Forum Post: Recent tax cuts have saved the top 1%, more in taxes than the rest of us have received in wages.
Posted 12 years ago on April 21, 2012, 8:22 a.m. EST by factsrfun
(8310)
from Phoenix, AZ
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
Excerpt from the Reich book:
“The tax cuts enacted in 2001 and 2003, and extended for two years in 2010, in 2011 saved the richest 1.4 million taxpayers (the top 1%) more money than the rest of America’s 140.89 million taxpayers received in total income.”
From “Beyond Outrage”, you should read it, I’ll be putting up more bits, unless than ban me.
This is exactly what the repubs have been supporting in their stonewalling the reform of that tax break - reforming it to keep benefits alive for those who need it and ending the breaks for the wealthy. What more needs to be understood about the repubs in office? They are not for the Population they are for greedy concerns.
If we don't take seroious action to address the wealth at the top, not just money in politics they will find a way to worm back in.
True and that is also why owning the system and maintaining participation by the people is necessary. 1st to kick the non-living out of the seat of influence - then to correct the things that the non-living broke or twisted - then never leave the store unattended ever again. The rich are individuals if they are living and breathing and so have only as much say as anyone else technically - The thing is once the people have regained government it is needed to take money out of the equation as well as conflict of interest. We need to continue forever to monitor and inform/lead the process.
Every signature by the president should get a final approval by the people. This will forever keep us in the game.
Yes every item should be by public approval. Ultimately this is the goal in getting the public to own the system, is that only approved items will ever reach the point of initiation.
They are working for us. Of course they should need our approval.
I believe we have a constitutional right to overturn legislation but we need 60% ?
We need to educate and then establish a regular open channel of communication. 60% (?) sounds about right. This is another area of education that needs to be shared and circulated. Also this issue needs to be standardized through out the country - none of that this rule here that rule there BS. It has to be a consistent system. Petitioning is our current legal right and process to address this type of issue of overturning legislation or proposing legislation. The people are largely unaware as this is not something those in power want to be widely understood or heaven forbid used. Then government would have to pay attention to what they are doing and for whom they are doing it.
not that I'm aware
but the government would think twice about going against a 60% public vote
60 votes in the Senate then we can hold them accountable
congress is already accountable
but they point the figure at each other, and it works, look how well it works here, when the GOP are below 40 in the senate there will be no place to point, of course those who pay attention know that getting rid of the GOP makes things better, a bit at a time
I don't understand why congress could pass a government insurance health plan
when the dems controlled both houses right after Obama took office
as I remember that was a very close one and you can't always depend on all the D's to be on the correct side of any issue, no more so than you can count on all the R's to be on the wrong side, but in fact these days the R's are almost always 100% on the wrong side as they were in 1993, to some extent one could consider it a good thing that all the D's agree fewer times, if you like the D's I mean.
They bulid kingdoms with the lives of the workers
[Removed]
It's not your money to steal. Why don't you go work and produce something and make some monet instead of living in a place named after and animal.
Steal?
Why you certainly have a dim view of the legal process of these here United States. Taxes are taxes - and adjusted rates are standard for differing incomes. So. You have a problem with the rich paying their fair share proportionately?
Why don't you just say that instead of throwing out a stupid troll talking point?
You are taking from one person to give to another. That is out and out stealing. You are penalizing those who do well.
I think everybody should be treated the same with the same rate. That doesn't mean just because one peson does better than the next that the government should come in and take their money.
What is fair is everybody paying the same rate not paying what they can afford. So don't give me this riduculous argument about fairness.
You are the one who want a socialistic society and are trying to take away people's liberty and their ability to prosper. It's not your right to do that and this country wasn't founded on it. Move to France.
Funny - what kind of teacher are you supposed to be? You blithely overlook history and facts about the downfall of the working public to the gain of the corporations/business/rich. Then blame the poor for the problem of being robbed from and then defend the theft by the corrupt and greedy.
