benefits than in the union states. Except instead of being near the top in academic excellence like the Northern Unionized states, we are 44th in the country. There are problems that need to be addressed in public schools just as their are problems that need to be addressed for the socio-economic conditions that account for lower testing levels. We also need to look at the inclusion requirements that force schools to include special needs kids into the regular classroom.

I went to NYC public schools until college, where I went to a private university. I came across some excellent teachers and some crappy ones. There's many good, elderly teachers. There's many crappy ones who don't care anymore.
The problems are not lack of unionization. NY's schools would be so much better without tenure - those crappy teachers would be gone, the good ones would be better compensated and better talent would be attracted due to better pay.

Catawba · Mar 18, 2011

iamitter said:
Capital gains aren't wages or income. It's return on investment. If you have an investment, you have that tax rate for that, too.

Click to expand...

That explains why they used to have super high tax rate on the super rich, to compensate for that.

That's just lies. Nobody is paying LESS than a secretary. The difference is that they may pay a smaller percentage, as more of their income comes from capital gains. If you think a secretary is paying more in taxes than a billionaire, I can't help you. They are not.

Click to expand...

Yes, a lower percentage of course, that is what we were discussing.

Also, the only people who have most of their income in capital gains and pay a lot are a couple hundred, maybe a couple thousand people at most.

Click to expand...

And those couple thousand own much of the wealth in this country, why should they not be required to pay their fair share?

I went to NYC public schools until college, where I went to a private university. I came across some excellent teachers and some crappy ones. There's many good, elderly teachers. There's many crappy ones who don't care anymore.

Click to expand...

I run into people like that in every profession, public and private alike. You are right that it is a problem but wrong that it just happens in public jobs, IMO.

The problems are not lack of unionization. NY's schools would be so much better without tenure - those crappy teachers would be gone, the good ones would be better compensated and better talent would be attracted due to better pay.

Click to expand...

It didn't work out that way for states that lost their unions. The reality here is that the pay and benefits just got worse and so did the academic excellence.

iamitter · Mar 18, 2011

There used to be different tax brackets. The highest bracket now includes many more people than the highest one did earlier.

The couple thousand owe their wealth to their own work. I am not advocating a flat tax. I am against, however, 90% tax rates. To say, if you earn a billion dollars, that you "owe" 900 million to the government for ****s and giggles because its your "fair share" is ridiculous.

I never said it wasn't a problem in private jobs. I wasn't making a point by saying that I went to a private university, just that that's where my public schooling and personal experience with it ended. Universities in general give tenure based on research not length of teaching or quality of teaching.

I don't know how you can claim that in states that just lost unions lost academic excellence. If in just a few weeks teachers started being crappy because they're not in a union anymore, screw them. They should be in it for the kids.

Badmutha · Mar 18, 2011

Catawba said:
"U.S. millionaires are reporting a sunnier outlook about the economy, although nearly half of them don’t feel truly rich. Fidelity Investments released its fourth Millionaire Outlook survey this week, which studies the investing attitudes and behaviors of more than 1,000 millionaire households throughout the country.

The survey found that four in 10, or 42% of millionaires do not actually feel wealthy. This is down four points from 2009; however, those who said they did not feel wealthy reported they needed to have at least $7.5 million in investable assets to begin feeling wealthy again.

Those who did report feeling wealthy said they began to feel that way with $1.75 million in investable assets."

Read more: When a Million Dollars Just Won't Cut it - FoxBusiness.com

According to the 2010 Census, one in seven Americans were officially poor in 2009, meaning for individuals, they made less than $11,000, and a family of four, less then $22,500.

Who's feeling sorry for the rich folk here?

The Obama Economy--1 in 7 Americans living in Poverty--1in 10 Facing Foreclosure--1 in 8 Collecting Food Stamps--1 in 5 Unemployed/Underemployed.....

.....Change you can believe in.
.
.
..

Badmutha · Mar 18, 2011

Catawba said:
And yet we keep giving the rich as much as teacher's pay in tax cuts year after year. I guess people will eventullly figure it out, or we will continue on our path to fascism.

Your not giving the evil rich a bloody cent......they are keeping more of their own money.....at no cost to you or anyone else.
.
.
.

Catawba · Mar 18, 2011

iamitter said:
There used to be different tax brackets. The highest bracket now includes many more people than the highest one did earlier.

Yes I know, here are the Top US Marginal Income Tax Rates, 1913--2003: http://www.truthandpolitics.org/top-rates.php

The couple thousand owe their wealth to their own work.

Everyone that works owe their wealth to their own work.

I am not advocating a flat tax. I am against, however, 90% tax rates. To say, if you earn a billion dollars, that you "owe" 900 million to the government for ****s and giggles because its your "fair share" is ridiculous.

