<p>What do genes have to do with it?</p>
<p>debrockman, we can pick and choose anectotes…that is why I like the research report.</p>
<p>It tells what is going on in society. ;)</p>
<p>This isn’t about demonizing anybody. It’s a strawman argument. You’re the one who keeps talking about demonizing…</p>
<p>I think Steve Jobs deserves his money…and he can afford to pay more in taxes too.</p>
<p>More and more of the economy’s rewards are going to fewer and fewer people…</p>
<p>I think that is a very bad development myself. Because people like Steve Jobs need customers. They don’t get rich playing with themselves.</p>
<p>I was just talking to a friend of mine. She was at St. Anthony’s in San Francisco today…St. Anthony’s feeds the hungry. (I think it is ST. Anthony’s). She was shocked. Shocked. Shocked to see so many well dressed people in the food lines. There are a lot of people who are smart and hard working in food lines these days.</p>
<p>The economy isn’t working too well for the majority of people. </p>
<p>That’s my anecdote.</p>
<p>“Shocked to see so many well dressed people in the food lines. There are a lot of people who are smart and hard working in food lines these days. The economy isn’t working too well for the majority of people.”</p>
<p>I am afraid our society is becoming very much a have/have not society. It’s those who have a job, and those who don’t. Not neccesarily those who have wealth anymore, but income. Your wealth can disappear in a flash with a medical emergency, job loss or housing crash, but a salary provides continuously.</p>
<p>And I don’t think for a minute (as we’ve had this argument many times before), that taking money from those who are successfully working and giving it to those who are not, will solve the problem. It could be used to lower the deficit, but I’m sure they’d just spend it. The solution is finding a way to inspire private industry to expand and hire, and if hiring more workers will cost them greatly in health care benefits/unemployment insurance/increased wages/training costs, they will find a way to continue their business through increased productivity with the workers they already have, paying them overtime or requiring them to work extra. That is a big part of what is happening right now. Those who are working are often getting plenty of hours, but those who aren’t–good luck finding a job!</p>
<p>She was shocked. Shocked. Shocked to see so many well dressed people in the food lines. There are a lot of people who are smart and hard working in food lines these days.</p>
<p>The people who work for min wage don’t disappear when they clock out. ( and those who had work wardrobes aren’t going to put their closet up on ebay when they no longer have a paycheck- eventually they will need them again)</p>
<p>Our family had a period of almost two years ( after layoffs due to closures)when we were making ends meet by yardwork, babysitting & other odd jobs. Didn’t use food bank as we still had savings that we managed to stretch out.
Yet our inlaws were shocked when they saw a line of people at a local church and discovered they were waiting for the food bank to open.
That segment of society didn’t exist in their heads.
They were equally shocked when we took an expensive christmas gift and returned it to buy groceries.
