*quality
*money

Boosting this quality contribution up in the Hot Listing - declared quality by NetRunner.

Adding video to channels (Money) - requested by NetRunner.

fantastic, great vid Saber2x

Some interesting facts about the top 1%:

The Top 1 Percent Of Americans Owns 40 Percent Of The Nation’s Wealth

The Top 1 Percent Of Americans Take Home 24 Percent Of National Income

The Top 1 Percent Of Americans Own Half Of The Country’s Stocks, Bonds, And Mutual Funds

The Top 1 Percent Of Americans Have Only 5 Percent Of The Nation’s Personal Debt

The Top 1 Percent Are Taking In More Of The Nation’s Income Than At Any Other Time Since The 1920s

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/10/03/334156/top-five-wealthiest-one-percent/

*doublepromote

Double-Promoting this video and sending it back into the queue for one more try; last queued Wednesday, October 5th, 2011 6:44pm PDT - doublepromote requested by geo321.

The Top 1% also pays nearly 40% of the Federal Income Tax
>> ^ghark:

Some interesting facts about the top 1%:
The Top 1 Percent Of Americans Owns 40 Percent Of The Nation’s Wealth
The Top 1 Percent Of Americans Take Home 24 Percent Of National Income
The Top 1 Percent Of Americans Own Half Of The Country’s Stocks, Bonds, And Mutual Funds
The Top 1 Percent Of Americans Have Only 5 Percent Of The Nation’s Personal Debt
The Top 1 Percent Are Taking In More Of The Nation’s Income Than At Any Other Time Since The 1920s
http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/10/03/334156/top-five
-wealthiest-one-percent/

Repeal NAFTA!

>> ^Trancecoach:

The Top 1% also pays nearly 40% of the Federal Income Tax
>> ^ghark:
Some interesting facts about the top 1%:
The Top 1 Percent Of Americans Owns 40 Percent Of The Nation’s Wealth
The Top 1 Percent Of Americans Take Home 24 Percent Of National Income
The Top 1 Percent Of Americans Own Half Of The Country’s Stocks, Bonds, And Mutual Funds
The Top 1 Percent Of Americans Have Only 5 Percent Of The Nation’s Personal Debt
The Top 1 Percent Are Taking In More Of The Nation’s Income Than At Any Other Time Since The 1920s
http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/10/03/334156/top-five
-wealthiest-one-percent/



The initial facts and your rebuttal don't mean a whole lot without knowing how much of the whole is actual income and how much is capital gains.

>> ^Trancecoach:

The Top 1% also pays nearly 40% of the Federal Income Tax
>> ^ghark:
Some interesting facts about the top 1%:
The Top 1 Percent Of Americans Owns 40 Percent Of The Nation’s Wealth
The Top 1 Percent Of Americans Take Home 24 Percent Of National Income
The Top 1 Percent Of Americans Own Half Of The Country’s Stocks, Bonds, And Mutual Funds
The Top 1 Percent Of Americans Have Only 5 Percent Of The Nation’s Personal Debt
The Top 1 Percent Are Taking In More Of The Nation’s Income Than At Any Other Time Since The 1920s
http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/10/03/334156/top-five
-wealthiest-one-percent/



Umm, no.

"The Internet is awash with statements that the top 1 percent pays, depending on the year, 38 percent or more than 40 percent of taxes.

It’s true that the top 1 percent of wage earners paid 38 percent of the federal income taxes in 2008 (the most recent year for which data is available). But people forget that the income tax is less than half of federal taxes and only one-fifth of taxes at all levels of government.

Social Security, Medicare and unemployment insurance taxes (known as payroll taxes) are paid mostly by the bottom 90 percent of wage earners. That’s because, once you reach $106,800 of income, you pay no more for Social Security, though the much smaller Medicare tax applies to all wages. Warren Buffett pays the exact same amount of Social Security taxes as someone who earns $106,800."
http://wweek.com/portland/article-17350-9_things_the_rich_dont_want_you_to_know_about_taxes.html

Sales taxes and other flat taxes are even more unfair. We low income people pretty much spend all the money we make and as a result pay (in my state) 8% of my income in sales taxes, while the top 1% only spend a small fraction of their wealth on items likely to collect sales tax, so I would not be surprised if the average top 1% pays even 1% on sales tax.