Wow I hope your user name is a total fabrication as I would pity the future of your students.
In your world all wealth is a zero sum game which is not the way it works. One person doesn't gain at another person's expense. If you want to cite history and the facts, then you should know that societies grow and propser as they become wealthier and the free market systems provide that. Show me the socilaistic experiment or the government controlled economy that has outperformed?
Nobody is blaming the poor but you can't penalize one group for doing well. You seem to think that those who do well gain by corruption.
I pity you as you truly don't understand economic systems if you think it is closed system.
What your shitting me. Right?
One person does not gain at an others expense????????
Wow the rich must truly be mystified at their own success in "your" world.
You have no grounding in reality - I truly hope that you are not employed as a teacher - what a sad statement that would be for someones educational system.
So there is no multiplier effect or velocity of money? The economy is not affected by how much somebody works?
Please get your self an education and stop saying stupid shit.
Can't answer the question, you are the one syaing it a zero sum equation. How does one person's gain - wages or goods - steal from another. Please enlighten us.
Sorry no that was "you" ( zero sum ) "you" said that no one profits off of an others expense. SFB.
You trolls sure are stupid you reintroduce failed arguments ( which start out with no basis in fact no basis in the real world ) to infinity. Each time presenting it as a valid argument. Repetition of crap does not make for it being valid then, now or in the future.
Trolls you need new material and tactics everyone has already seen your present lame BS to exhaustion.
You trolls are all the same try to tie someone down explaining things repeatedly so that you figure you have taken that individual out of circulation for a time.
Sorry I don't play that game.
What is that? Ancient troll tactic #6?
You can look around at other posts just like anyone else spend your time usefully. You may even begin to have your eye's opened.
Huh. I guess anything is possible no matter how improbable.
Thank you for playing - please come again.
Keep denying the facts, the publlic will love you!!!
Funny you have nothing so you use my last rejoinder. I am flattered - not complimented as a compliment is a good thing and you are not offering that. You are just being lazy and I would say a bit frustrated as all you can play is the mirror game as you have to think and come up with your own stuff otherwise and we have all seen the poor job you have done at that up to this point in time.
So are you now gonna start really digging yourself a hole? I mean in earnest? As most trolls like you do start digging a hole when it becomes apparent that you have nothing to offer.
Don't compliment yourself, there was no reply button - knucklehead.
Your making great progress, keep it up. The public really loves you and buys off on all your economic nonsense.
You still can't explain how the economy works. Well, you do live in Coon Rapids...
Sit and spin - that must have been your favorite toy when you were growing-up.
What's your name, and what school do you teach at?
Nice avoidance, can't explain how the economy works. Don't worry the money fairy and the food fairy will take care of you!!!
You guys sure make it fun to rib you!!!
I think it is you who is having a difficult time with understanding. Tell me. Are you spoon fed? Have you always been spoon fed? Will you ever learn to feed yourself? It is a big world out here and your handlers have not prepared you for participation. Open your eye's the sky is not a rosy shade of puke and the sun does not arise from inside the earth from where it does not rest for approximately twelve hrs a day.
You need to be introduced to reality - go spit on your handlers for their neglect. Then spend some time actually reading some good information. You will find much good information on this forum once you brush away the troll droppings like yours.
Still can't answer the question. Seriously, were you awake in HS economics?
You trolls are all the same try to tie someone down explaining things repeatedly so that you figure you have taken that individual out of circulation for a time.
Sorry I don't play that game.
What is that? Ancient troll tactic #6?
You can look around at other posts just like anyone else spend your time usefully. You may even begin to have your eye's opened.
Huh. I guess anything is possible no matter how improbable.
Thank you for playing - please come again.
Multiplier? Velocity? Zero sum?
Why should anyone respond to loaded buzz terms.
WallStreet steals from us every day. In every way they can figure out.
Yeah, they are really loaded buzz terms. Turn off Rachel Maddow and go out and get yourself a real girlfriend. But maybe you like the dominant type or maybe....
