9 things the rich don't want you to know

[herbivor]

I found this to be an interesting article regarding supply side economics.
http://www.wweek.com/portland/articl...out_taxes.html

[z31maniac]

Very good article.

[CorvallisBMW]

Wow, just wow.... Really makes you re-think the whole tax-break debate. I had always heard comments from various lefties I know about how wages were stagnate for 90% of people and the top 0.1% was raking in 400% more income, etc. but I always kind of brushed it off the way I brush off everything from Faux News; just silly biased mudslinging.

Thanks for sharing this article, hopefully people will take the time to read it.

[Killacortes]

and the rich get richer! what a suprise

[z31maniac]

Wow, just wow.... Really makes you re-think the whole tax-break debate. I had always heard comments from various lefties I know about how wages were stagnate for 90% of people and the top 0.1% was raking in 400% more income, etc. but I always kind of brushed it off the way I brush off everything from Faux News; just silly biased mudslinging.

Thanks for sharing this article, hopefully people will take the time to read it.

Yes the "real wages" debate is something that really chaps my ass.

The company doubles cash on hand for insurance reserves, employees get crappy 1.5-2.5% raises, OT abolished (this cost me $10k just last year) health insurance costs go up 35% and they changed the 401k contributions.

And the CEO's got even MORE money? Why didn't any of us? And now I take home less money this year than last, which was less than the year before that.

[KennyT]

My parents are considered to be 'rich' in a lot of circles and there is a reason they can continue making money in a shitty economy. They work for it.

They do not have loans on anything. It is really hard to get ahead when you are handing 30% of a payment to your bank. Neither have ever financed a car or carried a balance on a credit card.

If you want to save money, it costs something else. Live in a cheap little house, drive a honda that doesn't break down, and work 60 hours a week. Take that and invest in something (tools, property, business), and keep working your ass off. 10 years later you could afford to buy a new 7 series.

[CorvallisBMW]

Kind of makes you want to GTFO and work in a country that values it's workers instead of just saying it does.

[z31maniac]

My parents are considered to be 'rich' in a lot of circles and there is a reason they can continue making money in a shitty economy. They work for it.

They do not have loans on anything. It is really hard to get ahead when you are handing 30% of a payment to your bank. Neither have ever financed a car or carried a balance on a credit card.

If you want to save money, it costs something else. Live in a cheap little house, drive a honda that doesn't break down, and work 60 hours a week. Take that and invest in something (tools, property, business), and keep working your ass off. 10 years later you could afford to buy a new 7 series.

Completely missing the point.

[joshh]

Yeah that article isn't biased one bit.....lol. Great article....not.

"A corporate tax rate that is too low actually destroys jobs. That’s because a higher tax rate encourages businesses (who don’t want to pay taxes) to keep the profits in the business and reinvest, rather than pull them out as profits and have to pay high taxes."

That just makes perfect sense...LMFAO. If the corporate tax is lower the company will reinvest (they will have more to invest) because if they pull it out as personal income they get raped. Good thing I wasn't drinking something when I read that one.

It's the same old argument. From a very lefty magazine.

I will say this, the rich are being catered to without a doubt. But yet it's still them paying the vast majority of taxes.
You want to help the lower 47%, give them jobs! Not only will that give them more money but it will bring in much much more tax revenue. And stop trying to give out entitlements which kill personal motivation to find work.

[joshh]

It was unnecessary for Bush to lower personal income taxes. He should have lowered corporate taxes and made it easier for business to do business. Which in turn creates more jobs. Which then in turn creates more money going to Government. But then he also started two wars at the same time....no wonder things got worse. He lowered Government revenue and added huge debt, at the same time. But raising taxes now is chancing more problems. Not a good idea.

Personal income tax is so touchy. There's a sweet spot it seems depending on the economy. Where you bring in the most revenue but also allow people cash to spend with.

[CorvallisBMW]

Yeah that article isn't biased one bit.....lol. Great article....not.

"A corporate tax rate that is too low actually destroys jobs. That’s because a higher tax rate encourages businesses (who don’t want to pay taxes) to keep the profits in the business and reinvest, rather than pull them out as profits and have to pay high taxes."

That just makes perfect sense...LMFAO. If the corporate tax is lower the company will reinvest (they will have more to invest) because if they pull it out as personal income they get raped. Good thing I wasn't drinking something when I read that one.

It's the same old argument. From a very lefty magazine.

I will say this, the rich are being catered to without a doubt. But yet it's still them paying the vast majority of taxes.
You want to help the lower 47%, give them jobs! Not only will that give them more money but it will bring in much much more tax revenue. And stop trying to give out entitlements which kill personal motivation to find work.

It was unnecessary for Bush to lower personal income taxes. He should have lowered corporate taxes and made it easier for business to do business. Which in turn creates more jobs. Which then in turn creates more money going to Government. But then he also started two wars at the same time....no wonder things got worse. He lowered Government revenue and added huge debt, at the same time. But raising taxes now is chancing more problems. Not a good idea.

Personal income tax is so touchy. There's a sweet spot it seems depending on the economy. Where you bring in the most revenue but also allow people cash to spend with.

Had you read the whole article start to finish, you'd see that you're wrong on 9/10 of the things you just said.

[joshh]

Had you read the whole article start to finish, you'd see that you're wrong on 9/10 of the things you just said.

It really sucks I don't buy the whole "Clinton raised taxes thus everything was great vs Bush cut taxes and everything fell apart"....if you want to ignore everything else that was happening at those times respectively, doesn't it.
Some people are too busy trying to convince people that when Government taxes people everything is great because Government is the fulcrum. When in reality it's the tax payers and what they earn and spend that's the fulcrum. Facts suck!

Wrong=When the Government "makes" money the people make money.

Correct=When the people make money the Government "makes" money.

[CorvallisBMW]

Facts suck!

Ya, must be why you never use any

Your argument is OT anyway. The article talks about wage increases and rates, how wages have stagnated for 90% of us, how the rich are making their fortunes by taking it away from us, etc. It's not about gov't spending. Keep it OT please and don't derail it in to another of your 'government is evil' threads. We know you think that, we've heard it before. No need to repeat.

[z31maniac]

It really sucks I don't buy the whole "Clinton raised taxes thus everything was great vs Bush cut taxes and everything fell apart

Interesting, not the assertion of the article. Not even close.

[joshh]

Ya, must be why you never use any

Your argument is OT anyway. The article talks about wage increases and rates, how wages have stagnated for 90% of us, how the rich are making their fortunes by taking it away from us, etc. It's not about gov't spending. Keep it OT please and don't derail it in to another of your 'government is evil' threads. We know you think that, we've heard it before. No need to repeat.

Ah yes if you want to completely ignore #9. It's perfectly on topic. Bleeding the poor Government of money...

Interesting, not the assertion of the article. Not even close.

No, just part of it....