The top 20% earn 93% of the wealth, yet only pay 70% of the taxes, leaving the other 13% to the bottom 80% who only earn 7% of the wealth. THAT is what needs to be corrected.

>> ^vex:

>> ^Trancecoach:
The Top 1% also pays nearly 40% of the Federal Income Tax
>> ^ghark:
Some interesting facts about the top 1%:
The Top 1 Percent Of Americans Owns 40 Percent Of The Nation’s Wealth
The Top 1 Percent Of Americans Take Home 24 Percent Of National Income
The Top 1 Percent Of Americans Own Half Of The Country’s Stocks, Bonds, And Mutual Funds
The Top 1 Percent Of Americans Have Only 5 Percent Of The Nation’s Personal Debt
The Top 1 Percent Are Taking In More Of The Nation’s Income Than At Any Other Time Since The 1920s
http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/10/03/334156/top-five
-wealthiest-one-percent/


The initial facts and your rebuttal don't mean a whole lot without knowing how much of the whole is actual income and how much is capital gains.


We can't all be educated Vex.

Indeed we can't all be educated.

>> ^Yogi:

>> ^vex:
>> ^Trancecoach:
The Top 1% also pays nearly 40% of the Federal Income Tax
>> ^ghark:
Some interesting facts about the top 1%:
The Top 1 Percent Of Americans Owns 40 Percent Of The Nation’s Wealth
The Top 1 Percent Of Americans Take Home 24 Percent Of National Income
The Top 1 Percent Of Americans Own Half Of The Country’s Stocks, Bonds, And Mutual Funds
The Top 1 Percent Of Americans Have Only 5 Percent Of The Nation’s Personal Debt
The Top 1 Percent Are Taking In More Of The Nation’s Income Than At Any Other Time Since The 1920s
http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/10/03/334156/top-five
-wealthiest-one-percent/


The initial facts and your rebuttal don't mean a whole lot without knowing how much of the whole is actual income and how much is capital gains.

We can't all be educated Vex.

Very good analysis.

>> ^Ariane:

>> ^Trancecoach:
The Top 1% also pays nearly 40% of the Federal Income Tax
>> ^ghark:
Some interesting facts about the top 1%:
The Top 1 Percent Of Americans Owns 40 Percent Of The Nation’s Wealth
The Top 1 Percent Of Americans Take Home 24 Percent Of National Income
The Top 1 Percent Of Americans Own Half Of The Country’s Stocks, Bonds, And Mutual Funds
The Top 1 Percent Of Americans Have Only 5 Percent Of The Nation’s Personal Debt
The Top 1 Percent Are Taking In More Of The Nation’s Income Than At Any Other Time Since The 1920s
http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/10/03/334156/top-five
-wealthiest-one-percent/


Umm, no.
"The Internet is awash with statements that the top 1 percent pays, depending on the year, 38 percent or more than 40 percent of taxes.
It’s true that the top 1 percent of wage earners paid 38 percent of the federal income taxes in 2008 (the most recent year for which data is available). But people forget that the income tax is less than half of federal taxes and only one-fifth of taxes at all levels of government.
Social Security, Medicare and unemployment insurance taxes (known as payroll taxes) are paid mostly by the bottom 90 percent of wage earners. That’s because, once you reach $106,800 of income, you pay no more for Social Security, though the much smaller Medicare tax applies to all wages. Warren Buffett pays the exact same amount of Social Security taxes as someone who earns $106,800."
http://wweek.com/portland/article-17350-9_thin
gs_the_rich_dont_want_you_to_know_about_taxes.html
Sales taxes and other flat taxes are even more unfair. We low income people pretty much spend all the money we make and as a result pay (in my state) 8% of my income in sales taxes, while the top 1% only spend a small fraction of their wealth on items likely to collect sales tax, so I would not be surprised if the average top 1% pays even 1% on sales tax.
The top 20% earn 93% of the wealth, yet only pay 70% of the taxes, leaving the other 13% to the bottom 80% who only earn 7% of the wealth. THAT is what needs to be corrected.

