Human irrationality - an incorrectable cause of income disparity?

[Absentglare]

Tokens from where?

Exactly- everyone needs tokens from somewhere to get started.

Why is it that getting starting tokens from mom and dad is "good," but getting starting tokens from the government is "bad" ?

In both cases, they are "unearned" so why the discrepancy ?

 

[American]

Exactly- everyone needs tokens from somewhere to get started.

Why is it that getting starting tokens from mom and dad is "good," but getting starting tokens from the government is "bad" ?

In both cases, they are "unearned" so why the discrepancy ?

What the hell are you talking about?

 

[Absentglare]

What the hell are you talking about?

A human being is born incapable of being productive in the economy, yet that human being requires tokens in order to develop their productive potential (like 18-25 years worth of school, food, and shelter).

If no one is willing to make that investment, then the human being's productive development is stymied.

We have government to help with much of the costs, but government provides only a bare minimum up to high school. Tell me- how wealthy do you think you can get out of the typical career paths for a high school grad ?

Going to college basically means going hugely into debt (scaring away the more cautious and sensible poor students), getting money from mom and dad, working your ass off, but most likely some combination of them. And many careers require even more schooling on top of that (med school, law school).

Starting a business requires, if nothing else, the luxury of time to develop a serious business plan. Basically the only one that can leapfrog this is mom and dad.

We are refusing to invest in our children's development. We are penalizing them for having sense and caution. We are squandering productive potential. It has been slowing down our economy, it is a great burden to carry, especially considering that we carry it for no good reason.

 

[Moderate Right]

I'm saying that your 43% number wasn't from the charts i posted.

Do you dispute that 43% pay no federal income taxes?

 

[Absentglare]

Do you dispute that 43% pay no federal income taxes?

No, i'm disputing whether it could be inferred from the graphs i posted here.

 

[Lafayette]

THE GREAT AMERICAN WEALTH RIP-OFF

You could certainly use that to make the case of less regulation, but is it the regulation causing it or simply human irrationality? Should human irrationality go unchecked in our market?

Call it what you will, but I have a simpler explanation.

Income Disparity is wholly due to a warped upper-income taxation schedule instituted by Reckless Ronnie in the 1980s. See the history of tax-rates here:


Then look at Income Taxation schedules and see how they are distorted by a fixed tax-rate for households earning more than $100K per year:
.

Which in turn results in the Income Pump by which 10Percenters garner nearly half of all Income generated by the American economy and we 90Percenters are left to scramble after the other half:


Which shifts Revenue into Wealth and Wealth (minus Debt) into Net Worth:

Where the overwhelming proportion of both Wealth and Net Worth is possessed by small fraction of the American people.

And which some people call the Great American Wealth Rip-off
_______________________________

 

[Lafayette]

THE MONEY PUMP

Did the state force them to give up their property anyway.

To the extent that the representatives of the people voted to change taxation, yes the state forced them to give up their property (that is, general revenues of taxation). Taxation of revenues is decided and implemented by the state (that is both local and Federal).

It is the responsibility of the "state" (its elected representatives) to decide what is fair and equitable. In the question of national taxation, Reckless Ronnie made a drastic cut to upper income taxation. His proposal was adopted by Congress, which makes it real but not right. (Or Right but not real.)

Income is too important a matter in a market-economy for a system of taxation that allows a very distinct few (by means of an upper income flat-rate taxation) to benefit from exaggerated incomes of which they keep the major portion. Which simply shifts upward to become Wealth and (minus Debt) Net Worth. Which, in turn, is simply passed on dynastically to those who did not earn it, and obtained it solely by an accident of birth.

In this manner we are breeding the same "aristocracy" as prevailed in Europe that owned the main source of income that was agricultural land. And from which we fought a revolution to disassociate ourselves as a people because the English monarchy was employing the very same exploitation in the colonies*.