Was that a loaded, yet lame attempt at an insult?? Mostly it was lame.
I've never watched Maddow. you apparently have.
Tell me how WallStreet doesn't rip off everyone they can.
You're a good person shooz - did any of this rub off on you from BW - she is also a good person.
[-] 1 points by shooz (6534) 1 minute ago
It's my belief that there's hope, even for the lame of mind...........:) ↥like ↧dislike permalink
I used to have to train people at work. People that didn't want to be there, or were afraid to be there.
One learns patience and perseverance really are virtues.
Where did the money come from?
Money that banks, investment banks, investment companies use can come from different place such as depositors, individuals, corporations, pension plans, sovereign wealth funds...
Why the echo chamber???
Why repeat yourself??
OK, step by step, then.
What did they produce, to get the money?
"More buzz terms?
You could say the same thing about the mafia.
Where did the money come from?"
I'm not sure what buzz terms you are talking about. Money that banks, investment banks, investment companies use can come from different place such as depositors, individuals, corporations, pension plans, sovereign wealth funds...
That's all you have is empty buzz terms to explain yourself.
I suppose the question was difficult?
Simple answer.
Where did the money come from?
It thinks it is monopolizing your time.
It does not realize you are having fun teasing it.
Trolls almost to stupid to breath on their own.
Or . . . . wait do you think they are installed with a kind of breathing pacemaker thing?
[-] 1 points by shooz (6534) 8 minutes ago
You're the dumb shit that can't answer.
Why would I answer the question I asked you?
You've done nothing but evade answering.
Dip shit. ↥like ↧dislike permalink
It's my belief that there's hope, even for the lame of mind...........:)
Where did the money come from?
Boy, you are real dumbshit. Where do you think it comes from? You truthfully don't know.
You're the dumb shit that can't answer.
Why would I answer the question I asked you?
You've done nothing but evade answering.
Dip shit.
"Then how else do they make such huge sums of money?"
They take advantage of the inefficiencies in the markets by either raising money, loaning money, giving advice or making investments on their own. When nobody else want to take the risk they will. The markeplace puts a value on these services and gives it to them.
so they determine what jobs will be preformed by loaning the money to pay for the labor
and if those job don't produce profit , they loss some money
More buzz terms?
You could say the same thing about the mafia.
Where did the money come from?
So you are asking, does Walls Street attempt to maximize profits? Of course they do, as does every company or money making venture in existance. They are there to maximize return to shareholders.
I can't believe this, what do you think people do every day?
That wasn't the question and that wasn't an answer.
People do different things every day.
You've been here since December and you still have no clue what OWS is about. Sad, really. Some people, no matter how hard you try, cannot be taught to think for themselves.
You're the dumb shit that can't answer.
Why would I answer the question I asked you?
You've done nothing but evade answering.
Dip shit.
Didn't graduate from high school?
Did you make it out of Montessori?
It's still you, who doesn't answer a simple question.
It's you echoes me, to puff up your responses.
Does that make you feel bigger and more important?
Or do you get lost in conversation that easily?
So now you are changing what you are asking. Do you want to know what do they give people for they borrow or what they do with it once they get it. Like I said above, the product they produce is they give advice, they loan money, and they invest money.
You just never answered the first question.
So I'm attempting to get some kind non echo chamber response from you.
Shall I try again?
Where did the money come from?
"Why the echo chamber???
Why repeat yourself??
OK, step by step, then.
What did they produce, to get the money?"
They give people a return on their money.
they rig the game and make money off other people's money
What did they do to give a return?
You really have a hard time clearly answering a simple question.
But I guess you just want to play.......................:)
"That wasn't the question and that wasn't an answer.
People do different things every day"
No, Wall Street doesn't rip everybody off every day.
Then how else do they make such huge sums of money?
I think the free market was a result of social wealth
people had extra goods to spend at a free market
The abundance of goods has really only come to pass in the past 150 years.
