Richest Americans got richer under Bush

[RecycleMichael]

Interesting Bloomberg story...

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=ar5uxG_wV87A&refer=us

This line intriqued me the most...

"The average tax rate paid by the richest 400 Americans fell by a quarter to 17.2 percent through the first six years of the Bush administration and their average income doubled to $263.3 million, new IRS data show."

The wealthiest of all paid on average a tax rate of 17.2%!

[Conan71]

Tom Daschle certainly was enrichened during the Bush admin, and it's pretty obvious that he was taking some seriously creative tax breaks. []

The reason those people, like big Democrat supporters Warren Buffett, George Soros, and George Kaiser, are paying around 17% is that people in that income bracket don't pay themselves a salary.  People with that much wealth create jobs which are taxed at higher rates, own all or part of corporations which pay corporate taxes, spend money which is taxed with consumption taxes, they pay higher property taxes, etc.

The Democrats might raise the cap gains tax which hurts smaller investors, but they will come up with some creative loopholes for major players to see little difference.  The Dims will make a lot of noise to satisfy their class-envy base and will move on.

The implication seems to be that these 400 richest are a bunch of wealthy Republicans.  I'd venture a guess it's about 50/50.

[Fatstrat]

This is exactly what is supposed to happen in a capitalist society. The rich don't invest if there is no profit in it for them. When they invest, they create jobs. And therefore the lower levels of economic society benefit as well.
What Bloomberg doesn't tell you is that the Middle Class grew in numbers.And that the low economic class shrunk. Having moved UP to middle class thru the increased opportunities.
One reason why we such an influx of illegal aliens,is that they knew they could make a living in the U.S. Even on sub-minimum wage! There was plenty of work for everyone.
This trend began to slip 2 years ago when the Democrats took majority in the houses. And will likely continue to. The rich don't invest when they fear the Govt. will TAKE their money thru increased taxes. And when they sit on their money, the nation suffers.

[Hometown]

Huge gobs of money were made during Clinton's presidency, while he balanced the budget and paid down national debt.  Working people made significant gains too.  I increased my income by over $20,000 a year during Clinton's administration.

[cannon_fodder]

My math would then show that the richest Americans had an average tax increase of $17,000,000 (Current average of $45.3mil, old average of $28.27mil).

The headline could read:

Rich Americans see average taxes increase by $17,000,000 on average

All a matter of perspective.

I do agree though, that the "progressive" tax system is a farce.  I don't want to see capital gains taxed more (discourages investment, particularly foreign investment - I want their money making US jobs) but me paying 30-40% sucks balls when my Senators (all millionaires) are paying 20% (when they pay their damn taxes).

Another GREAT advertisement for the Fair Tax.
- - -

HT - your income increased $160,000.00 over the course of the Clinton presidency?  If you think that is personally attributable to Bill Clinton seek professional help.  Also, if you think that makes you a "working person" seek help.

Republican, Democrats... the impact on the economy SHOULD be minimal. Which is why Clinton did well.  Hands off (argument can be made that it was too hands off but...).

FAIR TAX!

[Red Arrow]

Jimmy Carter could have ridden the 1990s DotCom bubble to budget surplusses. The economy was headed down by the end of the Clinton years, just not as bad as now. Selective memory among Clinton supporters would lead one to forget that the economy was not completly rosey between Bush I and Bush II.

[Hometown]

$160,000.00?  No.  About $55,000 to about $72,000.  Bottom line is that working people made real gains.

Question:  What kind of Democrat do Republicans really, really hate?

Answer:  Successful Democrats -- like Bill Clinton.

You know, it took Bill Clinton to make Reagan's principles "work" (for eight years).

[cannon_fodder]

I misread your post then. Though you said you made +$20K each year.

In any event, I don't dislike Bill Clinton.  I give him credit for his accomplishments and by all accounts he is a very likable person.  I do question to what extent he punted the housing market, the stock market bubble, and the rising terrorism attacks into the future though.  BUT, there is no doubt the Clinton years were good ones and people made real gains.

I also only give him partial economic credit as it was Al Gore who took the initiative to invent the internet and spur a technological revolution nearly equivalent to the second industrial revolution.  But he does gets partial credit for allowing it to develop as an industry without sticking governments head too far into it and messing it up.  A president can do far more to destroy an economy than they can do to help it.

I guess all we can hope for his that the rich keep getting richer and the rest of us get richer too.

[TheArtist]

Large corporations or the super rich dont seem to be where the real job wealth is. I guess its part of my personal experience, and my parents, as a small business owners. The idea of working for another company, for someone else, is,,,to put it quite bluntly, stupid. When you work for someone elses company your job is to make them money, not yourself. Unless you own stocks.

Let me put it another way. I remember hearing about the number of small companies in Tulsa and how they are such a huge part of our economy. We are said to be above the national average in incomes. I work for mostly "well to do" people. I would say that the vast majority of the people I work for own their own companies or are major stakeholders, vp, etc. in small to medium sized local companies.

