Income inequality "solutions"

[Unrepresented]

That wouldn't be my opinion.

Seniors seem to enjoy entitlements. That's a huge proportion of our spending. Those entitlements were created for compelling reasons.

 

[fisticuffs]

I just don't see this. I would suggest firing anyone in an entry level job who isn't promoted within 2 years.

What problem does that solve? What do you do with these people you deem unworthy of their jobs, a living wage? Do we euthanize them? put them in poor people camps? Making them unemployed doesn't seem like it going to help them much. Not helping them at all also has it's problems.

Your posts are very short on solutions, very high on boilerplate partisan talking points and campaign slogans.

 

[Unrepresented]

What problem does that solve? What do you do with these people you deem unworthy of their jobs, a living wage? Do we euthanize them? put them in poor people camps? Making them unemployed doesn't seem like it going to help them much. Not helping them at all also has it's problems.

You'd probably have to raise taxes to pay for that.

 

[two fingers]

They won't have to pay anything, at all, unless the estate has a value over $5 million.

The federal estate-tax exclusion now is set permanently at $5 million and is indexed for inflation.

~99.8% of Estates owe $0 in estate taxes.

0.24% of estates pay an estate tax, averaging around 14%.

Even for the family farm that is always listed as the "we had to sell it to pay the taxes" inheritance -

For farms involved in estate, 2012:

97.3% filed no estate tax return
2.1% filed estate tax return but owed no tax
0.6% owed estate tax.

...and the federal government will give you subsidized, low interest, 15 year loans to pay the taxes even in those rare cases to avoid liquidation.

Thank you for clarifying for the masses. I assure you that I am fully up to date on CURRENT estate tax laws. However, my statement was in response to the idea having been floated that somehow keeping your net worth in the family is somehow immoral.

 

[DeathFromBelow]

What problem does that solve? What do you do with these people you deem unworthy of their jobs, a living wage? Do we euthanize them? put them in poor people camps? Making them unemployed doesn't seem like it going to help them much. Not helping them at all also has it's problems.

Your posts are very short on solutions, very high on boilerplate partisan talking points and campaign slogans.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sgpa7wEAz7I

 

[UncleFluffy]

Bingo. My income gets taxed. I invest some of it in stocks. The corporation I invest in gets taxed BEFORE they pay me. Then I get taxed on that income. And then, when all is said and done, it gets taxed when I pass it on. How many times taxing the same money is enough?

Generally, each time it changes hands - for example, we have income tax *and* sales tax.

How much of an exception to this general rule to make when the new owners are related to the previous ones is somewhat of a political question so I'll stay away.

But inheritance tax definitely fits in with the general pattern.

 

[two fingers]

Your living taxes could probably be lowered by increasing inheritance taxes.

And both could be reduced by doing things that shall not be discussed (by me) in this thread. And, no, I don't want anyone to be homeless or starve.

 

[Stewie26]

Quite frankly, the solution is that their is "No Solution". In all the thousands of years of human civilization there have been both rich and poor people. This will never change. The best thing one can do is educate yourself and your children so you have a valuable skill to sell to society and then prosper as much as possible utilizing those skills. I can't put it anymore simple than that. Just sayin.

 

[spade2you]

SS and medicare are not entitlements. Those things were paid for by those seniors. If you think you are ever going to get back as much as you paid in you are smoking some Colorado medicinal bud.

Taxing medicinal weed will fix the defecit, end world hunger, and make drug dealers into honest citizens. For erections lasting longer than 4 hours, you're welcome.

 

[yodedude2]

<snip> the idea having been floated that somehow keeping your net worth in the family is somehow immoral.

i'm glad you didn't get that idea from me as that's certainly not what i intended to suggest. i made what i considered an interesting point about cultural biases. thank you for considering my thoughts rationally.

 

[spade2you]

You get no argument from me.

We've already ended world hunger? Damn, that was fast.

 

[aborgman]

SS and medicare are not entitlements. Those things were paid for by those seniors. If you think you are ever going to get back as much as you paid in you are smoking some Colorado medicinal bud.

SS and Medicare absolutely are entitlements. Anything one is entitled to is, by definition, an entitlement.

