U.S. tax system: Why do the rich just keep on getting richer?

[rapbeats]

U.S. tax system: Why do the rich just keep on getting richer?
U.S. tax system: Why do the rich get richer? (Opinion) - CNN.com

now ya know, this is how the rich get richer and never go broke like us regulars

5. None of this is relevant to the truly rich, such as Bill Gates or Warren Buffet

The truly rich don't live off salaries. They live off their capital, the other great factor of production in a capitalist economy.

If you already have wealth, you need never pay tax -- any tax -- in America again. You can play what I call Tax Planning 101 and, unlike high wage earners, you don't have to pay any professional much or do anything too fancy at all. You simply buy and hold assets, borrow against their value to finance your lifestyle, and then die, as we all do. Only when the really rich die, their assets go to their heirs with no income tax consequences.

President Obama made a sensible proposal in his 2015 State of the Union speech to change this absurdity, by requiring capital gains -- the difference between an asset's value and its tax "basis" (typically cost) -- to be taxed on death. That proposal was declared dead on arrival. No serious presidential candidate, including Clinton, has embraced it.

So there you have it. Wage earners are being increasingly taxed. High wage earners are trying to avoid the taxes, aided by a well-heeled industry of professional tax advisers. Politicians like Clinton or FDR may make a big splash by attempting to raise tax rates on these high wage-earners, and the advisers will come running to the rich to help them plan around the increased taxes. All the while the 800-pound gorilla -- the fact that the U.S. tax system is highly ineffective at getting at capital or wealth other than wages -- keeps getting ignored.

Nothing really changes. Capital wins. It need not go on a diet like the rest of us with standard New Year's resolutions, and it stays safe from the grasp of politicians who want headlines but don't want to antagonize their donors. And so stay tuned for more silly proposals that make big headlines but promise little real change.

and yet people cant see why some of us say the game is rigged.​

 

[rapbeats]

and let me leave this here.

Working class voters: why America's poor are willing to vote Republican
Working class voters: why America's poor are willing to vote Republican

In Las Vegas shortly before the 2010 mid-terms I met a woman protesting illegal immigration outside an Obama event who was voting for the tea party candidate Sharon Angle. When it turned out she didn't have health care I asked her if that wouldn't be a reason for her to support Obama. "I haven't really gotten into the whole Obamacare thing," she said. "To be honest I can't even think about that right now. I'm so concentrated on the illegals."

"For decades, Americans have experienced a populist uprising that only benefits the people it is supposed to be targeting," writes Thomas Frank in What's the Matter With Kansas. "The angry workers, mighty in their numbers, are marching irresistibly against the arrogant. They are shaking their fists at the sons of privilege. They are laughing at the dainty affectations of the Leawoof toffs. They are massing at the gates of Mission Hills, hoisting the black flag, and while the millionaires tremble in their mansions, they are bellowing out their terrifying demands. 'We are here,' they scream, 'to cut your taxes."

At times the contradictions are striking. In August 2009, when opponents of Obamacare were disrupting town hall meetings with claims of death panels, Kenneth Gladney and other members of St Louis tea party got into a fight with Democrats at a public meeting. He had to go to the emergency room with injuries to his knee, back, elbow, shoulder and face and ended up in a wheelchair. It turned out Gladney, who had recently been laid off, had no health insurance. He appealed for donations.

'They say they want less help for themselves'
In a report from Minnesota earlier this year the New York Times examined the growing number of people who were simultaneously dependent on government aid and against more government spending. "Many people say they are angry because the government is wasting money and giving money to people who do not deserve it," it concluded. "But more than that, they say they want to reduce the role of government in their own lives. They are frustrated that they need help, feel guilty for taking it and resent the government for providing it. They say they want less help for themselves; less help in caring for relatives; less assistance when they reach old age."

• ^^lol at that last part. they have no idea that the game is rigged. There's no reason to feel guilty for taking government assistance. when you have paid into it all of your life. its your savings account. same with unemployment. In addition. just look at the original article on taxes i posted. and how the rich remain rich. in addition we know they lobby congress and get the rules changed in their favor in essence locking you out of a shot at being wealthy. thats one less avenue you have to wealth. But for some odd reason the brokest of broke or even the middle class still dont get it. they are still daydreaming about balling one day. not realizing even with high taxes for ballers. they would still be ballers. if i took 90% of ays and beyonces wealthy. that 10% is enough to be very rich, and never go broke. but if i take 90% of warren buffet's wealth. oh my. he would still be stupid wealthy, and i could've done a lot of stuff to help poorer people with that kind of guap. and 90% is extreme.

 

[Domingo Halliburton]

A trait I've realized in every millionaire I meet is that they all want to shield their money from taxes.

