For the love of god or whoever … VOTE!

[highfigh]

What do you mean by "free passage to super wealth without paying their fair share"? What is their fair share?

Let's take the example of Jeff Bezos. He's worth in the range of $200B, so he's an easy target. He also lives in Washington State, so he doesn't pay state income tax. He's sold $9B (so far this year) of Amazon stock, and the sales are listed as "direct" on the insider trading sites, so he holds the shares in his name. I can't find the cost basis for any of these shares, and I suspect it's very low, like less than 5% of the cost, but I don't really know. Just for grins, let's assume the cost basis is $500 per share, and the average sales price $3000/share (which isn't far off) and it makes the math easy. $9B divided by $3000 is 3,000,000 shares (the actual number is higher I think) times $2500 in long-term capital gains. So in this little thought experiment, which is probably low, his taxable capital gain is $7.5B. I'm not a tax expert, but I don't understand how as an individual he gets out of a total federal long-term capital gains tax of 23.8%. That's the 20% taxable gains rate, plus the ACA surtax of 3.8%. 23.8% of $7.5B is $1.875 billion. If the cost basis of the shares is lower and the share count higher, which I believe both are probably true, his capital gains taxes on these sales could easily be over $2B.

And that's just his taxes on these stock sales. I'd be surprised if he didn't have many billions of non-Amazon assets generating income, which he also paid taxes on.

So my question is, highfigh, what do you believe JB's fair share is? I'm just curious.

The IRS has a large amount of revenue due, but people don't pay, negotiate much lower amounts or string them along for years haggling and going to court (Warren Buffet). I'm not saying they should be taxed to the extent that they were in the past- that would not only be unfair, it would make more people place their money offshore or leave the country.

I wasn't referring to a state, I was referring to the nation since that's what the thread is about. I don't want excessive taxation but apparently, that's the way you interpreted my post.

I would like to know why you didn't address the comment about how the government hasn't created the class divide.

 

[Trebdp83]

Maybe when the votes are all officially counted this thread can be retitled to “For the love of god or whoever...write your congressman or SHUT THE F#%K UP!”

 

[highfigh]

I'm complete brevity, it's this simple. No Democracy, or Republic, in the history of Western Civilization has ever survived. Not one. Maybe not all the same reason, but truly, not one. And the Founding Father's were keenly aware of thus, AND the obvious dangers and completes disregard for any Monarchy.

But now somehow, the plan has been subverted, by the far right of thier own party. And even now appears to be completely and entirely subjugated to guess what. A strong, over bearing, norm ignoring, stomp on everyone, ESPECIALLY the States, Executive. WTF..? Where did the platform go..?

Look another way. A cancer invades your system. Your body trues to fight it off but is initially unsuccessful. So does one just give up, roll over and do nothing as the cancer mestasisizes and corrupts the whole body.? Seriously? How and when would anyone think that was gonna work.

Now here's another thought... If the Trumtwats are all going to stay loyal, and you're playing this game to keep them in line, how will you ever break free? On the other hand, if the AssClown thinks he will try to run again in 4 years, are you really going to take him back with open arms..? an impeached and (likely by then) convinced criminal..? OMFG, come on now...

My point I guess is that if they had stood up from the beginning and not given over the whole kit and kiboodle, they might have a chance to break free now. But by going along, all they've accomplished is, I think, the destruction of thier entire party. With half to 3/4 of it in the control of a 2 bit Con Man, Carnival Clown, who commands the minds and votes of some 50 million or more of what used to be your Political Party.

I just never understood the plan. And it only took a 5 minute Google search, or an hour long Documentary for you to have seen 4 year ago exactly how this was going to end.

I can't think of anything that would put Trump back in the WH and I don't want to consider the possibility that the country could go bad to the point that he looks like the best candidate in such a short time. Even if he's convicted of felonies, he could still run.

WRT why nobody stood up and did anything to stop him, look at the clown car the GOP rolled out before the 2016 election- they did try to prevent him being the candidate, but one by one, the others were stripped away and eventually, he was the last one. I think it was less a matter of acceptance and more similar to the reaction of someone who lost an argument.

The 5 minute search or hour long documentary would only show what would happen now that it has happened. NOBODY made public statements that would have described it accurately but a lot of people like to say "I knew this would happen!".

 

[highfigh]

At least WB donates to real charities. He has also pledged to give away 90% (I think) of his wealth. Tax avoidance is legal tax evasion is NOT. All three very unlike Trump.

Partly because he has said he doesn't believe in giving everything to heirs, which may be his way of saying "I don't want the government to take so much inheritance tax". He has already given his kids large chunks of money- I don't remember how much but I think it was around a billion, each. People in Milwaukee speculated about it when his son Peter moved here (his wife's home town). Never heard that Buffet is part of any criminal enterprise.

