Eat the Rich -- Why taxing the "rich" more isn't the answer

[mcsluggo]

Agree. Which is why I have no problem with the "death tax"

yay!

for the life of me i wil lNEVER understand how the uuber rich inheriters have manged to turn the "death tax" into a rallying cry of injustice...

it

just

makes

ZERO

sense

by

ANY

stretch

of

the

imagination.

---------- Post added April-6th-2011 at 02:34 PM ----------

In theory I like the idea of a flat tax or at least a much flatter tax system. However my support for such a system is predicated on having no deductions and no loopholes. Just pay "x" percent and be done with it.

I very seriously doubt the wealthy would be willing to accept such a system because they enjoy complaining about high taxes while retaining the ability to use accountants and tax attorneys to lower their effective tax rate to very low levels. Ditto that for corporations, many of whom use loopholes to get their effective tax rates to zero.

i would love a simple graduated tax structure oalong these lines.

nobody pays any taxes on their first $20k

EVERYBODY pays 10% on $20 through $50k

EVERYBODY pays 15% on 50-100

EVERYBODY pays 20% on $100-200k

EVERYBODY pays 25% on every dollar over $200K

NO DEDUCTIONS< except for the number of people being supported by that income. Period.\

((((obviously.. i just pulled those brackets out of my ass, and have ZERO idea how much revenue this would bring in versus what is needed.... I am just highlighting the structure. The specifics of rates would have to actually be calculated---- you know... based on real data and whatnot.))))

This would force the government to ACTUALLY FUND every inducement they want: for instance, if you believe that home ownership is a priority that needs extra boosting, tax people and then write out subsidy checks, none of this garbage tax break farce where you pretend like a program is FREE because it doesn't ever appear as a government outlay. If a program is neccessary, then fund it, keep the books transparent, and let it be on the record exactly how much that program costs.

[boofMcboof]

fair enough, I believe in equal taxes across the board, why should we tax someone more because they worked harder or made it in an industry that is more lucrative? I just don't understand the idea that people believe those with more money than them should suffer consequences. Those people worked hard for their money, why should they pay more because of it?

Your right hard workers should not be taxed more. They shouldn't be taxed at all. The fact is labor should not be taxed, it's the people who make their wealth off of charging economic rent (interest off of loans, insurance, property rent, land value gains, capital gains) that should carry the burden of taxes.

By removing income taxes off of labor, we would return to a competitive labor market ready to compete in the world again. This is how the US generated most of it's true wealth in 20th century. Instead most of the gains in production are being siphoned off paying off debt to financial sector. This is excessive overhead placed on entire country and the reason why our economic engine is sputtering.

[TheGoodBits]

Total Receipts by individual Tax Payers who earn in the top 1% (between 2005 and 2008 it has averaged around 40% of total tax receipts So lets say 400 Billion)

Total Receipts by individual Tax Payers who earn in the top 5% (between 2005 and 2008 it has averaged around 60% of total tax receipts So lets say 600 Billion)

What is the percentage of total income going to the top 1%? Top 5%?

What is the percentage of total wealth controlled by the top 1%? Top 5%?

[drtdrums]

What is the percentage of total income going to the top 1%? Top 5%?

What is the percentage of total wealth controlled by the top 1%? Top 5%?

IIRC, the top 1% made ~20% of total income by the same numbers that had them paying 40% of the taxes.

I apologize for not responding to other posts yet. This was a quickie.

[Tweedr01]

Assuming the rich worked harder is a bit of a stretch.

How about those who didn't work for any of it? There's plenty of them out there.

~Bang

But you can't screw everyone for a select few, do you know of any millionaires/billionaires that didn't work hard for their money?

---------- Post added April-6th-2011 at 10:57 AM ----------

In theory I like the idea of a flat tax or at least a much flatter tax system. However my support for such a system is predicated on having no deductions and no loopholes. Just pay "x" percent and be done with it.

