Taxes on the rich are actually good for the economy.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

I like pot holes, they make my jelly jiggle.

[_Simpson_ 250]

I can't get over the fact that the poor working slobs are the most vocal group when it comes to resisting higher taxes for the rich. I doubt the rich really care because they know that they will find loopholes if taxes are raised.

Poor working slobs eh, well I see what your frame of mind is There is a bigger picture here and by that stupid comment I can tell you dont get. Educate yourself

[_Simpson_ 250]

The biggest problem with this article is that it assumes that all these problems are directly because of tax percentages.Its a real biased article that only points out facts that try to help support this no name blogger from Eugene.

I will have to disagree with Haza and say Bill this is a horrible article.

Not good enough. Show us how and where he is wrong, and which of his conclusions are unsupported by facts.

Well for starters how he tries to associate the bubble bursts to the tax percentage. In 87 we had a burst, which had nothing to do with tax percentages, theres been a lot of speculation to what it was but how much the rich were being taxed was not one of them. By the end of 87 we had recovered and the economy was barely affected. So from 1982 to 2000 our economy was doing pretty good until we had the dot com bust which had nothing to do with tax percentages.

The writer assumes that the billionaire will have one or two million less in his bank account if we increase taxes. I disagree I think usually the billionaire will have just as much in savings but wont invest as much. Either way it really isnt a good argument to why we should tax the rich at ungodly amounts. It does affect us at the bottom too.

So, at least in the case of the Dot.com boom and bust, speculation was the major contributing factor, not the top marginal tax rates? Perhaps overspeculation is at least in part the cause of the boom and bust cycle. But, that begs the question, if there is less capital available for speculation, would that not also smooth out the boom and bust cycle?

Well then that all hinges on if you think that money is better in the governments hand than yours. The government having to much of our money causes its own set of problems. Since that money has been in our hands I think we done pretty good in the last two decades.

Is the money really in your hands, or in the hands of the clever and lucky few? Are you one of those that pays the top marginal rate? Is your net taxable income over $372,950 a year?

I am not, no. My point was that in the hand of who made it, I think they will better spend there abundance of money than the government would.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

I agree somewhat but the rich pay most of the taxes now and they can pay a bit more but look at other things. The rich buy bigger houses yes and they pay a lot more in property taxes. Since they have large houses they need to hire people to take care of these houses and that is jobs. They usually buy more high end things and that means jobs. (Remember when during Carter that the 10% percent luxury taxes on yachts went into affect it destroyed a very lucrative industry and threw many out of work.)

They also just don't look to park their wealth but want to invest their money and many businesses gets financed. These businesses tend to hire the majority of workers in this country. They also tend to buy a lot of bonds that finance communities and departments. And of course they tend to be very generous to charities. Over all the rich get there by being producers and producers do tend to need workers. Workers tend to spend their money and that fuels more jobs.

Of course there are some rich that tend to hoard but have never looked at the percentages that do this but I think they are a small percentage.

The government on the other hand are ran by politicians and their sole aim is to be powerful. To be powerful they need to stay in office for awhile so they can get those choice committee assignments and bring home the bacon. They do this by promising to go along and get along. They also care less about spending as this will mean more money that could be used to fund projects and projects mean power to the ones that can ok who get the projects and so on. We know the government has never once ever been able to run anything in a judicious and frugal manner (except when downsizing the military) so they yearly can't keep their hands off anything.

That is a fair argument, that in building their castles, and acquiring their toys, the rich do provide an impetus to the economy in general. There is also the notion of "Nobles oblige" applied to the rich, that they should spend their wealth wisely, in a manner that best aids society in general. Can they do that on their own, or does society itself play some role in guiding the "Nuevo Riche" on the best way to spend their money?

That still leaves the question of the speculator, and the leverage that wealth has, in creating boom and bust.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

You also have to decide what you want America to be.

