Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 
Interesting. Are you doing this deliberately?
KingOfSomewhereHot said:
Which was likely in reference to what you said earlier, which was:
But in this statement:
you've not only changed from the top 10% to to the top 1%, you've also simply ignored the remainder of the top 10% by jumping to the bottom 90%.
I'm not sure you're doing this deliberately, sliding all over the place, or moving the goal line when someone comes up and says "Hey, I'm in the top 10% and I'm not super wealthy!" because it puts a dent in your caricature of the rich. But, just so we're clear, in your view who are the rich" and the "super rich" (setting aside that these are subjective and relative terms anyway)?
Interesting. Are you doing this deliberately?
KingOfSomewhereHot said:
Which was likely in reference to what you said earlier, which was:
But in this statement:
you've not only changed from the top 10% to to the top 1%, you've also simply ignored the remainder of the top 10% by jumping to the bottom 90%.
I'm not sure you're doing this deliberately, sliding all over the place, or moving the goal line when someone comes up and says "Hey, I'm in the top 10% and I'm not super wealthy!" because it puts a dent in your caricature of the rich. But, just so we're clear, in your view who are the rich" and the "super rich" (setting aside that these are subjective and relative terms anyway)?
A lot of people in that top 10% pay no federal taxes at all. Once someone earns over about $120,000 they don't have to pay any more of their income into social security either. In order for household income to get into the top 10% they have to earn in 2007 a minimum of $118,000 and 76% of people earning more than $75,000 a year are part of households with more than one income often filling jointly. There are all kinds of ways for very wealthy people to pay very little in taxes. That probably doesn't apply to Kingsof.. because he I suspect is paid mostly through a salary and likely has few ways of paying less in taxes, certainly as opposed to someone who gets most of their income from their business. The wealthiest 10% of American's in real terms will not be found by looking at the amount people state as their income. People can be accruing substantial assets and show much less income.
"In 2009, roughly 47% of households, or 71 million, will not owe any federal income tax, according to estimates by the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center.
Under $50k: 63,500,000 69.5% won't pay a dime
$50-100k: 5,700,000 won't pay a dime
$100-$500k: 736,000 won't pay a dime
Over $1m: 6,000 won't pay a dime."
~ http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_b...ill-pay-0.html
Some people, I suspect, like Kings already pay their fare share of taxes, many though, especially those earning more, do not. The real point here though is what I pointed to earlier that the very wealthy that top 1% invest largely in the stock market, there wealth has doubled over the last 20 years or so and their tax rate has gone down. So the result is instead of that money being used to create jobs and lessen the tax burden on those earning less, the stock market is pumped up further with more money which does next to nothing to create jobs.
"If your enemies cannot find a flaw in your reasoning, they will find it in your reputation".
~ William Hazlitt
"If your enemies cannot find a flaw in your reasoning, they will find it in your reputation".
~ William Hazlitt
You are huh? Where are you showing this? Some other forum?
, you hate the rich 
Cool, like the promise about the Pell Grants, my son has benefited from it and its helped us too.
