Income inequality

[turtlespeed 212]

https://www.marketwatch.com/amp/story/guid/95354B6C-F5A1-11E9-B6FF-1CF1C260ADF9

 

The fix: 

Anyone that makes 120k/yr (10k/mo) has to give up 75%  of anything over that amount into a slush fund that will redistribute that money to every person in the US - including all immigrants - have exactly the same amount in their bank accounts. 

[jakee 1,254]

Your sentence is broken.

[billvon 2,384]

3 hours ago, turtlespeed said:

https://www.marketwatch.com/amp/story/guid/95354B6C-F5A1-11E9-B6FF-1CF1C260ADF9

 

The fix: 

Anyone that makes 120k/yr (10k/mo) has to give up 75%  of anything over that amount into a slush fund that will redistribute that money to every person in the US - including all immigrants - have exactly the same amount in their bank accounts. 

Your "fix" doesn't match the article.  What are you talking about?

[wolfriverjoe 1,340]

56 minutes ago, billvon said:

Your "fix" doesn't match the article.  What are you talking about?

What is he ever talking about?

[turtlespeed 212]

6 hours ago, turtlespeed said:

Anyone that makes 120k/yr (10k/mo) has to give up 75%  of anything over that amount into a slush fund that will redistribute that money to every person in the US - including all immigrants - have exactly the same amount in their bank accounts. 

I tried posting from my phone - but - eh - not worth the time to try to fight it.

Income inequality - 

The article states that the ultra rich are sitting on their money.

I proposed a fix for that - to ease the inequality.

Anyone that makes 120k/yr (10k/mo) must give up 75%  of any earnings over that amount, and put it into a government held slush fund, that will redistribute that money to every person in the US, including all undocumented immigrants.  That way we can all say that we have exactly the same amount in our bank accounts. 

Another more fair allotment s that everyone gives 100% of their income, and held monies, or savings, and let the government doll it out purely on a mathematical scale.  No one gets any more than anyone else.

[billvon 2,384]

1 hour ago, turtlespeed said:

I proposed a fix for that - to ease the inequality.

Anyone that makes 120k/yr (10k/mo) must give up 75%  of any earnings over that amount, and put it into a government held slush fund, that will redistribute that money to every person in the US, including all undocumented immigrants.  That way we can all say that we have exactly the same amount in our bank accounts. 

Another more fair allotment s that everyone gives 100% of their income, and held monies, or savings, and let the government doll it out purely on a mathematical scale.  No one gets any more than anyone else.

Not a great idea.  People who make $120K a year are still using a lot of discretionary income to put back into the economy.  Tax them and you harm the economy.  If you want to increase the progressive tax, OK - let's go back to Reaganesque tax rates, which are more like 70% over $1 million income (2019 dollars.)  And no slush funds; use them like any other tax income to narrow the deficit.

Here's a better idea, based on the article.  A 1% wealth tax on anyone worth more than $100 million.  That won't affect the economy, and will fund most of the current tax cuts/military spending/walls etc.

[jakee 1,254]

2 hours ago, turtlespeed said:

Anyone that makes 120k/yr (10k/mo) must give up 75%  of any earnings over that amount, and put it into a government held slush fund, that will redistribute that money to every person in the US, including all undocumented immigrants.  That way we can all say that we have exactly the same amount in our bank accounts. 

Now your maths is broken. If the ultra rich give up 75% of their money they will still be far richer than everyone else after that money has been redistributed. The idea that your plan will result in everyone having the same cash in the bank is blatant nonsense. Why do you assume the fix must involve everyone having equal assets anyway? That's absurd.

Quote

The article states that the ultra rich are sitting on their money.

And the article is specifically talking about the ultra rich. It even says, in the first paragraph, that talking about income inequality in terms of couples making $350k a year is phoney and you should forget about it. Since your 'fix' involves taking money from anyone earning over $120k, it appears you have failed to comprehend the basic points of article you linked.

[RonD1120 58]

I don't believe in income equality. It takes away or at least diminishes the desire to try to do better and earn more. It is basically against the American spirit. If you don't have enough your answer lies within you.

As for me, my father owns all the gold and all the silver and the cattle of a thousand hills. He supplies all my needs according to His riches in glory in Christ Jesus.

[gowlerk 1,903]

22 minutes ago, RonD1120 said:

As for me, my father owns all the gold and all the silver and the cattle of a thousand hills. He supplies all my needs according to His riches in glory in Christ Jesus.

Now who you jivin' with that cosmic debris?

Edited October 29, 2019 by gowlerk

[yobnoc 142]

34 minutes ago, RonD1120 said:

I don't believe in income equality. It takes away or at least diminishes the desire to try to do better and earn more. It is basically against the American spirit. If you don't have enough your answer lies within you.

As for me, my father owns all the gold and all the silver and the cattle of a thousand hills. He supplies all my needs according to His riches in glory in Christ Jesus.

The - and I cannot stress this enough - BIGGEST eye-roll just happened by the entire SC crowd.

[JerryBaumchen 1,047]

5 hours ago, wolfriverjoe said:

What is he ever talking about?

