millionaires

[billc]

there is a group of millionaires who have written to Obama urging him to end the bush tax cuts. They apparently want people who make 250,000 dollars a year to pay more in taxes, because as really rich people, these millionaire jerks have all of their money protected from excessive taxation. If they were serious about giving the government more of their own, hard earned money, they could simply write one big check to the government, before april 15. They could give all of their money to the government and just not worry about other peoples money. But no, they need to have people think that they are not only rich but that wealth means less to them than it does to you and me. Of course, they can either take the hit from higher taxes, because they have so much money it won't effect their actual lifestyle, or they have their money already sheltered from any new tax rates. What a bunch of losers.

 

[Tez3]

It's fine taxing bushes but I'd draw the line at taxing trees.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

Hey, any one of them you hear is giving out cash, lemme know. I need $75k to launch my studio.

 

[Big Don]

There is absolutely nothing stopping them from donating however much they'd like to give to the government. I'll bet you not one of them is a conservative, it isn't about taxes, it IS about ideology.

 

[elder999]

there is a group of millionaires who have written to Obama urging him to end the bush tax cuts. They apparently want people who make 250,000 dollars a year to pay more in taxes, because as really rich people, these millionaire jerks have all of their money protected from excessive taxation. If they were serious about giving the government more of their own, hard earned money, they could simply write one big check to the government, before april 15. They could give all of their money to the government and just not worry about other peoples money. But no, they need to have people think that they are not only rich but that wealth means less to them than it does to you and me. Of course, they can either take the hit from higher taxes, because they have so much money it won't effect their actual lifestyle, or they have their money already sheltered from any new tax rates. What a bunch of losers.

Let me get this straight. They say that they're willing to pay more-they don't want to raise your taxes, or the corporate income tax (where the real $$$$ are)-and you'e calling them losers why, exactly?

Oh, I know:

There is absolutely nothing stopping them from donating however much they'd like to give to the government. I'll bet you not one of them is a conservative, it isn't about taxes, it IS about ideology.

Irony, thy name is Big Don....:lfao:

 

[billc]

They are losers because they are wealthy enough to either avoid paying any new taxes or they are wealthy enough to not have an increase in taxes effect their lifestyle, and yet, enjoying great wealth, they are not content to spend their own money and live their own lives. They look over at the other guy, the hardworking stiff trying to get where they are, and they say, you know what, we don't think that other guy is paying enough of his hard earned money to the government. They then advocate for the government, with the implied threat of force, to take that guys money. As has been pointed out, they could easily take their own money and give it all to the government, they won't do that. They have to tell other people what to do. That is why they are losers.

 

[elder999]

. They look over at the other guy, the hardworking stiff trying to get where they are, and they say, you know what, we don't think that other guy is paying enough of his hard earned money to the government. .

Actually, the only people they're asking it for is themselves-as in those who earn $1,000,000 or more a year.Of course, that section of the code also applies to those whose household income is $250k or more, but that's still less than 2% of the populace-including sole proprietors of small businesses.I think they're trying to do some kind of survey-I'm fairly sure that most in that tax bracket are more than willing to pay more, as long as taxes don't get anywhere near the level they were when Nixon was president, or -gulp! Eisenhower.

 

[Blade96]

There is absolutely nothing stopping them from donating however much they'd like to give to the government. I'll bet you not one of them is a conservative, it isn't about taxes, it IS about ideology.

So what, really , if it is. Honestly its nice. They dont need all that money for themselves, why not do something nice with it. even giving it to the government would pay for roads, housing, etc.

 

[Ken Morgan]

Two points.

• Taxes in the USA will go up. There is little choice. The budget deficits and debts are just too great to be beaten down by cuts to spending.
• I like the idea of a flat tax, no matter how much you make you pay X amount. 10%, 20%? Whatever. I know that not everyone has the opportunities, but somehow I disagree that you should be taxing those people a greater rate who create and run successful small businesses, those who work tonnes of hours at work and those who get an education and become professionals in some way shape of form. Its almost like you’re punishing people for being successful in their lives.

 

[Bruno@MT]

The idea of flat tax has been refuted several times.
The major issue is that if you tax everyone the same, then either
a) the poor to middle class people will not have anything left to live from, or
b) the government is going to have to seriously cut its budgets. That includes the DOD budget which is already out of control.

Before we can discuss which tax system is best from an ideological pov, you should consider whether it would actually work or not. If not, then debating the ideological merits is pointless.

