What to Make of This Data?

Tony

Penultimate Amazing
Tony
Joined
Mar 5, 2003
Messages
15,410
We have a series of charts and graphs from Mother Jones showing the disproportionate amount of wealth in the hands of the top 1%:

http://motherjones.com/politics/2011/02/income-inequality-in-america-chart-graph

And we have a series of tables from the Tax Foundation showing that the tax burden falls on the top percentages of earners:

http://www.taxfoundation.org/news/show/250.html

Is this fair? Or should the top earners be paying an even larger share of the nation's taxes? What conclusions can be drawn from this? What can be done to address the vast disparity of wealth distribution?
 
Tony said:
We have a series of charts and graphs from Mother Jones showing the disproportionate amount of wealth in the hands of the top 1%:

http://motherjones.com/politics/2011/02/income-inequality-in-america-chart-graph

And we have a series of tables from the Tax Foundation showing that the tax burden falls on the top percentages of earners:

http://www.taxfoundation.org/news/show/250.html

Is this fair? Or should the top earners be paying an even larger share of the nation's taxes? What conclusions can be drawn from this? What can be done to address the vast disparity of wealth distribution?
Click to expand...

Should anything be done to address the disparity?
 
Since the burden on the infrastructure and evironmental impact which government must address are the result, largely, of ecconomic activity, yes, the wealthier should pay proportionately more to address those problems, being, as they are, the greatest beneficiaries of that activity.
 
Those are jawdropping charts in the Mother Jones link.

Yeah, I think the rich should pay more taxes considering the budget deficit.

The goal should not be to redistribute wealth but to pay for the government programs. I realize that some government things should be cut too. But I don't think it's the same things that are being targeted now, which are mainly programs to help the poor. Unfortunately the things that should be cut are protected by powerful interest groups. I would get rid of ethanol mandates and other agricultural subsidies, and pork barrel projects.
 
How about a tax on transaction involving financial instruments? That would fall mostly on the one growing sector of the ecconomy and the source of some of our woes.

Let the banksters pay for better policinng of their Ponzi schemes and a little more to support the infrastructure they exploit at a far higher rate than do working people.
 
leftysergeant said:
Since the burden on the infrastructure and evironmental impact which government must address are the result, largely, of ecconomic activity, yes, the wealthier should pay proportionately more to address those problems, being, as they are, the greatest beneficiaries of that activity.
Click to expand...

How could those benefits be quantified? How much more proportionately should they pay?
 
Tony said:
We have a series of charts and graphs from Mother Jones showing the disproportionate amount of wealth in the hands of the top 1%:

http://motherjones.com/politics/2011/02/income-inequality-in-america-chart-graph

And we have a series of tables from the Tax Foundation showing that the tax burden falls on the top percentages of earners:

http://www.taxfoundation.org/news/show/250.html

Is this fair? Or should the top earners be paying an even larger share of the nation's taxes? What conclusions can be drawn from this? What can be done to address the vast disparity of wealth distribution?
Click to expand...

I would suggest getting data from a more neutral source, since both the ones you cite have ideological axes to grind.
 
dudalb said:
I would suggest getting data from a more neutral source, since both the ones you cite have ideological axes to grind.
Click to expand...

Both links list their sources, and in both cases the sources are from reputable organizations. Are you suggesting the data has been fabricated?
 
leftysergeant said:
How about a tax on transaction involving financial instruments? That would fall mostly on the one growing sector of the ecconomy and the source of some of our woes.
Click to expand...

You'd need to regulate the derivatives market first, and from what I hear there are big scary monsters in there.

Let the banksters pay for better policinng of their Ponzi schemes and a little more to support the infrastructure they exploit at a far higher rate than do working people.
Click to expand...

I'd agree though I don't think the problem at the SEC was that we weren't paying them enough to browse porn. More laws, money, and bureaucracies won't mean better regulation unless these people are somehow compelled to actually do their jobs.
 
Last edited:
Tony said:
We have a series of charts and graphs from Mother Jones showing the disproportionate amount of wealth in the hands of the top 1%:

http://motherjones.com/politics/2011/02/income-inequality-in-america-chart-graph

And we have a series of tables from the Tax Foundation showing that the tax burden falls on the top percentages of earners:

http://www.taxfoundation.org/news/show/250.html

Is this fair? Or should the top earners be paying an even larger share of the nation's taxes? What conclusions can be drawn from this? What can be done to address the vast disparity of wealth distribution?
Click to expand...

Taxes reflect income, therefore those with the higher incomes pay more taxes as a dollar value.

If 15% make 85% of the income then they pay 85% of the taxes, the tax per dollar is not that much higher.
 
Last edited:
yeah!

How come people like Oprah and Mark Zuckerburg are worth billions and yet the bagger at my local grocery store is making just minimum wage!?

This is outrageous!

well...at least it would be outrageous if I didn't have common sense and rational logic.
 
Tony said:
How could those benefits be quantified? How much more proportionately should they pay?
Click to expand...
The amount of money they earn, as a precentage of the modal income is a pretty good indicator.

I am, of course, not just talking about the benefits they recieve. They also owe something to the rest of us to mitigate or ameliorate the public harm that they do, and the cost of assuring compliance with laws and regulations. Their is no reason for the working class to subsidize their bosses by paying someone to clean up the environment behind them.
 
I can't believe anyone here actually thinks taxes shouldn't fluctuate...that they should set in stone for life.
 
deepatrax said:
yeah!

How come people like Oprah and Mark Zuckerburg are worth billions and yet the bagger at my local grocery store is making just minimum wage!?

This is outrageous!

well...at least it would be outrageous if I didn't have common sense and rational logic.
Click to expand...

It is outrageous. The bagger, unlike Oprah or Zuckerburg, actually provides a valuable service to society ;).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom