What should the federal tax brackets be?

[opebo]

Europeans ... get eight week vacations,

No, we don't.

Oh, really?  So what do you get, the same absurd two weeks that Americans get?  I think actually six weeks is the standard in most Continental countries, and eight would be for someone who has a lot of seniority.

[A18]

Homeownership is at a record high.

This is an odd circumstance, given the huge increase in housing prices and the considerable reduction in working class wages.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Of course the 1975 car was a better value relative to wages than the 2005 car, when new.  I remember back in high school - about 1985 - I bought a 1973 Caddilac as a joke/beater for $500 and the thing was a fantastic car. 

You must be logged in to read this quote.

To take up Dibble's argurments about quality - the quality of education for the lower classes has plummeted since 1975, while it has stayed the same or improved for the elite.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Consumer electronics have almost no impact on quality of life.  In fact they're largely substitutes for quality of life.  And yes, I think movies made in the 1970's were far better than what is made today.  Entertainment has to do with good stories, writing, and acting - real art - not computer generated explosions.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I'm sure any socialist would agree with me that the quality of life for most Americans have gone down precipitously for most Americans since the 1970's.  This is actually something akin to a cliche among retired working class people who see their children and grandchildren struggling at much lower wage levels than they faced.

Now what the  are you arguing? Yes, quality of life has increased, but it hasn't really?

If conditions are better now - cars, housing, health care, electronics - how the hell has the quality of life gone down?

Are you saying these have replaced other things? If so, please enumerate all the things people have lost.

[opebo]

Homeownership is at a record high.

This is an odd circumstance, given the huge increase in housing prices and the considerable reduction in working class wages.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Of course the 1975 car was a better value relative to wages than the 2005 car, when new.  I remember back in high school - about 1985 - I bought a 1973 Caddilac as a joke/beater for $500 and the thing was a fantastic car. 

You must be logged in to read this quote.

To take up Dibble's argurments about quality - the quality of education for the lower classes has plummeted since 1975, while it has stayed the same or improved for the elite.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Consumer electronics have almost no impact on quality of life.  In fact they're largely substitutes for quality of life.  And yes, I think movies made in the 1970's were far better than what is made today.  Entertainment has to do with good stories, writing, and acting - real art - not computer generated explosions.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I'm sure any socialist would agree with me that the quality of life for most Americans have gone down precipitously for most Americans since the 1970's.  This is actually something akin to a cliche among retired working class people who see their children and grandchildren struggling at much lower wage levels than they faced.

Now what the f**ck are you arguing? Yes, quality of life has increased, but it hasn't really?

If conditions are better now - cars, housing, health care, electronics - how the hell has the quality of life gone down?

Are you saying these have replaced other things? If so, please enumerate all the things people have lost.

Apparently you didn't read my post - I was refuting your claim that anything was better now.  If you will re-read, I think you will notice that I arranged it neatly, point by point, responding to your claims of increased quality. 

The only point that I did not refute was the one of statistical homeownership.  What could be causing that in the face of decreasing working class incomes and increasing home prices?  I don't know.  Perhaps an aging population?  Perhaps poor folks own homes in slums where they're still cheap?  Increased suburbanization?  Don't have an answer on that one, but I do know the median home now is a much higher multiple of the median income.  I suppose the most likely explanation is this is where all those double income family wive's wages have gone - into buying the house.

[A18]

Welfare has been greatly reduced, as has unionization.  Social Security doesn't actually do any redistribution from class to class.  The main change has been in tax policy, unionization, and the reduction in the real minimum wage.   I suppose the obvious conclusion is that even in those good old days, not enough was being done.

One more time:
MOST AMERICANS ARE NOT ON WELFARE.
MOST AMERICANS DO NOT GET PAID MINIMUM WAGE.

Get it through your thick skull.

With exactly one exception, all tax hikes on lower income brackets also applied to upper income brackets.

