Quantcast
U.S. & World

Top 1 percent in US took biggest share since 1928

Comments

Return To Article
  • worf Mcallen, TX
    Sept. 13, 2013 2:39 p.m.

    Obama declared war on the rich?

    In words only.

    What about Nancy, Al Gore, and himself?

    How many people can afford an eighty million vacation? How many vacations has Michelle Obama taken? Did they pay taxes on that? Aren't they exenpt from Obama Care?

  • no fit in SG St.George, Utah
    Sept. 11, 2013 1:04 p.m.

    Chris, B.
    Come on now, tell the truth.
    Are you employed by the Romney's?
    Hope they are paying you well!

  • RedWings CLEARFIELD, UT
    Sept. 11, 2013 12:33 p.m.

    It used to be that the top 1% did actually increase value. Each manufacturing job that is created creates up to 10 other jobs. Service jobs only create about 4 additional jobs. The downside in the past was that the companies took advantage of workers, which led to the rise of labor unions.

    Now, those at the top do not create jobs and wealth for others. They make their wealth in buying and selling others. For example, how many manufacturing jobs were lost by Mitt Romney when he was at Bain Capital?

    There is a reason that India and China are emerging economies - they were handed our manufacturing jobs by the wealthy....

  • lket Bluffdale, UT
    Sept. 11, 2013 11:58 a.m.

    sad that people think these ultrarich do anything for this country other than to profit by it. the top 1% made money from the wars record profits. they have shiped jobs over sea and have been given tax credits fo it. many dont keep their money in our banks so it is not making more jobs. they make money on fossil fuels when it is poisoning our planet, and they could go into green power which is cheap but they will not do it because at first the profit goes down. tide power is cheap. water power is cheap. but profit at any cause is what they do. this country is turnig into a third world nation because of the top 1%. soond only the rich will go to colledge. because it costs too much forthe rest of us.

  • Happy Valley Heretic Orem, UT
    Sept. 11, 2013 11:18 a.m.

    ...and hoarding at the top will increase the need for those horrible entitlements. What happened to give the 1% more tax breaks and they will pay better, hire more and trickle down some of that blessed wealth to the common folk? It was a calculated lie and is still being peddled by those snake oil salesmen in the conservative party.

    entitlements will continue to increase until we give up the notion that the wealthy are job creators instead of the money hoarders they really are.

    Seems the money changers have become someone to look up to by conservatives christians instead of the sleaze at the end of a whip held by their master.

  • JWB Kaysville, UT
    Sept. 11, 2013 9:42 a.m.

    The fear of loss of entitlements is a big reason people get elected. Political parties that espouse handouts are more likely to have their people elected in some states and even nationally due to the federal programs. Those bureaucrats don't want to lose their jobs if their party is not elected to office to further espouse their needs to people that have wants.

    It is a never ending cycle for our nation once entitlements took over.

  • louie Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Sept. 11, 2013 9:37 a.m.

    No reason to make the upper one percent suffer with a higher tax rate.....right.

  • Happy Valley Heretic Orem, UT
    Sept. 11, 2013 9:35 a.m.

    Some people comment on what has happened historically when this situation occurs.

    Others, who seem to worship the wealthy, who long to join their esteemed economic status are completely blind to the effects of an unbalance that is not easily repaired. They fondly remember the 50's when we had a middle class and some balance but can't for the life of them understand why.

    I would say it was the high corporate tax rate that encouraged reinvestment and better wages for employees instead of that disaster known as "trickle down."

  • Albert Maslar CPA (Retired) Absecon, NJ
    Sept. 11, 2013 8:58 a.m.

    A major part of the reason for the uber rich to profit more is the fact of ObamaCare that reduces full time jobs combined with the real unemployment rate being double government figures. Corporations can squeeze more profits even when the top line is static. Could this be part of government conspiracy to make more people more dependent upon welfare so as to exercise more control and votes?

  • JWB Kaysville, UT
    Sept. 11, 2013 8:53 a.m.

    1928 was an important year as it was right before the fall of 1929 when our country's food lines were instituted everywhere. Men's hearts failed along with their lives, economically, spiritually, psychologically, emotionally and everything else fell apart, even families.

    Our President keeps on telling us that the former administration caused us to go through the worst economic event since the "Great Depression" and that in July 2009 we had overcome that problem due to his winning the Nobel Peace Prize and his experience as a Community Organizer.

    He is good at the public relations but not the same public relations as the most recent Democratic President of the United States of America. They both are smooth talkers but we need men of integrity and real character. I am not sure the Secretary of State, John Kerry is what we need at this time, either. At least he has been a protester so he knows what it is like to fight against the government of the United States of America. He did have the Kennedys supporting him along the way, though.

    We live in a strange world of words that make people "feel" good, though not actually good.

  • lost in DC West Jordan, UT
    Sept. 11, 2013 5:27 a.m.

    Gandalf,
    No, but BO has declared war on the 1%. How else do you think he won reelection with his abysmal record?

    Airnaut?
    Inciting to violence, are you? Letting class envy eat away at you? So much for the “tolerance” of the left.

    atl134,
    no more money to hire more workers when Obamacare will take so much from you

    lightbearer,
    while Jefferson was great in his own way, he is NOT one to give fiscal lessons. he died deep in debt, with about 3 mortgages on Monticello. He was essentially arguing that HE should not have to pay any taxes.

  • worf Mcallen, TX
    Sept. 10, 2013 6:03 p.m.

    Hmm:

    Top honor roll students in US took biggest share since 1928.

    Didn't all students have the same opportunity for high grades?