Would it be fair to say that our parents and grandparents were not socialists? Look, I am not advocating a 90% tax rate, but it is important to remember that was the tax rate for 50 years of the most prosperous time in our history, and to bring into perspective the need to raise the taxes for the top income earners, without loopholes.
We have 30 years of history to show us that we are not going to cut spending enought alone to balance our budget. So after we get finished cutting whatever they can agree on, we will still have to raise taxes a little for the wealthy, or continue to rack up more and more national debt, while the middle class disappears.

I don't know how you can claim that in states that just lost unions lost academic excellence. If in just a few weeks teachers started being crappy because they're not in a union anymore, screw them. They should be in it for the kids.

You don't know how dedicated teachers are to work for what they do in a non-union state. If they were not, there would be no teachers. But we are definitily no longer attracting the best and brghtest to school teaching. Would you teach when you max out at retirement at $50,000 and have to takeover your healthcare? That is what a non-union state looks like. And even more importantly, without collective bargaining teachers no longer have their best tool for bringing about the very changes that are needed in public schools.

Aunt Spiker · Mar 18, 2011

Catawba said:
Then how much does a family income of $50,000 for a family mean? That is the middle class.

The "poverty line" is recalculated every year.

It was discovered in research decades ago that poor people spend 1/3 their income on groceries to feed their family. If someone earned 15,000 a year that means they'd spend about 1/3 of that which is 5,000$ on food.

So - that's what the government uses to calculate the poverty level = one year's of food for a family of four x 3 (because of the 1/3 thing). And that's why it progressive - it goes up with each extra child. And that also means it fluctuates depending on where you live - food costs more. The states generally alter that to reflect food costs in different areas. It also changes when food-costs go up, too.

This year the federal poverty line for a family of four in the lower 48 is $22,350 (In Alaska and Hawaii it's higher)
For a family of 6 (my family size) it's $29,990

That means you can take that $29,990 and divide by 3 - and that gives you the average food costs for a year (if you're not a thrifty shopper) Which is just under $10,000.

Lionel Hutz · Mar 18, 2011

If they're great teachers, pay them well. If they're not, don't. The whole system is screwed up when you can't fire a teacher and most of their money comes in at the end from a pension. This leads to unmotivated teachers, which we absolutely do not need. If someone is burned out from teaching by 45, let them quit, knowing they extracted their wages. If they have to work another 20 years, something they don't want to do, to receive their real compensation, a great pension, they're not going to be very good teachers. Our kids don't need these kinds of teachers.[/QUOTE]

I think that the vast majority of people can agree that it should be easier to get rid of bad teachers. But whose standard do you use to determine that, especially if you tie bonuses and higher pay to those teachers who are performing well?

TurtleDude · Mar 18, 2011

hazlnut said:
No links or facts to back that up?

you are ignorant of the fact that Buffett runs B-H and takes only 100K in salary so as to not pay 35% on the several million dollar salary similarly situated executives get?

TurtleDude · Mar 18, 2011

Catawba said:
Turtledude with facts???? Its why I just ignored his post. He never does. The sheer weight of his esteemed opinion he says should be enough.

I assume those who come here actually are aware of the subject. Yet you have never disproven what I have said
for example those who get dividend income are taxed 15% AFTER the corporate profits were often taxed as well

and Buffett pays the highest possible rate on like income compared to anyone else

disprove that

Renae · Mar 18, 2011

Catawba said:
We are going backwards to the days of a two class system, the barons and the poor. I don't see anyway to reverse the trend but to return to a progressive tax system

All that does is make more poor people. Good plan. So why do you hate the poor again?

TurtleDude · Mar 18, 2011

Catawba said:
iamitter said:

That explains why they used to have super high tax rate on the super rich, to compensate for that.

Yes, a lower percentage of course, that is what we were discussing.

And those couple thousand own much of the wealth in this country, why should they not be required to pay their fair share?

I run into people like that in every profession, public and private alike. You are right that it is a problem but wrong that it just happens in public jobs, IMO.

It didn't work out that way for states that lost their unions. The reality here is that the pay and benefits just got worse and so did the academic excellence.

Click to expand...

I am not seeing any evidence supporting your socialist rants here

TurtleDude · Mar 18, 2011

MrVicchio said:
All that does is make more poor people. Good plan. So why do you hate the poor again?

socialists use the poor as pawns to gain wealth that they cannot earn in the private sector

Renae · Mar 18, 2011

TurtleDude said:
socialists use the poor as pawns to gain wealth that they cannot earn in the private sector

Partially, partially it's purely for power.

I was working for a black preacher man in 2008. He asked me why I was voting Republican. I gave him my reasons and he basically called me a fool. Why?

"You ain't rich, voting against Obama is shooting yourself in the foot, the Democrats want to help you" was the mentality.

(this coming from a man in a comfy $90k a year well benefited job PLUS his Church stuff... you should have seen his car)

When I responded "I want to make my own wealth not have hand outs" he laughed at me, saying and I paraphrase "You can't get rich in their world if you weren't born rich"

Sad, really.

justabubba · Mar 18, 2011

MrVicchio said:
Partially, partially it's purely for power.