I very seriously doubt the wealthy would be willing to accept such a system because they enjoy complaining about high taxes while retaining the ability to use accountants and tax attorneys to lower their effective tax rate to very low levels. Ditto that for corporations, many of whom use loopholes to get their effective tax rates to zero.

good point, it's never as simple as we want it to be, if it were this wouldn't be an issue

---------- Post added April-6th-2011 at 10:59 AM ----------

Your right hard workers should not be taxed more. They shouldn't be taxed at all. The fact is labor should not be taxed, it's the people who make their wealth off of charging economic rent (interest off of loans, insurance, property rent, land value gains, capital gains) that should carry the burden of taxes.

By removing income taxes off of labor, we would return to a competitive labor market ready to compete in the world again. This is how the US generated most of it's true wealth in 20th century. Instead most of all gains in production are being siphoned off paying off debt to financial sector. This is excessive overhead placed on entire country and the reason why our economic engine is sputtering.

good call

[Gator Bait]

my dad, who is a cpa told me that he just did a tax return for a guy who made multiple millions of dollars just in dividends this year and wound up paying the same percentage of taxes as my dad and many other middle class people (my dad makes low 6 figures, probably close to 150k or so). something doesn't seem right about that

something doesn't seem right about them paying the same percentage rate? What doesn't seem right? He is still paying way more taxes than your dad if he is making millions.....I'm on the flip side here....I can't understand how other people thing that people who make more money should pay a higher percentage than everyone else.

ALL TAX deductions and write offs should go away...there should be a flat rate that everyone pays with no exceptions.....we'd save a ton of money by just simplifying the system. Could also implement a consumption based national sales tax to generate more revenue as well.

[Skinz4Life12]

something doesn't seem right about them paying the same percentage rate? What doesn't seem right? He is still paying way more taxes than your dad if he is making millions.....I'm on the flip side here....I can't understand how other people thing that people who make more money should pay a higher percentage than everyone else.

ALL TAX deductions and write offs should go away...there should be a flat rate that everyone pays with no exceptions.....we'd save a ton of money by just simplifying the system. Could also implement a consumption based national sales tax to generate more revenue as well.

I agree with this. But people making millions of dollars should have a higher rate than someone making 100k.

Believe me, there are all sorts of loops holes for people like my dad's client that can reduce their taxes to a very low amount

[Tweedr01]

I agree with this. But people making millions of dollars should have a higher rate than someone making 100k.

Believe me, there are all sorts of loops holes for people like my dad's client that can reduce their taxes to a very low amount

not to be nit picky, but you're contradicting yourself there, if you agree with what he is saying then you would want everyone to be taxed the same. unless you are just reiterating the point that as of right now there are loop holes for your dad's client.

so you'd be for a flat tax system if there were no available loop holes for a tax break then correct?

[Koolblue13]

I would love to see a flat percentage of taxes that is even for everybody, with no deductions. Maybe unless you've donated to charities.

As far as corporate taxes, I'd either like a system that gives them no taxes or a deduction based on domestic employment and production.

[Skinz4Life12]

not to be nit picky, but you're contradicting yourself there, if you agree with what he is saying then you would want everyone to be taxed the same. unless you are just reiterating the point that as of right now there are loop holes for your dad's client.

so you'd be for a flat tax system if there were no available loop holes for a tax break then correct?

i see what you are saying, but i agree with something like what mcsluggo posted

[TheLongshot]

But you can't screw everyone for a select few, do you know of any millionaires/billionaires that didn't work hard for their money?

Albert Haynesworth.

[Gator Bait]

I agree with this. But people making millions of dollars should have a higher rate than someone making 100k.

Believe me, there are all sorts of loops holes for people like my dad's client that can reduce their taxes to a very low amount

oh I know. And I'm against the loop holes, but if you have not "tax returns" process and deductions the loopholes go away. Straight up flat rate for everyone..makes too much sense. Of course it will never pass because congress is full of rich people who benefit from a complicated tax system that they can manipulate and as you said, the middle class gets screwed.

