Reply
Highlighted
Valued Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
99
Views

Re: Wealth Distribution

99 Views
Message 1 of 87

@Olderscout66 wrote:

@rk9152 wrote:

Interesting scout - corporations operate under government charter, workers involved in Board selection, profits regulated by the government, Corporations are created by the State to benefit the public. I am surprised - that isn't the Socialist economic model, it is the economic model of Mussollini's Fascism.

 

 


You could be right about Mussolini - his programs are the model for much if not most of what the Republican Party has legislated since 1980.

 

Fortunately el Duce's  policies have nothing to do with Senator Warren's proposal to end the Republican drive to create a Corporate Oligarchy to replace our Democracy.


Focus on Sen. Warren's proposal, not President Reagan. Is that not much like Italy under fascism?

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
99
Views
Highlighted
Valued Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
123
Views

Re: Wealth Distribution

123 Views
Message 2 of 87

@rk9152 wrote:

Interesting scout - corporations operate under government charter, workers involved in Board selection, profits regulated by the government, Corporations are created by the State to benefit the public. I am surprised - that isn't the Socialist economic model, it is the economic model of Mussollini's Fascism.

 

 


You could be right about Mussolini - his programs are the model for much if not most of what the Republican Party has legislated since 1980.

 

Fortunately el Duce's  policies have nothing to do with Senator Warren's proposal to end the Republican drive to create a Corporate Oligarchy to replace our Democracy.

Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
123
Views
Highlighted
Valued Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
127
Views

Re: Wealth Distribution

127 Views
Message 3 of 87

Sen. Elizabeth Warren speaks at The National Press Club

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Vu1ysp7QYk

 

August 21, 2018 - 1 Hour

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
127
Views
Highlighted
Valued Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
153
Views

Re: Wealth Distribution

153 Views
Message 4 of 87

Interesting scout - corporations operate under government charter, workers involved in Board selection, profits regulated by the government, Corporations are created by the State to benefit the public. I am surprised - that isn't the Socialist economic model, it is the economic model of Mussollini's Fascism.

 

 

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
153
Views
Highlighted
Valued Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
165
Views

Re: Wealth Distribution

165 Views
Message 5 of 87

Got this in an email from a friendwho forwarded it from
https://popular.info/
 

It explains Elizabeth Warren's plan to save Capitalism and Democracy, which is why the Republicans have gone all out to lie and distory the public's understanding of Senator Warren's proposal.

 

 

On Wednesday, Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) introduced legislation aimed squarely at this problem: The Accountable Capitalism Act.

How accountable capitalism works

Under Warren’s bill, corporations with over $1 billion in annual revenue would be required to receive a “federal corporate charter.” That charter would require corporate directors to consider all stakeholders in a corporation -- workers and shareholders -- when making decisions. 

A company that continued to pursue maximum profits at the expense of workers could be sued.

Warren’s bill doesn’t just require a new charter. Workers at large corporations would elect 40% of the board of directors.

Currently, most executive compensation at public companies comes in the form of stock. This incentivizes CEOs and other top executives to juice share prices. Warren’s bill would also prohibit executives who receive stock as compensation from selling it for five years, encouraging more long-term thinking. 

Companies are juicing stock prices by buying their own shares. Corporations spent a record $437 billion on stock buybacks in the second quarter of 2018. Warren’s bill disincentivizes stock buybacks. Each time a company buys back shares, its executives are prohibited from selling their stock for three years. 

Wait, but don’t corporations exist to return value to shareholders?

It’s worth taking a step back to consider the corporate form and how it started. Corporations don’t exist in nature. They were created by the state to benefit the public. 

Ordinarily, people are legally responsible for their actions. If something you do ends up hurting someone, you are responsible for compensating them. If you borrow money, you are responsible for paying the debt. 

This makes it very risky to do complicated things like building houses or manufacturing cars. People can get hurt, or you can end up with a lot of debt. But people need houses and cars.