Egypt stored grain for years of famine
There was no abundance then as they could not produce enough for their people.
there had to be abundance to store the grain in the first place
Above average yields - "seven fat years"
Gee, factsrfun, just when I thought I was outraged enough....This fact is really too much to comprehend.
more to come just paid a whopping 3.25 for the book.....if I don't get too fed up
Try not to have a heart attack. I nearly did over the fact above.
This guy has been writing about the 1%, since the eighties, did get hchc to bite, what a troll he is
I guess this is sort of old news, but I was surprised by the size of the swindle.
Robert Reich has lots of intelligent analyses on various matters, eg. :
fiat lux ...
just got the book more to come
Good for you (& us!) 'frf' and I doff my proverbial cap at your well chosen moniker as verily, you have shown that 'facts are fun' although unfortunately it has been scientifically shown that much of the right-wing and most of the 'right-wingnuts' are impervious to 'facts' .
Still we all stumble forwards towards a better shared future ..
et dum spiro, spero ...
everyone's entitle to their own opinion just not their own facts, I think it was Paul Wellstone who said that, any I like it, I think he was talking about the right mostly
It's not only taxation. Anyone who has labored anywhere along the global supply chain/sweatshop has felt their wages squeezed as retailers, grocers, etc. attempt to drive down prices. The American consumer has been showered in cheap goods and discount retailers like Amazon and Wal Mart will say that their ability to drive down prices justifies low wages, that it's a win-win all around. That's bogus because workers will never achieve economic autonomy in this climate. Yeah, I could afford some cheap trinkets; but a home, healthcare (even with health benefits), healthful food, and continued education (rising tuition prices) are out of reach for most -- you know, the good things in life. Don't tell me that my wage is sufficient simply because I could save up a little and buy a flat screen TV (don't watch TV), a cell phone, and a beater car that can get me to and from work.
You are indeed driving toward the problem, the very people who so idolizes the free market system because of its negotiated agreements with all parties free to take it or leave it. These people refuse to acknowledge any differentness in the power of the two sides except when the big bad union is trying to get a decent life for its members, then they are always big bullies, bullies against the workers and the poor bosses who want nothing more that to provide jobs, at least according to their thought processes. Anyway when one side is looking to buy that second Cadillac and the other is trying to eat the deals made are not fair and it’s OK if we want fix that.
Not sure if everyone's seen this yet.......:)
http://occupywallst.org/forum/a-ticker-on-whats-lost/
It's cool, do you remember the debt clock on Wall Street, if you do you might remember when Clinton balanced the budget, they took it down so people wouldn't get confused and realize a Democrate was doing good and paying down the debt, one of the big things Wall Street did to attack Clinton/Gore.
Ooooops there goes another school.
Ooooops there goes another road.
Here comes the profiteers.
I know it's like how much do we have to give these people so they will agree to just invest their money and live off the profits, I wounldn't think it would take that much, I bet if you taxed them at three times the current rate they still wouldn't stop investing and start working for a living, I mean can you imgaine Romney swinging a hammer?
Romney??
He won't do the work it takes to get his foot out of his mouth.
you see I figure they would take 10% and be damn happy they ain't got to work, I mean that's still 2 million for Romney, what? he's going to give speaches for the not very much amount 3 or 4 hunderd thousand that would get boring
[Removed]
they better
see it....seeee it...
Think Homer S.
But but but trickle down economics!!!! Oh that's right, the economy went under during the Bush Tax cuts.
Gee and they wonder why OWS and dissent are surging up against them.
Been trickled on lately?
Can someone please wake me from this bad dream?
We can do it, but not while Republicans hold public office.
It's hard to believe something like this could be true. We the people really have fallen asleep.
Probably a fluke from the inheritance tax being lifted that year, but does explain how they end up with so much.
http://robertreich.org/post/19205965330
What will fix this is a Basic Income Guarantee; http://occupywallst.org/forum/a-basic-income-guarantee-how-humanity-remains-huma/
thanks for stopping by, I'll check it out
[Removed]
[Removed]
[Removed]
[Removed]
Which is why I keep saying: If you are poor, it's because you want to be or because you're stupid.