 

[Domingo Halliburton]

...double

 

[rapbeats]

A trait I've realized in every millionaire I meet is that they all want to shield their money from taxes.

truth.gov. lol . the question is, what if they didnt what if they paid their so called Fair share and in a time of need they paid extra. how nice would this country look even in comparison to the country we see today? would there be nearly as much poverty? slums/ghettos/ etc.? would there still be a bunch of hick towns that look ran down?

 

[Domingo Halliburton]

truth.gov. lol . the question is, what if they didnt what if they paid their so called Fair share and in a time of need they paid extra. how nice would this country look even in comparison to the country we see today? would there be nearly as much poverty? slums/ghettos/ etc.? would there still be a bunch of hick towns that look ran down?

You can get really existential and say, "what is the point of money?"

And live in some 26th century Sci fi world where everything is shared like marx's vision, right?

 

[ORDER_66]

truth.gov. lol . the question is, what if they didnt what if they paid their so called Fair share and in a time of need they paid extra. how nice would this country look even in comparison to the country we see today? would there be nearly as much poverty? slums/ghettos/ etc.? would there still be a bunch of hick towns that look ran down?

True but it wouldnt it also depend on HOW the taxes are distributed back into society...

 

[GunRanger]

Rich not paying more in taxes has little to do with the middle class. The government isnt going to make you pay less just because they get more from other people.

 

[mc_brew]

truth.gov. lol . the question is, what if they didnt what if they paid their so called Fair share and in a time of need they paid extra. how nice would this country look even in comparison to the country we see today? would there be nearly as much poverty? slums/ghettos/ etc.? would there still be a bunch of hick towns that look ran down?

the wealthy don't care about this.... if they are truly wealthy enough to live off assets and not income they don't live in ghettos or hick towns... probably never travel over a crumbling bridge, their kids go to private schools, etc, etc.... they could give a rat's ass if the whole country burns down as long as their own private paradise remains...

 

[desjardins]

A lot of wealth is generated via investments which can be reinvested without ever paying capital gains tax. I remember reading somewhere that a dude who had $50 million simply lived off his yearly dividends which was like $800k a year or something crazy. So that's what was taxed....not the massive amount of wealth he had sitting in his accounts.

Honestly even greater than this problem I think are the corporate tax loopholes. You have corporations literally paying NO tax on BILLIONS in profit.

 

[ill]

A lot of wealth is generated via investments which can be reinvested without ever paying capital gains tax. I remember reading somewhere that a dude who had $50 million simply lived off his yearly dividends which was like $800k a year or something crazy. So that's what was taxed....not the massive amount of wealth he had sitting in his accounts.

Honestly even greater than this problem I think are the corporate tax loopholes. You have corporations literally paying NO tax on BILLIONS in profit.

He already got taxed on that "wealth" when he first attained it. Why should he be taxed a second time on that same money?

We're taxed on our income, not on our level of wealth.

 

[desjardins]

He already got taxed on that "wealth" when he first attained it. Why should he be taxed a second time on that same money?

We're taxed on our income, not on our level of wealth.

Huh it's investments not a savings account
He might have started out with $5 million for all I know. Wealth grows exponentially at that level and if it's always reinvested it's not being taxed. If you counter that it will eventually be taxed if he ever withdrawals it, that's not necessarily true with tax loss harvesting and other strategies people at that level utilize.

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

truth.gov. lol . the question is, what if they didnt what if they paid their so called Fair share and in a time of need they paid extra. how nice would this country look even in comparison to the country we see today? would there be nearly as much poverty? slums/ghettos/ etc.? would there still be a bunch of hick towns that look ran down?

Poverty will always exist. Its about managing it.

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

A lot of wealth is generated via investments which can be reinvested without ever paying capital gains tax. I remember reading somewhere that a dude who had $50 million simply lived off his yearly dividends which was like $800k a year or something crazy. So that's what was taxed....not the massive amount of wealth he had sitting in his accounts.

Honestly even greater than this problem I think are the corporate tax loopholes. You have corporations literally paying NO tax on BILLIONS in profit.

The problem is that we can't stop corporations from leaving the USA...so we HAVE to offer some incentives.

Because we've seen what happens when they leave.

 

[↓R↑LYB]

A lot of wealth is generated via investments which can be reinvested without ever paying capital gains tax. I remember reading somewhere that a dude who had $50 million simply lived off his yearly dividends which was like $800k a year or something crazy. So that's what was taxed....not the massive amount of wealth he had sitting in his accounts.

Honestly even greater than this problem I think are the corporate tax loopholes. You have corporations literally paying NO tax on BILLIONS in profit.

Hopefully I get to be one of these tax dodging millionaires one day