(2003)Top 1% of households receive 57.5% of all capital income, yet only pay 34% of the income tax

Here you go, read up:
http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorule...ealth.html

http://www.ntu.org/tax-basics/who...taxes.html

Quote : In 2003, just 1% of all households -- those with after-tax incomes averaging $701,500 -- received 57.5% of all capital income, up from 40% in the early 1990s.

Quote : Most amazing of all, the top 0.1% -- that's one-tenth of one percent -- had more combined pre-tax income than the poorest 120 million people (Johnston, 2006).

gee its funny, why dont we collect more taxes from these people who have NOTHING compared to the elite in this country? oh well probably because when you take another 5% from someone taking in a million a year it doesnt mean they cant afford to pay their rent, it means they might not get to buy another ferrari.

Thats not to say we necessarily need to raise income taxes. most of the top 1% of households are not accumulating most of their wealth through income, they are accumulating it through other means. capital gains, estate tax, etc. lets add a very progressive system to those taxes, and we could probably leave the income taxes alone.

http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm...ew&id=1002

whats interesting is my title probably is no longer correct.. chances are the top 1% actually receive more than 57.5% by now if you look at trends



Also for those who think that this topic is redundant.. you might be right if the other topic didnt have a title that was completely without context (typically you can only add context when you actually have an understanding of something.. which usually breaks sensationalist info bites)

I like to set off discussions with the whole story, and not only a (misunderstood) half of it.

Have fun not collecting any capital gains taxes when investment moves offshore.

Quote from OhNoItsDEVO :

the tax system is definitely set up to benefit the rich, and before saying that taxing them more will just send our jobs away, well they did a good enough job of that when taxes were low, but that was due to a 'strong dollar' policy which is a subject for another discussion.

The middle and middle/upper class, those who make between 40k to 200k, have the largest tax burden. The bottom and the top have relatively little tax burden, and business owners, thanks to loopholes, being able to write off expenses, having long term capital gains tax rates and dividend rates that are lower then regular income tax rates, and only paying social security on the first 100k of income.

It's a sad state of affairs that labor is taxed more highly then speculative investing, basically playing around with numbers on a computer screen. The tax system should be graduated, but simple, with no loopholes, where flat percent is paid based on one's income, something like...

0 - 16,000 0%

16,000 - 250,000 15%

250,000 - 500,000 22%

500,000 - 1,000,000 28%

1,000,000 - 5,000,000 35%

5,000,000+ 45%

No tax preferences or deductions NADA. Tax returns one page for everyone. 90% of the IRS no longer needed.

Quote from dissident : the tax system is definitely set up to benefit the rich, and before saying that taxing them more will just send our jobs away, well they did a good enough job of that when taxes were low, but that was due to a 'strong dollar' policy which is a subject for another discussion. The middle and middle/upper class, those who make between 40k to 200k, have the largest tax burden. The bottom and the top have relatively little tax burden, and business owners, thanks to loopholes, being able to write off expenses, having long term capital gains tax rates and dividend rates that are lower then regular income tax rates, and only paying social security on the first 100k of income. It's a sad state of affairs that labor is taxed more highly then speculative investing, basically playing around with numbers on a computer screen. The tax system should be graduated, but simple, with no loopholes, where flat percent is paid based on one's income, something like... 0 - 16,000 0% 16,000 - 250,000 15% 250,000 - 500,000 22% 500,000 - 1,000,000 28% 1,000,000 - 5,000,000 35% 5,000,000+ 45% No tax preferences or deductions NADA. Tax returns one page for everyone. 90% of the IRS no longer needed.

cant really disagree with any of that.

you will have people stating that "but those people who earn 5 million earned every penny and therefore should not be taxed more!"

1) these people should read outliers
2) social mobility in this country is incredibly low. those who are born rich are rich, those who are born poor are poor. its a fact of life that there arent equal opportunities for everyone

Quote from Gotchaforce : cant really disagree with any of that. you will have people stating that "but those people who earn 5 million earned every penny and therefore should not be taxed more!" 1) these people should read outliers 2) social mobility in this country is incredibly low. those who are born rich are rich, those who are born poor are poor. its a fact of life that there arent equal opportunities for everyone

I just laugh when I hear em say that. Yeah a lot of people are undisciplined and live life impulsively and could save money and don't, but there are also a lot of people in dead end jobs who should be making much more. This is America. We should be held to a higher standard of living, but some people have their way, we'll all be living a Mexican standard of living before long as they seem to be intent on letting them all in and having them displace our jobs to preserve the 'bottom line' and keep those share prices up. However that's not to say our standard of living is really that bad.. I guess nothing said here will change anything. People tend to lose perspective. Just having a roof over one's head, family, friends, and food on the table is enough to be grateful for. Everything else is gravy.

Quote from Gotchaforce : Here you go, read up: http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorule...ealth.html I like to set off discussions with the whole story, and not only a (misunderstood) half of it.

so tell me --- how do countries that you would aspire us to be more like treat capital gains?

