Hard work = $250,000 ?
Find a Conversation
| Fri, 10-24-2008 - 9:07am |
I’ve read repeatedly that the $250,000 is hard earned money that the government has no right to tax. Personally, I don’t believe that hard work consistently results in high salaries and I’m not convinced that people who make more money work harder or deserve more than most people. Most people, I believe, do work hard and most people are rewarded with 25,000 – 45,000 salary. Not all some hard workers make more and some make less. What do you think? Is the Just World view valid?
http://www.princeton.edu/~rbenabou/beliefs7csend.pdf
most people have a strong need to believe that they live in a world that is just, in the sense that people generally get what they deserve, and deserve what they get. When confronted with data that contradicts this view they try hard to ignore, reinterpret, distort, or forget it —for instance by finding imaginary merits to the recipients of fortuitous rewards, or assigning blame to innocent victims.
Because of their imperfect willpower, individuals constantly strive to motivate themselves (or their children) towards effort, educational investment, perseverance in the face of adversity, and away from the slippery slope of idleness, welfare dependency, crime, drugs, etc. This is another recurrent finding from the sociological evidence. In such circumstances, maintaining somewhat rosy beliefs about the fact that everyone will ultimately get their “just deserts” can be very valuable. Furthermore, if enough individuals end up with the view that economic success is highly dependent on effort, they will ultimately represent a pivotal voting block, and set a low tax rate. Conversely, when individuals anticipate that society will carry out little redistribution, the costs of a deficient motivation to effort or savings are much higher than with high taxes and
a generous safety net. Each individual thus has greater incentives to maintain his belief that effort ultimately pays, and consequently more voters end up with such a world view.
For instance, data from the World Values Survey shows that only 29% of Americans believe that the poor are trapped in poverty, and only 30% that luck, rather than effort or education, determines income. The figures for Europeans are nearly double: 60% and 54% respectively. Similarly, Americans are more than twice as likely as Europeans to think that the poor are lazy (60% versus 26%).
Indeed, 59% of Americans agree or strongly agree that “in the long run, hard work usually brings a better life”; this view commands much less support in Europe, ranging from 34% in Sweden to 43% in Germany.
Is the “American dream,” according to our theory, just a self-sustaining collective illusion?


Pages
<>
You are comparing apples to oranges here.
I disagree with you, but I'm pretty sure
----------
I agree with you. In my household, there are four of us who work very hard. My husband works 40 hours a week (and if he's lucky gets a little overtime on Saturday), plus he plays in a band on Fridays, Saturdays, and holidays to pick up extra $$$. I'm self-employed and routinely work 7 days a week. I did that even when my kids were little, and I had all the responsibilities of any other SAHM, in addition. On top of that, from 2001 through 2007, I was a full-time college student and earned 3 degrees, including a graduate degree, in hopes of improving our lot in life. Unfortunately, the economy is in such a mess that I have yet to find a job in my field. Now that my kids are grown, they still live with us, and both work 40 hours a week, plus o/t when they can get it. There are times when both of my kids and my husband have been known to work 12 hours a day, sometimes 7 days a week.
If you combined all of our annual salaries, we make about $100K/yr. My husband and I account for about $60K of that. It's time for US to get a tax break instead of those "hard working" CEOs.
“If, by a ‘liberal,’ they mean someone who looks ahead and not behind, someone who welcomes new ideas without rigid reactions, someone who cares about the welfare of the people – their health, their housing, their schools, their jobs, their civil rights, and their civil liberties – someone who believes we can break through the stalemate and suspicions that grip us in our policies abroad, if that is what they mean by a ‘liberal,’ then I’m proud to say I’m a ‘liberal.’”
~Ghostwriter, M.A.
I disagree with you, but I'm pretty sure
I'm hoping that you read my whole post.
>>For those who are scraping by (lets say the bottom fifth of the income bracket "budgeting and sacrifice" are not semantics - it's closer to surviving. <<
What I don't understand is how anyone can think that it's good for a country to have 40 plus percent of their income earning citizens pay nothing in the way of federal income taxes to help support their country.
Instead they would jeopardize economic growth (i.e, JOBS) so they don't have any responsibility to contribute. I'd say it's not he wealthier who are being selfish. Remember they are after all paying the highest share of their income and almost the entire federal tax burden.
The question should be why isn't he raising taxes on everyone if they're so badly needed? The answer is easy. He wanted to get elected--and it worked. But yet the "wealthy" are selfish? Please.
<
-Kristen
Many years ago, I worked in banks and it was 28% of gross that was the amount that was
I disagree with you, but I'm pretty sure
wow! i am amazed!
we def couldn't afford what those calculations would allow us. (we would be needing a bailout if we had)
;-)
right, either way, i agree with you about the irrelevance of salary=home price
but some people haven't been claiming that, it is relevant that housing costs are more expensive in areas....and it IMO is a co-incidence that the cost of a house happens to be $250k and we are also discussing the tax line at 250k
-Kristen
Pages