    We are all a product of our decisions.

  • worf Mcallen, TX
    Sept. 10, 2013 6:00 p.m.

    Envy, and jealousy in the highest form.

    So what! I can't afford eighty million dollar vacations, but I'm not in awe of those who do.

    If someone earned it through business, or other legal means through a free society, that's great.

    If it was stolen money from tax payers than the person should be punished.

  • Lightbearer Brigham City, UT
    Sept. 10, 2013 5:11 p.m.

    Re: "Those top 1% people paid 39.37% of ALL the income taxes collected!"

    What could be more fair than that those with most of the wealth pay most of the taxes?

    Thomas Jefferson, one of the Founding Fathers of this Republic, was in favor of progressive taxation, and thought that people whose wealth was below a certain level should not pay any taxes at all:

    "Another means of silently lessening the inequality of property is to exempt all from taxation below a certain point, & to tax the higher portions of property in geometrical progression as they rise" (Letter to Rev. James Madison, President of William and Mary College, October 28, 1795).

  • Nosea Forest Grove, OR
    Sept. 10, 2013 5:07 p.m.

    I wonder how much "value" Chris B has added to our society? Could he be one of the "job creators" who are not creating jobs -- and ironically never seem to lose their job? In the face of all the facts, how anyone can argue, at this point, that the game is not extremely skewed in favor the wealthy is beyond me.

    The wealthy take 93% of all profits, but they are not 93% smarter nor do they work 93% more than the rest of us, and they certainly do not add 93% more "value" to our society -- just look at the contributions of Mitt Romney and his kind (mostly "takers" from up on top) to verify these numbers.

  • John20000 Cedar Hills, UT
    Sept. 10, 2013 5:01 p.m.

    The tax philosophy of everyone with income pays the same percentage is anti-family. Children/dependents should remain as a reduction in tax.

  • Chris B Salt Lake City, UT
    Sept. 10, 2013 4:48 p.m.

    Mitt Romney pay millions in income tax each year.

    The average American pays a few thousand in income tax

    We all owe Mitt Romney and others a big thanks for paying for their share and ours.

    The military, education, infrastructure do not become more expensive simply because Mitt Romney makes more money.

    We all use those things and we should all pay for them.

    I use them those things just as much as Mitt does.

    I just wish there weren't so many lazy people who think others should pay their bills.

  • Chris B Salt Lake City, UT
    Sept. 10, 2013 4:35 p.m.

    @DN Subscriber 2,

    You're right on. If someone is using the benefits the government provides through income tax, they should be paying income tax.

    Those of us who aren't rich should be thanking the rich.

    They're paying for what they use AND for most of what I use.

    Thanks rich people!

    I'm sorry there are so many lazy people who think you need to pay their bills.

  • mcclark Salt Lake City, UT
    Sept. 10, 2013 4:29 p.m.

    It is tough to win a rigged game. The wealthy buy the politicians to write the laws to favor them.

  • DN Subscriber 2 SLC, UT
    Sept. 10, 2013 3:36 p.m.

    OKay, so the richest of the rick made a bundle of money.

    Now, let's look at how much those greedy folks paid in taxes to support the other 99% and especially the 43% who pay NO income tax.

    Those top 1% people paid 39.37% of ALL the income taxes collected!

    So, 43% pay nothing, and the folks earning above about $350K pay through the nose.

    Class warfare rhetoric of envy and socialist demands for those actually paying to pay "their fair share" will never end. IN fact, they will demand more "refundable" tax credits to turn nominal "taxes" into actual money paid to them, while still screaming about the greedy rich guys.

    What we need is for every person with any income to pay the same percentage in income taxes, no exceptions, no deductions. Everyone gets skin in the game. Then we might see some real interest in cutting wasteful government spending an cutting taxes on everyone.

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    Sept. 10, 2013 3:32 p.m.

    Those poor big businesses have it so rough with those greedy workers wanting a larger slice of the pie. Turns out there's just no money to hire more workers or increase worker pay when you just keep the money for yourself.

  • Dragline Oream, UT
    Sept. 10, 2013 2:57 p.m.

    It's good to see the wealthiest are doing so well. They deserve it.

    Now, what happened after the extreme wage gap in 1928? A banner year in 1929? I don't think so.

  • airnaut Everett, 00
    Sept. 10, 2013 2:44 p.m.

    Anyone for a little "Bastille Day"?
    "Let them eat cake".

    I think it's about time for another French/Russian/Lamanite/America Revolution.

  • Gandalf Salt Lake City, UT
    Sept. 10, 2013 2:43 p.m.

    This is not good. Does anyone believe that the 1% have become more productive over the last 30 years by the same percentage as their share of the wealth has grown? The 1% have declared war on the 99%

  • Chris B Salt Lake City, UT
    Sept. 10, 2013 2:33 p.m.

    And the top 1% creates more value than the rest of the population does.

    Liberals think that the amount of value and productivity in an economy is a given each and every year, and that the only x factor is how that increase in value is distributed.

    False.

    The wealthy are wealthy because they increased value.

    Crying about how much money you make?

    Go increase the value of something.

  • Chris B Salt Lake City, UT
    Sept. 10, 2013 2:32 p.m.

    Nothing wrong with that.

    It's not Mitt Romney's responsibility to take care of me.

    It's my responsibility to make myself valuable to potential companies. If I do that I will be able to reach an agreement that fairly compensates me for my work.

    If I am worth more than a company is paying me, another company will pay for me for my worth.

    If no one is willing to pay for what I want, I'm not worth it.

    And it's my responsibility to change that.