The Rich Paying Fair Share?

[Tero]

Rich is more than $200 000 a year. Almost nobody's work is worth more than 500 000. So tax 100% above that or allow them to invest in a US based business. UK for you UKers.

[Coito ergo sum]

It's only because we agree to a low salary that they are rich. We should just tax 80%. Boy are we stupid.

From what income bracket up?

What do you think?

and don't forget to tax ALL income made in the country, regardless of where the person is officially domiciliated.

The US does that. Actually, the rule in the US is that an American citizen is taxed on worldwide income, and can only be entitled to a set-off if income taxes are paid to another taxing authority. That's the technical rule, anyway.

[Coito ergo sum]

Well, I hate implicit. I want to know the actual figures.

Well, the top 5% pay more than 50% of all the income taxes,

while earning 1/3 of all the income

. Is that their fair share? If not, what would be?

and how much of the total income are they getting? maybe they ough to pay 97% of income tax. Just because they can afford it.

You tell me. What do you think.

[Svartalf]

It's only because we agree to a low salary that they are rich. We should just tax 80%. Boy are we stupid.

From what income bracket up?

What do you think?

and don't forget to tax ALL income made in the country, regardless of where the person is officially domiciliated.

The US does that. Actually, the rule in the US is that an American citizen is taxed on worldwide income, and can only be entitled to a set-off if income taxes are paid to another taxing authority. That's the technical rule, anyway.

Any income, whatever the source, above $200.000 ought to be taxed 80%

[Coito ergo sum]

[Seth]

It's only because we agree to a low salary that they are rich. We should just tax 80%. Boy are we stupid.

From what income bracket up?

What do you think?

and don't forget to tax ALL income made in the country, regardless of where the person is officially domiciliated.

The US does that. Actually, the rule in the US is that an American citizen is taxed on worldwide income, and can only be entitled to a set-off if income taxes are paid to another taxing authority. That's the technical rule, anyway.

Any income, whatever the source, above $200.000 ought to be taxed 80%

Why?

[PsychoSerenity]

Capitalism is a fundamentally unfair system. The idea that people who happen to have done exceedingly well out of it can then complain:

"why are we being punished, why do we have to pay so much, it's not fair"

- is fucking stupid. After tax they are still getting vastly more than the majority below them.

If you want genuinely fair tax rates, then Adam Carolla would be paying tax such that his net earnings were not significantly above that of ONE schoolteacher, - unless you want to argue that the effort he puts in, or his contribution to society, are just worth so many times more than what anyone else could give, or perhaps that due to some wonderful aspect inherent to his character he just naturally deserves more than everyone else.

FFS if you want to argue that the wealthiest people in a capitalist society should pay less tax on the basis of fairness, fuck yourself up the arse with a dictionary until you learn what the word 'fair' means.

[Seth]

Capitalism is a fundamentally unfair system.

No it's not, it's the fairest and best economic system that can possibly exist because it rewards innovation and hard work and penalizes sloth, idleness and non-productivity.

The idea that people who happen to have done exceedingly well out of it can then complain:

"why are we being punished, why do we have to pay so much, it's not fair"

- is fucking stupid. After tax they are still getting vastly more than the majority below them.

So what? Those below them don't deserve to have more because they choose not to work hard and risk their economic security in order to profit from the opportunity that capitalism provides ANYONE who has sufficient drive and work ethic.

If you want genuinely fair tax rates, then Adam Carolla would be paying tax such that his net earnings were not significantly above that of ONE schoolteacher, - unless you want to argue that the effort he puts in, or his contribution to society, are just worth so many times more than what anyone else could give, or perhaps that due to some wonderful aspect inherent to his character he just naturally deserves more than everyone else.

Socialist greed-based bilge. He makes what he does because people choose to pay him that much for his services. He offers a product that people want and he charges what the market will bear, and he's fully entitled to enjoy the fruits of his labor however he pleases. Socialist fucks don't deserve a dime of his money because they haven't worked for it and have nothing to contribute to the economy anyway. They are social leeches who need to be left to either starve in the gutter or get off their lazy asses and exploit the capitalist system to make something of and for themselves, rather than trying to steal it from the productive class.

FFS if you want to argue that the wealthiest people in a capitalist society should pay less tax on the basis of fairness, fuck yourself up the arse with a dictionary until you learn what the word 'fair' means.

"Fair" in socialism means "I get what I want no matter who has to labor to give it to me." "Fair" in any rational system means "I get what I work for and I get to keep it and not be forced to give it to fuckwit socialist layabouts who want to leech off my productivity and innovation."

[Horwood Beer-Master]

...is fucking stupid. After tax they are still getting vastly more than the majority below them...

Exactly.

These people claim that the amount of tax they have to pay shows they are unappreciated for their efforts and contributions (whatever the hell those may be), but if they're measuring "appreciation" in monetary terms then even after tax they are massively more "appreciated" then all those "scrounging" nurses and teachers - which is exactly the way they supposedly want it. So what the fuck are they complaining about?

[Seth]

...is fucking stupid. After tax they are still getting vastly more than the majority below them...