I still can't understand how anyone should think someone making over 100k should be taxed at a higher rate. Do you think their milk at the store and gas at the gas station should be more expensive as well?

---------- Post added April-6th-2011 at 11:44 AM ----------

I would love to see a flat percentage of taxes that is even for everybody, with no deductions. Maybe unless you've donated to charities.

As far as corporate taxes, I'd either like a system that gives them no taxes or a deduction based on domestic employment and production.

No tax deductions PERIOD...no tax returns. Your company takes the flat rate out of your paycheck and they are then audited by the vastly reduced IRS.

[Popeman38]

just my opinion

when my dad explained the break down of this particular client's tax return (the multi millionaire) and told me how much he paid in taxes i was amazed at how little it actually was. the middle class is paying a much higher percentage of their wages to taxes than this guy is. it just didn't seem right to me.

you have your opinion, and i have mine. not like its gonna change anything.

You stated they were paying the same %, which means the multi-millionaire is actually paying more $$ in taxes.

i see what you are saying, and i hate being taxed myself but i know i have a responsibility to pay my share for the roads, schools, etc..

i guess i look at it like, if i make 3 million dollars a year and pay 10% towards taxes, that 300k. i still wind up with 2.7 million for the year

then there is this other guy who makes 100k and pays 10% towards taxes, which is only 10k. but that bumps him down to only 90k for the year.

obviously this is a very basic, hypothetical scenario but the guy who gets taxed for 10k probably feels that more than the guy getting taxed 300k

They are both paying 10% of their income.

I am a firm believer in a flat tax, with no exceptions/deductions. 25% across the board.

[Koolblue13]

I'd be fine with that GB, although I do think encouraging donations to worth while charities would make for a good deduction, if there was one.

[Skinz4Life12]

I still can't understand how anyone should think someone making over 100k should be taxed at a higher rate. Do you think their milk at the store and gas at the gas station should be more expensive as well?

i just think the more you make, the higher percentage tax you should pay without loopholes and deductions so that you wind up paying less taxes than someone making a very small fraction of what that person makes

---------- Post added April-6th-2011 at 11:49 AM ----------

I am a firm believer in a flat tax, with no exceptions/deductions. 25% across the board.

i just think that sucks for the guy making 30k a year

[Popeman38]

i just think that sucks for the guy making 30k a year

$30k = $7500 in taxes, or $289/paycheck.

$300K = $75K in taxes, or $2,885/paycheck

$3M = $750K in taxes, or $28,847/paycheck.

Each guy pays the same %, but ends up paying 10 times the actual $$, because they make 10 times the salary. It is the definition of fair.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

i just think the more you make, the higher percentage tax you should pay without loopholes and deductions so that you wind up paying less taxes than someone making a very small fraction of what that person makes

But why? What is the reason that someone making less money should pay even a lower amount than they already are?

i just think that sucks for the guy making 30k a year

Well, sure it "sucks" for that guy...but making $30K sucks (for some people) in and of itself. The only fair way to handle taxes is that everyone does the same percentage. The guy making $30K pays $7,500 while the guy making $1M pays $250,000. You don't think that disparity is vast enough? If not, why?

[Gator Bait]

I am a firm believer in a flat tax, with no exceptions/deductions. 25% across the board.

I think 25% would probably be overkill. These are just shot in the dark numbers, but I think a 15% income tax and 5% national sales tax would probably do the trick. These rates would also need to be accompanied by huge decreases in spending across the board.

Defense, Department of energy, and department of education to name a few.

And for those of you who are about to flip out that I said the department of education...know that the department of education was formed in the 70s and test scores have gone DOWN since its implementation. If they didn't need a dept. of edu before 1970, why do they all of a sudden need it now?

