The Forgotten Man

[Shadowfax]

Hard work is what most companies are built on. If the sole proprietor is successful, he/she will have to hire help eventually. If they are wildly succesful, the risk taker will be very wealthy. What I don’t understand is why, after that “stage” is reached, the pendulum swings the other way. Did the Waltons treat their first employees well, paying them more than they were making. Now, they can’t give up a fraction of their fortunes to give their employees benefits, as one example?

I agree that there is a return deserved for risk taking, but how much is enough? And if you strip away the supports of the low level, minimum wage types, how does the upper echelon continue to support their profits?

Not to sound like a presidential candidate, but I come from humble beginnings. I am the only person in my generation in my family with an advanced degree. My mother was the only one in her generation of my family with an undergrad degree. I went to public schools, did well, but faced a rude awakening at the elite college I attended when competing with other college students who went to prep schools, had travelled abroad, had parents who were doctors, lawyers, etc. My family existed and subsisted at times on welfare and food stamps–not because we sat around on the couch and did nothing, but because my mother’s jobs did not pay well in her early years and with a child to feed. She eventually chose a job helping others as a state-employed social worker so she still doesn’t make a fortune, but her living is adequate and she will hopefully have a decent retirement.

I can’t abide people saying that people who don’t make much aren’t working hard or don’t have ambition, etc. My mother worked two jobs most of her life, then I started working informally at 9 (no, not a paper route, that would be parental neglect to allow a child to do that in a ghetto neighborhood–not much readership and woe to you if you interrupt a drug transaction in the hallway).

When those who are doing extraordinarily well were born into privilege, or are being paid for ridiculous things like dribbling a basketball or driving cars really fast. Where is the societal contribution of these activities? They make more than doctors! Or my personal favorite, Stan’s CEO could run his company into the ground, and he could still receive a multimillion dollar severance! Wow, now there’s an incentive! How about we tax the shit out of that sort of income!

I think the greedy buttheads that complain because their taxes will go up by a few thousand dollars (they’ll barely notice) ought to suck it up. They, by and large, reaped the benefits of our economy through luck and privilege (and, in a fair number of cases, exploiting or breaking the rules). I guess they’ll have to forego that new Mercedes this year, crowding the garage with all the others. If you benefit from the AMerican dream, you ought to help finance that dream for others.

I can’t see how anyone can say they are working harder than another. Your gardener works hard to save the SoCal common white man from having to trim his own lawn. You’ll be whining when he tells you he is quitting his gardener job to go back to college…but probably he is doing that backbreaking work to put his kids through college, because he’s bought into the American dream, no matter whether he’s an American or not.

[Shadowfax]

Hard work is what most companies are built on. If the sole proprietor is successful, he/she will have to hire help eventually. If they are wildly succesful, the risk taker will be very wealthy. What I don’t understand is why, after that “stage” is reached, the pendulum swings the other way. Did the Waltons treat their first employees well, paying them more than they were making. Now, they can’t give up a fraction of their fortunes to give their employees benefits, as one example?

I agree that there is a return deserved for risk taking, but how much is enough? And if you strip away the supports of the low level, minimum wage types, how does the upper echelon continue to support their profits?

Not to sound like a presidential candidate, but I come from humble beginnings. I am the only person in my generation in my family with an advanced degree. My mother was the only one in her generation of my family with an undergrad degree. I went to public schools, did well, but faced a rude awakening at the elite college I attended when competing with other college students who went to prep schools, had travelled abroad, had parents who were doctors, lawyers, etc. My family existed and subsisted at times on welfare and food stamps–not because we sat around on the couch and did nothing, but because my mother’s jobs did not pay well in her early years and with a child to feed. She eventually chose a job helping others as a state-employed social worker so she still doesn’t make a fortune, but her living is adequate and she will hopefully have a decent retirement.

I can’t abide people saying that people who don’t make much aren’t working hard or don’t have ambition, etc. My mother worked two jobs most of her life, then I started working informally at 9 (no, not a paper route, that would be parental neglect to allow a child to do that in a ghetto neighborhood–not much readership and woe to you if you interrupt a drug transaction in the hallway).

When those who are doing extraordinarily well were born into privilege, or are being paid for ridiculous things like dribbling a basketball or driving cars really fast. Where is the societal contribution of these activities? They make more than doctors! Or my personal favorite, Stan’s CEO could run his company into the ground, and he could still receive a multimillion dollar severance! Wow, now there’s an incentive! How about we tax the shit out of that sort of income!

I think the greedy buttheads that complain because their taxes will go up by a few thousand dollars (they’ll barely notice) ought to suck it up. They, by and large, reaped the benefits of our economy through luck and privilege (and, in a fair number of cases, exploiting or breaking the rules). I guess they’ll have to forego that new Mercedes this year, crowding the garage with all the others. If you benefit from the AMerican dream, you ought to help finance that dream for others.

I can’t see how anyone can say they are working harder than another. Your gardener works hard to save the SoCal common white man from having to trim his own lawn. You’ll be whining when he tells you he is quitting his gardener job to go back to college…but probably he is doing that backbreaking work to put his kids through college, because he’s bought into the American dream, no matter whether he’s an American or not.

[Shadowfax]

Hard work is what most companies are built on. If the sole proprietor is successful, he/she will have to hire help eventually. If they are wildly succesful, the risk taker will be very wealthy. What I don’t understand is why, after that “stage” is reached, the pendulum swings the other way. Did the Waltons treat their first employees well, paying them more than they were making. Now, they can’t give up a fraction of their fortunes to give their employees benefits, as one example?

I agree that there is a return deserved for risk taking, but how much is enough? And if you strip away the supports of the low level, minimum wage types, how does the upper echelon continue to support their profits?

Not to sound like a presidential candidate, but I come from humble beginnings. I am the only person in my generation in my family with an advanced degree. My mother was the only one in her generation of my family with an undergrad degree. I went to public schools, did well, but faced a rude awakening at the elite college I attended when competing with other college students who went to prep schools, had travelled abroad, had parents who were doctors, lawyers, etc. My family existed and subsisted at times on welfare and food stamps–not because we sat around on the couch and did nothing, but because my mother’s jobs did not pay well in her early years and with a child to feed. She eventually chose a job helping others as a state-employed social worker so she still doesn’t make a fortune, but her living is adequate and she will hopefully have a decent retirement.

I can’t abide people saying that people who don’t make much aren’t working hard or don’t have ambition, etc. My mother worked two jobs most of her life, then I started working informally at 9 (no, not a paper route, that would be parental neglect to allow a child to do that in a ghetto neighborhood–not much readership and woe to you if you interrupt a drug transaction in the hallway).

When those who are doing extraordinarily well were born into privilege, or are being paid for ridiculous things like dribbling a basketball or driving cars really fast. Where is the societal contribution of these activities? They make more than doctors! Or my personal favorite, Stan’s CEO could run his company into the ground, and he could still receive a multimillion dollar severance! Wow, now there’s an incentive! How about we tax the shit out of that sort of income!

I think the greedy buttheads that complain because their taxes will go up by a few thousand dollars (they’ll barely notice) ought to suck it up. They, by and large, reaped the benefits of our economy through luck and privilege (and, in a fair number of cases, exploiting or breaking the rules). I guess they’ll have to forego that new Mercedes this year, crowding the garage with all the others. If you benefit from the AMerican dream, you ought to help finance that dream for others.

I can’t see how anyone can say they are working harder than another. Your gardener works hard to save the SoCal common white man from having to trim his own lawn. You’ll be whining when he tells you he is quitting his gardener job to go back to college…but probably he is doing that backbreaking work to put his kids through college, because he’s bought into the American dream, no matter whether he’s an American or not.

[CA renter]

Submitted by stansd on October 7, 2008 – 8:49pm.
CA renter…what kind of argument is that?

First throw out a false choice of being uber wealthy versus being a gardner, and then conclude with, “I’m going to have to agree with myself on this one.”
——————-

Fair enough. Let’s start a sign-up page where those who fear being taxed 50%+ can volunteer for another job (doesn’t have to be gardening) that would lower their income enough to be taxed at a lower rate — just like the bottom 50% of working people who they constantly complain about. They think the lower-income people are getting a better deal, right? So they should jump at the chance to get that better deal…right????

Would that work for you? How many people do you think would sign up? Would they finally stop bitching when they get these lower-paying/lower tax rate jobs?

[CA renter]

Submitted by stansd on October 7, 2008 – 8:49pm.
CA renter…what kind of argument is that?

First throw out a false choice of being uber wealthy versus being a gardner, and then conclude with, “I’m going to have to agree with myself on this one.”
——————-

Fair enough. Let’s start a sign-up page where those who fear being taxed 50%+ can volunteer for another job (doesn’t have to be gardening) that would lower their income enough to be taxed at a lower rate — just like the bottom 50% of working people who they constantly complain about. They think the lower-income people are getting a better deal, right? So they should jump at the chance to get that better deal…right????