:rolleyes:</p>
<p>I’ll be sure and tell my husband that we are in the 20% income tax bracket. He’ll be thrilled and tell the accountant. I’ll also mention it to our kids, one of whom is starting out. She’ll be delighted. (and yes, I am not including state income tax.) </p>
<p>And the most charitable amongst us? The poorest and the wealthier segments of society who give proportionately more of their income to those less fortunate.</p>
<p>Busdriver11…for 30 years…the rich have gotten richer and richer…the middle class has stagnated and is now seeing their standard of living drop, and the lower class is getting poorer.</p>
<p>So for 30 years the rich have gotten richer and it didn’t trickle down. So…I doubt that an increase in taxes for the rich are going to hurt the other classes because the increase in wealth for the rich didn’t help the other classes. The rich are doing exceedingly well right now. Where are the jobs? They were shipped overseas. The rich got richer and the jobs went poof.</p>
<p>If taxes are increases for the rich…two things can happen and they are good for the middle class</p>
<p>One…there are studies that have mentioned that if you increase taxes and the public believes the money is going to be used to cut the deficit,
the public feels better about the economy and spends more and the economy does better.</p>
<p>Two…we could increase taxes and actually use the money to help the middle class as I mentioned in an earlier post. Directly use the money to
help the middle class instead of waiting for trickle down to work…which just look at the numbers…trickle down doesn’t work.</p>
<p>When we had higher tax rates under Clinton…the rich did very
well…as Doct mentioned. We won’t have to hold out any tin cups for the rich. Pretty sad that we do have to hold out tin cups for some middle class people…even some formerly upper middle class people.</p>
<p>I guess my past has affected my thinking. I remember when social goods were highly valued. A streetcar ride cost a nickle. Health care costs were </p>
<p>reasonable. A person could build a new roof one day and go home to his
own house. And really afford his house…not be able to buy it because of
some financial garbage.</p>
<p>My grandfather couldn’t get a job for two years during the last
depression. We can all read that we should cut off benefits. Benefits make people lazy. They won’t work. I think those people in the food lines
would love a job right now. My grandparents used to stand in food lines…so they could SURVIVE. My grandfather worked until he literally couldn’t work anymore…around 80 years old. </p>
<p>That is my anecdote.</p>
<p>“And the most charitable amongst us? The poorest and the wealthier segments of society who give proportionately more of their income to those less fortunate.”</p>
<p>I gave a much higher percentage of my income to charity when I made alot less. Was I more charitable and caring then, when I made less money? Nope. But as my income increased, I started paying unreal amounts of income tax (because those of us whose income is from salary, cannot hide or reinvest our pay, have very few tax breaks, and pay a significant portion of taxes on our wages). I’m not complaining about the tax rates, just explaining the rationale.</p>
<p>And I started considering the high taxes I was paying to be charity. The only difference was that it was the government chosing whom my “donations” were going to, as opposed to a personal choice.</p>
<p>dstark, I really don’t disagree with much of your post. I wouldn’t disagree with raising tax rates if they really were going to cut the deficit (of course, that would be on the premise that people would not change their behavior…because raising taxes always changes behavior). But I don’t see where, in your earlier posts, you described how we could use that money to help the middle class? Which post is that, because I don’t see it.</p>
<p>I guess post 116. </p>
<p>We don’t have a zero sum game economy…but it’s close…</p>
<p>Society is going to get its money somewhere. If it doesn’t get it from the Bill Gates of the world…it is going to get it from others. Maybe us, maybe not. Maybe our fellow citizens instead. Our fellow citizens can be taxed…or inflation could decrease the value of the dollar…but somebody is going to pay.</p>
<p>Larry Ellison wants to bring America’s Cup to the SF Bay Area. He wants to use government’s land. So he needs the government. That’s us. And
Ellison is going to invest hundreds of millions of dollars in this project. That’s good…because the government isn’t doing too well. And jobs will be created…but he needs others…he can’t do it himself. He
needs workers. He needs the government land.</p>
<p>And in the end…the piers Ellison needs…that are ours…will be fixed up and will be more productive than they are now. And jobs will be created
like I said. And Ellison wants to lease the government land for 75 years after he invests the money. So Ellison is not doing this out of charity. He
wants this…for himself. Ellison loves the America Cup…and he wants to
lease the public’s land…Ellison will make money if he gets the use of government’s land. </p>
<p>I think we should help Ellison do this unless there is a better proposal. I
am unaware of one. So assuming there isn’t a better proposal…I support what Ellison is doing to a point.</p>
<p>Ellison will make money…and I think we should tax that money a little more during the years. ;)</p>
<p>Ellison gets his America’s Cup. Ellison gets richer. Society is better off.</p>
<p>I don’t care if Ellison gets richer. But let him pay a little more in taxes…for one of his dreams.</p>
<p>Onr thing…i don’t want to see…the taxpayer subsidizing Ellison…that is
a possibility. Great. Ellison wins. The taxpayer loses. I am kind of sick of that.
