I’m not talking about those making just over 0k, which are being portrayed as wealthy. In many parts of the country, ie NY and SF, the cost of living necessitates that kind of money to own a home and have a family.

I’m talking about the CEOs with unlimited earning potential making to 0 million per year or more. As far as I can tell, their earnings are based on the performance or profitability of their company. To make a business profitable a CEO has incentives to keep wages down, cut benefits, layoff as many as possible, outsource any function possible (mfg, software development, customer service, etc.) close locations that might be profitable, but not as profitable, etc. These acts not only hurt US Citizens, but also the US Govt as it has significantly decreased the tax base. Beyond the immediate employees of these companies, numerous other companies local to their operations are hurt when these cuts are made.

In return for keeping the masses depressed they earn lottery type money each year, and every year they want more. It seems the majority are insatiable at the cost of the majority of US citizens.

My wife works for a company where the CEO makes million/year. The highest raise they gave to any employee last year was 1%, not enought to keep up with inflation (most employees received no raise). Yet the company beat estimates and paid dividends to stock holders. In return, the CEO makes more in a week then probably 99% of what the employees make in 1 year.

I can’t understand how raising taxes on those making over million/year on a sliding scale up to million (with a tax of 90% or so) would be detrimental to growth. I’m not talking about stock market growth, that’s been happening and jobs have been disappearing. I’m talking about job growth, and businesses like banks not shelling out all of their earnings to big executives so the banks can weather financial turbulence without govt intervention.

It seems raising taxes on these truly high earners would eliminate the incentive to "screw" everyone else, including the Government.
It doesn’t look like many of you have read past the first line. This isn’t about tax revenue for the government, it’s about insatiable greed that’s caused big executives/CEOs to make decisions that have caused millions their jobs and businesses.

I don’t get the concept of actively destroying the jobs and businesses of others (while raising your own pay to , or million/year) and creating a much larger tax burden on the US Govt. Then somehow, many of us have been brainwashed into thinking that we need to lower their taxes further? If it wasn’t possible for many of them to bring home more then -4 million, there’d be a lot more jobs in the US.
Yup,
Nobody has read beyond the first line. Why has the stockmarket recovered from it’s lows so strongly since around the time that Obama took office????? Because the recession gave businesses the guise to layoff everyone possible, cut benefits, increase workload on remaining employees, close locations that didn’t earn as much, negotiate heavy-handedly with suppliers and outsource every possible operation to the cheapest source.

So now unemployment is up around 9-10%, wages for most workers have been stagnant for over 10 years. While the DJIA is through the roof as are CEO wages?

And many of the arguements below still blindly state that these CEOs are entitled to that money and should have lower taxes still.

I’m not talking about those making just over 0k, which are being portrayed as wealthy. In many parts of the country, ie NY and SF, the cost of living necessitates that kind of money to own a home and have a family.

I’m talking about the CEOs with unlimited earning potential making to 0 million per year or more. As far as I can tell, their earnings are based on the performance or profitability of their company. To make a business profitable a CEO has incentives to keep wages down, cut benefits, layoff as many as possible, outsource any function possible (mfg, software development, customer service, etc.) close locations that might be profitable, but not as profitable, etc. These acts not only hurt US Citizens, but also the US Govt as it has significantly decreased the tax base. Beyond the immediate employees of these companies, numerous other companies local to their operations are hurt when these cuts are made.

In return for keeping the masses depressed they earn lottery type money each year, and every year they want more. It seems the majority are insatiable at the cost of the majority of US citizens.

My wife works for a company where the CEO makes million/year. The highest raise they gave to any employee last year was 1%, not enought to keep up with inflation (most employees received no raise). Yet the company beat estimates and paid dividends to stock holders. In return, the CEO makes more in a week then probably 99% of what the employees make in 1 year.

I can’t understand how raising taxes on those making over million/year on a sliding scale up to million (with a tax of 90% or so) would be detrimental to growth. I’m not talking about stock market growth, that’s been happening and jobs have been disappearing. I’m talking about job growth, and businesses like banks not shelling out all of their earnings to big executives so the banks can weather financial turbulence without govt intervention.

It seems raising taxes on these truly high earners would eliminate the incentive to "screw" everyone else, including the Government.
As I read the responses below, I’m seeing many of you refer to this as a punishment. Keep in mind this would be a "punishment" for a few who’ve cost millions of US Citizens their jobs, homes and businesses.

The idea behind this isn’t to send all of their money to the government in the form of taxes, but to keep that money in the business to hire more people, buy more equipment and to eliminate some of the competitive nature in business that’s costed so many citizens everything.

The previous CEO of the Home Depot made 2 million in 6 years, and they weren’t even happy with his performance. Had their been a 90% tax on everything over million/yr. (which is plenty of money btw), I think there would be little justification to pay individuals more then that.

I’m not talking about those making just over 0k, which are being portrayed as wealthy. In many parts of the country, ie NY and SF, the cost of living necessitates that kind of money to own a home and have a family.

I’m talking about the CEOs with unlimited earning potential making to 0 million per year or more. As far as I can tell, their earnings are based on the performance or profitability of their company. To make a business profitable a CEO has incentives to keep wages down, cut benefits, layoff as many as possible, outsource any function possible (mfg, software development, customer service, etc.) close locations that might be profitable, but not as profitable, etc. These acts not only hurt US Citizens, but also the US Govt as it has significantly decreased the tax base. Beyond the immediate employees of these companies, numerous other companies local to their operations are hurt when these cuts are made.

In return for keeping the masses depressed they earn lottery type money each year, and every year they want more. It seems the majority are insatiable at the cost of the majority of US citizens.

My wife works for a company where the CEO makes million/year. The highest raise they gave to any employee last year was 1%, not enought to keep up with inflation (most employees received no raise). Yet the company beat estimates and paid dividends to stock holders. In return, the CEO makes more in a week then probably 99% of what the employees make in 1 year.

I can’t understand how raising taxes on those making over million/year on a sliding scale up to million (with a tax of 90% or so) would be detrimental to growth. I’m not talking about stock market growth, that’s been happening and jobs have been disappearing. I’m talking about job growth, and businesses like banks not shelling out all of their earnings to big executives so the banks can weather financial turbulence without govt intervention.

It seems raising taxes on these truly high earners would eliminate the incentive to "screw" everyone else, including the Government.
Casey and Sig, I’m discussing the Federal Govt raising taxes, not individual states.
2012, Try to understand that a recent CEO of the Home Depot, who didn’t do a favorable job made out with an average of .4 million/yr during his career there. If the average US family brings in ,000/yr, it would take that family nearly 1500 years to earn what he did in 1. Nevermind the fact that he’s kept his 335,000 workers wages as low as he can during that time. Nevermind the fact that he’s cut their benefits in that time (putting additional financial hardship on them and their families). Nevermind the fact that they’ve close stores that weren’t as profitable as they’d hoped costing thousands their jobs. Nevermind the fact that their incredible demand for low cost goods in the name of greater profits has closed countless businesses and cost many thousands of jobs – all making for a smaller tax base for the US Govt. Nevermind that these business closing don’t hurt just the widget maker, but all the support businesses for that widget maker and their employees (physicians, a

I was going to sign up to an affiliate network and pay out the 30% fee for each commission payout but I quite like the idea of keeping on top of things myself and offering daily spiffs and incentives.
Problem is while I can find loads of free ones, I cant really find one that integrates with Google checkout.
Any ideas?
I can’t use paypal because it’s an adult website and they won’t allow it