Would that work for you? How many people do you think would sign up? Would they finally stop bitching when they get these lower-paying/lower tax rate jobs?

[CA renter]

Submitted by stansd on October 7, 2008 – 8:49pm.
CA renter…what kind of argument is that?

First throw out a false choice of being uber wealthy versus being a gardner, and then conclude with, “I’m going to have to agree with myself on this one.”
——————-

Fair enough. Let’s start a sign-up page where those who fear being taxed 50%+ can volunteer for another job (doesn’t have to be gardening) that would lower their income enough to be taxed at a lower rate — just like the bottom 50% of working people who they constantly complain about. They think the lower-income people are getting a better deal, right? So they should jump at the chance to get that better deal…right????

Would that work for you? How many people do you think would sign up? Would they finally stop bitching when they get these lower-paying/lower tax rate jobs?

[CA renter]

Submitted by stansd on October 7, 2008 – 8:49pm.
CA renter…what kind of argument is that?

First throw out a false choice of being uber wealthy versus being a gardner, and then conclude with, “I’m going to have to agree with myself on this one.”
——————-

Fair enough. Let’s start a sign-up page where those who fear being taxed 50%+ can volunteer for another job (doesn’t have to be gardening) that would lower their income enough to be taxed at a lower rate — just like the bottom 50% of working people who they constantly complain about. They think the lower-income people are getting a better deal, right? So they should jump at the chance to get that better deal…right????

Would that work for you? How many people do you think would sign up? Would they finally stop bitching when they get these lower-paying/lower tax rate jobs?

[CA renter]

Submitted by stansd on October 7, 2008 – 8:49pm.
CA renter…what kind of argument is that?

First throw out a false choice of being uber wealthy versus being a gardner, and then conclude with, “I’m going to have to agree with myself on this one.”
——————-

Fair enough. Let’s start a sign-up page where those who fear being taxed 50%+ can volunteer for another job (doesn’t have to be gardening) that would lower their income enough to be taxed at a lower rate — just like the bottom 50% of working people who they constantly complain about. They think the lower-income people are getting a better deal, right? So they should jump at the chance to get that better deal…right????

Would that work for you? How many people do you think would sign up? Would they finally stop bitching when they get these lower-paying/lower tax rate jobs?

[jonnycsd]

The vast majority of income taxes paid do not fund services, but rather transfer the fruit of your labor to others who did not do the work. It does not redistribute wealth, rather it redistributes income. Hence Income Tax is just a form of idirect slavery and makes it harder for working people to accumulate wealth.

If you really want to tax the rich and provide relief for the poor, then the entire Income Tax approach should be thrown out the window. An ASSET tax hits the wealthy much harder than an income tax.

Some quick facts to help cut through the emmotion and ideology of this thread: The top 1% of earners pay 21.20% of all taxes paid at an average rate of 24%, the top 2 – 5% of earners pay 14.55% of all taxes at an average of 18% (Top 5% pay @36% of all tax) The bottom 50% pay 3% of all tax collected at an average rate of 2.98%.

[jonnycsd]

The vast majority of income taxes paid do not fund services, but rather transfer the fruit of your labor to others who did not do the work. It does not redistribute wealth, rather it redistributes income. Hence Income Tax is just a form of idirect slavery and makes it harder for working people to accumulate wealth.

If you really want to tax the rich and provide relief for the poor, then the entire Income Tax approach should be thrown out the window. An ASSET tax hits the wealthy much harder than an income tax.

Some quick facts to help cut through the emmotion and ideology of this thread: The top 1% of earners pay 21.20% of all taxes paid at an average rate of 24%, the top 2 – 5% of earners pay 14.55% of all taxes at an average of 18% (Top 5% pay @36% of all tax) The bottom 50% pay 3% of all tax collected at an average rate of 2.98%.

[jonnycsd]

The vast majority of income taxes paid do not fund services, but rather transfer the fruit of your labor to others who did not do the work. It does not redistribute wealth, rather it redistributes income. Hence Income Tax is just a form of idirect slavery and makes it harder for working people to accumulate wealth.

If you really want to tax the rich and provide relief for the poor, then the entire Income Tax approach should be thrown out the window. An ASSET tax hits the wealthy much harder than an income tax.

Some quick facts to help cut through the emmotion and ideology of this thread: The top 1% of earners pay 21.20% of all taxes paid at an average rate of 24%, the top 2 – 5% of earners pay 14.55% of all taxes at an average of 18% (Top 5% pay @36% of all tax) The bottom 50% pay 3% of all tax collected at an average rate of 2.98%.

