Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Whenever there's talk about tax rates and what the "fair share" should be for the wealthy to pay, there's always a few liberals that bring out the argument of how top marginal tax rates were as high as 94% back in 1944. This is true. They were also 91% back in 1946, and and 77% in 1964.
Now, assuming people actually payed those taxes back in the day. Here's my question;
Lets say we raised the top marginal tax rate for all income above $250k to 94%, just like they were back in the day.
If we have someone already earning $250k, what is their incentive to increase their earnings $100k for a total of $350k, if they'd only get see $6,000 of it?
Essentially only getting to keep 6 cents of every dollar earned over $250k.
Again, lets say the top marginal tax rate only affected income over $500k. What incentive would a person have to earn $600k, when in reality, they'd only see $6,000 of their newly earned income?
Back in the days of 90+% tax rates the deductions were much more lucrative as well.
What deductions?
Romney and his buddies paying practically no taxes still accounted for 70% of all federal taxes paid in the US.
But of course, you think they should pay more.
Goddamned right they should!
It is time that the completely insane distribution of weath in this nation is addressed. If we have to address it through taxation, so be it.
Because higher taxes automatically equal higher wages, right?
Because by making those immoral, greedy CEOs pay more taxes, they will also somehow have more money to pay workers?
How 'bout the government just takes control of everything and pays everyone the same wages. Income inequality solved.
Here's a good avatar for you.
Whenever there's talk about tax rates and what the "fair share" should be for the wealthy to pay, there's always a few liberals that bring out the argument of how top marginal tax rates were as high as 94% back in 1944. This is true. They were also 91% back in 1946, and and 77% in 1964.
Now, assuming people actually payed those taxes back in the day. Here's my question;
Lets say we raised the top marginal tax rate for all income above $250k to 94%, just like they were back in the day.
If we have someone already earning $250k, what is their incentive to increase their earnings $100k for a total of $350k, if they'd only get see $6,000 of it?
Essentially only getting to keep 6 cents of every dollar earned over $250k.
Again, lets say the top marginal tax rate only affected income over $500k. What incentive would a person have to earn $600k, when in reality, they'd only see $6,000 of their newly earned income?
91% is too much. 70% is what we need.
20% of the wealthiest Americans are already paying 70% of all federal taxes. What burden are you talking about?
The amount of taxes paid & the marginal tax bracket is nonsense. The loopholes & low dividend tax rate are the whole problem. When you look at total tax revenue & not just income tax, the rich are actually paying lower effective tax rate than the poor/middle class.
Investment flows to where it receives a greater return. We can't compete if our product cost more because we have to pay more tax than the rich. This tax system is a huge benefit to the rich & a huge burden to the middle class. If a middle class person made widgets, they would cost more than the rich widgets because the middle class widget maker has to pay more tax per widget. This drives all the middle class out of business, into poverty & onto the government dole every time the rich wants to compete. The rich win every time thanks to the current tax scheme.
The people earning above $350k need to start actually paying a higher percentage of their income in taxes than the middle class.
Yes, the rich pay a lower effective tax rate than you and I. Even with that "immorality," 20% of the wealthiest Americans account for 70% of all federal taxes.
Should 20% of the population pay for 80% of all taxes? 90% 100%??
Romney and his buddies paying practically no taxes still accounted for 70% of all federal taxes paid in the US.
But of course, you think they should pay more.
Goddamned right they should!
It is time that the completely insane distribution of weath in this nation is addressed. If we have to address it through taxation, so be it.
And there we have it.. the mantra of wealth redistribution and the destruction of freedom
Goddamned right they should!
It is time that the completely insane distribution of weath in this nation is addressed. If we have to address it through taxation, so be it.
Because higher taxes automatically equal higher wages, right?
Because by making those immoral, greedy CEOs pay more taxes, they will also somehow have more money to pay workers?
How 'bout the government just takes control of everything and pays everyone the same wages. Income inequality solved.
Here's a good avatar for you.