If we, the sheeple, do not understand the concept of Income Disparity as well as Fairness and Equitability in our society, then the benefit of BOTH our Collective Work (income) and Collective Demand (for goods and services) will be unfair and even corrupt. It is therefore the duty and responsibility of we, the sheeple, (those most affected) to militate democratically for a change in the erratic and wholly biased and discriminatory national income tax-rate.

It is only by restoring Taxation Fairness that the enhanced government revenues, if then more intelligently employed, will help build a better America. And not the one we have that is just a money-pump for a select, wealthy group of families (only 20% of the population).

*How do you think the name of the state of Pennsylvania came to be? The forest land ("sylva") had been gifted by the English crown to "Penn" for services rendered in war.
---------------------------------

 

[Lafayette]

MENTAL ILLNESS AND POVERTY

In both cases, they are "unearned" so why the discrepancy ?

The Pioneer Spirit of the self-sufficient original colonists lingers on?

Regardless, those in need deserve a helping hand. Not a hand-out, but a hand-up.

Most people do not want to live in penury. They are forced to do so either out of bad-luck or health-reasons and in this latter I add "mental health".

From The Atlantic: Poverty and Mental Health: Can the 2-Way Connection Be Broken?, excerpt:

When people are mentally ill, they suffer social stigma, have higher health costs, and are at an increased risk of becoming poor.

People who live in poverty are at increased risk of mental illness compared to their economically stable peers. Their lives are stressful. They are both witness to and victims of more violence and trauma than those who are reasonably well off, and they are at high risk of poor general health and malnutrition. The converse is also true: When people are mentally ill, they are at increased risk of becoming and/or staying poor. They have higher health costs, difficulty getting and retaining jobs, are less productive at work, and suffer the social stigma and isolation of mental illness.

The are different degrees of mental-illness. Even the most jovial of people can hide it to a point where ordinary folk would never see it. It is rarely apparent, but below the Poverty Threshold it may be both prevalent and curable.

Even the most curable of mental illnesses, depression, can affect work-outcomes.
__________________

 

[Lafayette]

What the hell are you talking about?

A helping hand. Unlike Madison.

Some call it charity, others call it "social democracy". In either case, it is the political will to assure that all a nation's citizens have an equal footing with which to embark upon life and pursue it without fear.

Like free postsecondary schooling to have the skills/competencies necessary to find good jobs nowadays. And a helping-hand along the way when sickness or misfortune befalls them. Like a universal National Health System that cares for their sickness if unemployed free, gratis and for-nothing. (And does not prevent them seeking assistance when they need it most because of indecently high costs. Before ObamaCare, 16% of the American population had No Medical Insurance whatsoever and many died as a result because "ER" is not enough when the damage has been done!)

Notions of a helping-hand when needed are predominant in most developed countries today. It's only the US that has become "carried-away" (and I am being polite) by the Money-Money-Money Madness. It's a wicked infection, and if our founding-fathers were to see how it has captivated Americans they'd turn sick.

The same venality of 18th century European monarchic rule now afflicts the United States, despite the fact that we fought a revolution to free ourselves as a nation. And here we have it again - that same hegemony has snuck in the back door during Reckless Ronnie's Rule.

We have created our own "royalty" and their new megabuck-Prince is The Donald - like him or not.

He's one of yours, not one of mine ...
____________________________________

 

[Lafayette]

CLOSING HUMONGOUS TAX LOOPHOLES!

Do you dispute that 43% pay no federal income taxes?

I do. Who the hell cares?

You are off on a false trail with that comment.

It is not the number of poor who do not pay, but the amounts that the ultra-rich make due to flat-rate taxation of upper-incomes. Had taxation remained at 90% of all income (as it was before LBJ diminished the rate to 70% in the 1960s as a favor to his Oil-rich Friends back in Texas), we would not have the ravaging Income Disparity we do in the US today.

We, as a people, were stoopid not to see the consequences, back in the 1980s, when Reagan recklessly proposed and Congress accepted by passing the further massive reduction of upper-income taxes. It is time for a fundamental change in Income Taxation. And not the kind Bernie proposed - BUT an upper-limit taxation raised to 90% as well as closing the effingly humongous Tax Loopholes!