 

[highfigh]

Not all opinions are of the same weight, like when some "centrists" try to cast all opinions as equivalent like "Opinions on the shape of the Earth differs".



:snicker: A Senator dude complains about a $50 toilet seat? This is what I paid for a very good quality toilet seat a few years back. I don't how long ago the dude made that comment, though.



The ACA is based upon the old Heritage Foundation market based alternative to public universal healthcare, and not incidentally, what Romney care used as well as a template.

The big mistake was not to introduce a public option as well allow Medicare/Medicaid to negotiate drug prices. There certainly are issues with the implementation of a program this huge, but G.O.P. has been totally obstructionist about it. In every f*cking way.



Much has changed since the 70'ies. Cost, especially.

Are you referring to the Flat-Earth people" I don't know how that even started- it was proved wrong hundreds of years ago.

I don't know who complained about $50 toilet seats but the Senator who complained about $1000 hammers or ladders was William Proxmire and he did this in the late-'60s and early-'70s. Apparently, he didn't understand that the US has 'secret projects' to finance.

The public option and drug price negotiations are two of the things I don't like about the current plan and another is the use of the IRS to penalize people who didn't join (which ended last year). The idea that healthy 35-50 year olds would pay a major part of the cost was just not sensible.

 

[highfigh]

Who exactly blames their tax rate on the poor? That's not rational. For one thing, the math doesn't work.

The fundamental unfairness in the US tax system is that wages are taxed at a higher rate than capital gains, dividends, and carried interest and at far lower income levels. And there's the expense and loss deduction advantages not easily or generally available to wage earners. There is also an interesting discussion to be had that Social Security taxes are not progressive.

Social Security wouldn't risk becoming insolvent if the maximum wage used for contributions was higher. The US has many millionaires and billionaires who would never miss any if the highest income limit were raised to $250K, but the employers would be hit hard by it if they were still required to pay the equal half of FICA.

 

[pcosmic]

FK, Paula Orange is delivering a victory prayer for Orange in tongues....SEAN CONNERY...SEAN....TONY STARK....TONY TONY...BEOWULF BEOWULF....I SUMMON THEE LADS...COME AND TAME THE PAULA BEAST...SAVE THE AUIOHOLIC VILLAGES FROM THIS GREAT EVIL....

 

[Irvrobinson]

The IRS has a large amount of revenue due, but people don't pay, negotiate much lower amounts or string them along for years haggling and going to court (Warren Buffet). I'm not saying they should be taxed to the extent that they were in the past- that would not only be unfair, it would make more people place their money offshore or leave the country.

I wasn't referring to a state, I was referring to the nation since that's what the thread is about. I don't want excessive taxation but apparently, that's the way you interpreted my post.

I would like to know why you didn't address the comment about how the government hasn't created the class divide.

Warren Buffett hasn't gone to court that I'm aware of with the IRS, that's Berkshire Hathaway. The two are not the same.

I wasn't referring to state issues, so I'm not sure what your point is here. Are you referring to my mention of Washington State, to explain the tax calculations? That was just a mention to explain the tax due, not a judgment call. Though lucky for Bezos he doesn't live in Oregon, or he'd owe an additional 9.9% on the capital gain.

I don't believe the government has created the class divide, though I do believe the tax laws create unfairness. There are some cases, like the Walton family, which are inheritance aberrations (though that's a $200B one), and I repeatedly rant about private foundations, but I don't believe the government created a class of super-wealthy people. Modern technology has enabled the ability to create massive worldwide audiences for products, services, and intellectual property (like software). As late as the 1980s there was no such thing as a user base of billions of people. The only one I can think of prior to the 1990s was OPEC and oil in the 1970s.

I also believe that a large segment of native US young people have not pursued STEM proficiency and careers in similar proportion to previous generations. These fields are where the high paying jobs are, and an increasing proportion are filled by better-prepared immigrants. Great opportunities can't be filled by the unprepared.

 

[Irvrobinson]

Social Security wouldn't risk becoming insolvent if the maximum wage used for contributions was higher. The US has many millionaires and billionaires who would never miss any if the highest income limit were raised to $250K, but the employers would be hit hard by it if they were still required to pay the equal half of FICA.

Where's your data to support your assertion that raising the cap would avert insolvency? Everything I've read says different. Also, are you aware that the current law is written such that as the cap goes up so do maximum benefits? Do you think Americans are really ready for SS recipients who receive, say, $20K per month in benefits? Biden never mentions how he plans to address this little problem with his $400K+ solution (at least not that I've seen). The Oregon PERS pension system is like this, and some Oregon State and University of Oregon football coaches, not to mention some medical university professors, get huge pensions, and they're quite a scandal:

Top 20 Oregon PERS recipients as of Jan. 1, 2019

The Oregonian/OregonLive's PERS database has been updated with 2018 retirees.

www.oregonlive.com

Social Security was structured like it is to be a pension system for the working class, not a welfare system. No work, no pay. Congress changed that over the years, which is part of the problem. The other part of the problem is that there are fewer workers per recipient. The system needs a restructuring, but I'm not hopeful it will get one.

