• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Stop Coddling the Super-Rich

PzKfW IVe said:
None of that changes the fact that it is hogwash, as evidenced by the reasoned argument that you asked for.
:shrug:
Click to expand...

You are one of those people who always just has to get in the last word on everything, aren't you? Does it make you feel like you have won something?

Your opinion is your own. Repeat it all you like. Maybe it will catch on, since there seem to be so many of you out here that aren't real keen on doing any real thinking for yourselves.

It only continues to point up the emotional isolation you have put yourself in.

You don't seriously believe that you have presented a reasoned argument, do you?
 
Pretty good comment here:

Those Poor Rich People

By Alyce Lomax

These are tough times for the outrageously wealthy. Instead of the aspirational Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous exaltation of yesteryear, our popular image of the country's richest citizens now looks more like a reality show about spoiled, mean people.

First, Berkshire Hathaway's (NYSE: BRK-A ) (NYSE: BRK-B ) Warren Buffett made a high-profile pronouncement in The New York Times: Our society needs to stop "coddling" the wealthy by shielding them from tax burdens that the middle class has been forced to bear, at much greater relative financial sacrifice.

Later in his piece, Buffett did say that the megarich he knows are "by and large … very decent people" willing to pay more taxes. Regardless, Buffett openly called out our society's tendency to let rich people off the hook, and glorify them regardless of their conduct. Although rich people may feel that it's unfair for people now to turn around and criticize them, our wealthiest citizens often feed the fire with their own problematic behavior.

Dog eat dog
In simplest terms, mean people tend to make more money. That's the finding of a study presented at the annual meeting for the Academy of Management, as the Wall Street Journal reported. Mean men apparently earn about 18% more in salary than their kinder counterparts. Mean women have a harder time than their cruel male counterparts, but still take home about 5% more pay than more agreeable females.

The news gets worse. The Association for Psychological Science recently reported that the rich tend to have less empathy than the rest of us. They don't really have to rely on others, so they never really learn to care about others. Instead, they become financial hoarders, and they often aren't as philanthropic as they could be. Ouch.

Heroes
Of course not all rich people lack empathy or conscience. Take Starbucks' (Nasdaq: SBUX ) CEO Howard Schultz, who grew up in the projects in Brooklyn. His company provides health care benefits to workers because Schultz knows how badly it hurt his family when his father injured himself, lost his job, and had no benefits.

And of course, Warren Buffett's a different kind of billionaire. In 2006, he started giving away the fortune he's generated through Berkshire Hathaway. Most of his gifts are slated for the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, which focuses on global health and improving education.

Still, our culture has tended to exalt the decadent, non-empathetic members of the upper crust over those who exhibit more noble behavior. Why would anybody in their right mind defend nasty, money-grubbing, selfish behavior? We've got to stop.

Zeroes
Those of us who defend strong corporate governance keep a close eye on CEO pay, which is too often outrageously disconnected from any notion of true performance. Warren Buffett may have talked about the "coddled" rich avoiding tax sacrifice, but many wealthy CEOs don't seem to feel particularly driven to endure much financial sacrifice in their roles in the marketplace, either.

Last year, The Institute for Policy Studies pointed out that "lay-off leaders" -- companies that jettisoned the most workers after the financial crisis -- had CEOs who took home 42% more pay than peers in 2009. Johnson & Johnson (NYSE: JNJ ) , Hewlett-Packard (NYSE: HPQ ) , and American Express (NYSE: AXP ) were among the companies called to task.

Pardon me for saying so, but it seems to take a certain lack of empathy to rake in millions when thousands of workers lost their livelihoods on your watch. There's little notion of shared sacrifice in the midst of hardship, and these days, hardships are getting worse and worse for more Americans.

Those poor rich people
Wealthy people are increasingly suffering an image problem, but it's partially their fault for not acting a little more decently in times of crisis. Corporate boards can cut CEO pay, and I'm pretty sure that CEOs can also request to slash their own pay levels.

