Greed, pure and simple, They never have enough money. Every company looks for ways to make even more, and they don't care who they have to crush, in order to do it. It's the American way! Net worth $10 billion? Well, why not make it to $12 billion! Then $14 billion. So what if we have to get laws passed to squeeze out competition. We have enough lawyers on staff to keep that in litigation for 30 years. MONEY MONEY MONEY MONEY MONEY MONEY!!!! MORE MONEY!
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Outgoing FCC Chief Tom Wheeler Offers Final Defense Of Net Neutrality
- Thread starter Megalith
- Start date
Chunder
Gawd
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2011
- Messages
- 519
America once had a maximum income that kept capitalism in check, where any income over $200,000 (Nearly 2.97 million today) was taxed at 93% (88% from marginal tax rate + 5% from war tax). Coincidentally, this was when the American middle class was thriving, and millions were able to go to college for free or nearly free, while being able to buy homes and cars, yet still being able to raise a family with just 1 working adult. Businesses were also thriving at the time, and innovations and inventions were arguably being done at one of the fastest paces we've ever seen, while our government had a budget surplus that allowed for "pet projects" such as our freeway system or space program. It was a win-win-win situation.
Last edited:
You have been ill served by the education system.
Killahurtz
Gawd
- Joined
- Sep 4, 2004
- Messages
- 671
"net neutrality"...hahahahaha....BS...this jack leg helped make the internet a "utility" under the control of the FCC...your "user tax" to be showing up on your net bill soon...enjoy!
Makaveli@BETA
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2004
- Messages
- 2,433
You are the envy of most americans!
Killahurtz
Gawd
- Joined
- Sep 4, 2004
- Messages
- 671
Chunder...youngster...NO ONE ever paid the taxes that you site...you have been let down hard by the American public school system...you throw out rhetoric without a single fact...so I will at least try to offer you some research that has been done on the outlandish leftist BS that you are laying claim to understand...
"In 1958, out of 45.6 million tax filers, only about 10,000 reported incomes subject to the 81% rate or above. This means only .02% of filers had any income taxed at the 81% rate, let alone the 91% rate! (note: the 81% bracket was from $140,000-$400,000)"
"A study from the Congressional Research Service, estimated the effective tax rate on the top .01% of earners during the 50’s to be 45%. In either case, it seems the average taxes paid by the rich were 50% or less"
"If the rich in the 50’s were truly being soaked relative to the middle class, we would expect them to be shouldering a much higher percentage of the tax burden. This doesn’t appear to be the case. In 1958, the top 3% of taxpayers earned 14.7% of all adjusted gross income and paid 29.2% of all federal income taxes. By 2010, the top 3% earned 27.2% of adjusted gross income and their share of all federal taxes rose proportionally, to 51%. Contrary to the view that the rich paid a larger (or “fairer”) share in the 50’s, it appears to have remained roughly the same."
...you may want to research the topic before weighing in with leftist/Sandinista rhetoric...just a suggestion as I don't really care whether you "get it" or not...haha
here is some stuff from the leftist fish wrap CNBC...
"Buried inside a Congressional Budget Office report this week was this nugget: when it comes to individual income taxes, the top 40 percent of wage earners in America pay 106 percent of the taxes. The bottom 40 percent..., pay negative 9 percent
You read that right. One group is paying more than 100 percent of individual income taxes, the other is paying less than zero.
It's right there in Table 3 on page 13 of the report. The numbers are based on 2010 IRS and Census Bureau figures. "
"According to the CBO, the wealthiest 1 percent of Americans saw before-tax income grow more than 16 percent from 2009 to 2010, which isn't such a surprise since the stock market was coming off the bottom. Most of the rest of the country only saw gross incomes grow about 1 percent. When it comes to federal taxes,the top bracket paid 69 percent of the total last year. The bottom bracket paid 0.4 percent.
"People who make more should pay more, generally speaking. In America, they are. Yes, the rich (and almost rich) are getting richer. When it comes to individual income taxes, they're also covering the entire bill. And leaving a tip."
"In 1958, out of 45.6 million tax filers, only about 10,000 reported incomes subject to the 81% rate or above. This means only .02% of filers had any income taxed at the 81% rate, let alone the 91% rate! (note: the 81% bracket was from $140,000-$400,000)"
"A study from the Congressional Research Service, estimated the effective tax rate on the top .01% of earners during the 50’s to be 45%. In either case, it seems the average taxes paid by the rich were 50% or less"
"If the rich in the 50’s were truly being soaked relative to the middle class, we would expect them to be shouldering a much higher percentage of the tax burden. This doesn’t appear to be the case. In 1958, the top 3% of taxpayers earned 14.7% of all adjusted gross income and paid 29.2% of all federal income taxes. By 2010, the top 3% earned 27.2% of adjusted gross income and their share of all federal taxes rose proportionally, to 51%. Contrary to the view that the rich paid a larger (or “fairer”) share in the 50’s, it appears to have remained roughly the same."
...you may want to research the topic before weighing in with leftist/Sandinista rhetoric...just a suggestion as I don't really care whether you "get it" or not...haha
here is some stuff from the leftist fish wrap CNBC...
"Buried inside a Congressional Budget Office report this week was this nugget: when it comes to individual income taxes, the top 40 percent of wage earners in America pay 106 percent of the taxes. The bottom 40 percent..., pay negative 9 percent
You read that right. One group is paying more than 100 percent of individual income taxes, the other is paying less than zero.
It's right there in Table 3 on page 13 of the report. The numbers are based on 2010 IRS and Census Bureau figures. "
"According to the CBO, the wealthiest 1 percent of Americans saw before-tax income grow more than 16 percent from 2009 to 2010, which isn't such a surprise since the stock market was coming off the bottom. Most of the rest of the country only saw gross incomes grow about 1 percent. When it comes to federal taxes,the top bracket paid 69 percent of the total last year. The bottom bracket paid 0.4 percent.
"People who make more should pay more, generally speaking. In America, they are. Yes, the rich (and almost rich) are getting richer. When it comes to individual income taxes, they're also covering the entire bill. And leaving a tip."
You mean the WW2 Revenue act of 1942 where instead of the peacetime taxation of only the top 7% of people paying any income tax at all, instead they taxed everyone making more than $642 a year in order to pay for the war? (the only time tax was ever that high). Lovely example... Let's do WW2 every year! Just because it sounds nice (eg:eat the rich) doesn't make it a good idea.
Killahurtz
Gawd
- Joined
- Sep 4, 2004
- Messages
- 671
you are right LazN...
and that was after Woodrow Wilson , a democrat , created the FED , so he could borrow money to fund the US getting into WW1 , we can easily see hoe the fed reserve has helped destroy our nation.
they can look it up...I already did
and that was after Woodrow Wilson , a democrat , created the FED , so he could borrow money to fund the US getting into WW1 , we can easily see hoe the fed reserve has helped destroy our nation.
they can look it up...I already did