5 ms·

And as a result, people decide that being rich isn't worth it and become welfare queens instead. Tragic, really.

prostoalex 14y ago
They still pursue wealth, just not through the income venue.
suresk 14y ago
The "Welfare Queen" exists largely in the imagination of the right. Even in areas of the US with relatively generous public assistance, the difference in standard of living for someone who relies solely on welfare versus someone with even a moderate income (much less "rich") is so large, no rational person would choose to live on welfare just to avoid the taxation that resulted from having a high income. I certainly don't agree with tax policies designed to punish or discourage high incomes, but this is pure hyperbole.
- fpgeek 14y ago
  I suspect the grandparent comment is pure sarcasm.
  - suresk 14y ago
    If that is the case, I apologize and feel a bit sheepish. In my defense, I live an incredibly conservative area in the US, and many of my neighbors honestly believe this exact thing, so it isn't obvious sarcasm to me.
    - MartinCron 14y ago
      I really thought that saying something so obviously false would be easy to detect as sarcasm/satire.
- robotresearcher 14y ago
  > this is pure hyperbole. I'm pretty sure it was satirical.
- jacoblyles 14y ago
  There certainly do exist people that face a negative return to marginal work, due to the phase out of public assistance with income. I'm not really sure what "welfare queen" means, but there are plenty of people that face strong incentives to stay on public assistance and little help to get off of it. I wouldn't necessarily place all the blame on them, though.
  - eli_gottlieb 14y ago
    There certainly do exist people that face a negative return to marginal work, due to the phase out of public assistance with income. This is largely because either their state-government is incredibly stingy (see: Texas) or because their potential wages are incredibly low.
- MartinCron 14y ago
  As a sibling pointed out, someone didn't get the joke. :)
smsm42 14y ago
The whole marginal thing must be really confusing. The problem is not that rich people would stop generating income - they won't. The problem is that marginal rates modify behavior, including changing how income is generated, where it is generated, etc. And the rich are exactly the people that have ample tools and opportunities to do that. If you earn nearly-minimal wage in some shop, you don't have many other options. If your taxes are raised, there's not much you can do other than spit and curse. If you're an investor, you have wide array of options where to invest, how to invest, etc. I know it sucks that it is always sunny in the rich man's world, but it's a reality. If whoever designs tax policy ignores it, he'd be unpleasantly surprised when projected tax income falls short of the target, and would have to slash the benefits programs or get deeper in debt.

They still pursue wealth, just not through the income venue.

The "Welfare Queen" exists largely in the imagination of the right. Even in areas of the US with relatively generous public assistance, the difference in standard of living for someone who relies solely on welfare versus someone with even a moderate income (much less "rich") is so large, no rational person would choose to live on welfare just to avoid the taxation that resulted from having a high income. I certainly don't agree with tax policies designed to punish or discourage high incomes, but this is pure hyperbole.

fpgeek 14y ago
I suspect the grandparent comment is pure sarcasm.
- suresk 14y ago
  If that is the case, I apologize and feel a bit sheepish. In my defense, I live an incredibly conservative area in the US, and many of my neighbors honestly believe this exact thing, so it isn't obvious sarcasm to me.
  - MartinCron 14y ago
    I really thought that saying something so obviously false would be easy to detect as sarcasm/satire.
robotresearcher 14y ago
> this is pure hyperbole. I'm pretty sure it was satirical.
jacoblyles 14y ago
There certainly do exist people that face a negative return to marginal work, due to the phase out of public assistance with income. I'm not really sure what "welfare queen" means, but there are plenty of people that face strong incentives to stay on public assistance and little help to get off of it. I wouldn't necessarily place all the blame on them, though.
- eli_gottlieb 14y ago
  There certainly do exist people that face a negative return to marginal work, due to the phase out of public assistance with income. This is largely because either their state-government is incredibly stingy (see: Texas) or because their potential wages are incredibly low.
MartinCron 14y ago
As a sibling pointed out, someone didn't get the joke. :)

smsm42 14y ago

The whole marginal thing must be really confusing. The problem is not that rich people would stop generating income - they won't. The problem is that marginal rates modify behavior, including changing how income is generated, where it is generated, etc. And the rich are exactly the people that have ample tools and opportunities to do that. If you earn nearly-minimal wage in some shop, you don't have many other options. If your taxes are raised, there's not much you can do other than spit and curse. If you're an investor, you have wide array of options where to invest, how to invest, etc. I know it sucks that it is always sunny in the rich man's world, but it's a reality. If whoever designs tax policy ignores it, he'd be unpleasantly surprised when projected tax income falls short of the target, and would have to slash the benefits programs or get deeper in debt.