Shareholders also share the blame. For too long, they've defended high CEO pay as a given, not a reward for sound operational performance. Again, that somehow celebrates the super-rich as beyond the same standards the rest of us must follow.

In the discussion about what is rich and what is poor, hopefully our culture can start realizing that the "richest" folks contribute the most to a better world overall, and think about somebody other than themselves during the most difficult times. Those "poor" rich people indeed."

Those Poor Rich People (BRK-B)
 
Just1Voice said:
1. Of course the wealth belongs to the estate. But since the former owner of that estate is dead, the question concerning who owns it now remains to be resolved.
Click to expand...

In most cases that question is resolved by something called a WILL. It's written by the former owner of the estate to inform the public how they wish their estate to be distributed upon their passing. I don't think I've ever seen one that includes a voluntary contribution directly to the United States Treasury Department.

Just1Voice said:
2. I suppose I should have used "responsible" or "careful" or "safe." No one is arguing for the elimination of inheritance, only the responsible reduction of it, for the safety of all. I can think of several ways in which a large inheritance might lead to harm, both to the inheritor and to others. I cannot think of any way in which distributing some portion of a particularly large estate to the people could do the same.
Click to expand...

I can see many ways wherein distributing some portion of that money to the people could be a major harm. Especially things like Welfare, Foreign Aid, and other Social Programs.

Just1Voice said:
. It's not the government, I am talking about here. It is the citizens of that government. And it is not necessary that each individual should desire to see to it that the American Dream remains a real possibility for all children of this nation, just the majority of them. If you attempt to imply that the majority of citizens of our nation don't want that, well, I would ask that you produce some evidence to support that, because that certainly isn't what I was taught about this country or its people.
Click to expand...

It's not a matter of wanting it or not wanting it. The "American Dream" is an individual goal, not something that should be doled out by the Government. My "American Dream" is not the white picket fence, wife and 2.5 kids, house in the suburbs vision that has been so common over the years. That lifestyle doesn't work for me. It never has and never would. Therefore to have the Government STEAL money from someone else's estate with the intent of providing me (or anyone else) with that idealized "American Dream" is insanity so far as I'm concerned.
 
AdamT said:
Pretty good comment here:

Those Poor Rich People

By Alyce Lomax

These are tough times for the outrageously wealthy. Instead of the aspirational Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous exaltation of yesteryear, our popular image of the country's richest citizens now looks more like a reality show about spoiled, mean people.

First, Berkshire Hathaway's (NYSE: BRK-A ) (NYSE: BRK-B ) Warren Buffett made a high-profile pronouncement in The New York Times: Our society needs to stop "coddling" the wealthy by shielding them from tax burdens that the middle class has been forced to bear, at much greater relative financial sacrifice.

Later in his piece, Buffett did say that the megarich he knows are "by and large … very decent people" willing to pay more taxes. Regardless, Buffett openly called out our society's tendency to let rich people off the hook, and glorify them regardless of their conduct. Although rich people may feel that it's unfair for people now to turn around and criticize them, our wealthiest citizens often feed the fire with their own problematic behavior.

Dog eat dog
In simplest terms, mean people tend to make more money. That's the finding of a study presented at the annual meeting for the Academy of Management, as the Wall Street Journal reported. Mean men apparently earn about 18% more in salary than their kinder counterparts. Mean women have a harder time than their cruel male counterparts, but still take home about 5% more pay than more agreeable females.

The news gets worse. The Association for Psychological Science recently reported that the rich tend to have less empathy than the rest of us. They don't really have to rely on others, so they never really learn to care about others. Instead, they become financial hoarders, and they often aren't as philanthropic as they could be. Ouch.

Heroes
Of course not all rich people lack empathy or conscience. Take Starbucks' (Nasdaq: SBUX ) CEO Howard Schultz, who grew up in the projects in Brooklyn. His company provides health care benefits to workers because Schultz knows how badly it hurt his family when his father injured himself, lost his job, and had no benefits.

And of course, Warren Buffett's a different kind of billionaire. In 2006, he started giving away the fortune he's generated through Berkshire Hathaway. Most of his gifts are slated for the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, which focuses on global health and improving education.

