Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tejek who wrote (364203)	12/23/2007 1:15:25 PM
From: steve harris	Respond to of 1575535

The neomarxist finite pie vision is the basis of your false assumption. Who are the poor that Bill Gates and Warren Buffet stole from? Who are the poor that paid for your BMW?

To: tejek who wrote (364203)	12/23/2007 4:28:49 PM
From: longnshort	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1575535

The rich maybe getting richer but not at the expense of the poor. You think the pie is limited, that's your problem

To: tejek who wrote (364203)	12/24/2007 4:52:03 AM
From: Elroy	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 1575535

My point is they are not paying enough and that allows them to accumulate wealth faster than the rest of the population. What's wrong with one group accumulating wealth faster than another? That seems to be the crux of your objection.

To: tejek who wrote (364203)	1/21/2008 6:36:37 PM
From: TimF	Respond to of 1575535

"Not paying enough" is very subjective. But even if you assume they should pay more, and that they are getting wealthier faster than the rest of the population, that doesn't even remotely equate with getting rticher at the expense of the poor, or more generally at the expense of the rest of the population. "At the expense of", would mean that they do so by harming the rest of the population. If someone mugs you and takes your cash filled wallet they have gotten wealthier at your expense. If someone sells you something useful, and makes a profit from doing so, they have gotten wealthier in the course of making your situation better. Quite the opposite of "at your expense". If you increase taxes a lot, than you will have a real situation of something that is at the expense of most people. As for Mankiw's chart, it shows the percent of income taxes the wealthy pay is not only larger than their percent of the everyone's income, its been going up faster than their percent of the total income. In other words the relative tax burden has gone up not down.