Now you add the first paragraph...........................
Printable View
Now you add the first paragraph...........................
I don't support any taxes
Hence the moniker.:beer2:Quote:
Originally Posted by AnarchoPhil
I don't have time to look into the figures now, Mark, but what you've said IMO is misleading and I've heard that argument before. What is the approximate wealth in dollars of the top 2%? The top 10%? I know the disparity between the ultra super rich vs. the poor has gone from becoming a chasm in my lifetime to a staggering expanse which now separates the two.
That argument IMO is like speaking of the actual dollars that the super rich are paying which seems to go something like this whenever I hear it: "The top 10% wealthiest in the U.S. pay like billions and billions of dollars in taxes; They're paying like tons and tons of money!! While the bottom 50% of the U.S. citizens only pay like 10% of overall taxes collected. Do you see what I mean? Adding dollars rather than a percentage to the wealthiest and then lumping the poorest into a collective pool. What if the top 10% of the wealthiest in the U.S. hold 90% of the wealth? More power to em, I could care less ("Ya gotta serve somebody"). BUT, if something similar IS the case......then they should pay taxes in a proportion to their wealth that others have to pay in proportion to what little they have.
I'm not a soak the rich kind of guy. My opinion simply is if the middle and lower classes have to pay say 20% in taxes, then someone who has a billion dollars in taxable income should be paying 200 million dollars in taxes each year. If such a person DOES pay 200 million in taxes each year I have no beef. If not, cough it up, pal and cry me a river if they try to argue otherwise.
If in theory based on my example the billionaire actually paid 100 million in taxes and you'd say "That billionaire literally paid $100 MILLION DOLLARS in taxes last year. How much more should that billionaire be expected to pay???" I'd reply, " Yawn, another $100 million".
Chris L
If we had a flat tax my argument would be nonsense and yours would be sound, but thats not the case is it?Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisL
But, we should! ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by JMS
True. But I assume the top 10% are paying less percentage wise in taxes than the bottom 90% are at present. If that's true than my retort to your rhetorical question about how much more should the super rich be expected to pay would be something like "A lot more.". I don't advocate taking the majority of the super rich's wealth for distribution to the poor, etc. IF the super rich are in fact paying significantly LESS percentage wise in taxes than the remaining 90% than any whining by them or their proponents at the notion of the super rich paying more in taxes get a bunch of these from me :boohoo::boohoo::boohoo::boohoo:. That's all I'm saying.
Chris L
That's number juggling Mark. those 2 % also earn 90% of the money. Basically, while the people earning less get a leg up, on the whole, everything is percentagewise. So imo it is perfectly normal that a group earning 90% of all income also pays 90 of all taxes.Quote:
Originally Posted by JMS
Here's another twist to this conversation. The rich don't pay really high taxes...
Rich people pay capital gains taxes in large part. High "wage earners" pay high taxes, but there is actually a very small minority of people that fit that criteria. The federal income tax was always sold to the general public as a way to tax the rich, but they have always found ways to get around it. That's why you and I loose so much of our money in taxes. The truly wealthy that we are all thinking of pay significantly less in taxes than what you would think.
Just a thought.
This is my point exactly. Thank you!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by richmondesi
I personally don't believe anyone should pay a larger percentage in taxes than ANYONE else. That is why a flat tax is what I would ultimately want; however, it will never happen because all the people at the IRS would have to be dumped out on the streets. I haven't had a job yet this year and am looking at the possibility of going down the tubes - again - but I don't begrudge wealthy successful people the right to keep the same percentage of their income as I will keep when I am flipping burgers and asking if you want frys with that.Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisL
Historically there always has been a class of wealthy individuals and a class of those with virtually nothing. This isn’t going to change for a variety of sociological reasons; however, the rise of the middle class and subsequent rise of the poorer class is a direct result of the wealthier class making more money. A poor person in this country would be considered wealthy in other parts of the world. This is because of capitalism and a tax structure which (at times) allows for rapid and sustained growth because of the availability of capital through investment, savings and even spending by the wealthy.
There has to be an ongoing growing pool of investment capital for a business to borrow and grow. This comes from the savings and investments of the wealthy class. A flat tax is the only truly equitable solution which will allow economic growth. Otherwise we might just as well redistribute the wealth as the Communists advocate.
i would argue that at the end of the day for any practical purpose it makes no difference how much money you make and how much taxes you pay.
what matters is what you can buy with whatever money you are left with, which is determined by your sicioeconomic position relative to everybody else.
so i consider all this tax the rich, or tax the poor talk is just another exercise in futility for all the participants except the ones who get paid by keeping it going.