Hi Joe,

+1,

Jerry Baumchen

[yobnoc 142]

15 minutes ago, JerryBaumchen said:

Hi Joe,

+1,

Jerry Baumchen

Hi Jerry,

It was my idea to boycott turtle.

Just sayin...credit where it's due

But apparently @ryoder was the O.G. here; I just made the campaign.

[billvon 2,384]

1 hour ago, RonD1120 said:

I don't believe in income equality. It takes away or at least diminishes the desire to try to do better and earn more.

Jesus seemed pretty clear that being rich was a problem, as was not giving to others.

=======

Then Jesus said to His disciples, “Assuredly, I say to you that it is hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven. . . . . Do not lay up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy and where thieves break in and steal; but lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust destroys and where thieves do not break in and steal.  For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.

. . .

Then the righteous will answer Him, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see You hungry and feed You, or thirsty and give You drink?  . . .‘Assuredly, I say to you, inasmuch as you did it to one of the least of these My brethren, you did it to Me.’

========

[RonD1120 58]

16 hours ago, gowlerk said:

Now who you jivin' with that cosmic debris?

Philippians 4:19

[RonD1120 58]

15 hours ago, billvon said:

Jesus seemed pretty clear that being rich was a problem, as was not giving to others.

=======

Then Jesus said to His disciples, “Assuredly, I say to you that it is hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven. . . . . Do not lay up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy and where thieves break in and steal; but lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust destroys and where thieves do not break in and steal.  For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.

. . .

Then the righteous will answer Him, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see You hungry and feed You, or thirsty and give You drink?  . . .‘Assuredly, I say to you, inasmuch as you did it to one of the least of these My brethren, you did it to Me.’

========

Agree

Did you know that there are a lot of rich Christians that give away tremendous amounts of money to various services? We are a generous people. 

[billvon 2,384]

1 minute ago, RonD1120 said:

Agree

Did you know that there are a lot of rich Christians that give away tremendous amounts of money to various services? We are a generous people. 

Yes, we are.  But the problems with income inequality remain.

[DJL 232]

The only things that could realistically be applied are taxes on stagnant wealth and incentives to spend wealth. In this way you don't penalize earners.  This has a conceptual precedent in keeping money circulating in the economy and would TRULY cause wealth to "trickle down".

[SkyDekker 1,121]

The whole term is a misnomer that get's jumped on. The problem isn't that all incomes aren't equal. The problem is in the spread and the number of people involved. Combine that with a plutocracy and you can start seeing what the issue might be.

Responding to that with some asinine suggestion is intellectually dishonest.

[billvon 2,384]

1 minute ago, SkyDekker said:

The problem isn't that all incomes aren't equal. The problem is in the spread and the number of people involved. Combine that with a plutocracy and you can start seeing what the issue might be.

I'd suggest the problem isn't even income, although that's part of it.  The problem is the growing bimodal distribution of wealth.  Wealth is being more and more concentrated in the hands of very few.  This distorts any free-market model of the economy, and moves economic power into a tiny minority.  

[JoeWeber 2,294]

55 minutes ago, RonD1120 said:

Agree

Did you know that there are a lot of rich Christians that give away tremendous amounts of money to various services? We are a generous people. 

Generous with my money, you are. Give up your tax exemptions and charitable deductions when the recipients are Christian Ministries and it'll all ring less false.

[SkyDekker 1,121]

38 minutes ago, billvon said:

I'd suggest the problem isn't even income, although that's part of it.  The problem is the growing bimodal distribution of wealth.  Wealth is being more and more concentrated in the hands of very few.  This distorts any free-market model of the economy, and moves economic power into a tiny minority.  

Agreed. That was the plutocracy part of the comment.

[turtlespeed 212]

58 minutes ago, billvon said:

I'd suggest the problem isn't even income, although that's part of it.  The problem is the growing bimodal distribution of wealth.  Wealth is being more and more concentrated in the hands of very few.  This distorts any free-market model of the economy, and moves economic power into a tiny minority.  

Perhaps we could instill a system like the electoral college to manage those funds and the redistribution of them.

[billvon 2,384]

1 minute ago, turtlespeed said:

Perhaps we could instill a system like the electoral college to manage those funds and the redistribution of them.

We have the government to do that already, via taxation.  Your tax money is redistributed to air traffic control, roads, the CDC and other things you benefit from.  No need to invent new systems.

[DJL 232]

1 hour ago, turtlespeed said:

Perhaps we could instill a system like the electoral college to manage those funds and the redistribution of them.

I think you're barking up the wrong tree trying to get someone here to seriously advocate a blindly socialist economic system.

[jakee 1,254]

2 hours ago, turtlespeed said:

Perhaps we could instill a system like the electoral college to manage those funds and the redistribution of them.

How did that sentence make any sense to you?

 

You do realise that this is a recogniseable MO of yours, right? When you realise you were caught talking bollocks you just recall an unrelated hot button topic and hope it'll distract attention from your fuckup.

Edited October 30, 2019 by jakee