What does "99% of the world's wealth is owned by 1% of people" mean?

People don't actually pay any taxes. The corporations who pay their salaries do.

If you TREBLE the tax on individuals, all that would mean is the price corporations pay for labor would go up.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Apparenty you don't know the difference between normal salary and Investment Income.

We allow lower tax rates on investment income, because that income comes from the money you invest that was left over AFTER you paid your income taxes.

So no, they pay the HIGHEST rates on Income from normal earnings as I pointed out.

Arthur

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

And if you taxed stupidity....

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

It is a viscous circle of cat and mouse . Round and round and round it goes were it stops no body knows .
Hickory dickery doc the mouse ran up the clock

Kissing time good bye Quad . Kissing time Good Bye

You know what that means ? Punching the clock . The state of mind shift of the youth . The talent is getting uppity. The slaves are getting restless . The new demographic is expecting to live where they want to and there demand for flex hours is becoming more important than there job . They don't to be slaves to there job anymore either . It is the new paradigm of the Youth . They gonna rule one day too

 

You cannot be this stupid. I cannot fathom it. CORPORATIONS DO NOT MAKE INCOME ARTHUR?? WTF is the matter with you?

 

So, let me get this straight, income tax isn't a tax on income. It's a tax on income made from working.. ?

 

When you do your income tax, you keep different sources of income separate because the tax rate on regular earnings, such as salary, are taxed at a higher rate then income you make from investments.

The logic is pretty simple.

To make an investment you first have to make regular earnings and the more regular income you make (in tiers up to ~400,000k after deductions/exemptions/credits) the higher you pay (right now 35% is top)

What's left over you get to spend on the cost of living (house, food, utilities, car etc)

What's left after that you can spend on things besides the necessities (vacation, entertainment etc),

What's left after that you can invest.

If you invest it, say in a bank CD that pays you back a 5% per year return, you then pay 15% of that 5% return as a tax in addition to the income tax you pay on your regular earnings.

The rate's lower on investment income (held at least a year) than regular income to create an incentive to invest your money vs spending it on luxuries.

Arthur

 

Not sure what your bawling has to do with the quote of mine,

Of course corporations make income.

Never said they didn't.

So?

They don't pay taxes on income.

Never have.

Arthur

 

that is what the main bitch is. That is how 1% of people own 99% of everything.

 

Except they don't.

At least in the US.

The top 1% has about 38% of the personal wealth.

Arthur

 

Ok in the U.S then the next 10% own another 55%. Ya that's great huh that's exactly the opposite of Monarchy days huh. Way to go freemason founding fathers. This is much better. Too bad they let Banks and corporation replace heads of state and nobility.

 

Interesting. I've heard to term capital gains for years, but never gave it much thought. Up until the last few years I always had more month left at the end of the check so "extra" money didn't really figure in to it. I'll have to digest that concept a bit...

 

Nope.

The top 25% (more than TWICE the number of households as you suggest) own 87% of the wealth.

At least get in the right ballpark.

And YES it is far better than days of Kings and Queens.

The BIG difference in wealth distribution is the VAST amount of PUBLIC wealth that one gets to use and share in even if one doesn't have a lot of personal wealth.

That would be things like the Public Schools, Parks, Libraries, Broadcast TV and Radio, Transit etc etc.

Arthur

 

Did you mean to say "the VAST amount of PUBLIC wealth," or did you mean "the VASTLY DIMINISHING amount"? Just checking.

I'm not one for links and such, I'll leave that to the google-ites, but certainly you're aware of the MASSIVE CUTS--and in many instances, outright closures (libraries, in particular)-- to funding for "Public Schools, Parks, Libraries," and the like over recent years, no?

 

Yeah, we hit a big recession and we have continuing high unemployment so both state and federal tax revenue is down quite a bit so we probably closed a few less popular things.

So?

These closures in no way are MASSIVE as you seem to imply.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_National_Parks_of_the_United_States
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._state_parks
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Highway_System_(United_States)
http://www.loc.gov/flicc/
http://www.publiclibraries.com/

But then you aren't one for research let alone links and such.

Arthur

 

"Popular things"--ha! That's a good one! Public schools are now assessed by their "popularity."

Incidentally, we are no longer in Philadelphia (see other thread) for a number of reasons, one of them being that the Philly school district laid off 1500 teachers last year--that's right, 1500. Apparently, were my girlfriend still teaching there, her classroom size would have been between 40 and 45 students. But whatever, schools aren't that "popular," are they?