It is by increasing upper-income taxation (and closing lucrative tax loopholes), that the US will stop the plague of soaring corporate incomes. Why?

Because with excessive-incomes Confiscatory Taxation there will be no incentive for those multi-megabuck incomes! And, believe me, for a damn good decent salary, both inventiveness and risk-taking will not be diminished ONE IOTA! And there will still be plenty of American millionaires but one helluva lot fewer billionaires. (Who the hell cares?)

Get it? I doubt it ...
___________________

 

[American]

A helping hand. Unlike Madison.

Some call it charity, others call it "social democracy". In either case, it is the political will to assure that all a nation's citizens have an equal footing with which to embark upon life and pursue it without fear.

Like free postsecondary schooling to have the skills/competencies necessary to find good jobs nowadays. And a helping-hand along the way when sickness or misfortune befalls them. Like a universal National Health System that cares for their sickness if unemployed free, gratis and for-nothing. (And does not prevent them seeking assistance when they need it most because of indecently high costs. Before ObamaCare, 16% of the American population had No Medical Insurance whatsoever and many died as a result because "ER" is not enough when the damage has been done!)

Notions of a helping-hand when needed are predominant in most developed countries today. It's only the US that has become "carried-away" (and I am being polite) by the Money-Money-Money Madness. It's a wicked infection, and if our founding-fathers were to see how it has captivated Americans they'd turn sick.

The same venality of 18th century European monarchic rule now afflicts the United States, despite the fact that we fought a revolution to free ourselves as a nation. And here we have it again - that same hegemony has snuck in the back door during Reckless Ronnie's Rule.

We have created our own "royalty" and their new megabuck-Prince is The Donald - like him or not.

He's one of yours, not one of mine ...
____________________________________

Quite legal and constitutional at the state level, but that is not what the federal government was set up to do.

 

[American]

A human being is born incapable of being productive in the economy, yet that human being requires tokens in order to develop their productive potential (like 18-25 years worth of school, food, and shelter).

If no one is willing to make that investment, then the human being's productive development is stymied.

We have government to help with much of the costs, but government provides only a bare minimum up to high school. Tell me- how wealthy do you think you can get out of the typical career paths for a high school grad ?

Going to college basically means going hugely into debt (scaring away the more cautious and sensible poor students), getting money from mom and dad, working your ass off, but most likely some combination of them. And many careers require even more schooling on top of that (med school, law school).

Starting a business requires, if nothing else, the luxury of time to develop a serious business plan. Basically the only one that can leapfrog this is mom and dad.

We are refusing to invest in our children's development. We are penalizing them for having sense and caution. We are squandering productive potential. It has been slowing down our economy, it is a great burden to carry, especially considering that we carry it for no good reason.

Are you going to come to a salient point, or continue to bloviate and pontificate a bunch of philosophical nonsense? Millions of people make it in this world as it is, and it's because they put out an effort. Your problem is that you don't think people have to work, and that they are owed a living. I didn't ask for other people to be born, and I don't owe them anything. I have agreed to be taxed in order to provide a leg up, but that's as far as it goes. You need a dose of reality that you are soring lacking.

 

[Moderate Right]

No, i'm disputing whether it could be inferred from the graphs i posted here.

Why dispute something that is true, whether it was on your graph or not? Does it really help your cause to dispute something that is true? What's the point?

 

[Moderate Right]

THE GREAT AMERICAN WEALTH RIP-OFF



Call it what you will, but I have a simpler explanation.

Income Disparity is wholly due to a warped upper-income taxation schedule instituted by Reckless Ronnie in the 1980s. See the history of tax-rates here:
View attachment 67203445

Then look at Income Taxation schedules and see how they are distorted by a fixed tax-rate for households earning more than $100K per year:
View attachment 67203446.

Which in turn results in the Income Pump by which 10Percenters garner nearly half of all Income generated by the American economy and we 90Percenters are left to scramble after the other half:
View attachment 67203447

Which shifts Revenue into Wealth and Wealth (minus Debt) into Net Worth:

Where the overwhelming proportion of both Wealth and Net Worth is possessed by small fraction of the American people.