 

[highfigh]

Warren Buffett hasn't gone to court that I'm aware of with the IRS, that's Berkshire Hathaway. The two are not the same.

I wasn't referring to state issues, so I'm not sure what your point is here. Are you referring to my mention of Washington State, to explain the tax calculations? That was just a mention to explain the tax due, not a judgment call. Though lucky for Bezos he doesn't live in Oregon, or he'd owe an additional 9.9% on the capital gain.

I don't believe the government has created the class divide, though I do believe the tax laws create unfairness. There are some cases, like the Walton family, which are inheritance aberrations (though that's a $200B one), and I repeatedly rant about private foundations, but I don't believe the government created a class of super-wealthy people. Modern technology has enabled the ability to create massive worldwide audiences for products, services, and intellectual property (like software). As late as the 1980s there was no such thing as a user base of billions of people. The only one I can think of prior to the 1990s was OPEC and oil in the 1970s.

I also believe that a large segment of native US young people have not pursued STEM proficiency and careers in similar proportion to previous generations. These fields are where the high paying jobs are, and an increasing proportion are filled by better-prepared immigrants. Great opportunities can't be filled by the unprepared.

I wasn't even thinking about Bezos, or anyone specific when I wrote that comment, but the problem of people not paying their tax bill isn't new.

Politicians cater to their donors- we could look at it as a "friends and family discount", if you like. Jealousy over what someone else has is as old as humans, it just hadn't reached this level and scale before.

I remember many kids in high school who would use the "Why do I need to learn this- I'll never use it after I graduate" line in Math class. In comparison, a guy who sat next to me in Freshman Algebra I said he was bored with the material we were covering because he "had done this in what would be your third grade". His family had immigrated to the US around the time of the Soviet invasion of Prague. It seems that the US thinks American kids can't handle the more difficult subjects unless they're in AP classes.

 

[highfigh]

Where's your data to support your assertion that raising the cap would avert insolvency? Everything I've read says different. Also, are you aware that the current law is written such that as the cap goes up so do maximum benefits? Do you think Americans are really ready for SS recipients who receive, say, $20K per month in benefits? Biden never mentions how he plans to address this little problem with his $400K+ solution (at least not that I've seen). The Oregon PERS pension system is like this, and some Oregon State and University of Oregon football coaches, not to mention some medical university professors, get huge pensions, and they're quite a scandal:

Top 20 Oregon PERS recipients as of Jan. 1, 2019

The Oregonian/OregonLive's PERS database has been updated with 2018 retirees.

www.oregonlive.com

Social Security was structured like it is to be a pension system for the working class, not a welfare system. No work, no pay. Congress changed that over the years, which is part of the problem. The other part of the problem is that there are fewer workers per recipient. The system needs a restructuring, but I'm not hopeful it will get one.

Nobody gets $20K pre month from Social Security. Not even close. Also, super earners die early, just like low wage earners, so the large amounts they paid in go to others- it's by design.

Remember Romney's comment about 47% of US workers pay no income tax? That. They don't make much, but if they keep at it, they will get something, even if they never try to advance their lives. Some are physically or mentally unable to do more, but how many don't, because they don't want to or because they think their life of crime is working for them?

And we're back to Congress being a problem- let's look at who voted for these changes.

 

[trochetier]

Where's your data to support your assertion that raising the cap would avert insolvency? Everything I've read says different. Also, are you aware that the current law is written such that as the cap goes up so do maximum benefits? Do you think Americans are really ready for SS recipients who receive, say, $20K per month in benefits? Biden never mentions how he plans to address this little problem with his $400K+ solution (at least not that I've seen). The Oregon PERS pension system is like this, and some Oregon State and University of Oregon football coaches, not to mention some medical university professors, get huge pensions, and they're quite a scandal:

Top 20 Oregon PERS recipients as of Jan. 1, 2019

The Oregonian/OregonLive's PERS database has been updated with 2018 retirees.

www.oregonlive.com

Social Security was structured like it is to be a pension system for the working class, not a welfare system. No work, no pay. Congress changed that over the years, which is part of the problem. The other part of the problem is that there are fewer workers per recipient. The system needs a restructuring, but I'm not hopeful it will get one.

No income means zero points in the SS calculation. Thus one does get penalized when don't earn anything.

Maximum SS payment per month in SS in 2020 was $3790. Someone has to be earning equal to or greater than the SS max taxable for nearly 30 years to get the max SS per month. Many who get the highest SS payments also generally get taxed on their SS benefits because of other income to supplement SS benefits.

