So, if you have GOOD health insurance, they want to tax you

[MasterOfMeatPuppets]

Productive people like John Gotti and Bernie Madoff?

[VinnieKulick]

Um, they PRODUCED a higher amount of money.

Since when do the wealthy "produce" money? They EARN more. That has nothing to do with "productivity".

Yeah, they just wave a magic wand and money appears, right? They don't own businesses, they don't produce goods and services. They don't invent things. They don't do anything but magically earn money by doing nothing.

[chickenona]

Um, they PRODUCED a higher amount of money.

Since when do the wealthy "produce" money? They EARN more. That has nothing to do with "productivity".

Yeah, they just wave a magic wand and money appears, right? They don't own businesses, they don't produce goods and services. They don't invent things. They don't do anything but magically earn money by doing nothing.

Yeah, but you act like all of their money is going towards some great end here and we'd crumble without them. Just because a person is wealthy doesn't mean they're "producing" anything of value in terms of input into the economy. What they earn mostly goes right into their pockets, not the economy.

[bane]

Yeah, but you act like all of their money is going towards some great end here and we'd crumble without them. Just because a person is wealthy doesn't mean they're "producing" anything of value in terms of input into the economy. What they earn mostly goes right into their pockets, not the economy.

Thats not necessarily true. Wealthy people often own businesses that employ other people, therefore, they can be more "productive" than your average Joe. That's not always the case of course, but if we're making blanket statements, I think you'll find there are far more productive wealthy people than there are trust fund bums.

[VinnieKulick]

Yeah, but you act like all of their money is going towards some great end here and we'd crumble without them. Just because a person is wealthy doesn't mean they're "producing" anything of value in terms of input into the economy. What they earn mostly goes right into their pockets, not the economy.

First off, why does all the money have to "go towards some great end'?
Why is it that people always have an opinion about what OTHERS should do with their money.

Who employs you chickenona? Is there an owner? Do you have a retirement plan, or at least an option for one? Does your company have health insurance? Do you think whomever pays your portion of those things is just an anomoly? Or is it a person?

Without the upper class, the middle class and the lower class would definitely suffer.

[thejuggernaut]

You folks should adopt a lovely compounded taxation system like Quebec has, and we'll quickly find out who the tax mongers really are.

[chickenona]

Yeah, but you act like all of their money is going towards some great end here and we'd crumble without them. Just because a person is wealthy doesn't mean they're "producing" anything of value in terms of input into the economy. What they earn mostly goes right into their pockets, not the economy.

First off, why does all the money have to "go towards some great end'?
Why is it that people always have an opinion about what OTHERS should do with their money.

I didn't say it did have to go to "some great end". You said the wealthy "produce" money, which I took to mean that you were referring to what they contribute into the system. If they truly are "productive" simply because they have a lot of money, putting it back into the economy is what fits YOUR definition here.

Who employs you chickenona? Is there an owner? Do you have a retirement plan, or at least an option for one? Does your company have health insurance? Do you think whomever pays your portion of those things is just an anomoly? Or is it a person?

Without the upper class, the middle class and the lower class would definitely suffer.

I work for a large corporation, not an individual. I get wages and benefits for services I perform for them. They aren't "producing" for my paycheck - I'M doing that.

I'm not really sure what your point here is. You seem to be presenting the argument that the wealthy somehow "produce" benefits to the economy by virtue of their wealth alone.

[KneelandBobDylan]

I don't think punishing people who are productive is an effective way for a government to act.

Government isn't punishing productivity. That description is merely a way to put a derogatory spin on the progressive tax rate and convince morons to vote against their own economic self-interest and support less progressive taxation. The concept of progressive taxation comes from Adam Smith, the patriarch of free market capitalism.

"The subjects of every state ought to contribute towards the support of the government, as nearly as possible, in proportion to their respective abilities; that is, in proportion to the revenue which they respectively enjoy under the protection of the state." -Adam Smith

I don't think punishing companies because they have a successful business is the way a government should run.

Nobody is being punished for success. That's your imagination.

I don't think the government should be investing tax payer money in private sector business.

That's what Hoover thought after the 1929 stock market crash too.

Vinnie doesn't know Adam Smith from Adam Bomb.

[VinnieKulick]

Government isn't punishing productivity. That description is merely a way to put a derogatory spin on the progressive tax rate and convince morons to vote against their own economic self-interest and support less progressive taxation. The concept of progressive taxation comes from Adam Smith, the patriarch of free market capitalism.

"The subjects of every state ought to contribute towards the support of the government, as nearly as possible, in proportion to their respective abilities; that is, in proportion to the revenue which they respectively enjoy under the protection of the state." -Adam Smith

I don't think punishing companies because they have a successful business is the way a government should run.

Nobody is being punished for success. That's your imagination.

I don't think the government should be investing tax payer money in private sector business.

That's what Hoover thought after the 1929 stock market crash too.

Adam Smith eh? Sounds like Karl Marx.

And if you don't think that when Obama is talking "windfall profit taxes" he isn't talking about punishing the people who grow the economy, you're blind.

A progressive tax is an unfair tax, but since you're citing 'self interest" I guess you already know that.
A dollar is a dollar. If I earn a million and you earn fifty thousand, we should both be taxed the same percentage. After all, isn't that the 'fair' way to do it? But, you think the individual lives to support the government, while I think the government should exist to serve the people.

A difference of philosophy.

[Supersonic]

Adam Smith eh? Sounds like Karl Marx.

Well, Wealth of Nations provided the arguments to move away from restrictive mercantilism and explained how the principles of free trade, competition, and choice would enhance economic development, reduce poverty etc etc. It is essentially the philosophy of capitalism.

[VinnieKulick]

Oh, no wonder it sounds like Karl Marx, he used it as a jumping off point for his writings.

Not to mention where free markets are concerned, Smith felt that if capital was able to flow naturally on its own accord that it would, without the assistance of government, flow to the most productive hands; as the individual simply strives to better his own condition. So, he favored the government keeping out of the private sector, and letting individuals doing as they please.

[Supersonic]

Oh, no wonder it sounds like Karl Marx, he used it as a jumping off point for his writings.

Not to mention where free markets are concerned, Smith felt that if capital was able to flow naturally on its own accord that it would, without the assistance of government, flow to the most productive hands; as the individual simply strives to better his own condition. So, he favored the government keeping out of the private sector, and letting individuals doing as they please.

That's pretty much it. A bit of trivia is that Engels & Marx started to come up with theinitial ideas for all their theories on Socialism after spending time in my home city of Manchester in the UK (a real hardcore industrial city at the time when the working class were lucky to live until 30). So you could say that the seeds of Socialism originated from there.

Anyway, those health insurance premiums you mentioned are damn high. What's the usual ballpark figure for a married couple in their 30's? I wouldn't have too much of a problem with private health insurance in general if pre-existing conditions were included as the norm.