And which some people call the Great American Wealth Rip-off
_______________________________

Your graphs mean nothing. You guys are so intent on ignoring dollars in favor rates and percentages because you think it furthers your liberal agenda. Who pays more tax dollars, a lot more? Surprise, the rich do! Your own graph on income groups even shows that the top 40% not only pay more dollars in taxes but pay a higher tax rate than the lowest 60%. The graph also doesn't even show that 43% pay zero federal income taxes. Give me a minute to calculate what that tax rate is. Oh yeah, it's ZERO! And so what that the top 10% in the US are doing better than the top 10% in Europe? What kind of a comparison is that? You're comparing one country to an entire entity, which includes many poorer countries, making that number very skewed and cherry picked.

 

[pdog]

THE GREAT AMERICAN WEALTH RIP-OFF



Call it what you will, but I have a simpler explanation.

Income Disparity is wholly due to a warped upper-income taxation schedule instituted by Reckless Ronnie in the 1980s. See the history of tax-rates here:
View attachment 67203445

Then look at Income Taxation schedules and see how they are distorted by a fixed tax-rate for households earning more than $100K per year:
View attachment 67203446.

Which in turn results in the Income Pump by which 10Percenters garner nearly half of all Income generated by the American economy and we 90Percenters are left to scramble after the other half:
View attachment 67203447

Which shifts Revenue into Wealth and Wealth (minus Debt) into Net Worth:

Where the overwhelming proportion of both Wealth and Net Worth is possessed by small fraction of the American people.

And which some people call the Great American Wealth Rip-off
_______________________________

I don't entirely disagree. But that only explains the jump from 1:40 to 1:130. But only the irrationality seems to be able to explain the jump to 1:400 no?

 

[pdog]

Millions of people make it in this world as it is, and it's because they put out an effort.

But the bolded statement is 100% contrary for the basis for this thread. I might not have anything against making 130 times your underlings because you "put out an effort". But this thread describes an increase derived OUTSIDE OF EFFORT.

 

[Lafayette]

I don't entirely disagree. But that only explains the jump from 1:40 to 1:130. But only the irrationality seems to be able to explain the jump to 1:400 no?

The irrationality is explained by the fact that IF you have a 30% income-tax rate (and a couple of tax-write off boondoggles) then the more you earn, the more net (after-tax) income you have. Damn simple, that logic.

But the consequence has been to propel TopManagers to demand increasingly higher total-compensation. Low upper-taxation of income is an incentive for higher incomes (decided by a very small Compensation Committee of Board Members at the top*), which is happening by leaps and bounds in a country propelled by "Can you top this!!!!".

The sad irony of it all is that whilst the plutocrat class (of mega-millionaires) keeps seeking higher salaries, they donate to the Replicant Party that wants to "stop the handouts!" When the biggest "handout" is to their own donors.

If anything qualifies as a "blazing rip-off", it's that one and apparently nobody really gives a damn. We, the sheeple, produce the products for compensation allowing us to purchase goods/services in a market-economy the key mover of which is profits. If we are lucky, some of us get a return on profits by means of the stock-market.

But that return is a comparative pittance in relation to the mind-boggling amounts Upper-Management is raking in.

Looks pretty simple to me and amazingly childish ...

*Were that Compensation Committee to include members elected by company personnel, I suspect the level of compensation would be much larger downward and far less concentrated upward.
____________________________

 

[Lafayette]

Your graphs mean nothing. You guys are so intent on ignoring dollars in favor rates and percentages because you think it furthers your liberal agenda.

The simple truth hurts, doesn't it?

Too bad, too bad, too bad. People like you are selfish, selfish, selfish - which is why the truth hurts, hurts, hurts ...
_______________________

 

[Lafayette]

Quite legal and constitutional at the state level, but that is not what the federal government was set up to do.

Oh, and why not?

It was set up by Reckless Ronnie to allow the rich a preferential flat-tax system, by means of which they are ripping-off Net Income and shifting it into Wealth?