Why don't those ba$t@*$ds make some sacrifices before they ask for one more penny out of our overtaxed asses? We should demand a cleanup in corruption 1rst. It is way out of control. Local levels too. At least that is why I am American.
Mike
No but it would eliminate that government that is taking an ever greater propotion of what I earn and am worth. They have manipulated the system to the point where even when my income and real net worth is decreasing they still get more money out of me. I'm just asking how many times can you squeeze this stone before it cuts your hand.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bruno
well, if something can't happen locally it won't happen at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kingfish
'demanding' is easy on the internet, but when it comes to actually doing something things start getting 'complicated'.
tim was complaining of local taxes in earlier post - i can't think of more accountability than from the people who decide on those.
so if you can't influence your local level you can't influence anything.
i recently watched some episodes of the tv show 'parks and recreation' - it was very amusing to see a caricature of a local government. i really enjoyed the bit of people jumping on a 'good idea' and then realizing that 'it's just too much work', 'doesn't concern them personally', 'they would rather do something else instead' etc....
i guess if you try your hand of community organizing one day you can be the president :p
here in the UK vat works fine. its useful to add though that we don't vat everything and food isn't the only exception. books, and baby clothes are another couple i can think of. also, for those saying it's unfair, there is a system in place so that people like farmers can claim their VAT back. and quite honestly, retailers will after a while just drop their prices a bit so you can still have the $1.99 headline despite the vat.Quote:
Originally Posted by singlewedge
Ciao,
MisterDavid
EDIT: also, it's quite amusing how many people go on about less and less tax...tax is very necessary, and I'm happy for everyone to pay it. there is no legitimate argument for the government using tax as a way of population control (i.e. have more/less kids) there was an argument her in the UK for a while as to whether things that are bad for you should be taxed more etc....NO. tax is a way of generating income so that government and society can effectively function. that means yes we should pay tax so that we can have public transport, art museums, roads and power when we flick the switch, to name but a few, but poorer people should definitely pay less, otherwise they are not being allowed to effectively function. strike a balance. however, no-one should ever pay more than 45% tax.
I have an idea. let's destroy small buisness and all the people who drive the economy and give more to Washington. Oh we already did that.(Not blaming one party or the other, we all need to stick together)
M
If poorer people make enough money to function after they pay their taxes that argument would be void. may be the lower taxes that they pay are partially responsible with them being happy with lower salaries?Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterDavid
The past few weekends i went to a lot of great museums, only one was paid by my taxes. since that prevents them from charging money for entrance they still have booths where you get your ticket and are asked to give a donation in exchange for it. You don't have to do it, but I didn't see anybody who didn't. The suggested donations were also more expensive than at the other museums which do not get government support.
There are many ways to get effectively the same result and the pro- or against- arguments often make no sense to me.
Uhm, I don't understand your logic in making this statement. Do you have any data that suggests increased taxes have destroyed the american small business or that small business is driving the american economy? I mean compared to say large business being more efficient and thus more competitive than small business.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kingfish
Last I checked nobody is forcing anybody to shop at Wal-mart, eat at McDonalds or buy a car or computer made by a big corporation.
You are so right about people need to get more involved. It is the local and state levels that make the most difference in our lives. Band wagon jumping is too easy. Point taken.Quote:
Originally Posted by gugi
Mike
Quote:
Originally Posted by gugi
Yes I sure do in the city I live in. It is mainly small buisness that runs this city and it is hurting. They are not feeling too stimulated..
very good. so do you know how much has been the tax increases on the profits of small businesses over the say last decade and how much of that is federal and how much local?
i recently looked at the business plan of a friend who is thinking about starting a small business and taxes was not their main concern. the biggest concern was the compensation package for the employee(s) - a slave labor would be a show stopper, regardless of whether it can be done or not.
gugi,
I think you misunderstand me. It is pretty hard to squeeze more out a group of dying and hurting small buisness class. They are dying faster than polar bear. I am saying we all should be demanding more honesty and intergrity regardless of your philosophy. Any system would work if our officials would be more honest, that need to happen first.
mike