Wealth inequality in America

Bamabuzzard

FB Moderator
Staff member
Aug 15, 2004
30,570
18,354
237
48
Where ever there's BBQ, Bourbon & Football
No one is suggesting wealth should be equal, but if we choose to ignore history and continue in a system where the wealthiest continue to gain the most benefits due to an unequal playing field (regarding taxation), we're doomed to repeat said history.

Tax reform is a must.

I agree. I know many of us are beating a dead horse but a consumption tax collected at the time of purchase(s) is the quickest and most immediate way to "level the playing field". No loopholes to deal with, one set rate that shows no biases towards economic status, color or political parties.
 

crimsonaudio

Administrator
Staff member
Sep 9, 2002
63,414
67,193
462
crimsonaudio.net
How are the wealthy getting the most benefit when they are paying nearly ALL the taxes? I would be interested to see this same graph showing the amount of taxes paid. Poor people arent paying any taxes. and government assistance isnt going to make people any less poor.
The overall amount isn't the point, it's the percentage of income. Way too many loopholes in the current tax laws, and generally the wealthier are those who have the discretionary income to take advantage of all of them.
 

crimsonaudio

Administrator
Staff member
Sep 9, 2002
63,414
67,193
462
crimsonaudio.net
I agree. I know many of us are beating a dead horse but a consumption tax collected at the time of purchase(s) is the quickest and most immediate way to "level the playing field". No loopholes to deal with, one set rate that shows no biases towards economic status, color or political parties.
Yah, but imagine the unemployment numbers when the IRS was whittled down to about 1% of it's current staff!
 

Bamabuzzard

FB Moderator
Staff member
Aug 15, 2004
30,570
18,354
237
48
Where ever there's BBQ, Bourbon & Football
The overall amount isn't the point, it's the percentage of income. Way too many loopholes in the current tax laws, and generally the wealthier are those who have the discretionary income to take advantage of all of them.
Are you a proponent of a consumption tax? I have no idea how much the upper rich spend on average but just blindly throwing a number out there. If one of the upper 1% spent $35,000,000 that person would pay $7,000,000 in taxes (assuming a 20% rate). IMO, paying that much in taxes is plenty for one person to pay, regardless of their income.
 

Bamabuzzard

FB Moderator
Staff member
Aug 15, 2004
30,570
18,354
237
48
Where ever there's BBQ, Bourbon & Football
Yah, but imagine the unemployment numbers when the IRS was whittled down to about 1% of it's current staff!
I guess my argument against that would be if there is no perfect system. If we're looking for a system where everybody lives happily ever after then we're out of luck. As long as we keep the element of human judgement involved in the taxation system we're only going to get one screwed up biased system after another.
 

jthomas666

Hall of Fame
Aug 14, 2002
22,587
9,642
287
60
Birmingham & Warner Robins
I might add that layers of financial, safety, social, and other regulations serve the same purpose as layers of tax code in this case - only the larger entities can keep up. Smaller businesses are either forced out of business by myriad, complex requirements or prevented from growing into larger markets to compete with established giants, which is why large corporations readily collude with governmental bureaucracies. Simplifying the tax code isn't a bad idea, but I believe that it has to be viewed as only one part of the whole regulatory system.

GM and Ford may carp a little about CAFE standards, but they realize that this sort of thing is what keeps the Preston Tuckers of the world from getting on the same playing field. Ask a medical doctor with a private practice about the benefits of HIPAA. Regulations occasionally produce positive results, but they always stifle new competition by raising the entry bar. There is a point at which a society can be overregulated. Going beyond that point stifles creativity, profitability, the economy, and individual will. I believe we are now miles past that point.
I like the post; at the same time, I think the problem a combination of overregulation and bad/ineffective regulation--in many cases, regulations that were appropriate when they were implemented, but that have not been updated for the changing world.
 

crimsonaudio

Administrator
Staff member
Sep 9, 2002
63,414
67,193
462
crimsonaudio.net
Are you a proponent of a consumption tax? I have no idea how much the upper rich spend on average but just blindly throwing a number out there. If one of the upper 1% spent $35,000,000 that person would pay $7,000,000 in taxes (assuming a 20% rate). IMO, paying that much in taxes is plenty for one person to pay, regardless of their income.
Yah, I think a consumption tax is a great idea, though 20% is probably way too much. We'd need to look at overall annual spending and figure out a revenue stream similar to what we have not, with a few logical exclusions (food, for example).