I was working for a black preacher man in 2008. He asked me why I was voting Republican. I gave him my reasons and he basically called me a fool. Why?

"You ain't rich, voting against Obama is shooting yourself in the foot, the Democrats want to help you" was the mentality.

(this coming from a man in a comfy $90k a year well benefited job PLUS his Church stuff... you should have seen his car)

When I responded "I want to make my own wealth not have hand outs" he laughed at me, saying and I paraphrase "You can't get rich in their world if you weren't born rich"

Sad, really.

he was right. only you could not comprehend it
you vote them in to take money out of your pockets to place it in theirs
look at the trillion dollar tax break for the rich as a current example

and he was right in another way. you aren't rich
and chances are you will never be

so, the preacher was right. you - and those like you - foolishly vote against your own interests

Sad, really.

Renae · Mar 18, 2011

justabubba said:
he was right. only you could not comprehend it
you vote them in to take money out of your pockets to place it in theirs
look at the trillion dollar tax break for the rich as a current example

and he was right in another way. you aren't rich
and chances are you will never be

so, the preacher was right. you - and those like you - foolishly vote against your own interests

It's in my interest to live as a dredge to the Gov't?

No thanks.

hazlnut · Mar 18, 2011

TurtleDude said:
socialists use the poor as pawns to gain wealth that they cannot earn in the private sector

'Socialists' when referring to U.S. politics, is a far-right talking point popular with fans of Hannity and Limbaugh.

It is a complete misuse of the term.

TurtleDude · Mar 18, 2011

hazlnut said:
'Socialists' when referring to U.S. politics, is a far-right talking point popular with fans of Hannity and Limbaugh.

It is a complete misuse of the term.

you seem to spend far more time listening to them than I do.

and yes socialism is an accurate description of what many lefties crave

iamitter · Mar 18, 2011

justabubba said:
he was right. only you could not comprehend it
you vote them in to take money out of your pockets to place it in theirs
look at the trillion dollar tax break for the rich as a current example

and he was right in another way. you aren't rich
and chances are you will never be

so, the preacher was right. you - and those like you - foolishly vote against your own interests

That's completely untrue. It's perfectly possible to become wealthy even on a middle class salary, if you save and invest.

I grew up in a pretty poor family. I could never have afforded columbia if they hadn't been so generous with financial aid. However, due to my own efforts and the great education I got there, I was easily able to become relatively wealthy (salaries increase exponentially here so it only gets better - I'll probably retire within 10 years, though). I've already donated at least 3 times the financial aid I got back to columbia though, for them, I could say I was a good investment.

also, turtle, adjust your quote on the last page please. You quoted catawba and used my name.

hazlnut · Mar 18, 2011

TurtleDude said:
and yes socialism is an accurate description of what many lefties crave

'Socialism' and 'lefties' again words that have very little actual relevance in U.S. politics, except in hyperbolic partisanship.

If far-right cons will continue to cling to these hollow attacks, then 2012 is not going to the year they hope.

Those who continue to use these misleading, empty terms either don't know any better or are happy to toss red meat for the party -- e.g. Palin.

TurtleDude · Mar 18, 2011

hazlnut said:
'Socialism' and 'lefties' again words that have very little actual relevance in U.S. politics, except in hyperbolic partisanship.

If far-right cons will continue to cling to these hollow attacks, then 2012 is not going to the year they hope.

Those who continue to use these misleading, empty terms either don't know any better or are happy to toss red meat for the party -- e.g. Palin.

Irony alert-far right cons vs socialist dems.

TurtleDude · Mar 18, 2011

iamitter said:
That's completely untrue. It's perfectly possible to become wealthy even on a middle class salary, if you save and invest.

I grew up in a pretty poor family. I could never have afforded columbia if they hadn't been so generous with financial aid. However, due to my own efforts and the great education I got there, I was easily able to become relatively wealthy (salaries increase exponentially here so it only gets better - I'll probably retire within 10 years, though). I've already donated at least 3 times the financial aid I got back to columbia though, for them, I could say I was a good investment.

also, turtle, adjust your quote on the last page please. You quoted catawba and used my name.

those who neither have ambition nor plan want to pretend those who do much have "cheated" to get ahead

its how they justify demanding the government take from those who aren't slackers or ne'er do wells

When a Million Dollars Just Won't Cut it

Disappointed Evolutionist

Disappointed Evolutionist

Sleeper Agent

Disappointed Evolutionist

Sleeper Agent

Disappointed Evolutionist

Cheese

New member

warrior of the wetlands

warrior of the wetlands

warrior of the wetlands

warrior of the wetlands

long standing member

warrior of the wetlands

Sleeper Agent

warrior of the wetlands

warrior of the wetlands