Just where is that particular notion stated in the Constitution ... ?
_________________

 

[Absentglare]

Are you going to come to a salient point, or continue to bloviate and pontificate a bunch of philosophical nonsense? Millions of people make it in this world as it is, and it's because they put out an effort. Your problem is that you don't think people have to work, and that they are owed a living. I didn't ask for other people to be born, and I don't owe them anything. I have agreed to be taxed in order to provide a leg up, but that's as far as it goes. You need a dose of reality that you are soring lacking.

No, i'm acknowledging the fundamental fact that you gotta spend money to make money.

You're refusing to acknowledge that, seeming to imply that the "proper" way to get help is from mom and dad and, well, if your parents are poor, then you're screwed.

 

[Moderate Right]

The simple truth hurts, doesn't it?

Too bad, too bad, too bad. People like you are selfish, selfish, selfish - which is why the truth hurts, hurts, hurts ...
_______________________

Typical liberal. A one percenter pays millions in taxes while 43% pay zero and they call the one percrenter selfish. By the way, I'm not in the one percent. Not even close so I don't see where you get off calling me selfish. I could actually care less about the one percent but liberals are just plain dishonest about the whole thing and then pdog goes on to say that the government blew all of our tax money on wars and somehow that is the rich's fault and that they should now pony up for the government's sheer wastefulness while crossing their fingers that the government won't waste the newly collected taxes all over again.

 

[Lafayette]

FAIR TAXATION

A one percenter pays millions in taxes while 43% pay zero and they call the one percrenter selfish.

So what! The amount they pay is IRRELEVANT.

What is relevant is percentage paid across the range of income, which should be progressive. Ie., no FLAT-TAX creating a plateau beginning at the 5th-quintile as shown here to exist:


Goodness, is this a concept too difficult surpassing the comprehension of a high-school graduate?

You obviously need a lesson on in Taxation Fairness. Here it is:

A fair tax system should:

1) Be progressive, that is, those with more income pay a constantly larger share of it in taxes;

2) One that doesn’t exacerbate inequality by giving preferential treatment to the wealthy (e.g., by favoring capital over labor income);

3) One that doesn’t disproportionately benefit those who are already doing the best at the expense of the rest in a market-economy from which all should benefit and not just a few;

4) One that raises enough revenue from those with lots of resources to provide a leg up for those at a disadvantage in order to avoid Income Disparity that is rampant in America;

5) One that is confiscatory at a certain maximum income, which will discourage the desire for ever higher incomes at the highest income levels.

___________________________

 

[Lafayette]

Typical liberal. A one percenter pays millions in taxes while 43% pay zero and they call the one percrenter selfish. By the way, I'm not in the one percent. Not even close so I don't see where you get off calling me selfish. I could actually care less about the one percent but liberals are just plain dishonest about the whole thing and then pdog goes on to say that the government blew all of our tax money on wars and somehow that is the rich's fault and that they should now pony up for the government's sheer wastefulness while crossing their fingers that the government won't waste the newly collected taxes all over again.

Blah, blah, blah. Same claptrap.

You are devoid of any sense of egalitarian principles.

Moving right along ...
_______________________

 

[imagep]

As I have said in other threads, liberals are overly obsessed with the one percent. Show me some ideas that effect only the bottom one percent and the top one percent and leave everyone else alone. Liberal ideas often destroy the little guy business owner just because of the top one percent and liberal ideas also often destroy the middle class just because of the bottom one percent. As I said in my last post in this thread, liberal ideas, while often well intended, often backfire and make things worse with unintended consequences.

Can you provide any examples of how "liberals destroy the little guy business owner"?

 

[imagep]

But you want to punish all businesses for the misdeeds of the one percent. If you want to go after the one percent then go after the one percent but leave the other 99% of businesses alone.

The OP actually mentioned that he is against any and all taxation on businesses. I'm really not sure what type of "punishment" you can possibly be referring to, other than business taxation. Can you enlighten me?