You dumb shit. I was on base and in uniform when we stopped those ships off of Cuba. Volunteered, not drafted. Do you have a dd214? If not, don't even try to call me unpatriotic. What I have said, is that the people on the factory floor should get a bigger slice of the pie. Maybe some of these CEO's should only get a million or so, and some of the people doing the actual production a few thousand more a year. It would boost the economy, and lead to the majority of us paying more of the tax burden.
Why no, that is not what I said at all. What I said was the 20% should not have such a greater income than the 80% that they pay 70% of the taxes.
In other words, the 80% should be recieving a whole lot more for the work that they do. How do you like them apples? That is even worse to you worshipers of plutocracy.
Because it's immoral that someone that works harder than others be rewarded with so much more.
What a totally idiotic reply. You think people that work 48 to 72 hours a week at a job that is physically and mentally demanding are lazy? Romney worked harder than these people? That is like saying a bank robber works harder than anyone else because he manages to steal a couple of million in an hours time.
People like Buffet and Gates work smarter, and more creatively, but not harder than most of the people I work with. And both those men state that the wealthy should pay at least the total percentage that the middle class does.
[91% is too much. 70% is what we need.
Okay.
Do you honestly believe people will be compelled to earn 30 cents on the dollar beyond $250k?
Goddamned right they should!
It is time that the completely insane distribution of weath in this nation is addressed. If we have to address it through taxation, so be it.
And there we have it.. the mantra of wealth redistribution and the destruction of freedom
So your definition of a free nation is a plutocracy. The majority of us don't like that idea, and are taking measures to prevent it. Or, given that we are almost there right now, get it turned around.
[91% is too much. 70% is what we need.
Okay.
Do you honestly believe people will be compelled to earn 30 cents on the dollar beyond $250k?
Of course. It is still good money.
Why? Because he earned that luxury.
[91% is too much. 70% is what we need.
Okay.
Do you honestly believe people will be compelled to earn 30 cents on the dollar beyond $250k?
[91% is too much. 70% is what we need.
Okay.
Do you honestly believe people will be compelled to earn 30 cents on the dollar beyond $250k?
If I may...your question is flawed...
It should be the following....
Do you honestly believe that giving away 70% in taxes to the government will compell business owners to take the chance of losing a lot of money by expanding?
Why? Because he earned that luxury.
By doing what exactly? Going to a good business school? -- yeah, that's a terrible sacrifice.
So your response is assuming the business owner will KNOW FOR SURE that his return will be 30%.
Because higher taxes automatically equal higher wages, right?
Because by making those immoral, greedy CEOs pay more taxes, they will also somehow have more money to pay workers?
How 'bout the government just takes control of everything and pays everyone the same wages. Income inequality solved.
Here's a good avatar for you.
You dumb shit. I was on base and in uniform when we stopped those ships off of Cuba. Volunteered, not drafted. Do you have a dd214? If not, don't even try to call me unpatriotic. What I have said, is that the people on the factory floor should get a bigger slice of the pie. Maybe some of these CEO's should only get a million or so, and some of the people doing the actual production a few thousand more a year. It would boost the economy, and lead to the majority of us paying more of the tax burden.
Question...
If I start a business....and after 6 months, it fails due to a fire.....and I lose my entire investment......should I have the right to have my employees share in my loss?
If not...why should they share in the success if they are not to share in the failure?
Why? Because he earned that luxury.
By doing what exactly? Going to a good business school? -- yeah, that's a terrible sacrifice.
No.
By having sleepless nights for the first few years of running the busioness.
By sacrificing family time and free time for the first several years.
By not having the luxury of vacation days and sick days and personal days for the fiorst few years.
By worrying about meeting payroll and venodr bills during a recession
By not being able to turn to the emnployee handbook and saying "I have my rights...I can take tomorrow off" when they heard that a relative died.
Why? Because he earned that luxury.
By doing what exactly? Going to a good business school? -- yeah, that's a terrible sacrifice.
No.
By having sleepless nights for the first few years of running the busioness.
By sacrificing family time and free time for the first several years.
By not having the luxury of vacation days and sick days and personal days for the fiorst few years.
By worrying about meeting payroll and venodr bills during a recession
By not being able to turn to the emnployee handbook and saying "I have my rights...I can take tomorrow off" when they heard that a relative died.