 

[bluewaveschool]

Let me get this straight... a bunch of rich people said ok, repeal Bush's tax breaks on us, let the middle class/poor keep theirs... and some of you are COMPLAINING about this why?

 

[Bruno@MT]

Let me get this straight... a bunch of rich people said ok, repeal Bush's tax breaks on us, let the middle class/poor keep theirs... and some of you are COMPLAINING about this why?

Ideology, dogma, and blind faith in the republican party.

 

[crushing]

The idea of flat tax has been refuted several times.

By whom?

 

[billc]

The problem is that they are not really saying, "Tax Us" they are really saying "hey, raise the tax rates, which won't effect us because we are really rich, but really soak that guy who is just starting out, hiring people and creating new jobs. Do this because one, we like telling other people how to spend their money, two, it doesn't effect us so much, three, it hurts people who are trying to compete with us and our businesses. So that is where the problem is with these losers.

 

[Bruno@MT]

By whom?

I am too lazy to look up the relevant studies, so let's see where we get with common sense.
Currently, the rich are paying much more than the poor and middle class, right?
The US budget is more or less fixed and cannot be be cut significantly, right? Wars to fight and all of that.
And it is also not a secret that with the economic crisis, the US has a significant amount of poor and middle class people struggling to get by.

So...
What happens if suddenly the rich are no longer paying the majority of the taxes, and the (already struggling) poor and middle class have to take up the slack?

Let me put it differently:
Flat tax IS realistic IF first the budget is cut to an amount that can be sustained under a flat tax system without the poor and middle class ending up with a significant tax increase.
If that happen, then I totally agree that flat tax can work if it is set up properly. But with the current US budget, the poor and middle class simply cannot foot the bill.

 

[crushing]

With all the loopholes, deductions, and ways out of paying taxes in the current system, especially for those with the resources to have lawyers and accountants at their beck and call, I wouldn't be surprised to find that many "rich" are actually paying less tax than people in the middle class.

A lower flat tax rate may actually increase revenues and gets the government out of using social engineering in an attempt to influence behaviors.

I don't know how good of a comparison it is because we have different habits and governments, but some countries, such as Russia, have gone flat tax and have experienced increased revenues. Maybe it won't work? But I think it's worthy of further investigation along with budget cuts.

 

[billc]

You find that when taxes are lowered the government will take in more money. The problem is that they will spend everything they get and then spend even more, and then say that you cannot afford to cut taxes.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

Drop income tax, switch to flat sales tax of 15% on everything except raw foods, medical, and drug.

 

[Ray]

They are losers because they are wealthy enough to either avoid paying any new taxes or they are wealthy enough to not have an increase in taxes effect their lifestyle, and yet, enjoying great wealth, they are not content to spend their own money and live their own lives. They look over at the other guy, the hardworking stiff trying to get where they are, and they say, you know what, we don't think that other guy is paying enough of his hard earned money to the government. They then advocate for the government, with the implied threat of force, to take that guys money. As has been pointed out, they could easily take their own money and give it all to the government, they won't do that. They have to tell other people what to do. That is why they are losers.

Don't confuse wealth with income. Property is taxed, so if you have property it can be taxed regardless of income. If you have wealth without having taxable property and without (current) income then you don't pay income tax. If you a mortgage, then that's property that can be taxed however you can generally write off your interest from your income tax.

I'm for a flat tax of, say, 10% for everyone across the board coupled with the gov't spending no more than it takes in. For special projects (like an interstate highway) it could sell bonds to finance and charge a toll to pay the interest...once the interest is paid then the toll needs to vanish. Along with all this craziness I'm espousing, I think that each bill introduced should be related to one thing without fat being added along the compromise trail.

 

[Bruno@MT]

Drop income tax, switch to flat sales tax of 15% on everything except raw foods, medical, and drug.

Worthy suggestions, all.
But have you run the numbers? How much money will tha raise in taxes, and what will be dropped from the budget to make it work?

Without that, you are no different to the guy who announced on my forum that he had found the solution, which was to confiscate all inheritances, and take away everything that is > 1 million $. I told him that a) rich people would just put everything in trusts or similar constructions, and b) a quick calculation shows that even if all US based millionaires and billionaires snuff it at once, you only raise enough money to support the federal budget for 1 year. So what do you do the next year?

He kept ignoring my request for numbers and just hammered on the idelogical pov (he was a philosophy major). Without numbers, you become that guy.