Still, our culture has tended to exalt the decadent, non-empathetic members of the upper crust over those who exhibit more noble behavior. Why would anybody in their right mind defend nasty, money-grubbing, selfish behavior? We've got to stop.

Zeroes
Those of us who defend strong corporate governance keep a close eye on CEO pay, which is too often outrageously disconnected from any notion of true performance. Warren Buffett may have talked about the "coddled" rich avoiding tax sacrifice, but many wealthy CEOs don't seem to feel particularly driven to endure much financial sacrifice in their roles in the marketplace, either.

Last year, The Institute for Policy Studies pointed out that "lay-off leaders" -- companies that jettisoned the most workers after the financial crisis -- had CEOs who took home 42% more pay than peers in 2009. Johnson & Johnson (NYSE: JNJ ) , Hewlett-Packard (NYSE: HPQ ) , and American Express (NYSE: AXP ) were among the companies called to task.

Pardon me for saying so, but it seems to take a certain lack of empathy to rake in millions when thousands of workers lost their livelihoods on your watch. There's little notion of shared sacrifice in the midst of hardship, and these days, hardships are getting worse and worse for more Americans.

Those poor rich people
Wealthy people are increasingly suffering an image problem, but it's partially their fault for not acting a little more decently in times of crisis. Corporate boards can cut CEO pay, and I'm pretty sure that CEOs can also request to slash their own pay levels.

Shareholders also share the blame. For too long, they've defended high CEO pay as a given, not a reward for sound operational performance. Again, that somehow celebrates the super-rich as beyond the same standards the rest of us must follow.

In the discussion about what is rich and what is poor, hopefully our culture can start realizing that the "richest" folks contribute the most to a better world overall, and think about somebody other than themselves during the most difficult times. Those "poor" rich people indeed."

Those Poor Rich People (BRK-B)
Click to expand...

when you start using terms like "those Poor rich people" it is hard not to see class envy and spite at work
 
TurtleDude said:
when you start using terms like "those Poor rich people" it is hard not to see class envy and spite at work
Click to expand...

You should amend this statement to say that it's not hard for you personally to see that. And of that I have no doubts, since ytou have made it pretty obvious that you see envy and spite everywhere. You might want to look up the psychological definition of the term "projecting." It applies strongly to your perspective.
 
Just1Voice said:
You should amend this statement to say that it's not hard for you personally to see that. And of that I have no doubts, since ytou have made it pretty obvious that you see envy and spite everywhere. You might want to look up the psychological definition of the term "projecting." It applies strongly to your perspective.
Click to expand...

I just go by the posts that about 6-9 rich bashers post constantly. people who think that the rich exist to fund the slackers and unproductive. People who claim that one percent paying 40% of the income tax is not enough. people who think the tax code should make life fair or at least afflict the comfortable and comfort the allegedly afflicted (usually from their own poor choices)
 
TurtleDude said:
I just go by the posts that about 6-9 rich bashers post constantly. people who think that the rich exist to fund the slackers and unproductive. People who claim that one percent paying 40% of the income tax is not enough. people who think the tax code should make life fair or at least afflict the comfortable and comfort the allegedly afflicted (usually from their own poor choices)
Click to expand...

What you go by is your own perspective, to the exclusion of all else.
 
Just1Voice said:
What you go by is your own perspective, to the exclusion of all else.
Click to expand...

Oh yeah, i forgot lefties who always bray about the common good have the wisdom, by virtue of being lefties, to set aside their own perspective and speak for the entire world
 
TurtleDude said:
Oh yeah, i forgot lefties who always bray about the common good have the wisdom, by virtue of being lefties, to set aside their own perspective and speak for the entire world
Click to expand...

Specifically - just who are you talking about? This seems like a over simplification and gross generalization devoid of actual names and positions.
 
haymarket said:
Specifically - just who are you talking about? This seems like a over simplification and gross generalization devoid of actual names and positions.
Click to expand...

did you read the post before mine?
 
TurtleDude said:
did you read the post before mine?
Click to expand...