That one exception is the Tax Reform Act of 1986. It's sponsors were two liberal Democrats, Richard Gephardt of Missouri in the House of Representatives and Bill Bradley of New Jersey in the Senate.

[A18]

Homeownership is at a record high.

This is an odd circumstance, given the huge increase in housing prices and the considerable reduction in working class wages.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Of course the 1975 car was a better value relative to wages than the 2005 car, when new.  I remember back in high school - about 1985 - I bought a 1973 Caddilac as a joke/beater for $500 and the thing was a fantastic car. 

You must be logged in to read this quote.

To take up Dibble's argurments about quality - the quality of education for the lower classes has plummeted since 1975, while it has stayed the same or improved for the elite.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Consumer electronics have almost no impact on quality of life.  In fact they're largely substitutes for quality of life.  And yes, I think movies made in the 1970's were far better than what is made today.  Entertainment has to do with good stories, writing, and acting - real art - not computer generated explosions.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I'm sure any socialist would agree with me that the quality of life for most Americans have gone down precipitously for most Americans since the 1970's.  This is actually something akin to a cliche among retired working class people who see their children and grandchildren struggling at much lower wage levels than they faced.

Now what the f**ck are you arguing? Yes, quality of life has increased, but it hasn't really?

If conditions are better now - cars, housing, health care, electronics - how the hell has the quality of life gone down?

Are you saying these have replaced other things? If so, please enumerate all the things people have lost.

Apparently you didn't read my post - I was refuting your claim that anything was better now.  If you will re-read, I think you will notice that I arranged it neatly, point by point, responding to your claims of increased quality. 

The only point that I did not refute was the one of statistical homeownership.  What could be causing that in the face of decreasing working class incomes and increasing home prices?  I don't know.  Perhaps an aging population?  Perhaps poor folks own homes in slums where they're still cheap?  Don't have an answer on that one, but I do know the median home now is a much higher multiple of the median income.

I read your post, and there was absolutely no substance. All you did is deny that things are any better, without mentioning specifics.

Do you actually think 1975 cars are better than 2005 cars? What do you mean relative to wages? Do you mean that people now have better cars, but they have less of other things?

If so, specify.

[opebo]

Welfare has been greatly reduced, as has unionization.  Social Security doesn't actually do any redistribution from class to class.  The main change has been in tax policy, unionization, and the reduction in the real minimum wage.   I suppose the obvious conclusion is that even in those good old days, not enough was being done.

One more time:
MOST AMERICANS ARE NOT ON WELFARE.
MOST AMERICANS DO NOT GET PAID MINIMUM WAGE.

No, not most, but a huge number, and certainly both groups represent the most desperate in our economic heirarchy.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

There have been numerous reductions in the tax rate on the upper class during that time period, however.

[opebo]

Do you actually think 1975 cars are better than 2005 cars? What do you mean relative to wages? Do you mean that people now have better cars, but they have less of other things?

If so, specify.

It is obvious - a median worker in 1975 could buy the median car sold in that year with a smaller percentage of his earnings than a median worker in 2005 could buy the median car sold in 2005.  And the cars really aren't much 'better'. 

[A18]

You said things were worse for 80% of Americans. Well, 80% of Americans do not receive welfare. And 80% of Americans do not get paid minimum wage. So obviously they aren't suffering from those policies.

Tax reductions don't hurt anyone unless you can specify government services that were cut.

[A18]

Do you actually think 1975 cars are better than 2005 cars? What do you mean relative to wages? Do you mean that people now have better cars, but they have less of other things?

If so, specify.

It is obvious - a median worker in 1975 could buy the median car sold in that year with a smaller percentage of his earnings than a median worker in 2005 could buy the median car sold in 2005.  And the cars really aren't much 'better'. 

Okay, so all you're saying is that cars are taking up more of people's wages. Well, what are all the other things they're missing out on now that they used to buy with their 'extra money?'