Exactly.

These people claim that the amount of tax they have to pay shows they are unappreciated for their efforts and contributions (whatever the hell those may be), but if they're measuring "appreciation" in monetary terms then even after tax they are massively more "appreciated" then all those "scrounging" nurses and teachers - which is exactly the way they supposedly want it. So what the fuck are they complaining about?

They are complaining about having the fruits of their labor stolen from them to serve the needs of useless, dependent class fuckwads who contribute nothing to the economy but demand largess from the government because they think someone owes them a living.

[Coito ergo sum]

Capitalism is a fundamentally unfair system. The idea that people who happen to have done exceedingly well out of it can then complain:

"why are we being punished, why do we have to pay so much, it's not fair"

I would submit that socialism is a fundamentally unfair system since it posits that one ought not be able to benefit by working harder than someone else.

- is fucking stupid. After tax they are still getting vastly more than the majority below them.

Nobody here is complaining about unfairness, except those who say that "the rich" are not paying their fair share. All I'm asking in the OP is -- if you think it's unfair, what would be fair.

The answer -- people arbitrarily choose a number they can't conceivably see themselves making, and say that such persons' income should be, essentially, confiscated.

If you want genuinely fair tax rates, then Adam Carolla would be paying tax such that his net earnings were not significantly above that of ONE schoolteacher,

Why and how in the world would that be fair?

- unless you want to argue that the effort he puts in, or his contribution to society, are just worth so many times more than what anyone else could give, or perhaps that due to some wonderful aspect inherent to his character he just naturally deserves more than everyone else.

He may work harder, or he may work smarter. Either way, he engaged in voluntary interactions with other people, who paid him for his time and production. It's not really about whether you, I or anyone else thinks he's "worth" more or less than anyone else.

FFS if you want to argue that the wealthiest people in a capitalist society should pay less tax on the basis of fairness, fuck yourself up the arse with a dictionary until you learn what the word 'fair' means.

I never said they should pay less. I just asked if the top 5% paying more than 50% of the taxes was enough, or if it needed to be more to be "fair."

And, nice invective. What makes you so upset about this? That you don't know what you're talking about?

[Coito ergo sum]

...is fucking stupid. After tax they are still getting vastly more than the majority below them...

Exactly.

These people claim that the amount of tax they have to pay shows they are unappreciated for their efforts and contributions (whatever the hell those may be), but if they're measuring "appreciation" in monetary terms then even after tax they are massively more "appreciated" then all those "scrounging" nurses and teachers - which is exactly the way they supposedly want it. So what the fuck are they complaining about?

They aren't worried about whether anyone "appreciates" them. They're worried about earning money and/or taking risks with their capital, and having the proceeds taken away at confiscatory rates.

[Horwood Beer-Master]

...is fucking stupid. After tax they are still getting vastly more than the majority below them...

Exactly.

These people claim that the amount of tax they have to pay shows they are unappreciated for their efforts and contributions (whatever the hell those may be), but if they're measuring "appreciation" in monetary terms then even after tax they are massively more "appreciated" then all those "scrounging" nurses and teachers - which is exactly the way they supposedly want it. So what the fuck are they complaining about?

They are complaining about having the fruits of their labor stolen from them to serve the needs of useless, dependent class fuckwads who contribute nothing to the economy but demand largess from the government because they think someone owes them a living.

If everyone you consider "dependent" on the super-rich were to disappear tomorrow, you'd learn a fairly hard sharp lesson on who's really the "dependent" ones...

[Horwood Beer-Master]

...is fucking stupid. After tax they are still getting vastly more than the majority below them...

Exactly.

These people claim that the amount of tax they have to pay shows they are unappreciated for their efforts and contributions (whatever the hell those may be), but if they're measuring "appreciation" in monetary terms then even after tax they are massively more "appreciated" then all those "scrounging" nurses and teachers - which is exactly the way they supposedly want it. So what the fuck are they complaining about?

They aren't worried about whether anyone "appreciates" them. They're worried about earning money and/or taking risks with their capital, and having the proceeds taken away at confiscatory rates.

The point is, they're clearly still reaping in (far) more than enough proceeds to make it (highly) worth their while to continue doing what they're doing regardless of taxation.

And yet taxation "worries" them? What a bunch of self-absorbed pricks.

[Coito ergo sum]

...is fucking stupid. After tax they are still getting vastly more than the majority below them...

Exactly.

These people claim that the amount of tax they have to pay shows they are unappreciated for their efforts and contributions (whatever the hell those may be), but if they're measuring "appreciation" in monetary terms then even after tax they are massively more "appreciated" then all those "scrounging" nurses and teachers - which is exactly the way they supposedly want it. So what the fuck are they complaining about?

They are complaining about having the fruits of their labor stolen from them to serve the needs of useless, dependent class fuckwads who contribute nothing to the economy but demand largess from the government because they think someone owes them a living.

If everyone you consider "dependent" on the super-rich were to disappear tomorrow, you'd learn a fairly hard sharp lesson on who's really the "dependent" ones...

I never called anyone dependent.