Republican or Democrat?

[gmblack3a]

Originally Posted by Holden_C04

I knew someone would twist my words. When is the last time you saw a rich fella sweat other than at tennis? I mean come on, give me a break.

Wealth has NOTHING to do with effort or labour. I know a lot of poor people who work their butts off all their lives and don't have much to show for it.

Thats because they don't live within their means.

People make choices from the time they are 16 yrs old that will effect them for the rest of their lives. Did they bust their butts in school to stay ahead?

A few friends that I know that are successful work 70-80 hours a week. They have put it all on the line to get where they are in life. They deserve everything they have.

We have a family friend who is about 3 yrs younger then me. First he went to school for 6 yrs to be a pharmacist. He worked in that field for a few years, then when to medical school and became a ER MD. 10 yrs of the toughest schooling, 10 yrs on the deans list..... He tells me last year that he finally paid off the last of his school loans. He also tells me that is total income tax is about 50% with the local city income taxes in his area.

So tell me again how hard work does not pay.

[dave40co]

Originally Posted by Holden_C04

I knew someone would twist my words. When is the last time you saw a rich fella sweat other than at tennis? I mean come on, give me a break.

I bet a lot of them have been sweating this past couple of weeks!

[Setec Astronomy]

Originally Posted by jfelbab

My point is that like most entrepreneurs, they got there by working 80+ hour weeks, building up thier small business. Success was not handed to them, so to answer your question, I see them sweating all the time. I respectfully reject your notion that wealth has nothing to do with effort.

Yeah, but the people responsible for this latest mess are not enterpreneurs as you are describing or even people previously mentioned like Gates and Jobs, and most of those small business entrepreneurs are still not in the top 1% of earners ( >$603,000/yr.). I would fall on the other side of this, that real wealth starts with privelage or inheritance or celebrity, obviously with some exceptions, like Gates, Buffet, and many others. None of the CEO's of these bailed-out or bought-out companies had anything to do with the entrepreneurial start of those companies.

[Holden_C04]

Originally Posted by gmblack3a

Thats because they don't live within their means.

People make choices from the time they are 16 yrs old that will effect them for the rest of their lives. Did they bust their butts in school to stay ahead?

A few friends that I know that are successful work 70-80 hours a week. They have put it all on the line to get where they are in life. They deserve everything they have.

We have a family friend who is about 3 yrs younger then me. First he went to school for 6 yrs to be a pharmacist. He worked in that field for a few years, then when to medical school and became a ER MD. 10 yrs of the toughest schooling, 10 yrs on the deans list..... He tells me last year that he finally paid off the last of his school loans. He also tells me that is total income tax is about 50% with the local city income taxes in his area.

So tell me again how hard work does not pay.

You're still talking about the middle class. I am talking about the guys who play tennis all day and spend weekends at the country club. Two different worlds.

[Lumadar]

Originally Posted by Holden_C04

I knew someone would twist my words. When is the last time you saw a rich fella sweat other than at tennis? I mean come on, give me a break.

Wealth has NOTHING to do with effort or labour. I know a lot of poor people who work their butts off all their lives and don't have much to show for it.

Your post right there basically completely sums up the difference in opinion on how Republicans and Democrats each view the concept of labor and rewards. I'm not saying that you're wrong, as there is no way to truly say who is right or wrong, but I will say your viewpoint directly clashes with that of a conservative.

You believe that if someone "works hard" that they should be rewarded equally, or at least somewhat similarly to the extremely rare wealthy elite that work white collar jobs. Now, I can see on some level how you can think that, but at the same time I personally align myself with the conservative thinking that it isn't just about how "hard" you work, but it is about supply and demand.

Supply and demand? You're probably thinking I'm nuts, but I'm not (At least I don't think so! ). My point is that virtually ANYONE can "work hard" (Although many choose not to, but that is a different subject) but a select few choose to differentiate themselves from others by working hard in school, choosing smart career paths, and getting themselves noticed by showing their unique TALENTS that enable them to be leaders and innovators at large corporations.

We live in a capitalistic economy- everything is driven by the mighty dollar and the goal to "make more money." Stockholders want maximum returns, and therefor businesses are willing to pay HUGE salaries to their executives and managers as they have unique skills AND the vast majority work absolutely ludicrous hours.

I personally was involved in the startup of a company that started with 5 guys, and now 7 years later was valued at over $25,000,000! I'll tell you what though, that company wouldn't ever have even existed if it wasn't for a few RISK TAKERS that had unique visions, skills, and personal drives that allowed them to make it happen.

...and for what it is worth, many of these guys have worked 10-14 hour days for YEARS on end. The myth that high level executives just sit in their posh offices and don't work hard, long hours is just, well, a myth.

Bottom line? Life isn't fair. Nowhere in our constitution or the amendments, or any major religious holy book does it claim that life is supposed to be "equal" for everyone. Some people are born into wealth and are afforded an easier chance to make it into a high paying job- that's life. I don't think it should become their burden to provide for those who weren't. Odds are, even if THEY didn't have to work particularly hard in their lives, someone in their family in the past did. Risk takers and innovators deserve rewards. **(If you want to look at the long term big picture, consider if we were to raise taxes through the rich for the wealthy, and use the money to give welfare and socialize medicine for the poor- what incentive would the poor have to work hard? )

Slight aside, the concept of why a flat tax is better for the economy and doesn't just benefit the rich like you claimed is that it will make it economically feasible for more businesses to stay in America. There is a reason companies are either outsourcing jobs, or leaving altogether- the taxes and costs make it impossible to be competitive on a global level.

