Can any con/repub give me good reason why the rich should not be taxed MORE?

[RDD_1210]

"Can any con/repub give me good reason why the rich should not be taxed MORE?"

Because the rich have EARNED or inherited their money and you have no legal rights to steal it from them, and it wouldn't even dent the bottom economy bucket, if you did. Sorry, but without the rich, you might not even be able to receive your entitlement check....

So why don't we do away with taxes all together?

 

[RDD_1210]

LOL, of course its our problem. We elected this government, and they made the decisions that put us where we are. This is absolutely our problem. Maybe you're the type that likes to pretend like a problem doesn't exist and hope someone else figures it out. But everyone who lives in this country is a part of the problem.

I'm not pretending are deficit and debt problem doesn't exist. But suggesting it's really the voters fault is ridiculous. Have you thought about what the problem really is then? It would mean YOU, the voter and known liberal, want government to spend less, but are knowingly electing people that are fiscally irresponsible. I guess I'll meet you part way on that. There are apparently just too many damn liberals in this country. People that tend to believe it is the role of government to do all this shit for people and so elect whatever candidate promises to give them the most.

And I was in favor of letting the tax cuts expire for everyone, not just the rich.

Why? Why is it you feel our government, which I think we would all agree is horribly financially irresponsible and inefficient, still needS more money. That's like trying cure a crack head by giving them more crack.

We have to pay for the debt we've already created. We can't unspend what we already spent. We can reform how we spend in the future but that doesn't change the past. We have obligations to live up to. We can get there fastest by bringing in more money (taxes) and reducing how much we spend.

And as horribly inefficient as our government is, that doesn't change the fact that it will continue to need money to operate. Taxes are what help fuel the needs of our country. Some you may agree with, some you don't. We can reduce some of those needs, but will never be able to eliminate them all together.

 

[Bern80]

Can any con/repub give me good reason why the rich should not be taxed MORE?

Simple. It's their money and not yours. That's the only reason you need.

Can you give me a good reason why you shouldn't be taxed more?

Your transformation to complete partisan hack is now complete.

And now your transformation to person out of counter arguments is complete.

Seriously, suggesting that you're not entitled to what someone else has earned is now partisan hackery? Suggesting that peole like you (whom I assume is not uber wealthy) should maybe pay more simply to more fairly distribute the tax burden is hackery? Pretty pathetic RDD.

 

[RDD_1210]

Simple. It's their money and not yours. That's the only reason you need.

Can you give me a good reason why you shouldn't be taxed more?

Your transformation to complete partisan hack is now complete.

And now your transformation to person out of counter arguments is complete.

Seriously, suggesting that you're not entitled to what someone else has earned is now partisan hackery? Pretty pathetic RDD.

Should taxes go away completely then?

 

[AquaAthena]

"Can any con/repub give me good reason why the rich should not be taxed MORE?"

Because the rich have EARNED or inherited their money and you have no legal rights to steal it from them, and it wouldn't even dent the bottom economy bucket, if you did. Sorry, but without the rich, you might not even be able to receive your entitlement check....

So why don't we do away with taxes all together?

Fifty percent of you, already have.....

 

[RDD_1210]

"Can any con/repub give me good reason why the rich should not be taxed MORE?"

Because the rich have EARNED or inherited their money and you have no legal rights to steal it from them, and it wouldn't even dent the bottom economy bucket, if you did. Sorry, but without the rich, you might not even be able to receive your entitlement check....

So why don't we do away with taxes all together?

Fifty percent of you, already have.....

Doesn't answer my question.

 

[M14 Shooter]

This would help to rectify the maldistribution of income that is preventing workers from realizing their share of the gains from economic growth.

You proceed from a false premise, that it is the proprer role of government to address this supposed "maldistribution of income".

As your premise is false, the idea built upion it - that the rich should be taxed more - is unsound.

 

[Bern80]

We have to pay for the debt we've already created. We can't unspend what we already spent. We can reform how we spend in the future but that doesn't change the past. We have obligations to live up to. We can get there fastest by bringing in more money (taxes) and reducing how much we spend.

