Are the rich paying their 'fair' share?

[Jon Miller]

Oh yes, because the American poor are starving wrecks, aren't they. Stand by for American October Revolution.

There are plenty of americans who are starving or facing malnutrition.

17.2 million households (so probably 2-3x as many people)

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/11/24/375776/food-insecurity-by-the-numbers/?mobile=nc

JM

[Hauldren Collider]

This is not true.

Especially for the highest paid people, btw.

There is an inverse correlation between CEO pay and CEO performance, for example.

JM

I'll give you CEO pay because they tend to set their own pay, but those are pretty much a corner case. There aren't very many CEOs and the cost of paying them is usually not significant to the operating expenses of the business.

[Al B. Sure!]

I am factoring that into my definition of "value". Sorry if that was unclear.

I DanSed you.

Shifts towards higher-paying professions are not instantaneous, especially when they require a certain educational background and certification.

And explain how firefighting is a valueless job. It must be if most fire departments are volunteer.

[Hauldren Collider]

I use to be a communist. Threads like this make me inclined to become one again.

The state protects capital, the state acts in the way to protect assets and the capital class. This empowers the capitalists, and weakens the position of labour. If the wealthy won't agree to pay their fair share (in whatever mechanism it takes, for a capitalist society this might be consumption tax + transfer payments), then the poor will end up revolting.

JM

Oh yes, because the American poor are starving wrecks, aren't they. Stand by for American October Revolution.

You do realize that most (if not all) marxist revolts have actually been peasant revolts and not actual labor revolts, right? And peasants actually usually owned their land, if I recall correctly.

[Jon Miller]

Obviously what they do isn't as valuable as what my dad does or they'd be making as much as he does.

This is not true.

Especially for the highest paid people, btw.

There is an inverse correlation between CEO pay and CEO performance, for example.

JM

[Hauldren Collider]

Police are more valuable than actuaries. Firefighters, as well, yet most communities don't even pay firefighters! Must be a very valueless job!

It's not about value. There's other factors that affect pay beyond how 'valuable' or necessary the job done is. For example, how many people could and are willing to do the job.

I am factoring that into my definition of "value". Sorry if that was unclear.

[Al B. Sure!]

Obviously what they do isn't as valuable as what my dad does or they'd be making as much as he does.

Police are more valuable than actuaries. Firefighters, as well, yet most communities don't even pay firefighters! Must be a very valueless job!

It's not about value. There's other factors that affect pay beyond how 'valuable' or necessary the job done is. For example, how many people could and are willing to do the job. Shifts towards higher-paying professions are not instantaneous, especially when they require a certain educational background and certification.

[Jon Miller]

I use to be a communist. Threads like this make me inclined to become one again.

The state protects capital, the state acts in the way to protect assets and the capital class. This empowers the capitalists, and weakens the position of labour. If the wealthy won't agree to pay their fair share (in whatever mechanism it takes, for a capitalist society this might be consumption tax + transfer payments), then the poor will end up revolting.

JM

[Al B. Sure!]

We have a whole other thread on this, so I'm not going to waste my time with it.

Umm... I thought THIS is the thread where we discussed this. Remember what this thread was originally about.

[Al B. Sure!]

But the price of the house is an asset that he can go right around and sell.

I'm curious about housing value appreciation between Fairfax and Philly.

Looks like housing in Philly did appreciate in the 2000's after declining in the early 90's, but at a lower rate than other cities'. From 1998 to the peak, housing appreciated 172% in a 10-city composite, but only 143% in Philly.

http://www.econsult.com/articles/07252011_Price_Indices.pdf

[Jon Miller]

But those with wealth have an advantage.

And if labor decides to act and defend itself, to even things up a bit, by increasing taxes/etc, somehow it is 'wrong' or 'not fair'.

I have to work to be able to eat. I have to work to have a place to sleep.

The wealth do not have to.

This is unfair.

JM
(And the middle class do not have to for a small period of time.)

[Hauldren Collider]

Wrong.

They make money off the labor of people like me. I do my labor for cheaper so that the human race can benefit, not so that a few people can get rich.

JM

When did you turn into a marxist? The value of your labor is what you get paid for it. Just because the product goes and sells a billion units instead of a million doesn't mean you were worth more than what you were paid. Labor value is determined by supply and demand just like everything else.

[Hauldren Collider]

Obviously what they do isn't as valuable as what my dad does or they'd be making as much as he does.

You act like being an owner isn't a valuable thing in and of itself. It is. There's tremendous risk involved with being an owner, and assuming that risk is why they make the big bucks.

[Jon Miller]

Look, Jon, my dad gets paid what he does because he a) works hard and b) is awesome at what he does and c) what he does is really valuable. Those are the only 3 reasons. And as an equity partner and an owner, which he wouldn't be if he didn't already qualify for a) b) and c), he also assumes the risk of the company, something ordinary partners are unwilling to do. In return he gets big payouts.

And other people work hard, are awesome at what they do, and what they do are really valuable.

But they get paid far less as compared to what they produce.

JM

[Al B. Sure!]

Albie/HC, you should stop discussing property taxes and discuss actual home prices more. Most of the homes on Trulia in McLean are seven figures. You have to pay for those with money, just like everything else. It's not some sort of magical benefit of being rich that doesn't involve exchanging money for land and housing.

Oh I know this but I wasn't going to give my opponents an argument to use against me until I had a response.

But since you took the cat out the bag, even if Fairfax residents did pay significantly higher local taxes than Philly residents and that money was used to better fund local police, education, etc. (as was apparently HC's and gribbler's original argument), I doubt it would explain the huge disparity in crime rates.

There are 6600 Philly police officers serving 1.5 million people with an annual budget of $536M.
Fairfax has 1400 officers serving 1 million people with an annual budget of $117M.

And yet, we have 6 times the crime rate. This is because the number of police officers and the PD's budget alone does not explain differences in crime rates. Median household income is a good predictor of crime rates, however.