So, these statistics are from the IRS and isn't internet hearsay. Medicare makes the percentages paid by top earners go up. So do property taxes. (Sales tax and state taxation is another discussion and doesn't involve the Federal government. In any case there's no way to enforce a progressive sales tax. So if this is unfair, then the only thing to do is eliminate it altogether. But that is a state-by-state decision.) Medicare along with Medicaid and some other mandatory taxes account for 33% of Federal expenses/budget, while social Security for 21% (even thoug Social Security is a separate Trust Fund).

Social security is capped for various reasons and it doesn't have anything to do with current tax debates or legislative proposals. Social security tax is about 15%, half of which is paid by the employer. Social Security is in theory a separate budget from the rest of the federal budget. And for 2011, the total tax is reduced with the employee paying only 4.2% of it and the employer paying 6.2%.
Medicare, as mentioned, is not capped at any income. On a million dollar income you pay about $14,500. On a 45K income you pay about $652.

Unemployment taxes are paid fully by employers not employees.

The complaint that the bottom 80% pay 13% is misleading because the bottom 50% (half the population) pay between only 0-3%.

Top 10% (not top 20%) - pay 70%
Bottom 50% - pay 3%
Everyone else - 27%

But it gets a bit more complicated because about 47% of households pay 0% income tax, a majority in the bottom 40% of earners.

Top 10% earners have to pay more (70%) for the roads, government salaries, wars, national parks, Airforce One, NPR, corporate welfare, bank bailouts, and most other government services (the bottom 50% pay less than 3% of it) but when buying goods (with or without sales tax), like coffee or an iPhone or pumping gas or a movie ticket, it does cost top earners a smaller percentage of their income.

Some other "taxes" are, in effect, flat taxation like business license, car registration, bridge toll, sanitation and flood control, parking meters, etc.

Fairness in this is a matter of opinion (and self-interest). I'm not an accountant so I can't really go into all the various loopholes in our tax code.

And I'm talking mostly about taxation at the Federal level of which income tax accounts for about half. Like I said, sales tax is a state matter and so are fees like parking meters etc. Taxation at the state level seems to draw less controversy because Democratic states will "happily" pay more and Republican states will "happily" pay less and you can select a state to live in at just the right taxation for you.

And as we all know on the Sift, you have that statists on one side who think more taxation is better because the government is here to help and anti-statists on the other who think "that government is best wich governs least" (or not at all). And also the hybrids like Lyndon Johnson, Larry King, Jon Stewart, and others, including most corporatists.

>> ^Ariane:

>> ^Trancecoach:
The Top 1% also pays nearly 40% of the Federal Income Tax
>> ^ghark:
Some interesting facts about the top 1%:
The Top 1 Percent Of Americans Owns 40 Percent Of The Nation’s Wealth
The Top 1 Percent Of Americans Take Home 24 Percent Of National Income
The Top 1 Percent Of Americans Own Half Of The Country’s Stocks, Bonds, And Mutual Funds
The Top 1 Percent Of Americans Have Only 5 Percent Of The Nation’s Personal Debt
The Top 1 Percent Are Taking In More Of The Nation’s Income Than At Any Other Time Since The 1920s
http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/10/03/334156/top-five
-wealthiest-one-percent/


Umm, no.
"The Internet is awash with statements that the top 1 percent pays, depending on the year, 38 percent or more than 40 percent of taxes.
It’s true that the top 1 percent of wage earners paid 38 percent of the federal income taxes in 2008 (the most recent year for which data is available). But people forget that the income tax is less than half of federal taxes and only one-fifth of taxes at all levels of government.
Social Security, Medicare and unemployment insurance taxes (known as payroll taxes) are paid mostly by the bottom 90 percent of wage earners. That’s because, once you reach $106,800 of income, you pay no more for Social Security, though the much smaller Medicare tax applies to all wages. Warren Buffett pays the exact same amount of Social Security taxes as someone who earns $106,800."
http://wweek.com/portland/article-17350-9_thin
gs_the_rich_dont_want_you_to_know_about_taxes.html
Sales taxes and other flat taxes are even more unfair. We low income people pretty much spend all the money we make and as a result pay (in my state) 8% of my income in sales taxes, while the top 1% only spend a small fraction of their wealth on items likely to collect sales tax, so I would not be surprised if the average top 1% pays even 1% on sales tax.
The top 20% earn 93% of the wealth, yet only pay 70% of the taxes, leaving the other 13% to the bottom 80% who only earn 7% of the wealth. THAT is what needs to be corrected.

