It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: Puppylove
How did the sciences advance?
Wasn’t their an incentive for individuals to research and create those technologies?
originally posted by: pexx421
I see lots of capitalist myths here. The self made man. The wealthy philanthropist. Cute.
Thing is, capital is a finite resource, like water or anything else. And money in the hands of the market, as in being paid, spent, etc is economic activity. However trillions in the hands of few are completely removed from the economy, either sitting as “investments” in real estate, or the 5 trillion sitting in offshore accounts. This is tantamount to someone accumulating the vast majority of the water, for instance, and instead of using it just socking it away while others are dying of thirst. If that money was taxed and used for economic activities such as govt building projects, infrastructure, services etc it would add to the economy. Sitting there growing it’s subtracting from it instead.
As to philanthropy..... f that. If they would just pay their taxes rather than dodging, we wouldn’t need any of their philanthropy. Instead they pay far less in philanthropy than I pay in taxes, and they get celebrated for it..... along with a tax break. That’s not philanthropy. It’s marketing, pr, and self aggrandizement. About 50% of my money goes to taxes, 50% of theirs should too. Taxes should be levied on surplus income, rather than taken from needed funds. I, and most people I know, choose between going to the doc or getting clothes, etc. That’s not an issue with the wealthy elite, and yet I pay a much higher percent of my income than they do. And that’s just income! That’s not even wealth, which is a far higher disparity.
originally posted by: Edumakated
originally posted by: pexx421
I see lots of capitalist myths here. The self made man. The wealthy philanthropist. Cute.
Thing is, capital is a finite resource, like water or anything else. And money in the hands of the market, as in being paid, spent, etc is economic activity. However trillions in the hands of few are completely removed from the economy, either sitting as “investments” in real estate, or the 5 trillion sitting in offshore accounts. This is tantamount to someone accumulating the vast majority of the water, for instance, and instead of using it just socking it away while others are dying of thirst. If that money was taxed and used for economic activities such as govt building projects, infrastructure, services etc it would add to the economy. Sitting there growing it’s subtracting from it instead.
As to philanthropy..... f that. If they would just pay their taxes rather than dodging, we wouldn’t need any of their philanthropy. Instead they pay far less in philanthropy than I pay in taxes, and they get celebrated for it..... along with a tax break. That’s not philanthropy. It’s marketing, pr, and self aggrandizement. About 50% of my money goes to taxes, 50% of theirs should too. Taxes should be levied on surplus income, rather than taken from needed funds. I, and most people I know, choose between going to the doc or getting clothes, etc. That’s not an issue with the wealthy elite, and yet I pay a much higher percent of my income than they do. And that’s just income! That’s not even wealth, which is a far higher disparity.
This post has completely disqualified you from having any discussion regarding economics / finance. You are in over your head and not even demonstrating a rudimentary understanding of the topic.
Capital is not horded or completely removed from the economy. The wealthy do not sit on cash and take it out of the economy. That money is put into investments which in turn is lent out to other businesses / entrepreneurs. Banks do not sit on cash. Banks also are lending deposits out as well. This allow for loans and other investments.
Even when say a billionaire purchase real estate, that money is in the economy. That property had to be built. Contractors, decorators, architects, electricians, etc all employed.
I swear, half the conversations wouldn't be needed if some of you just took a basic econ 101 course.
originally posted by: contextual
Can't really complain if you keep voting in capitalist governments.
originally posted by: pexx421
originally posted by: Edumakated
originally posted by: pexx421
I see lots of capitalist myths here. The self made man. The wealthy philanthropist. Cute.
Thing is, capital is a finite resource, like water or anything else. And money in the hands of the market, as in being paid, spent, etc is economic activity. However trillions in the hands of few are completely removed from the economy, either sitting as “investments” in real estate, or the 5 trillion sitting in offshore accounts. This is tantamount to someone accumulating the vast majority of the water, for instance, and instead of using it just socking it away while others are dying of thirst. If that money was taxed and used for economic activities such as govt building projects, infrastructure, services etc it would add to the economy. Sitting there growing it’s subtracting from it instead.
As to philanthropy..... f that. If they would just pay their taxes rather than dodging, we wouldn’t need any of their philanthropy. Instead they pay far less in philanthropy than I pay in taxes, and they get celebrated for it..... along with a tax break. That’s not philanthropy. It’s marketing, pr, and self aggrandizement. About 50% of my money goes to taxes, 50% of theirs should too. Taxes should be levied on surplus income, rather than taken from needed funds. I, and most people I know, choose between going to the doc or getting clothes, etc. That’s not an issue with the wealthy elite, and yet I pay a much higher percent of my income than they do. And that’s just income! That’s not even wealth, which is a far higher disparity.
This post has completely disqualified you from having any discussion regarding economics / finance. You are in over your head and not even demonstrating a rudimentary understanding of the topic.
Capital is not horded or completely removed from the economy. The wealthy do not sit on cash and take it out of the economy. That money is put into investments which in turn is lent out to other businesses / entrepreneurs. Banks do not sit on cash. Banks also are lending deposits out as well. This allow for loans and other investments.
Even when say a billionaire purchase real estate, that money is in the economy. That property had to be built. Contractors, decorators, architects, electricians, etc all employed.
I swear, half the conversations wouldn't be needed if some of you just took a basic econ 101 course.
Right. So apparently all the massive growths in us gdp directly reflect growing industry and business, and that’s why our wages and standards of living have been growing over the last 40 years, right? Or could it be that what we are sold as “investments” are often just methods for the “investors” to extract more money from the economy and not actually add a product or growth. That’s called subtractive and actually contracts the economy, but is largely ignored by our “economists”. You know, the same economists who, like you probably, actually believed that massive tax breaks would be used to invest in the us economy. And I’m sure here that you’ll try to explain some twisted way that stock buybacks are actually productive to the economy, just like corporate takeovers, outsourcing, and all the other wonderful mechanisms of Reaganism, trickle down, etc that have made our economy boom for the last 40 years. Well, for .1% of us at least.
But at least we see you approve of transfer of wealth.
How could it be that the tax code of the 1950s had a top marginal tax rate of 91 percent, but resulted in an effective tax rate of only 42 percent on the wealthiest taxpayers? In fact, the situation is even stranger. The 42.0 percent tax rate on the top 1 percent takes into account all taxes levied by federal, state, and local governments, including: income, payroll, corporate, excise, property, and estate taxes. When we look at income taxes specifically, the top 1 percent of taxpayers paid an average effective rate of only 16.9 percent in income taxes during the 1950s.[4]
originally posted by: Ahabstar
A pepperoni and sausage pizza will cost you about $2 to make. You can sell it on average for $15. So you are about 77,000 pizzas away from being a millionaire. Or roughly 30 pizzas per day over seven years time, if you want to stay a super small business.
originally posted by: Edumakated
There has always been extreme wealth and poverty at the margins.
Yes, when you are living paycheck to paycheck it is hard to imagine someone having tens of millions or billions at their disposal. Heck, most people just want an extra 50k a year.
However, the world does not and never will work that way. Wealth is not is fixed pie. The entire pie grows.
Most of these billionaires have created many times their wealth on a global scale which is why they are so rich in the first place.
Most are extremely charitable. Go to any city and see all things that are funded by their charitable giving.
Envy can eat at you. Just live your life and don't worry about what others have. Many are rich in material goods but poor in their personal lives.
I have a beautiful wife, two great kids, and my health. I am rich.
I rather have that than riches but kids who hate me because I'm never around or a gold digging spouse, etc.
originally posted by: Ahabstar
A pepperoni and sausage pizza will cost you about $2 to make. You can sell it on average for $15. So you are about 77,000 pizzas away from being a millionaire. Or roughly 30 pizzas per day over seven years time, if you want to stay a super small business.
originally posted by: dfnj2015
I was in Beijing in 2003. Everything cost 1/7th of what it cost here.
originally posted by: chr0naut
originally posted by: Edumakated
There has always been extreme wealth and poverty at the margins.
Yes, when you are living paycheck to paycheck it is hard to imagine someone having tens of millions or billions at their disposal. Heck, most people just want an extra 50k a year.
However, the world does not and never will work that way. Wealth is not is fixed pie. The entire pie grows.
For a large number of people, their slice of that pie never grows, for others, their slice grows way beyond what an entire community can eat. Some starve while others have more than they can eat, without limit.
Most of these billionaires have created many times their wealth on a global scale which is why they are so rich in the first place.
Most billionaires create their wealth off the work and productivity of others. They underpay their workers compared to the value of the workers productivity and pocket the difference for themselves as if the capability to direct the workers was somehow more difficult and harder work than what the actual producers do.
Most are extremely charitable. Go to any city and see all things that are funded by their charitable giving.
What of the poor who are also extremely charitable with their meager incomes? Will they ever get more than a warm feeling as acknowledgement? Yet they still give to their churches and charities (and taxes, you have to remember that the wealthy are great at tax avoidance).
Envy can eat at you. Just live your life and don't worry about what others have. Many are rich in material goods but poor in their personal lives.
I have a beautiful wife, two great kids, and my health. I am rich.
I have a wife, two great kids, am grieving for two others, and no longer have my health (such stuff happens as you get older). I am now comfortable financially, but have struggled all my life and have watched people I have loved die who could possibly have been saved, had I had the wealth.
The excessively rich are damaging to the rest of society.
Envy of the extremely rich is far less destructive to people in general than the consequences of their greed.
I rather have that than riches but kids who hate me because I'm never around or a gold digging spouse, etc.
Consume, be silent, die.
originally posted by: Edumakated
originally posted by: pexx421
originally posted by: Edumakated
originally posted by: pexx421
I see lots of capitalist myths here. The self made man. The wealthy philanthropist. Cute.
Thing is, capital is a finite resource, like water or anything else. And money in the hands of the market, as in being paid, spent, etc is economic activity. However trillions in the hands of few are completely removed from the economy, either sitting as “investments” in real estate, or the 5 trillion sitting in offshore accounts. This is tantamount to someone accumulating the vast majority of the water, for instance, and instead of using it just socking it away while others are dying of thirst. If that money was taxed and used for economic activities such as govt building projects, infrastructure, services etc it would add to the economy. Sitting there growing it’s subtracting from it instead.
As to philanthropy..... f that. If they would just pay their taxes rather than dodging, we wouldn’t need any of their philanthropy. Instead they pay far less in philanthropy than I pay in taxes, and they get celebrated for it..... along with a tax break. That’s not philanthropy. It’s marketing, pr, and self aggrandizement. About 50% of my money goes to taxes, 50% of theirs should too. Taxes should be levied on surplus income, rather than taken from needed funds. I, and most people I know, choose between going to the doc or getting clothes, etc. That’s not an issue with the wealthy elite, and yet I pay a much higher percent of my income than they do. And that’s just income! That’s not even wealth, which is a far higher disparity.
This post has completely disqualified you from having any discussion regarding economics / finance. You are in over your head and not even demonstrating a rudimentary understanding of the topic.
Capital is not horded or completely removed from the economy. The wealthy do not sit on cash and take it out of the economy. That money is put into investments which in turn is lent out to other businesses / entrepreneurs. Banks do not sit on cash. Banks also are lending deposits out as well. This allow for loans and other investments.
Even when say a billionaire purchase real estate, that money is in the economy. That property had to be built. Contractors, decorators, architects, electricians, etc all employed.
I swear, half the conversations wouldn't be needed if some of you just took a basic econ 101 course.
Right. So apparently all the massive growths in us gdp directly reflect growing industry and business, and that’s why our wages and standards of living have been growing over the last 40 years, right? Or could it be that what we are sold as “investments” are often just methods for the “investors” to extract more money from the economy and not actually add a product or growth. That’s called subtractive and actually contracts the economy, but is largely ignored by our “economists”. You know, the same economists who, like you probably, actually believed that massive tax breaks would be used to invest in the us economy. And I’m sure here that you’ll try to explain some twisted way that stock buybacks are actually productive to the economy, just like corporate takeovers, outsourcing, and all the other wonderful mechanisms of Reaganism, trickle down, etc that have made our economy boom for the last 40 years. Well, for .1% of us at least.
But at least we see you approve of transfer of wealth.
After WWII, our economy boomed because we were practically the only industrialized nation at that point because pretty much every other civilized country was bombed to pieces except the US.
Wage stagnation occurred because of several changes. First, feminism brought a ton of new workers into the work force for many jobs which depressed wages. Second, global markets not only opened up selling opportunities for our countries, it also allowed other countries to offer cheaper labor options.
Tax rates in the past were high but rarely paid.
Here is a breakdown if you care to educate yourself...
Taxes on Rich Were Not Much Higher in the 50s
How could it be that the tax code of the 1950s had a top marginal tax rate of 91 percent, but resulted in an effective tax rate of only 42 percent on the wealthiest taxpayers? In fact, the situation is even stranger. The 42.0 percent tax rate on the top 1 percent takes into account all taxes levied by federal, state, and local governments, including: income, payroll, corporate, excise, property, and estate taxes. When we look at income taxes specifically, the top 1 percent of taxpayers paid an average effective rate of only 16.9 percent in income taxes during the 1950s.[4]
originally posted by: Edumakated
originally posted by: chr0naut
originally posted by: Edumakated
There has always been extreme wealth and poverty at the margins.
