Allowing Bush tax cuts for the "rich" to expire is a very bad idea. My reason is actually very simple because it will be a tax hike for the middle class. Tax laws in the US are very complex and just because your taxable income for 1 year is over $250,000 does not mean you are alway this highly paid. Here's a scenario.

I do not work the government. I work in the private sector and I do NOT have a pension. I live paycheck to paycheck since real wages have not gone up for the last decade and I have basically no means of retirement other than social security which is getting pushed back further and further. In my line of work there are no one being hired if they are over 50.

The only way for me to retire is by moving from company to company hoping one of these gigs will turn out to be successful and I get a wind fall via. stock options. Now if you know about stock options these once in a lifetime gain is considered ordinary income and would be over the $250,000 for the 1 time which means... it is subject to the millionaire tax. You might think oh this guy look at him, his income this year is $4 million and he must be rich nevermind that this is essentially my lump sum pension. Think $4 million is a lot? look at the typical government worker who retires at 50 with 90% of his final year's pay that goes on until he and his spouses die, this can easily top $4 million in aggregate and yet just because he isn't getting this via. a lump sum means he doesn't have to pay a millionaire tax while I would be subject to even though I am really not any better off. I think the "tax the rich" concept is flawed because it pits government workers against works in the private sector, and this is very sad.

A much better taxation would be not based on annual income but rather based on lifetime income, i.e. your total income since the day you started working is added up year over year and your tax is based on the total overall income... oh wait, they will never to this because government workers with a pension will scream and whine because finally they'd be asked to pay this millionaire tax even if they arent.... my point exactly.

do not raise taxes on the "rich" the concept is terribly flawed.

-teton

Comments

xyoungblood's picture
xyoungblood 3 years 11 weeks ago
#1

So what you're saying is, that you were getting out of high school or college and you began your job hunt. You decided to go for the get rich plan of striving for the golden parachute and you've essentially failed. When I got out of high school I thought to myself where do I want to be in 30 years, I decided to become a union blue collar worker in the private sector. And yes in 7 years I will retire with a very good pension. Here's the gist, you chose to gamble with your future, you road the rollercoaster, you were the rabbit racing for the finishline. I chose security, I chose boring and mundane work, at a lower wage, with union dues, I am the turtle. We all choose, everyone of us. Even people who say they had no choice, choose to stay at jobs they hate for what ever reason. We don't want to take personal responsiblity, we want to blame others for our misfortunes. Denial.

And now you are choosing to villify those of us that choose a different path. Here's a thought, "Let the tax cuts expire, so that when you do retire you can actually recieve the SS benefits that you have invested in your entire life. The fund that we all pay into, "except for the rich", so that we can help each other out; because that is what living in a society means. We gather our resources for the good of society.

I'm sorry that you feel like there is no light at the end of your tunnel, but please don't drag my children and your children's future into your dark abyss by unrepressed emotional revenge voting in 2012. A fight for unions, is the fight for the middle class. Stop your right wing anti-union rhetoric, it is not based in logic.

teton's picture
teton 3 years 11 weeks ago
#2

Fight for the union is actually not fight for the middle class. It is in reality the opposite. The key to union is that it relies on the private sector to provide the returns that are necessary to pay out the pensions. You can't invest in the government because the government does not issue stocks, only debt which gives a fixed return. Pensions have been calculated based on a market return of stocks, i.e. S&P 500

In the end the point is unions depends on the private sector corporation to provide steller returns so union members can retire. If you were to tax corporation so their profit is diminished... what will ultimately happen to your pensions???

Of course... your union leader do not want to tell you that by being in union you are in a fight against people who are not in a union.

Remember BP? They fouled up the gulf but Obama allowed them to live on? Why? of couse if BP was to go under Union members all over the world will be crying foul that their pensions just tanked by 15% or so.

So now you see... both you and I depend on the private sector company to do well so our retirement can be fully funded. The only difference here is that your fund is given to you over time, i.e. 40 years and so your taxes are lower while my fund is a 1 time $4 million pay day and because of "progressive tax" structure I must have significantly higher taxes even though I am not any higher paid then you are.

This is the reality my friend, but sadly even Thom Hartmann will not mention this on his radio show.

Phaedrus76's picture
Phaedrus76 3 years 11 weeks ago
#3

look at the typical government worker who retires at 50 with 90% of his final year's pay that goes on until he and his spouses die

Ok, you keep repeating this lie. The only group this is typical for are soldiers, sailors, marines, cops and firemen. The rest of govt workers need to work to 62 to get retirement pay immediately. My wife's govt pension, when she hits 62 in 25 years, will be about $210 a month. Had she stayed at the government job for 40 years, she would have gotten a grand $1400 a month. The only ones who get good pensions are the managers, and the public safety workers. And Firemen are notorious for retiring in their forties, and being dead 8 years later, because they work in a hell of smoke and flame, filled with toxic chemicals.

xyoungblood's picture
xyoungblood 3 years 11 weeks ago
#4

"You can't invest in the government because the government does not issue stocks".

This is why I fight against your ilk. The government is we. You divide the government into a seperate entity, it's not, its the people. Except that you right wing slags keep handing more and more power to your corperate overseers. You don't give a s@#t about people only profit, we are only slaves to you, and that is dispicable.

Unions are the future of society, social democracies are the future of societies, your lot is dying out, and in the next 20 years will cease to exist. Money will no longer be the measure of success, the only measure of success will be "how did your contributions advance the whole of society".

Capitolist pigs are no longer welcome here.

Add comment

Login or register to post comments

Currently Chatting

Community Archive

GOP Blocks Equal Pay...again.

Just in time for election season, Senate Republicans blocked legislation aimed at closing the gender pay gap. For the third time since 2012, Republicans refused to allow debate on the Paycheck Fairness Act, and reminded women that the GOP doesn't believe in equal pay for equal work.