Posted by gomiami1972 on 5/27/2018 10:34:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 5/27/2018 10:27:00 PM (view original):

Posted by gomiami1972 on 5/27/2018 10:06:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 5/27/2018 9:59:00 PM (view original):

Posted by gomiami1972 on 5/27/2018 9:56:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 5/27/2018 9:42:00 PM (view original):

Posted by gomiami1972 on 5/27/2018 6:15:00 PM (view original):
Sorry, bad_luck, I wasn't ignoring you. By creating a hard cap on income, you create a hard cap on motivation to achieve (for most.) We live in a money economy. Only a saint would continue to reach upward once they reach that $10M level.

Most of us are not saints. What you propose is a great utopian ideal. In reality, it would breed retardation and mediocrity.

It doesn’t create a cap on motivation. $10m is an unbelievably large amount of money. Anyone starting a business would be happy to personally make $10m once, let alone more than $10m annually.

In reality, it would create an incentive to reinvest. We know, for a fact, that cutting upper income tax rates doesn’t encourage owners to reinvest the money back into the business.

But if, for example, you’re a business owner and you project $12m in personal income for a year, you have a choice. You can hang on to the additional $20k and give an extra $1.98m to the feds or you can put that entire $2m back into the company—pay your employees more, buy new equipment, etc. The tax caps the amount large shareholders can extract from the business.

No, it is not...depending on the state you live in.

Besides, a Bachelor degree will cost $10M in about a generation or so.

There are 330 million people in the US. ~18k file federal taxes with a TAXABLE income over $10m. It’s incredibly rare.

Does someone else want to take a shot? I can't seem to break through.

Strip those 18K of the monetary incentive to amass wealth and a nice chunk of our 330 million countrymen will be dying for a job.

Walk me through it. Someone owns a business and they are personally making tens of millions of dollars in income every year. The tax rates change and now they are essentially capped at $10m taxable (after deductions). Do they close the business?

It is illogical to assume that a society that taxes 99% of all personal income above $X would not also have a similar corporate tax code. There goes your ability and motivation to reinvest.

It is illogical to assume that a society that taxes 99% of all personal income at the federal level above $X would not also have a similar state tax code. There goes your ability and motivation to reinvest.

I could list more but I have a busy Memorial Day tomorrow.

Nope. You didn’t answer the question. You changed my premise and then said it won’t work. Corporate and state rates aren’t tied to personal rates.

Posted by strikeout26 on 5/27/2018 10:33:00 PM (view original):
Answer me this, what gives the government the right to take that much of any individuals money?

The constitution.

The constitution allows for taxation. The constitution also protects personal property. I'll ask again, what gives the government the right to take that much of ones money? Let me add a follow up question. Why do you believe they should have that right.

Posted by gomiami1972 on 5/27/2018 10:41:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 5/27/2018 10:35:00 PM (view original):

Posted by gomiami1972 on 5/27/2018 10:34:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 5/27/2018 10:27:00 PM (view original):

Posted by gomiami1972 on 5/27/2018 10:06:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 5/27/2018 9:59:00 PM (view original):

Posted by gomiami1972 on 5/27/2018 9:56:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 5/27/2018 9:42:00 PM (view original):

Posted by gomiami1972 on 5/27/2018 6:15:00 PM (view original):
Sorry, bad_luck, I wasn't ignoring you. By creating a hard cap on income, you create a hard cap on motivation to achieve (for most.) We live in a money economy. Only a saint would continue to reach upward once they reach that $10M level.

Most of us are not saints. What you propose is a great utopian ideal. In reality, it would breed retardation and mediocrity.

It doesn’t create a cap on motivation. $10m is an unbelievably large amount of money. Anyone starting a business would be happy to personally make $10m once, let alone more than $10m annually.

In reality, it would create an incentive to reinvest. We know, for a fact, that cutting upper income tax rates doesn’t encourage owners to reinvest the money back into the business.

But if, for example, you’re a business owner and you project $12m in personal income for a year, you have a choice. You can hang on to the additional $20k and give an extra $1.98m to the feds or you can put that entire $2m back into the company—pay your employees more, buy new equipment, etc. The tax caps the amount large shareholders can extract from the business.

No, it is not...depending on the state you live in.