Do you want to retain America's current status as the best place in the world to get insanely rich? That status comes at a cost - it means fewer 'protections' for the middle and the bottom, it means less investment in infrastructure, it means less regulation, more laissez faire...

Or do you want a fairer, nicer, America that is good to more people but no longer the 'go to' place if you seek riches beyond your wildest imagination?

[_Simpson_ 250]

Explain to me why it is that in the last 2 decades that we have had a great economy without taxing the top earners into oblivion. We actually lowered it from I think 70% to 28%.

Great economy. Half the country is bankrupt, the rest are dirt poor. Some of you here clearly rely on the indoctrinated we are the best as a measure of success. Or I assume you guys travel to 2nd and 3rd world countries and come back thinking, we are so lucky to be Americans. America is a great place for the rich. For the rest who are middle class and poor, it suxs.

As a start regarding travel, look at your airports compared to that of other developed countries. Probably the worst I have seen. Once agian this links back to the article. Which other countries have this same issue? third world countries. Whereas the highest GDP grossing countries that properly tax the rich have awesome infrastructure; because all for reasons stated in the article.

yes the rich have become even more rich over the last two decades but the middle class are still living paycheck to paycheck and struggling. They also have shitty run down infrastructure to use. the wealthy don't care, they use their private jets here. Live in their gates communities and so on. What you guys call success to many in other developed countries is considered a failure. I know how people are in this country so you will either respond by not caring about anyone else or respond with a range of excuses.

Let use LAX for example. Has not been updated since the 80's; since it was built. Whereas I can list a good 40 airports outside the US that absolutely destroy it. The first thing someone who visit from Australia comments on is the condition of LAX. Once again this goes back to the middle class and poor not having enough money to spend to improve facilities like that. Then it's coupled with repubs absolute loathing of any money spent in America, unless it comes to military. People need to wake up and realize excluding third world countries, no one looks up to the country anymore. For obvious reasons. I'm not trying to insult anyone but how can you ever improve when you have a a group of people who don't even see a problem; furthermore, actually believe the average American is doing well.

Yes we are going thru some tough times right now but what about the decades before this. You focus on all the negative of the states I am not going to take your opinion and I hope many wont for the same reason I choose not too.

Why are you even working here in the states?

[Heracles 417]

This statement is just false most of our cities are in very good condition.I have been alot of places here in the states. You are just going to try to focus on the ghettos or bad neighborhoods, theres a bigger picture here. We have been a great nation for many years because we allow the citizens to have more of there money, and thats how I want it, further more thats how America wants it. Why does every topic with you turn into you telling people how great your nation is and how flawed America is, its getting old.

What are you talking about? Tell me one American city in the poast 15 years that has won any international award for its livability. None. This point just proves the indoctrinated we are the best because we say that many have that is keeping the country down. face it, you're not winners or leaders anymore. Most people are renovating, building up and developing their cities. America has people like you who don't even see the cities as a problem. The country is now pretty much ranked last in so many international surveys but nope, this is wrong; while the opinion of those like you here is right.

That is not how America wants it, that is how you want it. More and more people are waking up to this con. Crooks like you cannot con Americans for ever. Especially when there distant cousins are doing so well, based on the points of this article alone. The average Aussie could easily buy a house in LA, orange country etc. I would like to see the average Joe from LA try buy a $800K apartment in Sydney.

More of the same my country is better than yours nonsense. I gotta say its been a good 34 years for me here in the USA. I came from a poor family but have always had opportunity. Point being is that this America sucks attitude you always display isnt going to fly with me, I know better.

Truly this country will never improve when you have people like this who cannot even accept that your far from leading or even good at something anymore. But I am guessing in your case it's more of the as long as your particular area may be nice, who cares about the rest of the country. Another failed attitude.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

You also have to decide what you want America to be.

Do you want to retain America's current status as the best place in the world to get insanely rich? That status comes at a cost - it means fewer 'protections' for the middle and the bottom, it means less investment in infrastructure, it means less regulation, more laissez faire...

Or do you want a fairer, nicer, America that is good to more people but no longer the 'go to' place if you seek riches beyond your wildest imagination?

I heard that Mexico is actually the better place to live if you are rich, as shown by the highest per capita millionares of any place in the world. (Fact not verified, only blindly repeated).

[Heracles 417]

Yes we are going thru some tough times right now but what about the decades before this. You focus on all the negative of the states I am not going to take your opinion and I hope many wont for the same reason I choose not too.

Why are you even working here in the states?

because before I leave my goal is to crush any republican that have conned this country and its good people for to long.

[luckytxn 2,264]

I agree somewhat but the rich pay most of the taxes now and they can pay a bit more but look at other things. The rich buy bigger houses yes and they pay a lot more in property taxes. Since they have large houses they need to hire people to take care of these houses and that is jobs. They usually buy more high end things and that means jobs. (Remember when during Carter that the 10% percent luxury taxes on yachts went into affect it destroyed a very lucrative industry and threw many out of work.)

They also just don't look to park their wealth but want to invest their money and many businesses gets financed. These businesses tend to hire the majority of workers in this country. They also tend to buy a lot of bonds that finance communities and departments. And of course they tend to be very generous to charities. Over all the rich get there by being producers and producers do tend to need workers. Workers tend to spend their money and that fuels more jobs.

Of course there are some rich that tend to hoard but have never looked at the percentages that do this but I think they are a small percentage.

The government on the other hand are ran by politicians and their sole aim is to be powerful. To be powerful they need to stay in office for awhile so they can get those choice committee assignments and bring home the bacon. They do this by promising to go along and get along. They also care less about spending as this will mean more money that could be used to fund projects and projects mean power to the ones that can ok who get the projects and so on. We know the government has never once ever been able to run anything in a judicious and frugal manner (except when downsizing the military) so they yearly can't keep their hands off anything.

That is a fair argument, that in building their castles, and acquiring their toys, the rich do provide an impetus to the economy in general. There is also the notion of "Nobles oblige" applied to the rich, that they should spend their wealth wisely, in a manner that best aids society in general. Can they do that on their own, or does society itself play some role in guiding the "Nuevo Riche" on the best way to spend their money?

That still leaves the question of the speculator, and the leverage that wealth has, in creating boom and bust.

True all but they do finance most things that we desire such as companies and jobs. The less they have to do this means less money there is to fund things. There has been studies that show as the government gets into things that are traditionally charity driven that the charity starts to receive less contributions from the people. It is a vicious cycle as the government is then asked to do even more..

There are boom and busts for sure. There are many that come in when they see many being made and want to get in on it and they drive the prices higher. Then more come in to get in on it and they drive it higher still. Eventually the pricing is out of whack. The house of cards falls and the last ones in lose a lot. Greed is a beotch sometimes. Our government can try to regulate these things but it is hard to tell people to not be greedy. It is usually common sense to not come in late but many do so in hopes of riches. They learn a lesson though, hopefully.

[Heracles 417]

You also have to decide what you want America to be.

Do you want to retain America's current status as the best place in the world to get insanely rich? That status comes at a cost - it means fewer 'protections' for the middle and the bottom, it means less investment in infrastructure, it means less regulation, more laissez faire...

Or do you want a fairer, nicer, America that is good to more people but no longer the 'go to' place if you seek riches beyond your wildest imagination?

I heard that Mexico is actually the better place to live if you are rich, as shown by the highest per capita millionares of any place in the world. (Fact not verified, only blindly repeated).

Well that is a good point. Mexico has the third richest person in the world yet the average person is dirt poor. Some people clearly want to the same future for America. Other like yourself have woken up to this scam and don't want America to turn into a second or third world country; where there is huge disparity between the rich and poor. Where a small portion of the country is mega rich while the rest are dirt poor.

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

I work for the uber wealthy and its very hard to defend them. We've had 3 clients on the Forbes billionaire list and I have to say they can be very hard to work for. Basically once the contracts are signed they expect you to hop to and will push beyond the limits of the contract. They know that while they may be technically wrong regarding the agreement your not going to fight back because in court they can run you into the ground by effectively outspending you and outlasting you. A five year legal dispute is nothing to them, but for a small to midsize firm your going to eventually run out of funds before the case can be won. Its the mid to low level wealth that are the one's to work for because they are simply less powerful and will play by the book. Simply put, the wealthy can get things cheaper then the rest because they have the power to intimidate. The court system has become their power base.

I think taxes should return to 1950's levels. Great article by the way.

Edited August 29, 2009 by lancer1655

[Heracles 417]

True all but they do finance most things that we desire such as companies and jobs. The less they have to do this means less money there is to fund things. There has been studies that show as the government gets into things that are traditionally charity driven that the charity starts to receive less contributions from the people. It is a vicious cycle as the government is then asked to do even more..

There are boom and busts for sure. There are many that come in when they see many being made and want to get in on it and they drive the prices higher. Then more come in to get in on it and they drive it higher still. Eventually the pricing is out of whack. The house of cards falls and the last ones in lose a lot. Greed is a beotch sometimes. Our government can try to regulate these things but it is hard to tell people to not be greedy. It is usually common sense to not come in late but many do so in hopes of riches. They learn a lesson though, hopefully.

So why is it Australia has been least hit by this crisis? with their last recession occurring in 1988. it is the lack of greed that got this country into another crises. Have you ever asked yourself why the majority of international crises start in the US?

Dam straight you can regulate greed by the means stated in the article. Anyone earning over $200K should pay at least 50% in tax on any earnings above that. Now there is a positive way of approaching this, something Australia does. If they invest the money back into the community and country, they should receive tax breaks for it. So if they decided to buy real estate in poor areas or bonds that help a community, they should get tax breaks for it. Win win for all.

The republican head in the sand reagonomics no longer works. So when I here a republican say they want change, even with blood if necessary, I laugh because America has used your system since the 80's and it's now failing the country. With the rich now mega rich, while everyone else is becoming poor. You realize the average Aussie can buy two almost three houses in Texas for the price of one Aussie home. They also have the largest private retirement savings account per person in the world. Double that of the country in the second position 2. So you tell me which approach works best.

[_Simpson_ 250]

Yes we are going thru some tough times right now but what about the decades before this. You focus on all the negative of the states I am not going to take your opinion and I hope many wont for the same reason I choose not too.

Why are you even working here in the states?

because before I leave my goal is to crush any republican that have conned this country and its good people for to long.

Your a real saint haza

You work here and yet you b1tch about how bad it is here and how great your country is, go back to Australia and work I wont miss you. Please.

Edited August 29, 2009 by -Simpson-

[Heracles 417]

I work for the uber wealthy and its very hard to defend them. We've had 3 clients on the Forbes billionaire list and I have to say they can be very hard to work for. Basically once the contracts are signed they expect you to hop to and will push beyond the limits of the contract. They know that while they may be technically wrong regarding the agreement your not going to fight back because in court they can run you into the ground by effectively outspending you and outlasting you. A five year legal dispute is nothing to them, but for a small to midsize firm your going to eventually run out of funds before the case can be won. Its the mid to low level wealth that are the one's to work for because they are simply less powerful and will play by the book. Simply put, the wealthy can get things cheaper then the rest because they have the power to intimidate. The court system has become their power base.

I think taxes should return to 1950's levels. Great article by the way.

I see this myself. Unfortunately for the average Joe in America they have no exposure to this so they don't see or comprehend it. They don't realize that even if someone rich was grossly in the wrong, negligent, they could financially run them into the ground and there is not a dam thing they could do about it. Look at Enron and the Exxon Valdez disaster. I work with wealthy people every day and can say you don;t want to get on their bad side as they have a lot of power in the US. At least the middle and little guy has a change in Canadian, British or Australian court. Not here. Money talks and the truth walks out with your bank balance.