Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
User Settings
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:

Regularly scheduled events

Report this Comment
Use this form to report the selected comment to the moderators. Reporting should generally be used only if the comment breaks forum rules.

827. Re: Morning Metaverse Nov 1, 2013, 11:00 Beamer
Sepharo wrote on Nov 1, 2013, 07:39:
He did clarify that he was talking about federal taxes not state and personal taxes not business. Also he wasn't talking about the conditions of the poor but the wealth inequality from top to bottom.

This is why it's difficult talking with these guys.
They don't understand taxation. RollinThundr clearly doesn't understand the economy. Claiming that high personal taxation doesn't encourage more jobs? And then accusing me of not understanding things?

Of course, unlike him, I am willing to explain my position:
1) Back in the 40s-60s, we had very, very high personal taxation on very high incomes. Essentially, the people at the ultra high end (read: not a single person here) was taxed upwards of 94% on income over a certain level (today it would likely be around 1 or 2 million)
2) This was pretty much a salary cap. In essence, it meant that the people at the upper end couldn't earn infinitely, as they had prior
3) Yet, oddly, corporations still earned just as much as they did
4) Since the corporations were earning as much, but paying the top end less, they had an excess of funds. These funds had to go somewhere, so they went into expansion, which created more jobs
5) Since the corporations had excess funds, they didn't have an issue with having excess employees, either. Today, when a department has 100 people, but someone upstairs thinks the work could be done by 90, 15 people get cut. Back then, it didn't much matter

During the rise of the middle class, the CEO to Worker ration plummeted. CEO to employee pay ratio was 20:1 in 1950. It was 42:1 in 1980. 200:1 in 1990, 300:1 in 2000, fell a bit with the dotcom bubble, was 240:1 in 2006, and while I don't have a more current figure, Ron Johnson was 1700:1, and the head of the AFL:CIO is 354:1.

We have a decline of the middle class. People here are really going to claim that executive salary inflation isn't part of it? The US is making more money than ever, but the average American is making the same amount as he was 15 years ago.
Where is the money from the middle class going?
- It isn't going to taxation - simple math shows that taxes are lower than they were (see my post yesterday)
- It isn't going overseas, because the total personal income is significantly higher
- Then were could it be going? Hmm, what has risen proportionately since the heyday of the middle class. What could it be? I know! Executive pay!

Anyway, Mad Max, I don't know what your qualifications are, but I know RollinThundr is a low level municipal IT guy in Salem, MA. Salem doesn't have a very significant IT structure, so I'm guessing he's maybe an associates degree, maybe a mid-level bachelors followed by some certification, but almost definitely no economics background, which shows clearly from his posting.
Music for the discerning:
Login Email   Password Remember Me
If you don't already have a Blue's News user account, you can sign up here.
Forgotten your password? Click here.


Blue's News logo