“I can’t imagine what I’m going to do,” Schiff said. “I’m crammed into 1,200 square feet. I don’t have a dishwasher. We do all our dishes by hand.”
The family rents a three-bedroom summer house in Connecticut and will go there again this year for one month instead of four.
“People who don’t have money don’t understand the stress,” said Alan Dlugash, a partner at accounting firm Marks Paneth & Shron LLP in New York who specializes in financial planning for the wealthy. “Could you imagine what it’s like to say I got three kids in private school, I have to think about pulling them out? How do you do that?”
F*** that guy. Jesus Christ. F*** that guy hard.
yes… f*** this guy..(myvonne)
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. Oh, my, that’s… um… rich. The trauma and the drama of the suddenly not-as-rich. The sobbing! The anguish! The gnashing of teeth!
Have I mentioned I haven’t had a regular income in over three years and am living in my mother’s house with my wife and three children? In a small brick house with mold and leaky windows and occasional visits by bats and other unwelcome creatures? While pursuing a teaching license over an hour away? With only two cars between three drivers? And $60,000 in student loans?
And I’m just thankful that we’re not homeless and living in a tent in the middle of a field in a snowy winter.
STFO and GTFO.
The math is the math. You can’t lower current (tax) rates and raise revenue unless you’re getting revenue from someplace else. Now, either it’s coming from middle-class families, or poor families, or it’s coming from folks like you and me that can afford to pay a little more.
…You can’t get away from the basic concept that either we have a system in which the people who have benefited the most from this new economy by a magnitude of 200, 300 percent increases in their income — either they’re doing a little bit more, or they’re not.
I think they should. And this is not because I’m interested in punishing the rich. I want everybody to be rich! That’s great! It has to do with the fact that the less I’m asking you or me to do, the more I’m asking somebody who’s in a much tougher position to sacrifice.
This whole thing, summarized so simply and yet the conservative element in these United States continues to pretend not to understand the sheer, sympathetic logic of it all.
Well, the conservative element thinks the poor aren’t doing anything and are just lazy moochers who should just get a job and get off of welfare. You know, all those jobs the “job creators” have given us the last two to ten years.
Joining the battle over California taxes, a group of billionaires and political insiders say they will place a $10-billion tax increase on the November 2012 ballot.
The Think Long Committee, which includes Google Chairman Eric Schmidt, former governors Gray Davis and Arnold Schwarzenegger and Los Angeles philanthropist Eli Broad, says its proposal would provide $5 billion more for public schools every year and billions for public universities and local governments.
Although the group has prepared a report outlining its proposals, it has not taken the preliminary steps needed to place the ideas before voters. Members have not filed any potential initiatives with the state attorney general’s office or created a campaign committee to finance such an effort. A spokesman for Think Long said those moves would come in the next couple of weeks.
The group’s plan is based on a reshuffling of California’s tax system. It would lower the state’s personal income and sales tax rates and create a new levy of more than 5% on services that are not currently taxed, such as legal work or accounting.
Think Long spokesman Nathan Gardels said members want to “maintain California’s progressive tax system.” Under their proposal, families earning up to $45,000 a year would pay no state income tax, while those making up to $95,000 annually would pay 2%. This would lower some taxpayers’ obligations significantly.
The group also wants to double the current exemption for homeowners and renters on their state income tax and eliminate most other California income tax credits.
The richest 1 percent of Americans now take home almost 24 percent of income, up from almost 9 percent in 1976. As Timothy Noah of Slate noted in an excellent series on inequality, the United States now arguably has a more unequal distribution of wealth than traditional banana republics like Nicaragua, Venezuela and Guyana.
C.E.O.’s of the largest American companies earned an average of 42 times as much as the average worker in 1980, but 531 times as much in 2001. Perhaps the most astounding statistic is this: From 1980 to 2005, more than four-fifths of the total increase in American incomes went to the richest 1 percent.
That’s the backdrop for one of the first big postelection fights in Washington — how far to extend the Bush tax cuts to the most affluent 2 percent of Americans. Both parties agree on extending tax cuts on the first $250,000 of incomes, even for billionaires. Republicans would also cut taxes above that.
The richest 0.1 percent of taxpayers would get a tax cut of $61,000 from President Obama. They would get $370,000 from Republicans, according to the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center. And that provides only a modest economic stimulus, because the rich are less likely to spend their tax savings.