Log in

View Full Version : In the USA - the workers carry the rich through taxes



Schrödinger's Cat
22nd July 2008, 08:06
Contrary to what Tom and Company (™) would like to put forward as the rich man's plight, the workers of every arbitrary income gap carry the welfare state.

I'll use Rush Limbaugh's site for my source so that there can be absolutely no doubts - none, zilch, nada - that I'm pinching my nose and grabbing from a cesspool. If there is any unreliability, it's in favor of my opponents.

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/menu/top_50__of_wage_earners_pay_96_09__of_income_taxes .guest.html

We're basing these numbers in 2003. I think it's quite irrelevant if I pick from anywhere after 1945 since conservatives and right-libertarians alike deem this post-FDR era "welfarism," (maybe Ronnie I-see-aliens-attacking doesn't count?) but please correct my assumptions if wrong.

According to Rush, the top 1% of all income-earners contributed to approximately 34% of all reported income taxes. Rush-the-pedophile indicates a few paragraphs down in bold, red font that the top 1% is paying 10x more than the bottom 50%. At first this sounds outrageous. Many a person are wanting to go grab their "I support my Troops" and "Dubya 00" stickers at this point. However, The average income for the top 1% hovers around ~20%.

Truly, the ones getting punished at the top are the rich workers. Some small business owners, but mostly actors, well-to-do authors, intellectuals, and athletes. The bourgeoisie are doing just fine.

Why?

Because - as the truly rich know - you don't rely on income. You rely on investments. Stocks. Dividends. Mutual funds. Scatter yourself out, and hold down for a long time. The rich can afford the best market gurus in town, and they make good work of it - exploiting every loophole imaginable, including the biggest one of them all - not having to count your investments as income after 1 year.

That is why you won't see the bourgeoisie get too upset about raising the income tax. Yes, there will be hisseyfits. There will be media pundits calling for the end of socialism. But what the bourgeoisie really don't like to do is increase that magical number 15%. I think Obama entered the race calling for an increase to something negligable like 17%, but he's backing down now.

Wealth concentration is where the important numbers are at. And there you have something less infuriating - or perhaps, infuriating in a way Rush Limbaugh wouldn't want you to be.

The top 1% own over 40% of the country's wealth. This is mostly concentrated in the top .5%, the bourgeoisie. Rich workers and small business owners are forced to hold up the social programs.

The top 10% own roughly 75% (http://www.faculty.fairfield.edu/faculty/hodgson/Courses/so11/stratification/income&wealth.htm) of the country's wealth. Roughly 85-90% (http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&ct=res&cd=7&url=http%3A%2F%2Fsociology.ucsc.edu%2Fwhorulesamer ica%2Fpower%2Fwealth.html&ei=QYeFSOCOM6WuigGX7qGdBQ&usg=AFQjCNGcjjXIuZI496Ue1D_MpxL1TLg-9g&sig2=Kq6VpinL2QYe58K9KcBG2w) of all investments can be found in this category, with over half of that coming from the top 1%.

The bottom 50%, while paying a 'mere' 4% in taxes, only own less than 3% of the wealth.

So in truth, if you're a worker - whether you're unemployed, poor, middle class, or rich - (George Carlin's voice) you're fucked.

The welfare state - as it currently exists, at least (for all I know in 50 years things may finally get fixed) - exemplifies the class differences between the bourgeoisie and laborer.

Bud Struggle
22nd July 2008, 13:06
Why?

Because - as the truly rich know - you don't rely on income. You rely on investments. Stocks. Dividends. Mutual funds. Scatter yourself out, and hold down for a long time. The rich can afford the best market gurus in town, and they make good work of it - exploiting every loophole imaginable, including the biggest one of them all - not having to count your investments as income after 1 year.

That's pretty true--you make money on your investments not on your earnings, that's why there are so many real estate and stock and bond millionaires. Even in other business the trick is to pay yourself a small salary and get the rest of the money from the dividends that your company throws.

Shekky Shabazz
22nd July 2008, 14:43
Gene, I don't understand what you're arguing exactly. Certain taxes should be raised and others lowered? Private investment should be prohibited? That there is a *correct* number for all those different percentages? I'm new here, still figuring out where everyone stands, if you want to link an old post that might clarify some of this without rehashing all the details, please do.

TomK, who is Bogovich I see you refering to often?

RedAnarchist
22nd July 2008, 14:53
TomK, who is Bogovich I see you refering to often?


Click the link but I warn you, it isn't pretty - http://bogovich.forumcircle.com/index.php

Shekky Shabazz
22nd July 2008, 15:16
lol I see you're popular there...

I guess I can't post a link, but the title of a post is "Red Anarchist infiltrated these boards"

RedAnarchist
22nd July 2008, 15:19
lol I see you're popular there...

I guess I can't post a link, but the title of a post is "Red Anarchist infiltrated these boards"

I'm one of the many "Purged_Imbeciles" there. I trolled the forum a few weeks ago. They dislike me because I made fun of them:lol:

Lost In Translation
23rd July 2008, 01:52
I'm one of the many "Purged_Imbeciles" there. I trolled the forum a few weeks ago. They dislike me because I made fun of them:lol:
Haha, they're saying that because we (Revleft) are Anarchists and Trotskiyites, we do not follow the words of BOGOVICH (!!!). Therefore, we must be purged. Out of all the brainwashed people in there, BOGOVICH is the most sober one...He sounds like a Seer compared to his cronies.

Robert
23rd July 2008, 02:42
Don't you guys need all the allies you can get? Why do you want to antagonize other anti-capitalists?

Bud Struggle
23rd July 2008, 03:37
Don't you guys need all the allies you can get? Why do you want to antagonize other anti-capitalists?

Robert, would it be fair to even call what the member of RevLeft believe in "Communism" if they didn't have intense rivalry, factionalism and open displays of hostility to ever other kind of Communism that's even at slight variance with their own? Denouncements and attacks on other Communists are the "sacraments" of true Communism. :lol:

BOGOVICH--beware anyone with icepick!

Lost In Translation
23rd July 2008, 03:43
Don't you guys need all the allies you can get? Why do you want to antagonize other anti-capitalists?
Actually, they need all the allies they can get. We antagonize them because of the fact that they are the antithesis of what the left believes in. Just look at the layout of the website, and what they have put, and you will see.

534634634265
23rd July 2008, 06:56
sorry, but i thought the fact that taxes support the wealthy was one of the strong points of the socialist/communist ideal. isn't this old hat, or did i miss something?