The corporation was a solution to this problem. The government started issuing corporate charters to incentivize the production of things for the public benefit. The deal is that individuals who own and operate corporations will not be held personally responsible for their actions. Instead, the corporation, a legal fiction, is held responsible.

How corporations changed

Over time, the requirement that corporations provide a benefit to the public was relaxed. States wanted to attract businesses, so most adopted a “general incorporation” statute that allowed corporations to be formed for any purpose.

This was when things started to get out of control. Corporations started to become more powerful than the people who created them. They started to monopolize or ologopolize entire industries.

A particularly galling example is the public airwaves, which corporations control through public licenses. Today, politicians must spend countless hours fundraising, frequently from corporations, to pay corporations for access to the airwaves to run TV ads.  

For a long time, corporations, as currently constituted, were a good deal for the public. They facilitated lots of productive activity and generated an enormous amount of wealth. But if the deal isn’t working well anymore -- if corporate wealth is flowing to a handful of people while leaving workers behind -- the public has the power to change the terms.

The corporate form is a privilege, not a right.

Could Warren’s plan work?

The question is whether Warren’s bill would fundamentally change the activity of corporations. To answer this question, we can look to Germany, which has instituted a version of Warren’s plan, known as codetermination, since 1976. It’s called codetermination because workers, shareholders, and executives jointly determine the activities of the corporation.

In Germany, research shows that codetermination “reduces worker turnover, boosts salaries and productivity, and supports income equity.” The average German worker makes about $6,000 more than their American counterpart. Another study, comparing countries that mandate codetermination with those that do not, found codetermination “has a strong equalizing effect on the distribution of income.”

A 2010 study found that “productivity per employee is, on average, significantly higher” in companies with a codetermination model. The system has also “fostered a healthy degree of communication and cooperation between management and workers.”

Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
165
Views
Highlighted
Valued Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
187
Views

Re: Wealth Distribution

187 Views
Message 6 of 87

@Olderscout66 wrote:

@rk9152 wrote:

@Olderscout66 wrote:

I will concede Reagan did not lie when he said We kept our promises.” We promised that we would protect the financial integrity of social security. We have. We promised that we would protect beneficiaries against any loss in current benefits. We have. And we promised to attend to the needs of those still working, not only those Americans nearing retirement but young people just entering the labor force. And we’ve done that, too…\

 

He was totally WRONG, but it wasn't a lie because there's no chance Reagan would've realized how his taxscam would redistribute income and wealth to wreck his plan to save SS for all Americans.

 

Reagan set the "cap" to capture 90% of income, and all the projections showed that would keep the SSTF solvent FOREVER, but he and the GOPers only allowed the cap to increase according to inflation, and that was woefully inadequate to cover the needs created by the huge redistribution of income shown on those three charts.

 

Social Security is in financial trouble NOT because it pays too much to retirees but because it collects too little from current workers.

 

Republicans insist the fix is to make people work longer, pay more (higher percent FICA) and receive less.

 

Progressives want to reestablish the fund they way Reagan had fixed it so 90% ofincome is contributing to the fund, which would mean the cap needs to be $250,000 AND INDEXED TO INCOME DISTRIBUTION, NOT INFLATION. That, plus the existing tax on retirement incomes over $85.000, will keep the SSTF solvent FOREVER. No increase in retirement age, no increase in the FICA percent and no reduction in benefits.


I got my SS check this month did you??? If so, let's get together and say, "Thank you President Reagan".


I have a better idea - Let's honor his memory by doing what he did - FIX THE PROBLEM by raising the cap. Step one, eliminate the Congressional roadblocks, aka the Republican Caucus.

 

Stick to the point (since you brought up President Reagan) - I got my SS check this month did you??? If so, let's get together and say, "Thank you President Reagan".


 

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
187
Views
Highlighted
Valued Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
197
Views

Re: Wealth Distribution

197 Views
Message 7 of 87

@rk9152 wrote:

@Olderscout66 wrote:

I will concede Reagan did not lie when he said We kept our promises.” We promised that we would protect the financial integrity of social security. We have. We promised that we would protect beneficiaries against any loss in current benefits. We have. And we promised to attend to the needs of those still working, not only those Americans nearing retirement but young people just entering the labor force. And we’ve done that, too…\

 

He was totally WRONG, but it wasn't a lie because there's no chance Reagan would've realized how his taxscam would redistribute income and wealth to wreck his plan to save SS for all Americans.

 

Reagan set the "cap" to capture 90% of income, and all the projections showed that would keep the SSTF solvent FOREVER, but he and the GOPers only allowed the cap to increase according to inflation, and that was woefully inadequate to cover the needs created by the huge redistribution of income shown on those three charts.

 

Social Security is in financial trouble NOT because it pays too much to retirees but because it collects too little from current workers.

 

Republicans insist the fix is to make people work longer, pay more (higher percent FICA) and receive less.

 

Progressives want to reestablish the fund they way Reagan had fixed it so 90% ofincome is contributing to the fund, which would mean the cap needs to be $250,000 AND INDEXED TO INCOME DISTRIBUTION, NOT INFLATION. That, plus the existing tax on retirement incomes over $85.000, will keep the SSTF solvent FOREVER. No increase in retirement age, no increase in the FICA percent and no reduction in benefits.


I got my SS check this month did you??? If so, let's get together and say, "Thank you President Reagan".


I have a better idea - Let's honor his memory by doing what he did - FIX THE PROBLEM by raising the cap. Step one, eliminate the Congressional roadblocks, aka the Republican Caucus.

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
197
Views
Highlighted
Valued Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
222
Views

Re: Wealth Distribution

222 Views
Message 8 of 87

@Olderscout66 wrote:

I will concede Reagan did not lie when he said We kept our promises.” We promised that we would protect the financial integrity of social security. We have. We promised that we would protect beneficiaries against any loss in current benefits. We have. And we promised to attend to the needs of those still working, not only those Americans nearing retirement but young people just entering the labor force. And we’ve done that, too…\

 

He was totally WRONG, but it wasn't a lie because there's no chance Reagan would've realized how his taxscam would redistribute income and wealth to wreck his plan to save SS for all Americans.

 

Reagan set the "cap" to capture 90% of income, and all the projections showed that would keep the SSTF solvent FOREVER, but he and the GOPers only allowed the cap to increase according to inflation, and that was woefully inadequate to cover the needs created by the huge redistribution of income shown on those three charts.

 

Social Security is in financial trouble NOT because it pays too much to retirees but because it collects too little from current workers.

 

Republicans insist the fix is to make people work longer, pay more (higher percent FICA) and receive less.

 

Progressives want to reestablish the fund they way Reagan had fixed it so 90% ofincome is contributing to the fund, which would mean the cap needs to be $250,000 AND INDEXED TO INCOME DISTRIBUTION, NOT INFLATION. That, plus the existing tax on retirement incomes over $85.000, will keep the SSTF solvent FOREVER. No increase in retirement age, no increase in the FICA percent and no reduction in benefits.


I got my SS check this month did you??? If so, let's get together and say, "Thank you President Reagan".

Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
222
Views
Highlighted
Valued Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
229
Views

Re: Wealth Distribution

229 Views
Message 9 of 87

@Olderscout66 wrote:

@NOTHAPPENING wrote:

@Olderscout66 wrote:

@rk9152 wrote:

@Olderscout66 wrote:

Here's a few charts that should illuminate the problem: First shows that ALL the gains in income from the Reaganscam went to increase the income of the top 10% (the managerial class who would be expected to decide how profits were divided and raises given). If they didn't change their method based on their newly awarded ability to keep most ofwhat they gave themselves, what prompted this total reversal of 40 years of "sharing the wealth" that had producedthe greatest expansion ofthe American economy and size and prosperity of the middle Class in history?

