Quote:
Originally Posted by Ecky
The question then becomes, where is the crossover point?
|
Hard to say, and depends on cultural values. Should we extend equity to encompass the world? If so, any household making more than ~$35k is in the top 1%, and should have their privileged wealth redistributed to "the oppressed".
My values tend to be rooted in ancient philosophy, and are along the lines of developing personal relationships and care for those in the community. This is practiced voluntarily, not compelled by threat of violence. Politically, authority is distributed as locally as feasible, with little authority or money residing with the federal government. Nobody cares who is POTUS because they don't really affect anything locally because they are focused on diplomatic relations and national border security, and not gender pronouns and wealth transfers to those who made poor decisions to "invest" in their "education".
Quote:
|
And, where is the wealth generated? Is it the CEOs, or the American workers? Or, somewhere else entirely?
|
Wealth is generated from a system that encourages liberal mindsets to take risks that usually result in failure, but sometimes result in success. The system encourages risk-taking by protecting individuals from permanent catastrophe when their bad ideas fail (bankruptcy). The business can fail, but the individual doesn't have to become an indentured servant to pay back the loss. The investors take the loss or the gain.
The workers maintain the good ideas (conservative by nature), producing goods and services of value. They practice and perfect the good ideas, adhering to the specifications and best practices.
Quote:
|
A slightly different way of looking at it is this - in the US, taxes and the cost of goods are taken from everyone, and primarily given to the top couple of percent. How much do you have to make before you get back less than you pay out?
|
Your assertion is a contradiction. You state everyone pays, and the top earners primarily benefit from that payment. Then you suggest that at some higher income threshold, one pays more than they benefit.
The latter is correct, and the former incorrect. Over half of US households pay ZERO federal tax. Who isn't paying their fare share again? Could it be the majority of people? Who relies on the services rendered by taxes? Is it wealthy people going to the ER when they get the sniffles and then don't pay the bill? Are they the ones mugging people in the streets? Are they the ones cutting catalytic converters off cars?
The top 1% of US taxpayers pay 42% of taxes.
https://taxfoundation.org/data/all/f...a-2023-update/
The confusion comes from the fact that folks don't know that the uber-wealthy have almost all their wealth invested in their portion of the companies they own. Elon is fantastically wealthy because Tesla stock is so high. If Tesla stock plummets, there goes the wealth. The wealthy continuously gamble their wealth back into ideas, which either succeed or fail. They expand the pie that everyone eats from (or more often, fail). You don't tax unrealized gains, because they could be gone tomorrow.
The US system is far from perfect, but it is among the best system for innovation. Tax code and healthcare are at the top of the list of systems needing major simplification, primarily to cut overhead costs and reduce the footprint for corruption.