Besides, a Bachelor degree will cost $10M in about a generation or so.

There are 330 million people in the US. ~18k file federal taxes with a TAXABLE income over $10m. It’s incredibly rare.

Does someone else want to take a shot? I can't seem to break through.

Strip those 18K of the monetary incentive to amass wealth and a nice chunk of our 330 million countrymen will be dying for a job.

Walk me through it. Someone owns a business and they are personally making tens of millions of dollars in income every year. The tax rates change and now they are essentially capped at $10m taxable (after deductions). Do they close the business?

It is illogical to assume that a society that taxes 99% of all personal income above $X would not also have a similar corporate tax code. There goes your ability and motivation to reinvest.

It is illogical to assume that a society that taxes 99% of all personal income at the federal level above $X would not also have a similar state tax code. There goes your ability and motivation to reinvest.

I could list more but I have a busy Memorial Day tomorrow.

Nope. You didn’t answer the question. You changed my premise and then said it won’t work. Corporate and state rates aren’t tied to personal rates.

Stop it. My answer requires a bit of abstract thinking, nothing more.

You aren’t arguing against my point. You’re saying my idea won’t work because “other things that aren’t part of it.”

Posted by strikeout26 on 5/27/2018 10:38:00 PM (view original):
The constitution allows for taxation. The constitution also protects personal property. I'll ask again, what gives the government the right to take that much of ones money? Let me add a follow up question. Why do you believe they should have that right.

The constitution allows for taxation. Full stop.

We all agree the amount can’t be 0% or 100%. Everything in between is a negotiation.

Posted by gomiami1972 on 5/27/2018 9:31:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 5/27/2018 9:21:00 PM (view original):
Glad to have you on board, gomiami. It's always nice to have some logical thinking for a change.

Appreciate it. I could probably come up with a set of questions that would catapult Syria to the #1 spot. All data is easily manipulated, especially when circular reasoning is employed from the get-go.

OK, so what questions would you ask to gather a true happiness index?

Posted by strikeout26 on 5/27/2018 9:33:00 PM (view original):
How do you know they're happier? Based on this one report? If they are happier, why are people begging to move to the US?

Who is begging to move to the US? The only Swedish person I know that recently moved to the USA was Zlatan Ibrahimovic and it was against his will.

Posted by gomiami1972 on 5/27/2018 9:34:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 5/27/2018 9:31:00 PM (view original):

Posted by gomiami1972 on 5/27/2018 9:17:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 5/27/2018 8:57:00 PM (view original):
I will actually answer it for Sweden myself. They rank 9th on the World Happiness Index. Denmark, Finland, Norway at 1 2 3. All are similar to Sweden in tax structure. The USA is 18th.

That's a nice try but the methodology for the "happiness" report is suspect. The UN is promoting a particular viewpoint on what they consider happiness to be. Social support? Perceived corruption (as opposed to actual corruption?) Come on...

Sure, but it is still a better measure than nothing, right? People in Finland are 'happier' than in the USA or in the Congo.

First of all, hi. Nice talking to you.

Yes, people in Finland respond more positively to a socialist-leaning survey because Finland is a more socialist-leaning nation. If that is the argument, I agree completely.

If the Happiness Report is supposed to be objective and socio-politically neutral, then no.

Hi. :)

Socialists in a social democracy are happier, we agree. I like a lot of what Finland does.

Posted by strikeout26 on 5/27/2018 10:10:00 PM (view original):
You're not going to be able to break through. There are few on here that are so politically extreme that it's not worth discussing politics with them. You will figure out who they are. Actually, i'm sure you are already figuring it out.

Far-left:
Dino
BL
Bracco

Left:
tang
Taint
Laramiebob

Moderate:
Wylie
miami

Right:
CCCP
Strikeout
All3

Far-right:
Moy
Dougout

Posted by strikeout26 on 5/27/2018 10:33:00 PM (view original):
Answer me this, what gives the government the right to take that much of any individuals money?

I don't support 99%, but a certain amount must be taken to provide for social programs that help everyone.

But you could also look at this from a purely religious standpoint, which you and I seem to do a lot. Let's see what the bible has to say.

Leviticus 25:35-37
Deuteronomy 15:7-8
Psalm 41:1-3
Mark 10:23-25
Mark 12:41-44

Food for thought.