 

 

igure 2
 
Income Gains at the Top Dwarf Those of Low- and Middle-Income Households

 

 

Figure 1
 
Income Gains Widely Shared in Early Postwar Decades - But Not Since Then

Of course - taxpayers get tax cuts, why does that surprise you. And, as always, it makes no sense for an employer to pay his workers less because he got a tax cut.


Wakie wakie rk - The employers did not pay them LESS, that is, they did not CUT worker pay, they RAISED THEIR PAY BY MUCH LESS drastically reducing labor's share of the profits. Had labor's share of profits that held from 1948 until 1980 continued, today's AVERAGE worker would be getting $86,000, not $58,000 and the CEOs would be getting $1.3Million not $15.8Million

 

The change in how profits are distributed HAPPENED. It happened because before Reagan the ones dividing the profit could not keep the increases they gave themselves because they were at or near the TMR of 91% or 70%. Reagan cut the TMR to 28% but INCREASED taxes on the average worker by 44% (9.3% to 13.4% on average AGI) by slashing deductions and increasing the bottom rates.


Even liberals know it's not fair to TAKE 91% of someone's income for taxation. That's what Reagan did is make it fairer. If the government wants to spend a lot of money and wants fair taxes, someone has to pay (even liberals).


Shown the relavent numbers, not even a marginally challenged 5th grader would claim anyone has ever paid 91% of their income in Federal Income taxes.

 

That same fifth grader might look at the complaints about the non-taxpayers having witholding which is totally refunded and wonder, "How can a non-taxpayer complain that a tax payer isn't paying enough?".

 

 

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
229
Views
Highlighted
Valued Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
236
Views

Re: Wealth Distribution

236 Views
Message 10 of 87

@Olderscout66 wrote:

@KidBoy2 wrote:
Cirice posted..


@KidBoy2said: "FYI... The poor pay ZERO Federal income tax!!!"



If they make less than the standard deduction. But they still pay payroll taxes.


Assume nothing. Question everything. And start thinking.

===============================================================

FYI... The poor pay ZERO Federal income tax!!!"

That is a fact ...how can you question that?

How? By using facts relating to the situation instead of blovating bumper stickers.

 

 

If you KNOWINGLY deprive another of access to, benefit from or even enjoyment of their property, it's considered THEFT.You cannot steal what does not exist, so the money removed from the paycheck in full knowledge IT WILL ALL BE RETURNED has deprived the worker of access, benefit and enjoyment of his property, and he has unwillingly CONTRIBUTED to the federal budget which is a definition of "paying taxes".

 

When the Federal Government takes a slice (seldom less than 10%) out of the paycheck of the poor worker every payday, that worker has loaned the Government that money at NO INTEREST and has to wait until they get their tax return to recover what was theirs. The Federal Government uses those dollars from the poor to avoid borrowing for which they WOULD pay interest. If that poor worker is an undocumented immigrant, they will NEVER get the moneY back because they CANNOT file a tax return on their bogus SSN.

 

Their Federal Income tax may only be the opportunity cost of his withholding, but I can guarantee they feel the loss much more accutely than the 1%ers notice the absence of their withholding.


Well, if taking money which is later returned is theft - how about money taken that will not be returned?

 

As to the illegals - they are here illegally and therefore working illegally and therefore collecting pay illegally. And you want to complain about the withholding???

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
236
Views
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Users
Announcements

AARP Coronavirus Call-in Event

AARP will host a weekly, live Coronavirus Information Tele-Town Hall on Thursdays at 1 pm (ET). Learn more on AARP's Coronavirus Tele-Town Hall page and join us each week for the latest information.

Calling is toll-free. During the 90-minute live event, government experts will answer your questions and address health concerns related to COVID-19.