It seems to me that nearly all of the arguments that take place on this website concerning taxes are based on the percentages people pay. But there seems to be a lot of evidence from the Great Depression until the early 80s that high tax rates on the wealthy and regulation makes for a stable economy. Where the wealth gets put back into the system because otherwise they would lose it to taxation, and it would be put back into the system anyway via public projects.

It's a little insane that there are people making more in a year than 10, 25, 50 people might make in their lifetimes, have lobbying power due to this wealth, have corporate money backing their positions, and all the power that comes with that lobbying ability, and still don't feel like they've gotten enough because they might pay a higher effective tax percentage than someone who makes 1/10th or less of what they do. Same guy who probably owns a fridge, a car, a microwave, and has a bit of money in savings, but would be financially devastated in as little as 3 months if he lost his job. He probably also hasn't had a vacation in years (that's not to say he didn't use vacation days), and there's a good chance he could benefit from medical treatment but can't take enough time off in one go and still be able to pay his bills and afford to live.

I think it's pretty insane that we have a period in time in our history where we had overall economic stability for around 50 years and the guys who have the money to influence the government aren't pushing to get it stable (because it benefits them to have it the way it is now), government officials aren't pushing to get it back (because it benefits them to have it the way it is now), and the middle class and poor have almost no voice in the race (because they are too busy accusing each other of over-taxing the rich, not paying for their own healthcare, being in unions, being on government assistance, etc......because it benefits the previous two groups to have it the way it is now).

Kind of a risky situation to put yourself in, because there's the potential that it gets bad enough that the middle class and poor realize pointing fingers at each other hasn't gotten them anywhere. Of course it'll only take another 50 years or so to revert back to this, because hey...fuck history we need PROGRESS!

Well - the video gets one thing right. Repealing Glass-Steagall was a horrible mistake. Where they get it wrong is that it was not 'banks' or 'Wall Street' that was pushing for it.

Glass Stegall's repeal is a long story that begins with Jimmy Carter and ended with Bill Clinton. They leaned hard on banks because they wanted more poor folks owning houses. But the dang awful truth was that the poor folks just couldn't actually AFFORD to pay for those homes, and banks weren't in the business of giving them houses for nothing.

So Congress (with both the GOP and Democrats) began pushing for a change. It is very true that there were companies (notably AIG) who also pushed for this because they saw a way they could profit from it. But "banks" did not want this at all. They were forced into it. Once the housing bubble started they had to start in with the sub-primes just to compete but a lot of them knew it was very risky. But for a while it seemed to be working and everyone was making money hand over fist. And it has to be said also that CONSUMERS weren't exactly ethical either. Many people bought homes they knew they couldn't pay for just to make a quick buck.

That's the history and fact. Glass Steagall didn't go away because of evil banks. It went away because of governmetn social engineering. So bring it back already! Oh - yeah - that would interfere with Obama's CURRENT PRACTICE of forcing banks to give away more loans in minority communities...

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/577794/201107081851/DOJ-Begins-Bank-Witch-Hunt.aspx

The real problem is government. Get the government OUT of the market. Establish a simple set of basic, fair guidelines and then tell government to get out of everyone's way. Glass Steagall would have never been repealed without a corrupt government pushing for it.

Repealing Glass-Steagall got government out of the market, and was a huge mistake.
>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:

Repealing Glass-Steagall was a horrible mistake.
...
Get the government OUT of the market.

Here's an amazing exposé about how corporate greed led our country to a financial disaster.

The men who crashed the world

Repealing Glass-Steagall got government out of the market, and was a huge mistake.

That's like blaming the water for a flood when the guy up the river dynamited the dam. Who repealed Glass-Steagall? AIG? The "banks"? Nope. It was government - who had a specific objective in doing so. That is government interference in the market.