Seriously?

Really? Try googling "library closures."

And you aren't one for qualitative evaluation and such, just so long as the numbers look pretty...

And I'm not sure what your links are intended to show, as "closures" are but one aspect of the matter. But your M.O. is to hone in on a single idea or theme and ignore absolutely everything else that is going on around you--or that people futilely try to communicate to you.

 

Actually I was kinda distorting the truth a bit there: I am in fact "one for research... links and such." To supplement my virtually non-existent income I do a fair bit of proof-reading, fact-checking, and editing; consequently, I don't really feel like doing much of it when I'm posting on sciforums--and not getting paid.

Also, I abstain from citations and such in part to irk certain members and moderators who are constantly going on about how this is a place of "research" and "scholarship," and also those few who seem to have embraced scientism (obviously there's some overlap in these groups). Cuz, well... it isn't (as to the former), and, well... I respect proper science and those who "do" proper science, but I don't respect those who seem incapable of recognizing that "science" is as much controlled and contaminated by "special interest groups" as is everything else.

...

And what's this you say about a "recession"? But... But... I was under the impression that a substantial number of corporations were reaping record profits, and an even more substantial number of CEOs were taking in staggering salaries and bonuses. How can there be a... recession?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

I'm not certain that's the right statistic

In truth, I've never heard that assertion before, that 1% of people control 99% of wealth. And I'm a leftist, prone to hearing all sorts of accusations about wealth consolidation.

G. William Domhoff, a research professor at University of California Santa Cruz, offers up numbers more familiar to my understanding:

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

​

In 2006, The New York Times reported:

In 2000, the top 1 percent of the world's population—some 37 million adults with a net worth of at least $515,000—accounted for about 40 percent of the world's total net worth, according to the report.

The bottom half of the population owned merely 1.1 percent of the globe's wealth. The net worth of the world's typical person—whose wealth was above that of half the world's population and below that of the other half—was under $2,200.​

____________________

Notes:

Domhoff, G. William. "Who Rules America: Wealth, Income, and Power". 2011. Sociology.UCSC.edu. November 16, 2011. http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html

Porter, Eduardo. "Study Finds Wealth Inequality Is Widening Worldwide". The New York Times. December 6, 2006. NYTimes.com. November 16, 2011. http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/06/business/worldbusiness/06wealth.html

 

Joe blow average home owner took and is taking the blow . We must remember that a big part of the Home owner crowd lost big and that wealth went up in smoke . This put a big damper on growth . People discretionary income that they would invest just disappeared as so may had there net worth tied up in there houses.
So well banks are still sitting on losses . To much market interference by cronyism and as cronies continue to be cronies there is going to be unrest .

The protesters are not going away any time soon . They may fall back and regroup but believe me they will still be there and if cronies don't wise up there numbers will increase world wide .

Stand common people of the world . May 3rd. lives Stand . May day May day May Day . We can lift the curse if well all together as a team


Charter Schools what you all think . When I was taking a course in Real Estate law at Sac City college I started a high comprehension class geared to spoon feeding as to get a license in the industry . I started the private school 3 month after the college course which was a semester course . I knew more than the teacher at the final . Well I missed one question on the final . I was right . The teacher was wrong . We got in a big fight . He said to stop making waves our my grade would be reduced. I stopped immediately and went with the flow . He was wrong ! Thats a fact Jack . Out dated information was the reason why . He had out dated information he was teaching by . I got the latest greatest as law changed . Continued education is important this way . It is required in some professions

 

Can you name one school district that isn't providing education to its residents because of budget cuts?

Yes, Or do you not understand the implications of a large long recession on tax revenues and the need to possibly cut back?

I did, apparently there are 375 that are threatened with closure in the US.
Of course there are 121,000 or so libraries in the US, so I'm not getting my panties in a wad about a tiny fraction of 1 percent that MIGHT close.

Not at all, but when you are dealing with 50 states and thousands of cities and over 300 million people in the US alone, one has to look at the numbers.

Anecdotes don't cut it.

Sure the matter is complex, but the amount of PUBLIC wealth in the US has NOT declined significantly due to the depression.

If you think so then you can communicate with me real easily.
Present some facts/links to back up your claims.

I don't respond to hand waving, even if it is sincere hand waving.

Arthur