[Cost</a> projections for America’s Cup differ widely](<a href=“http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/12/03/BAEU1GLI1M.DTL&tsp=1]Cost”>http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/12/03/BAEU1GLI1M.DTL&tsp=1)</p>
<p>[Ellison</a> Seeks San Francisco Real Estate as Price for America’s Cup in City - Bloomberg](<a href=“Bloomberg - Are you a robot?”>Bloomberg - Are you a robot?)</p>
<p>We don’t have a zero sum game economy.</p>
<p>Right…and it’s not close either.</p>
<p>The Clinton economy was at LEAST as big a scam economy as the housing bubble he left behind that left us the current bust. I don’t know if you REMEMBER the dotcom bubble, but I do…the phony corporations, the sham profits. No thanks. I have NO desire to go back to the Clinton economy.</p>
<p>This country needs to allow as much money as possible to stay in the hands of the job creators in our country…the American entrepreneurs. Period. And if you don’t agree, you need to asks yourself what it is about success and job creation that you don’t like.</p>
<p>Doct, I like your posts in the addiction thread.</p>
<p>Off topic…how is your daughter liking med school…</p>
<p>Ok…to keep it on topic…it sure is easier to go to med school if your family has a few bucks. I don’t know how young adults, who have to borrow the full cost, handle that. That’s a lot of debt.</p>
<p>Yes she loves medical school. Its a lot different than undergraduate in that there is a tremendous amount of memorization involved. It is difficult for medical school students to swing the loans. Unlike many other graduate programs, for the federal loan programs, they are considered as independent, but from the institutional side, they’re not. So they can get loans but financial aid from universities is dependent on parental income regardless of tax status. Also many graduate programs pay their students for research work or assistantships which is typically not the case in medical school unless its a dual MD - Ph.D. program.</p>
<p>That’s great that your daughter loves medical school. To have a kid that loves what they are doing…well, it warms the heart. </p>
<p>And your daughter is going to help people. A double win.</p>
<p>I don’t know how med students memorize so much information. Beyond my capabilities.</p>
<p>Understanding the debt loads is also beyond my capabilities.</p>
<p>I tried to convince her to go the Wall st route as most of her classmates have done. However she pointed out that most after doing internships at Goldman Sachs (including Blankfein’s son whom she knew and graduated with), J.P. Morgan etc seemed to have lost their “souls” and didn’t want to turn into what they had. I guess, the Wall St. folks don’t really do much more than move money around and skim off the top - not anything really productive from what I can see.</p>
<p>Your daughter is right. Listen to your daughter. 
</p>
<p>I have been writing about that for a long time. :)</p>
<p>Wall St and prostitution are very similar. </p>
<p>In one field people sell their souls, in the other, people sell their bodies.</p>
<p>Your daughter made a great choice. She gets it.</p>
<p>DocT, be happy your D made the choice she did. The S of a close friend chose the investment banking route after two summer internships during undergrad. In his intake year, there were 100 hires. After 3 years, only four are left. Not one of the females lasted past the first year. My friend and her H are very worried about their S and the negative influences surrounding his job. It is a very unhealthy lifestyle and addiction issues are rampant. Best of luck to your D. The D of another friend is in her 2nd year of med school in Chicago and loving her experience so far.</p>
<p>I haven’t read all the comments, but my observation is that education is the best way to ensure higher income. You also need to make tough choices early on, as a dollar saved today will multiply to more in the future. These tough choices include living well below your means, with regards to housing, clothes, eating out, etc. </p>
<p>It may be tough to hear, but you aren’t going to be rich passively sitting by getting a nice liberal arts degree and working for someone else. You either need to start your own business with a good idea or work long hours in business.</p>
<p>Education helps ensure a good income, but so do stable relationships.</p>
<p>What do you think about the effects of taxation on incentives to work? A lot of people have said that raising taxes would reduce the rich’s incentives to work (Mankiw, NYT). However, at the same time a lot of rich people say that they like their job or business and would still do it even if they make a lot less money.</p>