Yes, when you are living paycheck to paycheck it is hard to imagine someone having tens of millions or billions at their disposal. Heck, most people just want an extra 50k a year.
However, the world does not and never will work that way. Wealth is not is fixed pie. The entire pie grows.
For a large number of people, their slice of that pie never grows, for others, their slice grows way beyond what an entire community can eat. Some starve while others have more than they can eat, without limit.
Most of these billionaires have created many times their wealth on a global scale which is why they are so rich in the first place.
Most billionaires create their wealth off the work and productivity of others. They underpay their workers compared to the value of the workers productivity and pocket the difference for themselves as if the capability to direct the workers was somehow more difficult and harder work than what the actual producers do.
Most are extremely charitable. Go to any city and see all things that are funded by their charitable giving.
What of the poor who are also extremely charitable with their meager incomes? Will they ever get more than a warm feeling as acknowledgement? Yet they still give to their churches and charities (and taxes, you have to remember that the wealthy are great at tax avoidance).
Envy can eat at you. Just live your life and don't worry about what others have. Many are rich in material goods but poor in their personal lives.
I have a beautiful wife, two great kids, and my health. I am rich.
I have a wife, two great kids, am grieving for two others, and no longer have my health (such stuff happens as you get older). I am now comfortable financially, but have struggled all my life and have watched people I have loved die who could possibly have been saved, had I had the wealth.
The excessively rich are damaging to the rest of society.
Envy of the extremely rich is far less destructive to people in general than the consequences of their greed.
I rather have that than riches but kids who hate me because I'm never around or a gold digging spouse, etc.
Consume, be silent, die.
If it is so easy to become a billionaire or even a millionaire, by all means, please risk your own capital to start a business and run it how you see fit. Pay all your low skilled workers $100k/yr and the CEO $125k/yr. Let us know how it works out....
For a large number of people, their slice of that pie never grows, for others, their slice grows way beyond what an entire community can eat.
originally posted by: chr0naut
originally posted by: Edumakated
originally posted by: chr0naut
originally posted by: Edumakated
There has always been extreme wealth and poverty at the margins.
Yes, when you are living paycheck to paycheck it is hard to imagine someone having tens of millions or billions at their disposal. Heck, most people just want an extra 50k a year.
However, the world does not and never will work that way. Wealth is not is fixed pie. The entire pie grows.
For a large number of people, their slice of that pie never grows, for others, their slice grows way beyond what an entire community can eat. Some starve while others have more than they can eat, without limit.
Most of these billionaires have created many times their wealth on a global scale which is why they are so rich in the first place.
Most billionaires create their wealth off the work and productivity of others. They underpay their workers compared to the value of the workers productivity and pocket the difference for themselves as if the capability to direct the workers was somehow more difficult and harder work than what the actual producers do.
Most are extremely charitable. Go to any city and see all things that are funded by their charitable giving.
What of the poor who are also extremely charitable with their meager incomes? Will they ever get more than a warm feeling as acknowledgement? Yet they still give to their churches and charities (and taxes, you have to remember that the wealthy are great at tax avoidance).
Envy can eat at you. Just live your life and don't worry about what others have. Many are rich in material goods but poor in their personal lives.
I have a beautiful wife, two great kids, and my health. I am rich.
I have a wife, two great kids, am grieving for two others, and no longer have my health (such stuff happens as you get older). I am now comfortable financially, but have struggled all my life and have watched people I have loved die who could possibly have been saved, had I had the wealth.
The excessively rich are damaging to the rest of society.
Envy of the extremely rich is far less destructive to people in general than the consequences of their greed.
I rather have that than riches but kids who hate me because I'm never around or a gold digging spouse, etc.
Consume, be silent, die.
If it is so easy to become a billionaire or even a millionaire, by all means, please risk your own capital to start a business and run it how you see fit. Pay all your low skilled workers $100k/yr and the CEO $125k/yr. Let us know how it works out....
It is not easy to become a billionaire because no-one has much extra money left to give. But once you have a working business and steady income, you can suppress competition promote sales and ensure that the money keeps rolling in.
At that stage, if I were in that position, I would set up a profit sharing arrangement with employees, which would help to retain staff, and be an ethically fair way to do business.
There are some businesses which do that. Very few owned by billionaires, though, because billionaires are greedy. They tend to think that they created the company alone and forget everyone else involved. Then they keep amassing the wealth as if their initial investment is the only factor in the success of the company.
It is not easy to become a billionaire because no-one has much extra money left to give.