I was speaking about you specifically. You threw me in with a much larger group of people and tried to ascribe what you thought of me to that entire group. Or perhaps you were trying to apply what you think of the entire group to me. In either case you are wrong. I am not speaking for the world. I speak for myself, though I tend to believe that given a choice between your stated goals and mine, the majority would prefer mine. I have said this more than once, but your memory, like your perception, appears to be very selective.

As to my ability to perceive things outside my own perspective, that is something I have been trained to do for a very long time, through competitions in Lincoln-Douglas style debate, for example, and participation in the arts. I make an effort to look outside myself at the situations of others and to empathize with them. Obviously you don't.
 
Last edited:
Just1Voice said:
You are one of those people who always just has to get in the last word on everything, aren't you? Does it make you feel like you have won something?
Click to expand...
I'm sorry -- you got what you asked for; the fact that you don't like it really isn't my issue.
:shrug:

You don't seriously believe that you have presented a reasoned argument, do you?
Click to expand...
Your replies, as addressed, have done nothing to diminish my response to you, and so if my responses are unsound, it is certainly not because of anything you have said.
 
PzKfW IVe said:
I'm sorry -- you got what you asked for; the fact that you don't like it really isn't my issue.
:shrug:
Click to expand...

Never said I didn't like it. Actually, I find it amusing.

PzKfW IVe said:
Your replies, as addressed, have done nothing to diminish my response to you, and so if my responses are unsound, it is certainly not because of anything you have said.
Click to expand...

Your response to me was not an argument at all. You presented three alternative perspectives to three supporting points I made as to why I thought it should be done. You have not presented any argument of your own. You seem to be under the impression that your perspectives somehow invalidate my argument, but they don't.
 
TurtleDude said:
when you start using terms like "those Poor rich people" it is hard not to see class envy and spite at work
Click to expand...

Yep, those financial writers are generally filled with envy and spite. Bunch of socialists.

Weak ad hominem attack.
 
AdamT said:
Yep, those financial writers are generally filled with envy and spite. Bunch of socialists.

Weak ad hominem attack.
Click to expand...

There are those here who scorn actual evidence and keep miles away from being pinned down with actual names and quotations so that they can pontificate in gross generalities and spout radical right wing talking points. The use of this silly ENVY charge is but one very obvious example.
 
Another megabucks voice weighs in: this time from the Republican camp:

"Another multi-millionaire says the rich should be paying more taxes. Registered Republican and co-founder of H&R Block, Henry Bloch knows his opinion is not popular with many in his party.

Like Warren Buffet, Bloch believes current tax code gives too many breaks to the rich.

He also has strong opinions about how much these tax breaks really contribute to job creation.
"That's so baloney," Bloch said. "Rich people don't create jobs. Companies create jobs."

Bloch believes politics are to blame for what Warren Buffet called "coddling of the rich."

Bloch says the middle class should be furious that the rich pay so little in taxes, hiding money in trusts and with their kids.

"You probably pay a higher rate than I do... and yet my income is probably many times what yours is." Bloch said to FOX 4 Reporter Rob Low.

Bill Black, an economics professor at the University of Missouri-Kansas City says the rich have been given so many breaks that their taxes are now about one-fifth or one-sixth of what they once were.


MIDDLE CLASS SHOULD BE FURIOUS: A KC MILLIONAIRE AGREES WITH BUFFET - WDAF
 
AdamT said:
Another megabucks voice weighs in: this time from the Republican camp:

"Another multi-millionaire says the rich should be paying more taxes. Registered Republican and co-founder of H&R Block, Henry Bloch knows his opinion is not popular with many in his party.

Like Warren Buffet, Bloch believes current tax code gives too many breaks to the rich.

He also has strong opinions about how much these tax breaks really contribute to job creation.
"That's so baloney," Bloch said. "Rich people don't create jobs. Companies create jobs."

Bloch believes politics are to blame for what Warren Buffet called "coddling of the rich."

Bloch says the middle class should be furious that the rich pay so little in taxes, hiding money in trusts and with their kids.

"You probably pay a higher rate than I do... and yet my income is probably many times what yours is." Bloch said to FOX 4 Reporter Rob Low.

Bill Black, an economics professor at the University of Missouri-Kansas City says the rich have been given so many breaks that their taxes are now about one-fifth or one-sixth of what they once were.


MIDDLE CLASS SHOULD BE FURIOUS: A KC MILLIONAIRE AGREES WITH BUFFET - WDAF
Click to expand...

that proves nothing. most of the top 1 percent make less than a couple million a year. and if you make a million a year your effective federal income tax rate is 24% or so. HOW CAN IT BE THAT THOSE PEOPLE WERE ONCE PAYING 5-6X that?

ITS A LIE A COMPLETE LIE
 
AdamT said:
"Another multi-millionaire says the rich should be paying more taxes. Registered Republican and co-founder of H&R Block, Henry Bloch knows his opinion is not popular with many in his party.

Like Warren Buffet, Bloch believes current tax code gives too many breaks to the rich.
Click to expand...


My goodness, the political system has reached the point of corruption where the CEO's of huge corporations and investment tycoons are even complaining?

These men (Buffet and Bloch) aren't Liberal conspirators, and they're not idiots or kooks (as I hear many fellow right-wingers suggest), and closing these tax loopholes and tricks are not going to benefit either of them financially. What could be their motives?

I believe that the top 1% have a voice much louder within Congress than they should proportionately have when compared to the rest of the US population. After all, we are supposed to be a nation where every person should have an equal say as to how policy is formed (is that right?). Unfortunately that's not the case.

The rich have the advantage right now, Buffet and Bloch are just trying to 'fair' things out a bit one statement at a time and I commend them for it.

Pursuit of MONEY should not be the basis upon which we form our society, as if becoming rich with cash is the highest level of destiny a human being could possibly wish to attain.
 
Last edited:
TurtleDude said:
that proves nothing. most of the top 1 percent make less than a couple million a year. and if you make a million a year your effective federal income tax rate is 24% or so. HOW CAN IT BE THAT THOSE PEOPLE WERE ONCE PAYING 5-6X that?

ITS A LIE A COMPLETE LIE
Click to expand...

that article is more proof that half your arguments are bs. especially the ones where you claim that people for higher taxes on the rich are lazy and untalented.
 
TurtleDude said:
that proves nothing. most of the top 1 percent make less than a couple million a year. and if you make a million a year your effective federal income tax rate is 24% or so. HOW CAN IT BE THAT THOSE PEOPLE WERE ONCE PAYING 5-6X that?

ITS A LIE A COMPLETE LIE
Click to expand...

Yep, you probably know a lot more about taxes than Henry Bloch ... of ... you know ... H&R BLOCH. :lol:
 
AdamT said:
Yep, you probably know a lot more about taxes than Henry Bloch ... of ... you know ... H&R BLOCH. :lol:
Click to expand...

I will repeat this for you

I love how you all worship authority without actually thinking for yourself

how do you think Bloch made all his money? Do you think he has a vested interest in the PIT scheme continuing?

TurtleDude said:
what was the actual EFFECTIVE tax rate on the top one percent back then compared to today? if you do that research you will find that your claim in another thread that the rich paid 5-6 times the FIT back then is idiotic. Currently most of those in the top one percent pay an effective rate of 24%. Some of those at the very top pay 17% due to CG and dividend income (of course this 17% fails to include the DOUBLE taxation on dividends nor the DEATH TAX)

5 X 24% is impossible. 5X17% is less than the top 90% marginal rate but its completely wrong when dealing with what was the effective rate back then-an effective rate that allowed far more deductions and yes (gasp) Loopholes.
Click to expand...
 
JMax said:
that article is more proof that half your arguments are bs. especially the ones where you claim that people for higher taxes on the rich are lazy and untalented.
Click to expand...

Non responsive to what you quoted from me. Lots of rich people want higher taxes. welfare socialism is the modern opiate of the masses and those who benefit from the political power that comes from being dealers of that opiate are going to support more of it
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom