Top 1%

The top 1% of American earners now own more wealth than the entire middle class Per USAToday.

Should something be done? Thoughts.

Robin Hood had it right. Take from the rich and give to the poor.

If you make over 500k, the rest should be taxed at 100%. This includes investment income. But, it should be taxed at the local level, not the federal. The dollars should go back to your community, and you have a preference in where it goes. For example, if you make 600K, you get to allocate what charity or benevolent place the 100K goes. This 100K is also not taxed at all at a federal rate.

Soak the rich.

You’re an idiot

get a very poor return on their investment.

how are you measuring their ROI

The best studies include benefits to local businesses, to national businesses and potential increases in real estate values for cities with pro-teams.

Vs.

The cost of financing the stadiums and other tax payer funded perks for pro-teams.

There are some teams that are revenue positive.

Most are big losers.

There is some kind of “loss leadership” mentality in some cities:
“This will bring in new residential developments, which will increase tax base, which will eventually pay for the stadium…”

But the pro- team usually demands a new stadium (and gets one) - long before the investment begins to pay off.

Most professional sports teams are a tremendous waste of money -every way you look at it.

The way I look at it is I want to be entertained and watching the best in the world is the best entertainment.

Pay for it yourself.

Don’t get me wrong.

Maybe local government should be subsidizing something.

How about youth sports.
Maybe good infrastructure and parks

Does “watching stuff” really deserve a government handout?

I’m all for the fans paying for it. That’s what I do when I buy different services (Hulu, Peacock, Paramount).

My point is that revenue is much lower than costs.

Tax payers are paying the difference.

Why should we have to pay for you to watch stuff?

Again… …

I am all for subsidies for youth sports, parks, recreation, infrastructure, art.

But low cost local “sports entertainment” is he just NOT a good public investment.

You shouldn’t. Where did I ever say you should?

Reconsider the Reagan tax cuts

https://publicintegrity.org/inequality-poverty-opportunity/taxes/unequal-burden/how-four-decades-of-tax-cuts-fueled-inequality/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reagan_tax_cuts#:~:text=In%201980%20Ronald%20Reagan%20was,rate%20had%20been%20since%201925.

.

The top 1% of American earners now own more wealth than the entire middle class Per USAToday.

Should something be done? Thoughts.

Robin Hood had it right. Take from the rich and give to the poor.

If you make over 500k, the rest should be taxed at 100%. This includes investment income. But, it should be taxed at the local level, not the federal. The dollars should go back to your community, and you have a preference in where it goes. For example, if you make 600K, you get to allocate what charity or benevolent place the 100K goes. This 100K is also not taxed at all at a federal rate.

Soak the rich.

You’re an idiot

Careful he will now think you are a liberal.

The top 1% of American earners now own more wealth than the entire middle class Per USAToday.

Should something be done? Thoughts.

Robin Hood had it right. Take from the rich and give to the poor.

If you make over 500k, the rest should be taxed at 100%. This includes investment income. But, it should be taxed at the local level, not the federal. The dollars should go back to your community, and you have a preference in where it goes. For example, if you make 600K, you get to allocate what charity or benevolent place the 100K goes. This 100K is also not taxed at all at a federal rate.

Soak the rich.

So… No one makes over $500K in your plan? Anything I receive over $500K I have to give away? Sounds a lot like socialism to me. Think about all the charities that are supported by those bad rich guys that would suddenly lose that income. The lottery? Take that off the table. Who will play if the highest the jackpot ever goes to is $500k. Nothing the lotteries supplement would exist after that.

I don’t often award “Dumbest Post on the Internet Today” but this one is an exception.

BTW, in what world do you think a $500K income puts you in the “rich” category? Just because the average person is lucky to make 25% of that a year does not mean that person is rich by normal standards.

Yep, screw em. Give it to charity if its over 500K. That money from the rich guys would still go to charities, just a larger percentage of it. Folks playing the lottery are desperate souls. They will still play. Hell, folks buy 1 dollar scratch off tickets in the hopes of wining 10 bucks.

Soak the Rich. And some say I’m lying when I say I am progressive.

And trump tax cuts for himself and real estate sector. It unleashed even more unaffordability.

We need much stricter laws on estate taxation. That won’t prevent folks like Musk, Gates, etc., from retaining wealth during their lifetimes. But, it solves some of the problem with people like the Walton family inheriting great wealth. If most of that wealth is retained for only one generation (ie, the person who built the company), in the long run we would be a much less unequal society.

This is what will always get me about the MAGA crew. They are essentially arguing for the benefits of a system with MUCH higher income and estate tax - without the rich having to pay these. In the 90s the exemption was around 600g with the top rate being at 55%.

The top 1% of American earners now own more wealth than the entire middle class Per USAToday.

Should something be done? Thoughts.

Robin Hood had it right. Take from the rich and give to the poor.

If you make over 500k, the rest should be taxed at 100%. This includes investment income. But, it should be taxed at the local level, not the federal. The dollars should go back to your community, and you have a preference in where it goes. For example, if you make 600K, you get to allocate what charity or benevolent place the 100K goes. This 100K is also not taxed at all at a federal rate.

Soak the rich.

You’re an idiot

Careful he will now think you are a liberal.

It appears what we have in the LR are what I refer to as “limousine liberals”. They are all very rich by the fact they hang out on the subforum of a rich man’s elitist sport ( Triathlon) where the entry level bike costs around 4K and the good ones (you know the really aero ones) will cost about 12K. Truly the 1% ers around here.

So we have rich guys on here espousing their liberal progressive views ad nauseum but when it comes to digging in their own pocketbooks, its “no, we’re not so sure about that.” Ha. seems about right. Give me a flipping break. If you can’t live on 500K and give the rest to your fellow man, then hypocrite you may be.

Careful he will now think you are a liberal.

Bwahahaha, he went one step further and used “limousine liberal.” Good troll tactic to use a poster’s most cherished insult against the poster, but in this case it’s just a little too obvious, and just comes off as funny. Recommend SDG dial back the troll tactics used for the last few weeks to the slightly more subtle stuff.

The first thing to change is stopping SS at $160K. Why should a person making $50K pay 6.2% on 100% of their annual paycheck, but someone making $250K only gets taxed on 64% of theirs?

The first thing to change is stopping SS at $160K. Why should a person making $50K pay 6.2% on 100% of their annual paycheck, but someone making $250K only gets taxed on 64% of theirs?

On paper, because the payout is also capped. Billionaires don’t get any larger a payout than those making $160K. And SS is supposed to be an annuity where you get out commensurate with what you put in. Not a subsidy program.

I’m not disagring with the idea. Just pointing out that it’s not as regressive as you suggest without bringing up the payout side.

Careful he will now think you are a liberal.

Bwahahaha, he went one step further and used “limousine liberal.” Good troll tactic to use a poster’s most cherished insult against the poster, but in this case it’s just a little too obvious, and just comes off as funny. Recommend SDG dial back the troll tactics used for the last few weeks to the slightly more subtle stuff.

It might only serve to prove windy’s point.

It might only serve to prove windy’s point.

That point has been QED for longer than I can remember. It’s like F=ma at this point, a general Law of the LR.

And some say I’m lying when I say I am progressive I actually lie, alot.

Fixed it for you.

The top 1% of American earners now own more wealth than the entire middle class Per USAToday.

Should something be done? Thoughts.

We can ask if this is fair, or good - - - but perhaps the question should be - - - Is this sustainable?
History seems to suggest No.

Most professional sports teams are a tremendous waste of money -every way you look at it.

The way I look at it is I want to be entertained and watching the best in the world is the best entertainment.

I tell my kids this all the time…“life is not a spectator sport”. I can’t understand the folks that spend their lives sitting on their asses cheering for someone else to participate in something.

If more people had this approach, then sports incomes would moderate a tremendous amount.

I thought all your kids played high level sports. AKA - you spend your money sitting on your ass watching your kids play sports…

The first thing to change is stopping SS at $160K. Why should a person making $50K pay 6.2% on 100% of their annual paycheck, but someone making $250K only gets taxed on 64% of theirs?

On paper, because the payout is also capped. Billionaires don’t get any larger a payout than those making $160K. And SS is supposed to be an annuity where you get out commensurate with what you put in. Not a subsidy program.

I’m not disagring with the idea. Just pointing out that it’s not as regressive as you suggest without bringing up the payout side.

I would also look at potentially using a progressive model as your salary goes up as well. You could look at some type of means testing but that gets into some really dicey areas as well.

Careful he will now think you are a liberal.

Bwahahaha, he went one step further and used “limousine liberal.” Good troll tactic to use a poster’s most cherished insult against the poster, but in this case it’s just a little too obvious, and just comes off as funny. Recommend SDG dial back the troll tactics used for the last few weeks to the slightly more subtle stuff.

It might only serve to prove windy’s point.

The rare person that pretty much everyone can agree upon.

Joins the ranks of Gurudriver, Big John, etc.

Most professional sports teams are a tremendous waste of money -every way you look at it.

The way I look at it is I want to be entertained and watching the best in the world is the best entertainment.

I tell my kids this all the time…“life is not a spectator sport”. I can’t understand the folks that spend their lives sitting on their asses cheering for someone else to participate in something.

If more people had this approach, then sports incomes would moderate a tremendous amount.

I thought all your kids played high level sports. AKA - you spend your money sitting on your ass watching your kids play sports…

They do. That is the exception to the rule, if your family member is in the game. If you are related to Dack Prescott or Aron Rodgers then by all means, get a box seat every game. If you are some schlub that the team wouldn’t miss if you never went to another game ( other than your money), then the devotion and Finanancial outlay seems a bit misguided.