Sidebar

Income Inequality

CajunCrimson

CajunCrimson

Moderator (FB,BB) and Vinyl Enthusiast
Staff member
Mar 13, 2001
26,777
21,564
337
Breaux Bridge, La
CharminTide said:
It’s not the same government...
Click to expand...
Well -- let me rephrase. The people elected new representation -- in the same government. The new representation planned on eliminating the program. So - the people ultimately decided against it.

I think I've reached a point where we should consider having three different income tax rates:

1. Registered Republicans
2. Registered Democrats
3. Everyone else

That way everyone can pay what they want -- based on their party affiliation.
 
Tidewater

Tidewater

Hall of Fame
Mar 15, 2003
22,463
13,297
287
Hooterville, Vir.
CharminTide said:
It’s not the same government...
Click to expand...
This may be a difference of definitions.
In a parliamentary system, a "government" is a party (or coalition) that forms a "government."
In the U.S. system, the same "government" exists now as in 1789. We just gradually change out Representatives, Senators, Presidents and judges.
Just my PoliSci two cents.
 
CharminTide

CharminTide

Hall of Fame
Oct 23, 2005
7,319
2,032
187
This is extremely interesting.

Accountable Capitalism Act

Elizabeth Warren has a big idea that challenges how the Democratic Party thinks about solving the problem of inequality.

Instead of advocating for expensive new social programs like free college or health care, she’s introducing a bill Wednesday, the Accountable Capitalism Act, that would redistribute trillions of dollars from rich executives and shareholders to the middle class — without costing a dime.

Warren hopes this will spur a return to greater corporate responsibility, and bring back some other aspects of the more egalitarian era of American capitalism post-World War II — more business investment, more meaningful career ladders for workers, more financial stability, and higher pay.
Click to expand...
In concrete terms, this law would require corporations with revenue over $1 billion to:
- allow their workers to elect 40 percent of the membership of their board of directors.
- forbid executives from selling stock they receive as compensation for at least five years after receipt, and at least three years after a share buyback.
- authorize corporate political activity by both 75 percent of shareholders and 75 percent of board members (many of whom would be worker representatives).
 
Tidewater

Tidewater

Hall of Fame
Mar 15, 2003
22,463
13,297
287
Hooterville, Vir.
CharminTide said:
This is extremely interesting.

Accountable Capitalism Act



In concrete terms, this law would require corporations with revenue over $1 billion to:
- allow their workers to elect 40 percent of the membership of their board of directors.
- forbid executives from selling stock they receive as compensation for at least five years after receipt, and at least three years after a share buyback.
- authorize corporate political activity by both 75 percent of shareholders and 75 percent of board members (many of whom would be worker representatives).
Click to expand...
The highest marginal tax rate in U.S. history was...100%. (FDR, by executive order, in 1942).
 
U

UAH

All-American
Nov 27, 2017
3,609
4,160
187
CharminTide said:
Neither the explainer nor Warren's proposal mentions the marginal tax rate. Or any tax policy.
Click to expand...
In terms of taxes there is one absolute ... we can not spend over $700 Bil. a year on defense and $50 Bil annually in Afghanistan and not have those who benefit most from those expenditures not pay taxes.

For those who will yell about entitlements... health care and social security are imminently fixable. All that is required is to conclude that government exists for a purpose other than enriching the one percent.
 
R

RollTARDIS

Scout Team
Nov 22, 2017
160
0
0
UAH said:
In terms of taxes there is one absolute ... we can not spend over $700 Bil. a year on defense and $50 Bil annually in Afghanistan and not have those who benefit most from those expenditures not pay taxes.

For those who will yell about entitlements... health care and social security are imminently fixable. All that is required is to conclude that government exists for a purpose other than enriching the one percent.
Click to expand...
My current finance book says that the main goal of a corporation is to maximize shareholder wealth. I think that’s how the 1% sees the government. They paid for a result and they are getting it, the rest of us be damned.
 
Tidewater

Tidewater

Hall of Fame
Mar 15, 2003
22,463
13,297
287
Hooterville, Vir.
CharminTide said:
Neither the explainer nor Warren's proposal mentions the marginal tax rate. Or any tax policy.
Click to expand...
Then I'm not sure why it was posted in the income inequality thread. Maybe a new thread?
I posted the historical fact (which I looked up in the library at the University of Alabama because t sounded too outlandish).
My point was that Congress could adopt any marginal tax rate it wanted to reduce income inequality, and it would still be no more than FDR's marginal rate.
 
RhodeIslandRed

RhodeIslandRed

All-SEC
Dec 9, 2005
1,517
9
62
Given that the bulk of the wealth disparity has occurred over the last 10 years, I’m surprised no one has brought up Quantitative Easing of the Bernanke years and the continued strong dollar phenomena with global trade.
 
92tide

92tide

TideFans Legend
May 9, 2000
58,265
45,054
287
54
East Point, Ga, USA
a good piece on this by jay bookman at the ajc

Opinion: Four decades of pay stagnation

I’m a strong supporter of capitalism -- no economic system can even challenge its capacity at producing a broad-based prosperity. That said, it also has its blind spots and excesses. It is built on the assumption that the value of everything can be expressed in dollars and cents, and human life is a bit more complex than that.

For example, capitalism puts no value on the lives and dignity of those whose productivity has declined as a result of age, and as a result we have had to implement programs such as Social Security and Medicare. Left to its own devices, capitalism treats workers as units of production to be maximized, discarded when worn out and then replaced, which is why we have 40-hour work weeks, child-labor laws, unemployment insurance and workers’ comp programs. And capitalism has yet to produce a model to provide universal access to health care, which is increasingly and properly viewed as a human right.

All of those programs have been attacked by opponents as socialism, when in fact they are crucial to maintaining public support for capitalism. Many have their origins in the New Deal under Franklin Roosevelt, as part of his effort during the Great Depression to save capitalism from its own worst instincts. As FDR put it at the time, “One of my principal tasks is to prevent bankers and businessmen from committing suicide”by opposing such programs
Click to expand...
 
Tidewater

Tidewater

Hall of Fame
Mar 15, 2003
22,463
13,297
287
Hooterville, Vir.
If the Democrats would raise taxes and hold the line on Federal spending, they would get my vote and my gratitude. (We need a combination of $1.3 trillion in tax increases/spending cuts for the next 40 years to save the country from disaster.)

One party wants to spend like drunken sailors.
The other wants to cut taxes but not reduce spending.

My goodness, if the Democrats cannot appear like adults given the current slate of Republicans, when will they?
Increasing taxes and holding the line on federal spending may help income inequality (see, Charmin, the link to the subject of the thread?) and, if the tax increases are big enough, may help reduce the debt as well.
 
Aledinho

Aledinho

All-SEC
Feb 22, 2007
1,377
3
57
Tidewater said:
If the Democrats would raise taxes and hold the line on Federal spending, they would get my vote and my gratitude. (We need a combination of $1.3 trillion in tax increases/spending cuts for the next 40 years to save the country from disaster.)

One party wants to spend like drunken sailors.
The other wants to cut taxes but not reduce spending.

My goodness, if the Democrats cannot appear like adults given the current slate of Republicans, when will they?
Increasing taxes and holding the line on federal spending may help income inequality (see, Charmin, the link to the subject of the thread?) and, if the tax increases are big enough, may help reduce the debt as well.
Click to expand...
A host on Fox once attributed a quote to New Gingrich: if you want to cut taxes, you're a republican. Everyone else is a democrat.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New Posts

Latest threads

TideFans.shop - NEW Stuff!

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.

Top Bottom