[Setec Astronomy]

Originally Posted by gmblack3a

A few friends that I know that are successful work 70-80 hours a week. They have put it all on the line to get where they are in life. They deserve everything they have.

What is "successful"? Do they make more than $603,000/yr? I think I would rate successful at a lot less than that. I think it was the other thread where I linked to the Washington Post chart of the tax proposals which indicates no change in income tax until $603,000 under Obama's proposal (there may be more FICA contribution).

Originally Posted by gmblack3a

We have a family friend who is about 3 yrs younger then me. First he went to school for 6 yrs to be a pharmacist. He worked in that field for a few years, then when to medical school and became a ER MD. 10 yrs of the toughest schooling, 10 yrs on the deans list..... He tells me last year that he finally paid off the last of his school loans. He also tells me that is total income tax is about 50% with the local city income taxes in his area.

So tell me again how hard work does not pay.

(Almost all) Doctors and lawyers don't make the kind of money that celebrities and CEO's do. And it doesn't take much to get into a 50% total tax bracket since it's easy to max out on federal because the max rate is less than half of what it was when Reagan was elected.

I'm not sure what your point really was about this--that he pays too much tax, or that people who make a lot work hard for it?

[TH0001]

Originally Posted by Holden_C04

You're still talking about the middle class. I am talking about the guys who play tennis all day and spend weekends at the country club. Two different worlds.

I work for some pretty rich people (2 of my clients are worth over a billion dollars) and I have a lot of clients that are worth 100 mil or more... and

NONE of them play tennis or whatever your ASSUMPTION presumes. Sorry dude but you are basing your whole outview on presumptions....

Every single cliet I work for who has a lot of wealth did (and does) bust their butts to get that. Every single one of them busted there butts (70-80 hour work weeks, married to the job, I mean hardcore job-nazi stuff) and still do. And even if they retire or start to take it easy and play tennis, I am not sure what gives anybody the right to take more of the money they earned.

Tyler you summed up the liberal mindset very clearly when you said that you find them keeping the money they earned the same as getting a hand out.

People should be afforded opportunity (as equally as possible)... what they do with it is their choice and their bussiness.

You have a lot of misconceptions about rich people... And I am suprised that you feel it is the government's job to redistribute the money to people who haven't sacraficed as much. Don't get me wrong, public welfare is a good thing and should be severly limited to 3 years. If somebody cannot improve themselves on our money in that time, then they likely never will.

[Setec Astronomy]

Originally Posted by Lumadar

...and for what it is worth, many of these guys have worked 10-14 hour days for YEARS on end. The myth that high level executives just sit in their posh offices and don't work hard, long hours is just, well, a myth.

Yes it is a myth. The difference is now that these guys make 10 or 100 times more than they did 25 years ago, and you can't fire them if they stink (see previously linked article). Rule of thumb years ago was the CEO made 20 times the average pay at the company, or 50 times the lowest pay, hence the President of the US making $400K. Try getting a CEO of a large company for even 10 times that amount.

Has their cost of living gone up 10 times? 100 times? I'll tell you what, I wish I was making 100 times what I was 25 years ago and couldn't get fired without a huge severance.

Originally Posted by Lumadar

There is a reason companies are either outsourcing jobs, or leaving altogether- the taxes and costs make it impossible to be competitive on a global level.

How about the company makes more money on an outsourced product so the CEO and his cronies make more in bonus? I think that's the real reason, no more union negotiation, no more environmental worries...and a fatter bottom line that the exec can take credit for, the future of his company or country be damned.

[Holden_C04]

Lolz...you called me Kevin.

[Holden_C04]

I have to go and be lazy because I make <$603,000 per year. When I stop being lazy, I'll come back and respond.

[Setec Astronomy]

Originally Posted by TH0001

I work for some pretty rich people (2 of my clients are worth over a billion dollars) and I have a lot of clients that are worth 100 mil or more... and NONE of them play tennis or whatever your ASSUMPTION presumes. Sorry dude but you are basing your whole outview on presumptions....

Just out of curiosity, your clients bragged to you about their net worth? And if you have clients that are billionaires, will it threaten their lifestyle to have an 11.5% tax increase? No one has ever suggested that any of these "wealthy" people have their lives confiscated and thrown in the trash. I think what is being asked is that because their ability to pay is higher, that they should pay a larger percentage than those whose ability to pay is lower.

Earlier in this thread or in the other thread you championed the use of scholarships, grants, etc. for people to improve themselves. These kinds of aid are not available to wealthy people--why? Because their ability to pay is much larger than someone with a lower income.

Perhaps in your locale the rich people are nouveau, but up here in the northeast, there is plenty of old money, acquired by inheritance or privilege (and plenty of those poor Wall Street workers who are sweating bullets that their $25 million bonus is going to be cut to $5 million). After all, W. went to Harvard, what were his chances of going there without his father's legacy? McCain was 894 in his class of 899 at the Naval Academy, which he freely admits...do you think his father and grandfather being admirals helped keep him from getting booted out?

[rjstaaf]

Unfortunately Republicans have taken on the Democrats penchant for big government so unless we find another source of income to pay for the things our government has gotten us into the wealthy are gonna have to keep bearing the largest burden....