[opebo]

You said things were worse for 80% of Americans. Well, 80% of Americans do not receive welfare. And 80% of Americans do not get paid minimum wage. So obviously they aren't suffering from those policies.

Tax reductions don't hurt anyone unless you can specify government services that were cut.

The 80% are the bottom four quintiles that recieve a considerably reduced share of national income compared to the early 1970's.  Some individuals and groups within that 80% - notably the lower three quintiles and particularly male workers - have experienced an absolute decline in wages.  Check out the census bureau date on the subject.

[opebo]

Do you actually think 1975 cars are better than 2005 cars? What do you mean relative to wages? Do you mean that people now have better cars, but they have less of other things?

If so, specify.

It is obvious - a median worker in 1975 could buy the median car sold in that year with a smaller percentage of his earnings than a median worker in 2005 could buy the median car sold in 2005.  And the cars really aren't much 'better'. 

Okay, so all you're saying is that cars are taking up more of people's wages. Well, what are all the other things they're missing out on now that they used to buy with their 'extra money?'

You're asking me what can people buy with money?  That is a very general question and I couldn't presume to give a definitive answer. I suppose just about anything and everything can be bought with money.

[Bono]

Europeans ... get eight week vacations,

No, we don't.

Oh, really?  So what do you get, the same absurd two weeks that Americans get?  I think actually six weeks is the standard in most Continental countries, and eight would be for someone who has a lot of seniority.

No. the legal standard is 22 days a year. Some people might, and probably do get more vacations, but that's company policy.

[opebo]

Europeans ... get eight week vacations,

No, we don't.

Oh, really?  So what do you get, the same absurd two weeks that Americans get?  I think actually six weeks is the standard in most Continental countries, and eight would be for someone who has a lot of seniority.

No. the legal standard is 22 days a year. Some people might, and probably do get more vacations, but that's company policy.

Is that at your employer in Portugal?  Or is that the legal requirement throughout the EU?  I think the places with the longest vacations are The Netherlands, Belgium, Germany, France, and the Scandianvian countries.  In any case, throughout Europe, with the possible exception of the UK/Ireland, vacations are a much more reasonable length than ni the US.

[A18]

You said things were worse for 80% of Americans. Well, 80% of Americans do not receive welfare. And 80% of Americans do not get paid minimum wage. So obviously they aren't suffering from those policies.

Tax reductions don't hurt anyone unless you can specify government services that were cut.

The 80% are the bottom four quintiles that recieve a considerably reduced share of national income compared to the early 1970's.  Some individuals and groups within that 80% - notably the lower three quintiles and particularly male workers - have experienced an absolute decline in wages.  Check out the census bureau date on the subject.

Now you're just spinning around in circles. What you're saying has itself been discredited in this very topic, but we're talking about quality of life.

[A18]

Do you actually think 1975 cars are better than 2005 cars? What do you mean relative to wages? Do you mean that people now have better cars, but they have less of other things?

If so, specify.

It is obvious - a median worker in 1975 could buy the median car sold in that year with a smaller percentage of his earnings than a median worker in 2005 could buy the median car sold in 2005.  And the cars really aren't much 'better'. 

Okay, so all you're saying is that cars are taking up more of people's wages. Well, what are all the other things they're missing out on now that they used to buy with their 'extra money?'

You're asking me what can people buy with money?  That is a very general question and I couldn't presume to give a definitive answer. I suppose just about anything and everything can be bought with money.

I'm asking you in what specific area has the quality of life gone down.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

0-15k - earned income credit
15k-20k - 0%
20k-30k - 5%
30k-40k - 10%
40k-50k - 15%
50k-70k - 20%
70k-100k - 30%
100k-150k - 35%
150k-200k - 40%
200k-500k - 50%
500k-5m - 60%
5m-100m - 70%
100m+ - 80%

[Richard]

0-15k - earned income credit
15k-20k - 0%
20k-30k - 5%
30k-40k - 10%
40k-50k - 15%
50k-70k - 20%
70k-100k - 30%
100k-150k - 35%
150k-200k - 40%
200k-500k - 50%
500k-5m - 60%
5m-100m - 70%
100m+ - 80%

Its amazing how you can legalize stealing.  Say, who gave you a right to take my stuff?  Can I take yours too?