Does it make sense to tax long-term capital gains like ordinary income? Essentially that's what you seem to be arguing for, albeit by using the tried and true class warfare argument.

Quote from dissident : It's a sad state of affairs that labor is taxed more highly then speculative investing, basically playing around with numbers on a computer screen. The tax system should be graduated, but simple, with no loopholes, where flat percent is paid based on one's income, something like...

um short-term capital gains are taxed as ordinary income in this country.

Quote from arack199 : You are off your rocker. Social mobility is extremely high in this country. We produce more first generation millionaires than anyone. I would support a straight flat tax. If you are poor, man up and work harder.

Ah yes... the tried and true "youre wrong" even though all my sources say im right.

do you argue that 2+2=5? the numbers dont lie (well, im sure they are somehow "lying" to idiots who rely entirely on the anecdote that someones grandfather came here and became rich!)

digging up the charts now..

http://www.nytimes.com/packages/h...ex_03.html

http://www.americanprogress.org/i...alysis.pdf

page 9

the answer here should probably be along the lines of two fronts.. number one, our government is way too big, corrupt, and inefficient for it's own good. Number two, you can't get out of debt when your money supply IS debt with interest attached. Fractional reserve banking which has now become zero reserve banking is part of it too. It's a ponzi scheme... government will never get out of a fiscal deficit.. it's going to run at a trillion plus a year every year forever until a trigger that causes a collapse. There is no getting out of this one without hyperinflation in my opinion. Wages won't trigger the hyperinflation, they'll just follow along for the ride. I don't see how debt can just be magically forgiven and disappear without consequences.. how can the federal reserve just buy all the debt and toss it into a black hole where it will never be repaid without repercussion? How can debt be 'forgiven' without a currency crisis? They gloss it over for now to be not what it really is... I've learned not to fight the rigged economy and markets though. They may be dishonest, but the alternative is collapse. Going short, going against the rulemakers, is a money losing decision.

There will never be money to fund social security and medicare fully, look for huge tax increases that won't work, and ultimate global hyperinflation. We've laundered each other's debt for long enough. Checkmate will come at some point. Being able to build empires with funny money is really a novel invention.. just look at what it has gotten us.. then just wipe the slate clean with hyperinflation and start over! Money is an illusion, numbers on a screen. Buy hard assets with this 'money' while you have it, don't just leave it in federal reserve notes or any other global currency.

Quote from dissident : It's a sad state of affairs that labor is taxed more highly then speculative investing, basically playing around with numbers on a computer screen.

And why is it, do you suppose, that most of the world taxes "speculative investing", (when it pans out and earns a profit....), at a lower rate than regular labor?

Quote from Elmer : And why is it, do you suppose, that most of the world taxes "speculative investing", (when it pans out and earns a profit....), at a lower rate than regular labor?

Something tells me that the OP won't figure that one out, and finds it easier just to re-distribute the wealth created by entrepreneurs.

Quote from rrc06 : Something tells me that the OP won't figure that one out, and finds it easier just to re-distribute the wealth created by entrepreneurs.

As I've said before, I could give a rip. If Warren and the pudding heads that listen to him want to tax capital gains at regular rates, go for it.

I'll be able to pick up some more great deals in foreclosures after the resulting rise in unemployment.

So, you took and article from 2006 with data that ends at 2003, then titled the thread inaccurately according to the projections.

Well done.

Also Table 3 is one of my favorites from your first link!

Table 3: Share of wealth held by the Bottom 99% and Top 1% in the United States, 1922-2007.
Year Bottom 99 percent Top 1 percent
1922 63.3% 36.7%
1929 55.8% 44.2%
1933 66.7% 33.3%
1939 63.6% 36.4%
1945 70.2% 29.8%
1949 72.9% 27.1%
1953 68.8% 31.2%
1962 68.2% 31.8%
1965 65.6% 34.4%
1969 68.9% 31.1%
1972 70.9% 29.1%
1976 80.1% 19.9%
1979 79.5% 20.5%
1981 75.2% 24.8%
1983 69.1% 30.9%
1986 68.1% 31.9%
1989 64.3% 35.7%
1992 62.8% 37.2%
1995 61.5% 38.5%
1998 61.9% 38.1%
2001 66.6% 33.4%
2004 65.7% 34.3%
2007 65.4% 34.6%

Oh how the rich are becoming richer!

I crunched the numbers for you:

Historical average for the bottom 99%=67.61% with a standard deviation of 5%
Historical average for the top 1%=32.39% with the same standard deviation of 5%

So basically, we are well within historical precedent.

Final edit: Look at the red numbers. This is what you want? Do you remember what the economy was like in the 70s? Think about it. The green numbers represent high proportion in the top 1%. I could've sworn liberals loved Clinton's economy in the 90s,,,