PDA

View Full Version : More on the Fallacy of the 99% versus the 1%



suitanim
10-31-2011, 03:34 PM
The numbers don't back them up. Time to pack up, and get that job waiting tables, get a little cash flow going and ride the bad economy out like everyone else (including those of us WITH a sense of personal accountability and responsibility)

http://www.ohio.com/business/how-much-can-the-99-percent-squeeze-out-of-the-1-1.242916

Of course, 2009 was a bum year for those in the top 1 percent. Their income fell from $2 trillion in 2007 to $1.3 trillion in 2009, a loss of $700 billion. During the same period, the income of the bottom 75 percent fell from $2.75 trillion to $2.67 trillion, a loss of $75 billion.

Can the top 1 percent afford to pay more? You bet, and probably should. With a starting point of $343,927, the bottom of the top 1 percent is very well off, even if private jets and mega-yachts are beyond reach.

But that’s beside the point. It’s way more than the other 99 percent have. So how much of their $1.3 trillion can we take? And, once taken, what can we do with it?

Here’s the arithmetic.

Only $1 trillion is left because they’re already paying $318 billion in taxes. Since the official federal deficit is estimated at $1,315 billion for the 2011 fiscal year, it should be clear that even if those in the top 1 percent paid 100 percent of their income in taxes, the federal budget would not be balanced. In other words, there would be no spending “dividend” from taxing the 1 percent at 100 percent. Any lesser tax would leave an even larger deficit, suggesting that we have a serious “can’t get there from here” problem.

Then there is the persnickety question of whether $1.3 trillion in income would actually show up once the 100 percent tax rate was known.

Let me guess. It’s unlikely. The top 1 percent didn’t get to the top 1 percent through stupidity. The bottom line here is simple. The 1 percent versus the 99 percent is a powerful sound bite, but it’s deeply trashy economics.

Godfather
10-31-2011, 05:09 PM
The top 1 percent didn’t get to the top 1 percent through stupidity.

Well, there are the reality TV stars...

The Patriot
10-31-2011, 05:31 PM
Now, let's look at the "spending cuts" end of the deal. If we taxed the top 1%, 100% of their wealth, and then cut every Federal program except Medicare, Social Security, and Defense, we'd still have a deficit. Incidentally, Medicare, Social Security, and Defense are the three programs nobody is allowed to touch.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/7a/U.S._Federal_Spending_-_FY_2007.png

GoSlash27
10-31-2011, 05:43 PM
Something I found darkly ironic:
http://www.citizen-times.com/article/20111029/NEWS/310290041/Occupy-Asheville-protesters-homeless-clash?odyssey=mod%7Cnewswell%7Ctext%7CFrontpage%7C s

Their whole message is supposed to be that the haves are evil for not sharing their bounty with the have-nots, and that the iniquity itself is some sort of justification. You'd think they'd happily share their wealth with those less-fortunate regardless of whether they're actually willing to work for it or not, but apparently not.
What's up, Occupiers? You want the rest of us to just give you stuff YOU haven't earned? Why don't you practice what you preach?

suitanim
11-01-2011, 07:21 PM
Well, there are the reality TV stars...

Good point....but aren't they really just taking advantage of the blatant ignorance and stupidity of many of the 99%? Who can we blame for "Jersey Shore" and "The Kardashians"? Those are self-inflicted wounds of the 99% in my book....

Godfather
11-01-2011, 09:49 PM
Good point....but aren't they really just taking advantage of the blatant ignorance and stupidity of many of the 99%? Who can we blame for "Jersey Shore" and "The Kardashians"? Those are self-inflicted wounds of the 99% in my book....

I think the real fallacy in the 99% vs. 1% is the idea that having the same economic status = having the same interests. That's just the Marxist Kool-Aid.

The Jersey Shore idiots wouldn't be rich in a meritocracy. They got rich making fools of themselves on TV...but that's OK. They didn't step on anyone to get where they are.

The real divide is between honest working people, who earned whatever they have, and parasites who live off the government. A ditchdigger or hotel maid or fry cook has no common interest with someone who sits on the couch and doesn't even try to find a job. And a wealthy entrepreneur has no common interest with Goldman Sachs or GE.

suitanim
11-03-2011, 05:03 AM
I think the real fallacy in the 99% vs. 1% is the idea that having the same economic status = having the same interests. That's just the Marxist Kool-Aid.

The Jersey Shore idiots wouldn't be rich in a meritocracy. They got rich making fools of themselves on TV...but that's OK. They didn't step on anyone to get where they are.

The real divide is between honest working people, who earned whatever they have, and parasites who live off the government. A ditchdigger or hotel maid or fry cook has no common interest with someone who sits on the couch and doesn't even try to find a job. And a wealthy entrepreneur has no common interest with Goldman Sachs or GE.

There's a lot to this. I also think, though, that 99% of these OWS kids would be the same, OR WORSE, if they suddenly found themselves in the positions of power and wealth they seemingly despise. Scratch a revolutionary and you'll almost always find a closeted aristocrat.