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

0-15k - earned income credit
15k-20k - 0%
20k-30k - 5%
30k-40k - 10%
40k-50k - 15%
50k-70k - 20%
70k-100k - 30%
100k-150k - 35%
150k-200k - 40%
200k-500k - 50%
500k-5m - 60%
5m-100m - 70%
100m+ - 80%

Its amazing how you can legalize stealing.  Say, who gave you a right to take my stuff?  Can I take yours too?

State and local taxes are regressive. How come you only consider tax systems stealing if they're progressive?

[phk]

0-15k - earned income credit
15k-20k - 0%
20k-30k - 5%
30k-40k - 10%
40k-50k - 15%
50k-70k - 20%
70k-100k - 30%
100k-150k - 35%
150k-200k - 40%
200k-500k - 50%
500k-5m - 60%
5m-100m - 70%
100m+ - 80%

Its amazing how you can legalize stealing.  Say, who gave you a right to take my stuff?  Can I take yours too?

You'll get hte money back when the working-class spend it.

[A18]

What state has a regressive tax rate? There may very well be one, but I'm quite sure Virginia does not.

Even in a regressive tax system, the rich pay more than the poor. Not that I consider taxation stealing.

[Richard]

0-15k - earned income credit
15k-20k - 0%
20k-30k - 5%
30k-40k - 10%
40k-50k - 15%
50k-70k - 20%
70k-100k - 30%
100k-150k - 35%
150k-200k - 40%
200k-500k - 50%
500k-5m - 60%
5m-100m - 70%
100m+ - 80%

Its amazing how you can legalize stealing.  Say, who gave you a right to take my stuff?  Can I take yours too?

State and local taxes are regressive. How come you only consider tax systems stealing if they're progressive?

I consider all income taxes stealing.  But yours in particular is very bad.

0-15k - earned income credit
15k-20k - 0%
20k-30k - 5%
30k-40k - 10%
40k-50k - 15%
50k-70k - 20%
70k-100k - 30%
100k-150k - 35%
150k-200k - 40%
200k-500k - 50%
500k-5m - 60%
5m-100m - 70%
100m+ - 80%

Its amazing how you can legalize stealing.  Say, who gave you a right to take my stuff?  Can I take yours too?

You'll get hte money back when the working-class spend it.

I am the ing working class.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

What state has a regressive tax rate? There may very well be one, but I'm quite sure Virginia does not.

Even in a regressive tax system, the rich pay more than the poor. Not that I consider taxation stealing.

Caliifornia has a more progressive tax system than the average state. In California, on average:
the poor pay 11%
the middle class pay 9%
the rich pay 7%

[A18]

This page says otherwise: http://taxes.yahoo.com/statereport.html

Rates: Low 1.0, High 9.3

$: Low 5,454  High 35,792

[Frodo]

What state has a regressive tax rate? There may very well be one, but I'm quite sure Virginia does not.

Washington, for one.  which is peculiar, because it is a state with an otherwise populist tradition -it is the reason we have initiatives and referendums, and strong labor unions.  i don't know why this state got saddled with the sales tax during the 1890s and early 20th century, as opposed to the progressive income tax which is one of the main legacies of the progressive movement of the late 19th and early 20th centuries.

in terms of tax systems, Oregon is where this state should be, with a statewide progressive income tax, and no sales tax.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

not true -try living in Washington state.  you will like it here, as a rich white boy, where we have a regressive tax code that penalizes the poor and middle class -just the way you like it.   

[A18]

A sales tax is not regressive. It has no income tax, so obviously it has no regressive tax system.

Taking 5% of $1,000,000 amounts to more than 15% of $10,000.