The super wealthy or people who deal with large corporations,,, well the majority of the jobs they create are the folk working at Mc Donalds, Best Buy, Starbucks, Macys, Target, Major banks, etc. Few good paying management jobs, lots of low wage worker jobs. I dont think thats really where we should focus the most attention on the job growth and incomes front. I think its the small and medium sized businesses that create the most middle/ upper middle/ well to do, wealth. Large corporations by their nature are meant to have lots of small people at the bottom funneling wealth to the few at the top. More smaller and medium sized businesses seem to equal more,,, "medium wealthy" people per worker. Hope you get what I am going at here lol. Its just what I see in my day to day experience anyway.

Giving tax breaks to the super wealthy and mega corporations, just seems to shift things in the wrong direction. Dont over tax them of course, but would rather incentivise small and medium sized businesses and the middle class. Plus its the working and middle classes that buy the services and stuff. Its only when they are buying that businesses can expand. If people want more, businesses will spring up to give it to them. Opening more "branches/stores"
of large corporations, more Best Buys and Wal-Marts, isnt going to create wealth for the average or middle class person. Thats more drones funneling money to fewer at the top, and China lol.

[cannon_fodder]

Artist, what you forget is that come jobs are more conducive to working for someone else.

Petroleum engineers would have a hard time going it on their own.  Rocket scientists.  Electrical engineers.  Automotive engineers.  They simply don't have the individual capital to go it alone.  

Then there is the millions of blue collar jobs as machinists, welders, drivers, fork lift operators - that have virtually no chance of going it alone.  They can start their own companies sure, but then THEY will need to hire people to do those jobs.


Many other professional jobs require years of training to be able to go it alone. Accountants, finance directors, marketing, tons of fields.  Right out of school you know nothing. Later in your career you may make more working for someone else than going it alone.

Many career require a combination of experience, capital AND connections to go alone.   An architect, accountant, or attorney needs experience and access to a client base to try and hang out their own shingle.   If you are from an area you have a leg up.  If you have built up a reputation working for someone else you have a better shot.

And still other professions simply are rarely conducive to going it on your own:  teachers, firefighters, policemen, casino managers, cruise ship captains.  TONS and TONS of jobs are not conducive to being your own boss.  Tell the blue collar workers in Tulsa that they have low wage worker jobs - most of the welders, operating engineers, machinists, etc. would disagree.

Then there is the risk factor.  If you have a family it is hard to bet your life savings on a business.  To quit a stable job with health insurance on a gamble.  

I agree with the sentiment of encouraging people to start their own businesses.  But don't forget that option is not always as easy for many peoples skill sets as it is for others.  A happy medium to encourage BUSINESS would be a good thing - the size of the business doesn't matter.  They all generate wealth and put people to work.

[Hometown]

Open a business?

We formed a corporation, had attorney and accountant and commercial broker working for us.  We had a plan approved by the small business association and assurances we wouldn't have any problem getting loans.  But ....

We didn't want to live our jobs 24 hours a day.  We didn't want to take on a lot of risk.  And I realized that I don't have the qualities that make a good business person.

In business you are always looking for your advantage, or at least the competition is.  I don't like relating to people in that way.

Selling feels like begging to me.

Now, there are people that have earned income like you wouldn't believe.  Like thousands of dollars an hour consultants.  Professionals with equity stakes in Microsofts, et cetera.

I remember when a food fortune heir living in Ft. Worth mocked the locals by saying, these people think car dealerships are big money, ha ha ha.

Seems like the money chase ruins the lives of the New Money people though.  They are usually trying to prove something to their fathers.  And their kids are always totally messed up.

In life -- balance is ultimately more important than tons of money.  But don't get me wrong, I work in Tulsa now and I NEED A RAISE.  Please.

[Conan71]

Hometown, if there were a spot for you in the company I work for, I'd recommend you.  We need a token liberal in the office.

[Hometown]

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

Hometown, if there were a spot for you in the company I work for, I'd recommend you.  We need a token liberal in the office.

Thank you Conan.  $40,000 a year plus some basic benefits gets all the Hometown anyone could ever need.  My Mother's copy of Emily Post, my Black's Legal Dictionary and Harvard Blue Book Citator are part of the deal.

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by Hometown

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

Hometown, if there were a spot for you in the company I work for, I'd recommend you.  We need a token liberal in the office.

Thank you Conan.  $40,000 a year plus some basic benefits gets all the Hometown anyone could ever need.  My Mother's copy of Emily Post, my Black's Legal Dictionary and Harvard Blue Book Citator are part of the deal.

You know, I bet you are a total laugh riot to have around the office.

[Hometown]

My sense of humor is sort of Jewishy.  Love irony.  Now, picture this.  I've done work for the likes of David Boies and Laurence Pulgram.  Just think, I could be that senior, top drawer assistant making you look really good.  $40,000.