[Destino]

From 1932 to 1986 the top tax rate in the US was 50% or higher (in some cases much much higher!) During that period of time the US grew to super power status in terms of military and economy. We defeated the Nazi, Japan, and won the cold war.

Today listening to these clowns on capital hill you'd have thought that such tax rates would have resulted in madness and chaos. An economy in ruins with the wealthy all having moved to the obscure European, Asian, or Latin American nations. With the wealthy hit with such a burden surely no one would be able to find a job as the rich could not afford to provide any!

Instead if you take a look around you'll note that since we adopted supply side economics and lower tax rates wealth has moved out of the country. The gap between rich and poor has increased and the middle class has shrank. US dominance has dwindled economically.

It's time to stop buying into this bull****. Look and the damn results.

[Gator Bait]

i just think the more you make, the higher percentage tax you should pay without loopholes and deductions so that you wind up paying less taxes than someone making a very small fraction of what that person makes

you might as well just reply that you'd like a socialist society. That isn't a personal attack, but it is true...and will clear up any responses anyone has for you.

[Destino]

I would love to see a flat percentage of taxes that is even for everybody, with no deductions. Maybe unless you've donated to charities.

As far as corporate taxes, I'd either like a system that gives them no taxes or a deduction based on domestic employment and production.

That would be a disaster. You'd completely eliminate the ability of the government to react to economic problems and you'd shift the burden onto the middle class. You'd see actual tax rates for the middle class sky rocket with the loss of mortgage interest deduction and the deduction of dependents. Meanwhile the rich would see a tax cut of massive proportions to their income. This kind of nonsense sounds so pretty when the salesmen talk about it and it's nothing more than intellectual crack.

[Koolblue13]

I think 25% would probably be overkill. These are just shot in the dark numbers, but I think a 15% income tax and 5% national sales tax would probably do the trick. These rates would also need to be accompanied by huge decreases in spending across the board.

Defense, Department of energy, and department of education to name a few.

And for those of you who are about to flip out that I said the department of education...know that the department of education was formed in the 70s and test scores have gone DOWN since its implementation. If they didn't need a dept. of edu before 1970, why do they all of a sudden need it now?

I think if we figured out what the percentage needed to pay off our debt and run our country, any percentage would do. That's the most "American" thing we could do, despite the number being high. Once it is payed off, we can reduce it and then focus on how to run the government more efficiently and continue reducing that percentage.

As far as the Dept of Energy and Education, if they were doing anything right, I would support them, but I fail to see how they are. Same goes for the ATF, CIA, FDA and a whole lot more.

[Skinz4Life12]

you might as well just reply that you'd like a socialist society. That isn't a personal attack, but it is true...and will clear up any responses anyone has for you.

lol, whatever man. we need to stop cutting taxes for the wealthy, end of story

[Koolblue13]

That would be a disaster. You'd completely eliminate the ability of the government to react to economic problems and you'd shift the burden onto the middle class. You'd see actual tax rates for the middle class sky rocket with the loss of mortgage interest deduction and the deduction of dependents. Meanwhile the rich would see a tax cut of massive proportions to their income. This kind of nonsense sounds so pretty when the salesmen talk about it and it's nothing more than intellectual crack.

I don't see how it would help the rich so much, as they can afford to find the loop holes available now.

I also don't see the value in rewarding people for continuing to over populate, with tax breaks.

The housing thing I do understand, but if it forced people to start buying more modest sized houses, instead of the McMansions I'd be all for it.

[Destino]

lol, whatever man. we need to stop cutting taxes for the wealthy, end of story

were we a socialist society from 1932-1986? Of course not. The frame job conservatives have done on the tax debate is impressive. They have everyone convinced that low tax rates are essential for the nations well being when history shows us this is absolutely not the case. Want to start understanding the root off all this **** Skinz4Life? Read up on Two Santas and how that changed everything in the US political debate.