What Is the Maximum Possible Social Security Benefit in 2020?

 

[Irvrobinson]

Nobody gets $20K pre month from Social Security. Not even close. Also, super earners die early, just like low wage earners, so the large amounts they paid in go to others- it's by design.

I didn't say they did. I said they would, if the caps came off. Every time the caps get raised the maximum benefit goes up. That's how it works. The maximum benefit is now $3790/month.

 

[Irvrobinson]

No income means zero points in the SS calculation. Thus one does get penalized when don't earn anything.

What does this have to do with what I posted?

 

[trochetier]

I wasn’t comparing him or Bezos to Trump. Also, he’s giving away his wealth to a foundation that spent about $500M on a headquarters building. I think foundations like the Gates Foundation should be abolished, or the donations fully taxable under the estate tax.

Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation | NBBJ

Today’s employees want to feel connected to their organization and its values. To accomplish this goal, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation connects its workforce to its mission through materials sourced from locations around the world where the Foundation does its work, creating a healthy and...

www.nbbj.com

" Reduce. Reuse. Redefine.
At 640,000 square feet, replacing a 12-acre asphalt parking lot in downtown Seattle, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation campus is the largest non-profit LEED-NC Platinum project in the world. Its conservation strategies reduce potable water use by 80 percent, and energy consumption by 40 percent — an upfront investment in this 100-year, energy-efficient building that will pay for itself in fewer than 30 years."

IMO, that's one great investment. $500m for a 100 year energy efficient building is only $5 million/yr. Moreover, the money got spent in United States, providing jobs, and benefits to those who built the facility, the suppliers, and not to mention the multiplying factor of that money recirculating through the Washington State economy.

 

[Irvrobinson]

Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation | NBBJ

Today’s employees want to feel connected to their organization and its values. To accomplish this goal, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation connects its workforce to its mission through materials sourced from locations around the world where the Foundation does its work, creating a healthy and...

www.nbbj.com

" Reduce. Reuse. Redefine.
At 640,000 square feet, replacing a 12-acre asphalt parking lot in downtown Seattle, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation campus is the largest non-profit LEED-NC Platinum project in the world. Its conservation strategies reduce potable water use by 80 percent, and energy consumption by 40 percent — an upfront investment in this 100-year, energy-efficient building that will pay for itself in fewer than 30 years."

IMO, that's one great investment. $500m for a 100 year energy efficient building is only $5 million/yr. Moreover, the money got spent in United States, providing jobs, and benefits to those who built the facility, the suppliers, and not to mention the multiplying factor of that money recirculating through the Washington State economy.

Yeah, not only built with tax-free dollars, but paid for with charitable tax deductions for the donors (e.g. a specific $350M from Gates). Barf.

 

[highfigh]

I didn't say they did. I said they would, if the caps came off. Every time the caps get raised the maximum benefit goes up. That's how it works. The maximum benefit is now $3790/month.

I never wrote anything about taking the caps off, I mentioned raising the cap but since you posted the maximum benefit, that applies to anyone making the $132K (or whatever the number is) and higher- far from what they're accustomed to, but they don't really need Social Security, do they?

 

[Irvrobinson]

I never wrote anything about taking the caps off, I mentioned raising the cap but since you posted the maximum benefit, that applies to anyone making the $132K (or whatever the number is) and higher- far from what they're accustomed to, but they don't really need Social Security, do they?

Actually, the maximum benefit requires waiting until you're 70 years old to start benefits. If you need Medicare Parts B, C & D it means you pay it yourself. Depending on your health situation and personal circumstances waiting until 70 can be an interesting dilemma.

 

[lp85253]

Social Security wouldn't risk becoming insolvent if the maximum wage used for contributions was higher. The US has many millionaires and billionaires who would never miss any if the highest income limit were raised to $250K, but the employers would be hit hard by it if they were still required to pay the equal half of FICA.

it's not in any direct threat to become insolvent now.. the reason it goes broke every year is a clause in the tax law that allows congress to use overages in revenue to be used to fund other programs .. it resets every year, then they steal outta the fund at the point it's paid for.. same with the post office ..it's self sustaining under it's own weight.. when congress gets done raiding the coffers , not so much...there are plenty of politicians telling half truths to justify privatization...

 

[highfigh]

it's not in any direct threat to become insolvent now.. the reason it goes broke every year is a clause in the tax law that allows congress to use overages in revenue to be used to fund other programs .. it resets every year, then they steal outta the fund at the point it's paid for.. same with the post office ..it's self sustaining under it's own weight.. when congress gets done raiding the coffers , not so much...there are plenty of politicians telling half truths to justify privatization...

They talk of it becoming insolvent by 2034 and sooner under certain conditions, like the lack of revenue due to COVID, etc.

Yeah, raiding the SS Trust- thanks, LBJ.