The video gets that one thing right. After the Great Depression the imposition of Glass Steagall created an environment where the banking system couldn't go nuts. That is a great example of GOOD government. Government is fine when it sets up a set of basic, fair rules and then just stays out of everyone's business and lets the market run itself.

But leftists (both in the GOP and Democrat party) have been jonesing for more and more "social engineering" power for a long time. They look out on the world and see 'unfairness' (as they define it) and want to use the power of government to change the system into something they think is better. But as with all tyrants and meddlers in misery - they forget (or choose to ignore) the sad history that is the result of such thinking. Poverty, oppression, and death.

Government constantly interfering in the private sector has created an environment of uncertainty and patronage where businesses are more beholden to whoever holds political office than to their customers. If you want to stop the 'offenses' of Wall Street - then you have to slap down government first. Reduce thier size, scope, power, influence, and ability to interfere. When government loses power, it will flow back to people who have the ability to control the market with their buying dollars.

I dont think I've ever agreed with you but I do agree with your remark that the repealing of the Glass-Steagall was a mistake.>> ^NetRunner:

Repealing Glass-Steagall got government out of the market, and was a huge mistake.
>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:
Repealing Glass-Steagall was a horrible mistake.
...
Get the government OUT of the market.

In the multitude of recent posts/blogs/discussions about eating the rich, one name is consistently absent of criticism, even prior to his death, Steve Jobs. Net worth over 6 billion dollars, doing no philanthropic work to speak of (as compared to the often vilified Bill Gates), and not one of the many billionaires pledging half of their estate to charities (check out "the giving pledge". Why not Jobs? "Cause dude, like, you know man, he made cool stuff."
Anyone that cannot see the benefit to society, the multitude of companies and people employed that simply augment and support apple products, from iphone covers, to sound docks, on, and on and on, well......if you can't see that, no wonder you don't understand and appreciate capitalism at it's best. True, I don't think money motivated Steve Jobs, I'm quite sure it didn't, but he wasn't keen on giving it away.
If you don't like your lot in life, do what I did, borrow money, do 8 years of post-grad training working 80 hour weeks, get a job, pay back your loans and have a lifestyle above the mean, get yourself on the Board of a charity and give 10% of your income to charities that you trust will distribute money to people that really need it. I didn't do all that work to give money to someone that wants to sit on their ass. I guess I'm what's wrong with this country, an ordinary dude that wants to get ahead.

*promote

Promoting this video back to the front page; last published Thursday, October 6th, 2011 3:07am PDT - promote requested by joedirt.

>> ^snoozedoctor:

In the multitude of recent posts/blogs/discussions about eating the rich, one name is consistently absent of criticism, even prior to his death, Steve Jobs. Net worth over 6 billion dollars, doing no philanthropic work to speak of (as compared to the often vilified Bill Gates), and not one of the many billionaires pledging half of their estate to charities (check out "the giving pledge". Why not Jobs? "Cause dude, like, you know man, he made cool stuff."
Anyone that cannot see the benefit to society, the multitude of companies and people employed that simply augment and support apple products, from iphone covers, to sound docks, on, and on and on, well......if you can't see that, no wonder you don't understand and appreciate capitalism at it's best. True, I don't think money motivated Steve Jobs, I'm quite sure it didn't, but he wasn't keen on giving it away.
If you don't like your lot in life, do what I did, borrow money, do 8 years of post-grad training working 80 hour weeks, get a job, pay back your loans and have a lifestyle above the mean, get yourself on the Board of a charity and give 10% of your income to charities that you trust will distribute money to people that really need it. I didn't do all that work to give money to someone that wants to sit on their ass. I guess I'm what's wrong with this country, an ordinary dude that wants to get ahead.


Steve jobs: The richest income tax evader the world has ever seen. A 1$/year salary? So endearing.

aye it's hard to pick on someone that looks like death and makes cool toys for everyone, but Steve Jobs was the epitome of the American dream corporate greed. What would the tax rate have been on his stocks, 15%?

If they had any sense they'd be protesting in front of the White House against Obama who bailed out these businesses that got us here in the first place.Why don't they protest Obama for hiring Jeffrey Immelt of GE, a CEO of a company that paid no taxes? What about the crony system of giving money to companies like Solyndra that are buddies of Obama?