djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 74,875
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Apr 20, 2020 16:45:37 GMT -5
I am afraid the huddled masses will rise up. They don't have much to lose. They can't afford healthcare. Their working conditions stink and they can barely make ends meet. Our society treats workers like dog poop. Hopefully we can repair that a little before they get too frustrated. By the way, supposedly the great times were when labor unions were strong and tax rates on the rich were very high. So, I'm pretty sure they aren't talking about jobs and the economy when they said "Make America Great Again". It was just an era when non-white people knew their place and kept their mouths shut. Revolutions tend to happen not at the lows but when things are improving but expectations are increasing at a greater rate, according to one of my college professors. that would mean that Trump and the Trumpsters are the new hippies.
which is a little hard to stomach.
|
|
Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 39,593
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
|
Post by Opti on Apr 20, 2020 18:12:30 GMT -5
The only way it's wealth distribution is if the wealthy were going to be paying for it. With corporate tax cuts and all the ways for the wealthy to get out of taxes...I don't see that being the case. Approximately, only the upper 50% of U.S. Citizens pay federal income tax. They will carry the load of the extra debt maintenance. The lower 50% had wealth distributed to them. In a % point of view, not many of the upper 50% get out of paying federal income tax. I would agree that under certain situations, there are those in the upper half who don't pay. It's not a statistical concern. The usual propaganda. As single person in the bottom 40% now, I always pay federal income tax and I'm not getting any wealth distributed to me. Even when I was well paid, I paid more than average in taxes because I did not have kids. Some at the very low levels with kids or disabilities may not have a net tax liability. That's much different than pretending no tax in paid at the lower levels. Someone not paying federal taxes and making $500K or $5Million should be a bigger deal than someone making say $5K in a year.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,386
|
Post by billisonboard on Apr 20, 2020 18:26:34 GMT -5
The only way it's wealth distribution is if the wealthy were going to be paying for it. With corporate tax cuts and all the ways for the wealthy to get out of taxes...I don't see that being the case. Approximately, only the upper 50% of U.S. Citizens pay federal income tax. They will carry the load of the extra debt maintenance. The lower 50% had wealth distributed to them. In a % point of view, not many of the upper 50% get out of paying federal income tax. I would agree that under certain situations, there are those in the upper half who don't pay. It's not a statistical concern. They have money given to them, not wealth.
|
|
thyme4change
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 26, 2010 13:54:08 GMT -5
Posts: 40,327
|
Post by thyme4change on Apr 20, 2020 18:29:28 GMT -5
Approximately, only the upper 50% of U.S. Citizens pay federal income tax. They will carry the load of the extra debt maintenance. The lower 50% had wealth distributed to them. In a % point of view, not many of the upper 50% get out of paying federal income tax. I would agree that under certain situations, there are those in the upper half who don't pay. It's not a statistical concern. They have money given to them, not wealth. And they put 100% of it back into our consumer economy. Rich people just tuck it into their back pocket where it doesn't do much of anything.
|
|
Tiny
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 29, 2010 21:22:34 GMT -5
Posts: 13,357
|
Post by Tiny on Apr 20, 2020 19:18:40 GMT -5
The only way it's wealth distribution is if the wealthy were going to be paying for it. With corporate tax cuts and all the ways for the wealthy to get out of taxes...I don't see that being the case. Approximately, only the upper 50% of U.S. Citizens pay federal income tax. They will carry the load of the extra debt maintenance. The lower 50% had wealth distributed to them. In a % point of view, not many of the upper 50% get out of paying federal income tax. I would agree that under certain situations, there are those in the upper half who don't pay. It's not a statistical concern. Can you define/explain what you mean by: wealth distributed to them?? I'm specifically interested in your definition of "wealth"...
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Mar 29, 2024 9:19:05 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 21, 2020 9:42:07 GMT -5
As an absolute, it will never come from "all" of tnem. I thought I had that covered with the certain situations statement. That has zero to do with what you quoted. My point is you can't call it wealth distribution if people who are not wealthy are paying for a chunk of it. If it was only wealthy paying for it even if it wasn't all of them (those exceptions to paying taxes that your certain situations statement was about) - sure call it wealth distribution. But when a large portion of those paying taxes would not be considered wealthy at all then it's not a wealth distribution. A distribution of money, sure, but not wealth since a lot of people paying for it aren't wealthy. It has everything to do with what I said. I never said 'the wealthy ', I said approximately the upper 50 percent pay federal income tax.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Mar 29, 2024 9:19:05 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 21, 2020 9:55:30 GMT -5
Approximately, only the upper 50% of U.S. Citizens pay federal income tax. They will carry the load of the extra debt maintenance. The lower 50% had wealth distributed to them. In a % point of view, not many of the upper 50% get out of paying federal income tax. I would agree that under certain situations, there are those in the upper half who don't pay. It's not a statistical concern. The usual propaganda. As single person in the bottom 40% now, I always pay federal income tax and I'm not getting any wealth distributed to me. Even when I was well paid, I paid more than average in taxes because I did not have kids. Some at the very low levels with kids or disabilities may not have a net tax liability. That's much different than pretending no tax in paid at the lower levels. Someone not paying deferral taxes and making $500K or $5Million should be a bigger deal than someone making say $5K in a year. The first word of my post was approximately. You got nothing for the covid handout ?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Mar 29, 2024 9:19:05 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 21, 2020 9:57:11 GMT -5
Approximately, only the upper 50% of U.S. Citizens pay federal income tax. They will carry the load of the extra debt maintenance. The lower 50% had wealth distributed to them. In a % point of view, not many of the upper 50% get out of paying federal income tax. I would agree that under certain situations, there are those in the upper half who don't pay. It's not a statistical concern. Can you define/explain what you mean by: wealth distributed to them?? I'm specifically interested in your definition of "wealth"... They had the money (wealth) distributed to them from the federal covid handout. They did not pay federal income tax. "Wealth distributed to them." I use Oxford's first definition.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Mar 29, 2024 9:19:05 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 21, 2020 10:00:42 GMT -5
They have money given to them, not wealth. And they put 100% of it back into our consumer economy. Rich people just tuck it into their back pocket where it doesn't do much of anything. Doesn't sound right. I either support the public debt through bond purchasing, or support operating business through stock prchasing. Even if I was losing my ass by putting it in a bank, it still supports those who work in the financial services. What are you thinking ? I'm thinking that M-1 velocity is slowing considerably, due to the fact of forced closure of business. That's where the pain is being felt.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Mar 29, 2024 9:19:05 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 21, 2020 10:09:43 GMT -5
Approximately, only the upper 50% of U.S. Citizens pay federal income tax. They will carry the load of the extra debt maintenance. The lower 50% had wealth distributed to them. In a % point of view, not many of the upper 50% get out of paying federal income tax. I would agree that under certain situations, there are those in the upper half who don't pay. It's not a statistical concern. They have money given to them, not wealth. Money is wealth. An abundance of valuables or money. (Oxford) The perception of what is 'wealth' is quite subjective, depending on where one sits on the socio-economic ladder. To many, that $1200 covid handout is wealth. For some one who claims to be in the academics of social study, you're posts are sounding quite ignorant.
|
|
thyme4change
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 26, 2010 13:54:08 GMT -5
Posts: 40,327
|
Post by thyme4change on Apr 21, 2020 10:47:37 GMT -5
They have money given to them, not wealth. Money is wealth. An abundance of valuables or money. (Oxford) The perception of what is 'wealth' is quite subjective, depending on where one sits on the socio-economic ladder. To many, that $1200 covid handout is wealth. For some one who claims to be in the academics of social study, you're posts are sounding quite ignorant. Only people who have an abundance of money already would consider more money wealth. Statistically, a very, very low number of people have an abundance of money.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,386
|
Post by billisonboard on Apr 21, 2020 10:53:45 GMT -5
They have money given to them, not wealth. Money is wealth. An abundance of valuables or money. In regards to economics, there is a significant difference between income and wealth. We are seeing a distribution of income that is different from usual. As I indicated before, it will be interesting to see the long term impact on distribution of wealth.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,386
|
Post by billisonboard on Apr 21, 2020 11:08:36 GMT -5
They have money given to them, not wealth. Money is wealth. An abundance of valuables or money. (Oxford) The perception of what is 'wealth' is quite subjective, depending on where one sits on the socio-economic ladder. To many, that $1200 covid handout is wealth. For some one who claims to be in the academics of social study, you're posts are sounding quite ignorant. BTW, good catch on what was missing from your pre-edit post.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 74,875
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Apr 21, 2020 12:41:12 GMT -5
Can you define/explain what you mean by: wealth distributed to them?? I'm specifically interested in your definition of "wealth"... They had the money (wealth) distributed to them from the federal covid handout. They did not pay federal income tax. "Wealth distributed to them." I use Oxford's first definition. it is true that the top 50% pay federal income tax. undeniable. it is not true that the bottom 50% have money "given" to them. they pay taxes too. often, well in excess of any benefits they obtain.
so then, who really gets the money?
that is a question every Republican should carefully analyze.
|
|
thyme4change
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 26, 2010 13:54:08 GMT -5
Posts: 40,327
|
Post by thyme4change on Apr 21, 2020 14:45:34 GMT -5
Approximately, only the upper 50% of U.S. Citizens pay federal income tax. They will carry the load of the extra debt maintenance. The lower 50% had wealth distributed to them. In a % point of view, not many of the upper 50% get out of paying federal income tax. I would agree that under certain situations, there are those in the upper half who don't pay. It's not a statistical concern. The usual propaganda. As single person in the bottom 40% now, I always pay federal income tax and I'm not getting any wealth distributed to me. Even when I was well paid, I paid more than average in taxes because I did not have kids. Some at the very low levels with kids or disabilities may not have a net tax liability. That's much different than pretending no tax in paid at the lower levels. They still pay a disproportionate amount in sales tax and gas tax. Probably property tax too - which their landlord is getting credit for paying, but passing it along to them.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Mar 29, 2024 9:19:05 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 22, 2020 10:18:42 GMT -5
Money is wealth. An abundance of valuables or money. (Oxford) The perception of what is 'wealth' is quite subjective, depending on where one sits on the socio-economic ladder. To many, that $1200 covid handout is wealth. For some one who claims to be in the academics of social study, you're posts are sounding quite ignorant. Only people who have an abundance of money already would consider more money wealth. Statistically, a very, very low number of people have an abundance of money. Per Oxford or anyone, money is one type of wealth. The view point position is what drives the perception of abundance. That's all I was trying to say.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Mar 29, 2024 9:19:05 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 22, 2020 10:22:09 GMT -5
Money is wealth. An abundance of valuables or money. In regards to economics, there is a significant difference between income and wealth. We are seeing a distribution of income that is different from usual. As I indicated before, it will be interesting to see the long term impact on distribution of wealth. There is also a significant difference in answering a partial post, out of context.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Mar 29, 2024 9:19:05 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 22, 2020 10:25:35 GMT -5
They had the money (wealth) distributed to them from the federal covid handout. They did not pay federal income tax. "Wealth distributed to them." I use Oxford's first definition. it is true that the top 50% pay federal income tax. undeniable. it is not true that the bottom 50% have money "given" to them. they pay taxes too. often, well in excess of any benefits they obtain.
so then, who really gets the money?
that is a question every Republican should carefully analyze.
I was only referencing the covid handout. Anything else you are now bringing up, wasn't considered in that statement.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,386
|
Post by billisonboard on Apr 22, 2020 10:27:49 GMT -5
Only people who have an abundance of money already would consider more money wealth. Statistically, a very, very low number of people have an abundance of money. Per Oxford or anyone, money is one type of wealth. The view point position is what drives the perception of abundance. That's all I was trying to say. I thought you were talking about the economic concept, instead of standard usage, when you mentioned "wealth redistribution" in Reply #4. My mistake.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Mar 29, 2024 9:19:05 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 22, 2020 10:27:58 GMT -5
Money is wealth. An abundance of valuables or money. (Oxford) The perception of what is 'wealth' is quite subjective, depending on where one sits on the socio-economic ladder. To many, that $1200 covid handout is wealth. For some one who claims to be in the academics of social study, you're posts are sounding quite ignorant. BTW, good catch on what was missing from your pre-edit post. Touch screens are annoying when typing out posts. You can hit create post before finishing. Reasonable premise on what you think happened.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,386
|
Post by billisonboard on Apr 22, 2020 10:34:12 GMT -5
BTW, good catch on what was missing from your pre-edit post. Touch screens are annoying when typing out posts. You can hit create post before finishing. Nice premise on what you think happened. Hear you on the touch screen issue. I am sitting in my recliner using a 9 inch tablet. I also use one finger sywpe type.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 74,875
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Apr 22, 2020 14:54:46 GMT -5
They have money given to them, not wealth. Money is wealth. money is income. it becomes wealth when it is invested or saved.
Here is the complete breakout by quintile:
Quintile Median Net Worth Bottom 20% -$6,029 Next 20% $7,263 Middle 20% $68,828 Next 20% $205,985 Top 20% $630,754
the bottom 20% have no wealth whatsoever.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,386
|
Post by billisonboard on Apr 22, 2020 15:18:48 GMT -5
money is income. it becomes wealth when it is invested or saved.
Here is the complete breakout by quintile:
Quintile Median Net Worth Bottom 20% -$6,029 Next 20% $7,263 Middle 20% $68,828 Next 20% $205,985 Top 20% $630,754
the bottom 20% have no wealth whatsoever.
How can they not have wealth? Didn't they all just get $1,200 in a mega wealth redistribution?
|
|
Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 39,593
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
|
Post by Opti on Apr 22, 2020 16:21:21 GMT -5
The usual propaganda. As single person in the bottom 40% now, I always pay federal income tax and I'm not getting any wealth distributed to me. Even when I was well paid, I paid more than average in taxes because I did not have kids. Some at the very low levels with kids or disabilities may not have a net tax liability. That's much different than pretending no tax in paid at the lower levels. Someone not paying deferral taxes and making $500K or $5Million should be a bigger deal than someone making say $5K in a year. The first word of my post was approximately. You got nothing for the covid handout ? I work in healthcare, a low paid position. I get to be exposed every day. You?
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 74,875
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Apr 22, 2020 18:36:12 GMT -5
money is income. it becomes wealth when it is invested or saved.
Here is the complete breakout by quintile:
Quintile Median Net Worth Bottom 20% -$6,029 Next 20% $7,263 Middle 20% $68,828 Next 20% $205,985 Top 20% $630,754
the bottom 20% have no wealth whatsoever.
How can they not have wealth? Didn't they all just get $1,200 in a mega wealth redistribution? they need five more.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,386
|
Post by billisonboard on Apr 22, 2020 18:48:50 GMT -5
How can they not have wealth? Didn't they all just get $1,200 in a mega wealth redistribution? they need five more. I think they would need a whole lot more before than that before they could start to develop wealth.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Mar 29, 2024 9:19:05 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 24, 2020 9:03:17 GMT -5
money is income. it becomes wealth when it is invested or saved.
Here is the complete breakout by quintile:
Quintile Median Net Worth Bottom 20% -$6,029 Next 20% $7,263 Middle 20% $68,828 Next 20% $205,985 Top 20% $630,754
the bottom 20% have no wealth whatsoever.
Remind me to not send you any wealth. Seriously though, it's an interchangeable synonym. One can measure there invested wealth by the amount of money they have. Or, if I have $10,000 in my pocket and it isn't recent income, it's still wealth as money. We really need to talk about something else, my eyes are starting to spin.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Mar 29, 2024 9:19:05 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 24, 2020 9:24:23 GMT -5
The first word of my post was approximately. You got nothing for the covid handout ? I work in healthcare, a low paid position. I get to be exposed every day. You? Retired, rarely leave the ranch these days. Enough supplies to last a couple of years. I drive into town to look around, but don't stop anywhere. I was quite soundly ridiculed, right here, for being somewhat of a prepper a couple of years ago. It was when I was describing the large, self powered, fire suppression system that surrounds my all metal and brick home during the extensive wildfires we were having back then. I call my home the 'bunker'. No visual appeal, but able to withstand an F-5 tornado while retaining structural integrity. Talk turned to bring a prepper and the like. I remember things being posted about how preppers are @#$%&$# nuts, or not very smart, etc, etc. I just call it a usable lifestyle, and don't really think about, it as I hunt and fish and volunteer my time for the kids at the roller rink. Now it seems more applicable, than a social dependant lifestyle which is urban living. If it makes me sound 'tone deaf' to the plights of others, I think you can understand.
|
|
thyme4change
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 26, 2010 13:54:08 GMT -5
Posts: 40,327
|
Post by thyme4change on Apr 24, 2020 9:25:39 GMT -5
I'll take linguistics advice from someone who knows the difference between there and their. Things aren't interchangeable just because you want them to be.
Every one of your arguments turns into a technical bullshit parsing of words. It bores me.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,386
|
Post by billisonboard on Apr 24, 2020 9:29:29 GMT -5
money is income. it becomes wealth when it is invested or saved.
Here is the complete breakout by quintile:
Quintile Median Net Worth Bottom 20% -$6,029 Next 20% $7,263 Middle 20% $68,828 Next 20% $205,985 Top 20% $630,754
the bottom 20% have no wealth whatsoever.
Remind me to not send you any wealth. Seriously though, it's an interchangeable synonym.One can measure there invested wealth by the amount of money they have. Or, if I have $10,000 in my pocket and it isn't recent income, it's still wealth as money. We really need to talk about something else, my eyes are starting to spin. Re: the bolded. In a very general discussion they are. In a serious discussion of distribution of resources they aren't.
|
|