"Tax the Super Rich Now or Face a Revolution"

[Retire Soon]

Do the richest 1% of our country believe that they are "divinely protected" and chosen for "great earthly wealth.?" The unemployment rate of America's young now stands at 21% compared to Egypt which has 25%. Will young Americans react with anger and hostility when they bear the brunt of tax increases? Will they be content when spending on education is drastically reduced while mortgage subsidies and entitlements for the elderly are left untouched as well as tax cuts for the rich? How long will it be before the "rest of the rich world explodes like Egypt?"

Paul Farrell of MarketWatch warns us that the U.S. is headed for a revolution and subsequent depression because the super rich simply don't care.

Tax the Super Rich now or face a revolution Paul B. Farrell - MarketWatch

[FinanceDude]

I think that's the most yellow journalism pandering I have read in quite some time.............

[Rustic23]

This should be in the political forum complete with the word extreme!

[ziggy29]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rustic23 This should be in the political forum!

Done. This has the potential to draw some emotion, so please bear that in mind in responding lest the pig make an early entrance.

[Independent]

I happen to think that one of the reasons the US working class did so well following WWII was that wealthy Americans were practicing enlightened self-interest. They decided they'd rather pay union wages and limit immigration than face an openly socialist political party.

It seems to me that caution has disappeared. But, it disappeared after some facts changed. The collapse of the Soviet Union was accepted as the great demonstration that free market capitalism, with all it's problems, is the better system.

So, although I can list all the problems that the writer in the OP lists, I think Americans will be extremely patient with them. They seem to equate any type of progressive taxes with the first step on a slippery slope to disaster.

Many people who post here know that in 2007 the top 400 American taxpayers averaged $345 million of income (for one year) and paid an average FIT rate of 17%. But most of them find that rate perfectly reasonable. They think that high earners "create jobs", so we're all better off if they have low taxes.

I find that an interesting theory that we tried and discovered wasn't true, but I'm in a minority. I don't expect any revolution, and I don't expect any political consensus for high (by historic standards) tax rates in the near future.

[Having said that, I should recognize that our poll on the Simpson/Bowles deficit reduction plan showed that nearly 90% of our respondents favored that plan. It included an increase in the marginal rate for those 400 up to 27%, but I don't think that was the primary reason people favored Simpson/Bowles.]

[DougViages]

Recently Forbes listed the 400 richest people in the world. Some 200 plus of them are Americans. Another financial analyst took it a step farther: The total Net Worth of the richest 400 Americans comes to just under 1.5 trillion dollars (1500 billion or an average NW of just under four billion each). If we confiscated all the NW and gave it t the federal government, the amount would not quite cover just this year's federal deficit.

Chew on that awhile!

[Animorph]

Didn't read the article, but WSJ has already been describing how states already depend on the rich for most of their income (something like top 1% to 5% accounting for 40%-50% of income). That income turns out to be highly variable (I'm sure capital gains have been pretty small for the past few years), causing big state income swings. The solution was to increase taxes for the lower 95% of payers with steadier income.

I think better use of a "rainy day fund" to smooth out the swings would be preferable. We already have enough angst about income inequality.

[Texas Proud]

Quote:

Originally Posted by FinanceDude I think that's the most yellow journalism pandering I have read in quite some time.............

+1

[SunsetSail]

Quote:

Originally Posted by FinanceDude I think that's the most yellow journalism pandering I have read in quite some time.............

+2

[rescueme]

Quote:

Originally Posted by FinanceDude I think that's the most yellow journalism pandering I have read in quite some time.............

+3

Of course, it's Farrell; I would expect nothing less...

[HFWR]

To paraphrase Willie Sutton, we rob banks because that's where the money is...

If we are to even remotely get back on track fiscally, it'll take higher taxes and lower spending. Much higher and much lower...

[REWahoo]

+4. Farrell at his best/worst once again. What a putz.

[MasterBlaster]

why do some people feel entitled to someone else's money ?

[M Paquette]

I don't know why Paul Farell is worried about this. In another of his fine columns he has the world ending next year, before any new taxes on the 'super-rich' could be collected.

It hardly seems worth levying a new tax when Certain Doom will arrive before the checks can clear. :->

[Texas Proud]

Quote:

Originally Posted by M Paquette I don't know why Paul Farell is worried about this. In another of his fine columns he has the world ending next year, before any new taxes on the 'super-rich' could be collected. It hardly seems worth levying a new tax when Certain Doom will arrive before the checks can clear. :->

You have to hedge your bets

[RetiredGypsy]

I didn't know Glenn Beck had a secret liberal pseudonym.

[HFWR]

Here's Fred's take on it...

Quote:

The country was now ruled by the tightly interlocking directorates of Wall Street, Congress, the upper reaches of the executive branch, and the big corporations, none of whose members had ever worked a night shift at Walmart while living in a rented trailer.

Fred On Everything

[haha]

Quote:

Originally Posted by HFWR Here's Fred's take on it...

Disturbing, and giving Fred a little slack for making it interesting, too true to laugh off.

I've been on this board since 2003. Early on we had some discussions along these lines. It was my contention that a large continent-spanning nation could not do well without a large, competitive manufacturing sector. I think this has been borne out. I also contend that a large country cannot keep a strong military without a strong economy. This has yet to be decided, but I still favor the same position.

I see continued loss in our future, with ups and downs, and perhaps increasing sectarian violence mainly drawn around ethnic/economic fault-lines. This also has not happened, and it may not. But I think it will.

Ha

[chinaco]

I'm ok with increasing inheritance tax rates (progressively) to recover the tax break given to the wealthy since the Reagan Administration (and forward) since the gov did not cut spending to match.... now the bill is due. They were able to keep it while they were alive. Time to pay it back!


You and I with our meager 401k and IRA (most of which are traditional)... when we pass on, we will pay big time!

Why should they avoid paying? Time to pay the bill!

[dex]

Quote:

Originally Posted by haha I see continued loss in our future, with ups and downs, and perhaps increasing sectarian violence mainly drawn around ethnic/economic fault-lines. This also has not happened, and it may not. But I think it will. Ha

I agree with you on this. It will show up first in the poor areas of inner cities among the Latino and Black communities. The increasing population, economic and political power of the Latino community will crowd out the Black community. The latest census numbers show this happening as does the Democrat Party courting the Latino vote.

I live in a congressional district that is 30% Black with a black congressman. There is also, a large Latino community in a neighboring area.

As to taxing the rich - over the coming years that economic class will be expanding to include most of us on this board.



First they came for the communists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a communist.

Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a Jew.

Then they came for the Rich,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't Rich.

Then they came for me
and there was no one left to speak out for me.