I guess my argument against that would be if there is no perfect system. If we're looking for a system where everybody lives happily ever after then we're out of luck. As long as we keep the element of human judgement involved in the taxation system we're only going to get one screwed up biased system after another.
Yah, I was joking, honestly. I doubt most folks would have any sleepless nights if the IRS laid off 99% of its work force today.
 

Bamabuzzard

FB Moderator
Staff member
Aug 15, 2004
30,570
18,354
237
48
Where ever there's BBQ, Bourbon & Football
Yah, I think a consumption tax is a great idea, though 20% is probably way too much. We'd need to look at overall annual spending and figure out a revenue stream similar to what we have not, with a few logical exclusions (food, for example).
I'd be good with 10%. I mean, really, that's all the Lord required under the old covenant. If 10% is good enough for the Lord it should be good enough for Uncle Sam, don't you think?! :eek:
 
Last edited:

BamaPokerplayer

All-American
Oct 10, 2004
3,112
149
82
Are you a proponent of a consumption tax? I have no idea how much the upper rich spend on average but just blindly throwing a number out there. If one of the upper 1% spent $35,000,000 that person would pay $7,000,000 in taxes (assuming a 20% rate). IMO, paying that much in taxes is plenty for one person to pay, regardless of their income.

20% is pretty close to the number that has been thrown around, of course that 20% would be all the taxes someone pays, no income, s.s. Etc...
 

JPT4Bama

Hall of Fame
Aug 21, 2006
5,793
0
0
Hoover, AL
The democrats filibuster-proof majority is one of the weaker of right wing canards. It has been explained extensively.

And even if the super majority existed in practice, and not just in theory, it's irrelevant. What Obama did or did not do isn't the issue. The issue is whether or not something should be done about the wealth inequality.
This is a beautiful concept. Sort of like "what can be done about bringing back Unicorns"?

In this country, poor should be a transitional condition. It was for me and like many others I pulled myself out of it. There can never be absolute financial equality anymore than complete world peace.
 

Bama Reb

Suspended
Nov 2, 2005
14,446
0
0
On the lake and in the woods, AL
This is a beautiful concept. Sort of like "what can be done about bringing back Unicorns"?

In this country, poor should be a transitional condition. It was for me and like many others I pulled myself out of it. There can never be absolute financial equality anymore than complete world peace.
I have a relative who put himself in a bad position due to a substance abuse issue. He lost his wife, his job, his home. It was just lucky that they had no children between them and that his only child, a daughter by a previous marriage, had already married and moved out of their home.
So the guy didn't think it was worth his while to save those things until he had already lost everything he had. He became homeless, and was down to sleeping out in the woods or wherever else he could make a bed for the night. One day he woke up and decided it was time for him to reverse his direction and set his life straight. He contacted family members who initially weren't willing to take a chance with him. Eventually though, we all banded together and gave him a place to stay and an opportunity to turn his life around. At the present he is clean and dry and on his way to turning his life around. Now we didn't pull him out of the hole he dug. We only 'threw him a rope', but he's having to pull himself out of that deep dark hole.
So it is with the poor. Giving them money and other material objects doesn't do them any good if they are not taught the value of work as a vehicle towards success.
Make them work for what they earn and they will develop a habit of working for those things they most value in life.
 
Last edited:

BradtheImpaler

All-American
Nov 16, 2010
2,001
0
0
Sugar Hill, GA
I have a relative who put himself in a bad position due to a substance abuse issue. He lost his wife, his job, his home. It was just lucky that they had no children between them and that his only child, a daughter by a previous marriage, had already married and moved out of their home.
So the guy didn't think it was worth his while to save those things until he had already lost everything he had. He became homeless, and was down to sleeping out in the woods or wherever else he could make a bed for the night. One day he woke up and decided it was time for him to reverse his direction and set his life straight. He contacted family members who initially weren't willing to take a chance with him. Eventually though, we all banded together and gave him a place to stay and an opportunity to turn his life around. At the present he is clean and dry and on his way to turning his life around. Now we didn't pull him out of the hole he dug. We only 'threw him a rope', but he's having to pull himself out of that deep dark hole.
So it is with the poor. Giving them money and other material objects doesn't do them any good if they are not taught the value of work as a vehicle towards success.
Make them work for what they earn and they will develop a habit of working for those things they most value in life.
How can votes be bought with that sort of rhetoric? ;)

The consumption tax... or Fair Tax... is the way to go in my opinion. However, there can't be any items that are exempt. I realize that this sounds like a burden on the poor, but IIRC there was a "prebate" built into the system to cover the tax on those items that should be exempted (food, prescriptions, etc.) because any exemptions would simply lead us to where we are now; powerful industry lobbyists dictating tax policy.
 

Tide1986

Suspended
Nov 22, 2008
15,670
2
0
Birmingham, AL
20% is pretty close to the number that has been thrown around, of course that 20% would be all the taxes someone pays, no income, s.s. Etc...

I assume people would still pay state taxes..imagine a 30% total upcharge on your grocery bill.

While I like the idea of a consumption tax, I'm not naïve enough to believe all of the other federal taxes would go away -- the consumption tax will simply become another means to try to generate revenues to support an ever-bloating federal government in my opinion. The only way I'll ever support a consumption tax is if its existence is conditioned upon full repeal of the 16th amendment including language that explicitly makes taxes based on income unconstitutional.
 
Last edited:

chanson78

All-American
Nov 1, 2005
2,926
1,795
187
47
Huntsville, AL
How are the wealthy getting the most benefit when they are paying nearly ALL the taxes? I would be interested to see this same graph showing the amount of taxes paid. Poor people arent paying any taxes. and government assistance isnt going to make people any less poor.
If anyone who buys and sells stocks for a living pays less percentage wise in income taxes than I do is when I have to call BS. It isn't that they pay so much in taxes, its that I, a middle class individual, paid more in taxes by percentage of my income than those jerk face investment bankers and corporate buttheads.

That is when it becomes ridiculous. The current tax code is progressive. It used to be only progressive to favor the poor, but with carried interest, and shell corporations the tax code is now progressive at both ends. It's the middle class that is getting screwed.
 

Tide1986

Suspended
Nov 22, 2008
15,670
2
0
Birmingham, AL
If anyone who buys and sells stocks for a living pays less percentage wise in income taxes than I do is when I have to call BS. It isn't that they pay so much in taxes, its that I, a middle class individual, paid more in taxes by percentage of my income than those jerk face investment bankers and corporate buttheads.

That is when it becomes ridiculous. The current tax code is progressive. It used to be only progressive to favor the poor, but with carried interest, and shell corporations the tax code is now progressive at both ends. It's the middle class that is getting screwed.
Where do middle class jobs generally come from?
 

Tide1986

Suspended
Nov 22, 2008
15,670
2
0
Birmingham, AL
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I am beginning to think that you believe the economy only exists due to people trading stocks and making exorbitant sums of money directing companies.
How would you suggest segregating these people from other "wealthy" people?

And you think these types of "wealthy" people have nothing to do with job creation?
 

New Posts

Latest threads

TideFans.shop : 2024 Madness!

TideFans.shop - Get YOUR Bama Gear HERE!”></a>
<br />

<!--/ END TideFans.shop & item link \-->
<p style= Purchases made through our TideFans.shop and Amazon.com links may result in a commission being paid to TideFans.