It would seem the rich are rich becaused they paid off the politicans to make them that way.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/10/business/the-unemployed-somehow-became-invisible.html?pagewanted=all
this really is a problem
So what it's their money in the first place. Cut out the jealousy.
Only because the law says it is, if we change the law then it's not theirs anymore, isn't that cool?
Yeah, real cool. Then why will those peeople continue to work and produce?
Get a clue who owns you!
Since when was sitting on your ass collecting dividends producing?
Who is sitting? This really comes down to class envy.
by his own statement Romney did nothing to earn his 40 million over the past two years, for one whoes sitting, class envy, hell this is about a bunch of silver spoons stealling our country
This country was founded on individual liberty not on socialistic ideals so sorry, you can move to Cuba or France if you want that. Romney, of all people, is not the one sitting around. He has a very favorable background of achievement so if he is the one you are complaining about, you are really off base.
Let's see three degrees (including 2 advanced) CEO of a major firm, and governor of a State. Yeah, I guess you are right, he has done nothing!!!
over the past two years he doesn't even know how the money is invested let alone guiding it in any way, he sits back and makes money off other people labor, I think we will be OK if he decides to stop doing that because his taxes go to 90% after the first million
You are confusing his investment portfolio and his occupation. They are two different things.
Unfortunately, we won't be okay since we can't get the economy growing again with Robin Hood in the White House. Get use to 8% unemployment.
his money comes from the invesrmest, living off other people work, he had no profession without his sliver spoon he would living in box somewhere.
Unless we get that tax rate back to 90% that will get us to elow 4% like back in the fifties.
He more than most doesn't have to apologize for anything. You don't get two advanced degrees by having a silver spoon in your mouth. He earned his money by leading a company successfully.
You want tax rates back to the fifties, then we should also bring spending back to those rates also.
How does cutting spending keep people from getting so rich they can buy the government?
I hate to tell you this but the rich always get the education, you're right it should not be that way, that's way we get our butts kicked around the world, the best education should go to the best students, not the ones with the riches daddies, and yeah back when Romney did work he made money by putting people out of work not by creating jobs, when you run a company you should have to pay a fine every time you fire or cause someone be fired, If Romney had to pay a thousand for every job he costs somebody he'd be borke.
There is no economics involved in saying you want to go back to the 50's. You are the one that brought that up.
Romney did not pass through Harvard with 2 degrees because he was rich. He was not a CEO because he was rich. He was not the head of the Salt Lake City Olympics because he was rich.
Have you ever run a company or managed a P&L. Have you ever had people's lives on the line due to losses, because if you had you would not be making such cavalier statements about job losses.
Damn right I am, back to the 50's when we were all in it together great growth low unemployment, sure they want us to forget that you can have those things with a 90% tax rate we don't have to coddle the rich.
Fact is the top 1.4 million taxpayers have been getting a free ride on the backs of everyone else, first we should make them pay the bill they ran up and we should levy taxes that cover what we spend. And we should require employers to pay enough to cover the cost of providing labor without the taxpayer having to kick in some.
You want the 50's then lets do it. Let's drop social security and welfare spending and overall government spending back to those levels. Let's go big talker with your curse words, let's do it.
Fact is that 47% of the populationa pays no Federal income tax at all. The fact is you want a free ride without working. The fact is that your form of socialistic form of government has been tried and hasn'tr work.
So come on big talker, throw an invective my way and show me what country has worked where you get everything for free. Come on.!!!
When was it tried? and we've had Social Security since the 30's so you are either so misinformed none should listen, or a lair either way....
When was government controlled economics tried? Pick any Eastern European country
Social Security is a far cry from what it was in 50's and what it wa intended to do by Roosevelt. His famous words was that he didn't want anybody on the dole and he wanted people to work for their coverage.