[jonnycsd]

The vast majority of income taxes paid do not fund services, but rather transfer the fruit of your labor to others who did not do the work. It does not redistribute wealth, rather it redistributes income. Hence Income Tax is just a form of idirect slavery and makes it harder for working people to accumulate wealth.

If you really want to tax the rich and provide relief for the poor, then the entire Income Tax approach should be thrown out the window. An ASSET tax hits the wealthy much harder than an income tax.

Some quick facts to help cut through the emmotion and ideology of this thread: The top 1% of earners pay 21.20% of all taxes paid at an average rate of 24%, the top 2 – 5% of earners pay 14.55% of all taxes at an average of 18% (Top 5% pay @36% of all tax) The bottom 50% pay 3% of all tax collected at an average rate of 2.98%.

[jonnycsd]

The vast majority of income taxes paid do not fund services, but rather transfer the fruit of your labor to others who did not do the work. It does not redistribute wealth, rather it redistributes income. Hence Income Tax is just a form of idirect slavery and makes it harder for working people to accumulate wealth.

If you really want to tax the rich and provide relief for the poor, then the entire Income Tax approach should be thrown out the window. An ASSET tax hits the wealthy much harder than an income tax.

Some quick facts to help cut through the emmotion and ideology of this thread: The top 1% of earners pay 21.20% of all taxes paid at an average rate of 24%, the top 2 – 5% of earners pay 14.55% of all taxes at an average of 18% (Top 5% pay @36% of all tax) The bottom 50% pay 3% of all tax collected at an average rate of 2.98%.

[TheBreeze]

[quote=gary_broker]Kewp, you are leaving out a huge part of the equation. The business owners are the ones that manned up, took the risk, and put up the capital to fund the business. Regardless of the prevailing perception around here most business owners (including myself) work relentlessly, WAY harder then any employee you could hope to hire (14 hours a day is typical) and we often have employee’s who make more money then ourselves!
Have you ever owned a business? It takes huge balls to risk your life savings on a business. If the business fails the employees move on to another job whereas the owner can be left penniless. That brings me to the intent of this post.. it is about risk/reward. In my view the people that put it all on the line and bust their asses to keep people employed deserve the success they achieve.
[/quote]

14 hours a day as a broker? So you sit in a comfy chair at a comfy desk and either look at a computer screen or talk to people on the phone and try to bilk them out of their money? Sounds tough. Try 14 hours as a strawberry picker. I bet you wouldn’t last a day.

As far as risking your life savings goes, most business owners choose to incorporate to protect themselves from personal liability. Then, they can take reckless risks with other people’s money. Some get lucky and succeed. Others go bankrupt with other people’s money (e.g., the taxpayer’s $700 billion bailout of the super-rich). Some are so unscrupulouse that they borrow taxpayer money and do it again.

Every rich person I know is just like you, Gary. They all feel entitled. None of them want to pay their fair share of taxes. Hopefully the next administration will force the super-rich to pay their fair share — especially given as its the super-rich on Wall Street who have pushed this country into The Great Depression II.

[TheBreeze]

[quote=gary_broker]Kewp, you are leaving out a huge part of the equation. The business owners are the ones that manned up, took the risk, and put up the capital to fund the business. Regardless of the prevailing perception around here most business owners (including myself) work relentlessly, WAY harder then any employee you could hope to hire (14 hours a day is typical) and we often have employee’s who make more money then ourselves!
Have you ever owned a business? It takes huge balls to risk your life savings on a business. If the business fails the employees move on to another job whereas the owner can be left penniless. That brings me to the intent of this post.. it is about risk/reward. In my view the people that put it all on the line and bust their asses to keep people employed deserve the success they achieve.
[/quote]

14 hours a day as a broker? So you sit in a comfy chair at a comfy desk and either look at a computer screen or talk to people on the phone and try to bilk them out of their money? Sounds tough. Try 14 hours as a strawberry picker. I bet you wouldn’t last a day.

As far as risking your life savings goes, most business owners choose to incorporate to protect themselves from personal liability. Then, they can take reckless risks with other people’s money. Some get lucky and succeed. Others go bankrupt with other people’s money (e.g., the taxpayer’s $700 billion bailout of the super-rich). Some are so unscrupulouse that they borrow taxpayer money and do it again.

Every rich person I know is just like you, Gary. They all feel entitled. None of them want to pay their fair share of taxes. Hopefully the next administration will force the super-rich to pay their fair share — especially given as its the super-rich on Wall Street who have pushed this country into The Great Depression II.

[Author]

Posts