Doesn't matter one whit whether you earned that right.

Entitlement: the condition of having a right to have, do, or get something.

 

[Unrepresented]

SS and medicare are not entitlements. Those things were paid for by those seniors. If you think you are ever going to get back as much as you paid in you are smoking some Colorado medicinal bud.

You're aware of the internal contradictions in your statements, no?

 

[two fingers]

I suggest you look into the Earned Income Tax Credit if you think money is not "re-distributed". Largely an idea of Paul Volcker and Ronald Reagan which very much is in the business of "re-distribution".



Here is why -

No one, anywhere, is suggesting "forcing income equality".

All the suggestions amount to reducing income inequality.

When Business Insider ranked "The Best Place In The World To Be An Entrepreneur" you see the following results -

1) USA (worse than world average inequality)
2) UK (better than world average inequality)
3) China (worse than world average inequality)
4) Canada (better than world average inequality)
5) Australia (better than world average inequality)
6) South Africa (worse than world average inequality)
7) Japan (better than world average inequality)
8) South Korea (better than world average inequality)
9) Brazil (worse than world average inequality)
10) Indonesia (better than world average inequality)

That shows basically no correlation between inequality and entrepreneurship.

Studies do show increased per capita GDP correlating with lower levels of inequality:

Invalid Link Removed

I am fully aware of the EITC. I am also not a huge fan of Ronald Reagan. So please people don't drag him onto the conversation in an effort to give credibility to an idea. There is no rule that says I "should" be a fan of Reagan. And his agreeing with something will do nothing to sway my opinion either way.

Also, the EITC is still on a very small scale. And it does little to really close the gap for the masses. I have not suggested doing away with it anyway. But to simply suggest that "It works on this level so it has to work more better....er on a bigger scale" is intellectually lazy. (Not that you did that. I am trying to understand what you are getting at.)

Driving a tack with a sledge hammer is a good example.


So what exactly ARE you suggesting? What plan would you put in place? Or what plan have you read that you would approve of? Pointing out what has worked on a small scale, and what you are NOT saying doesn't clarify for me what you would approve of. How would you "reduce" inequality?

 

[aborgman]

Thank you for clarifying for the masses. I assure you that I am fully up to date on CURRENT estate tax laws. However, my statement was in response to the idea having been floated that somehow keeping your net worth in the family is somehow immoral.

That would be dependent upon the individual morality in question. As morality is a purely subjective, personal, thing - it could moral, immoral, or amoral.

Adam Smith thought it immoral - because he believed the "free market" was the most efficient (and moral) way of distributing "property"... and he believed inheritance would destroy the free market.

 

[UncleFluffy]

SS and medicare are not entitlements. Those things were paid for by those seniors.

But if they were paid for, why are they being paid for a second time?

 

[Dale D Dilly]

SS and medicare are not entitlements. Those things were paid for by those seniors. If you think you are ever going to get back as much as you paid in you are smoking some Colorado medicinal bud.

You've got it backwards. An average joe will pull substantially more out than he put in.

 

[fisticuffs]

SS and Medicare absolutely are entitlements. Anything one is entitled to is, by definition, an entitlement.

Doesn't matter one whit whether you earned that right.

Entitlement: the condition of having a right to have, do, or get something.

Entitled is a noun. How it comes about is a verb, i.e. earned or given. It doesn't seem like people understand this they just like to use "entitlement" as a derogatory term.

 

[two fingers]

Quite frankly, the solution is that their is "No Solution". In all the thousands of years of human civilization there have been both rich and poor people. This will never change. The best thing one can do is educate yourself and your children so you have a valuable skill to sell to society and then prosper as much as possible utilizing those skills. I can't put it anymore simple than that. Just sayin.

Honestly, I tend to feel this way at the core. But I like to learn. And I mean that. So, if someone puts forth an idea that seems even remotely realistic I'm all for it, even if that idea helps to put people in a better position to find themselves doing the things we think work.

 

[fisticuffs]

Ok, but you are aware I assume that the term entitlements commonly refers to things such as welfare and food stamps and government handout type crap. Or at least that is my understanding.

Nope. You don't seem to understand your own talking points. "Entitlements" almost always refers to SS and Medicare.