Yes we do. I simply suggest we do it fairly. Regardless of who elected them, members of congress have limitations on what they can do and an obligation not waste our money. I suggest if we take a hard look at what our government really ought to spend money on we could cut the budges hundreds of billions of dollars AND keep taxes where they are now if not lower them. The revenue you no longer need as part of the budget minus debt, you now put toward the debt. That unfortunatley is going to take a radical rethinking of the role of government. It's going to take more than cutting the budgets of departments. It's going to take cutting out entire departments.

And as horribly inefficient as our government is, that doesn't change the fact that it will continue to need money to operate. Taxes are what help fuel the needs of our country. Some you may agree with, some you don't. We can reduce some of those needs, but will never be able to eliminate them all together.

No one has suggested that the federal government not collect any taxes. It is simply being suggested that they collect in taxes no more than they truly need to fulfill their constitutional obligations.

 

[Oldstyle]

Why are we continuing to discuss this?

If even Christina Romer is saying that raising taxes on ANYONE in this kind of economy is a bad idea then why do so many of you continue to push the idea like it's going to help our situation? Quite obviously IT WON'T!

The problem is the amount of money government in this country is wasting not the amount of money coming in. So instead of the class warfare game that we're now playing thanks to Barry and his friends desperate attempt to find some issue he can use to get reelected...how about we fix the problem? We need to cut the spending.

 

[Vaard]

"Can any con/repub give me good reason why the rich should not be taxed MORE?"

Because the rich have EARNED or inherited their money and you have no legal rights to steal it from them, and it wouldn't even dent the bottom economy bucket, if you did. Sorry, but without the rich, you might not even be able to receive your entitlement check....

So why don't we do away with taxes all together?

we should take all money spent by the federal government for the year... add a bit to pay down some of the debt.... divide by the number of people over 18 and send each a bill for the exact same amount.....


this would eliminate all federal taxes at all levels.....

and it would force people to face the true cost of govenrment instead of passing it down to future generations.......

sure, the first bill will be high, but you can bet that there will be serious spending reforms before the next bill comes........

 

[DiamondDave]

Oh, I get it. The deficit is only important when it's convenient. And what class warfare argument? Letting the Bush tax cuts expire would have impacted EVERYONE. That's the equal treatment repubs have been looking for.

What about cutting SPENDING?? You know.. on those redundant agencies, entitlement programs, etc?? You don't just cope with a deficit problem by taxing more on the 50% that pay federal income taxes

Yup, I'm on board with cutting spending. But we're talking about taxes now. Try and stay on topic.

You're the one saying that how you attack the deficit is thru higher taxation on the 'rich' or ending the 'Bush tax cuts'... I am merely saying that cutting spending is the better approach

 

[Chris]

 

[RDD_1210]

"Can any con/repub give me good reason why the rich should not be taxed MORE?"

Because the rich have EARNED or inherited their money and you have no legal rights to steal it from them, and it wouldn't even dent the bottom economy bucket, if you did. Sorry, but without the rich, you might not even be able to receive your entitlement check....

So why don't we do away with taxes all together?

we should take all money spent by the federal government for the year... add a bit to pay down some of the debt.... divide by the number of people over 18 and send each a bill for the exact same amount.....


this would eliminate all federal taxes at all levels.....

and it would force people to face the true cost of govenrment instead of passing it down to future generations.......

sure, the first bill will be high, but you can bet that there will be serious spending reforms before the next bill comes........

Lets see some figures for your plan. How much would this be per person?

 

[Chris]

 

[RDD_1210]

What about cutting SPENDING?? You know.. on those redundant agencies, entitlement programs, etc?? You don't just cope with a deficit problem by taxing more on the 50% that pay federal income taxes

Yup, I'm on board with cutting spending. But we're talking about taxes now. Try and stay on topic.

You're the one saying that how you attack the deficit is thru higher taxation on the 'rich' or ending the 'Bush tax cuts'... I am merely saying that cutting spending is the better approach

And doing both would be even better...

 

[Chris]

WASHINGTON, D.C.--The 400 highest-earning taxpayers in the U.S. reported a record $105 billion in total adjusted gross income in 2006, but they paid just $18 billion in tax, new Internal Revenue Service figures show. That works out to an average federal income tax bite of 17%--the lowest rate paid by the richest 400 during the 15-year period covered by the IRS statistics. The average federal tax bite on the top 400 was 30% in 1995 and 23% in 2002.

Richest 400 Earn More, Pay Lower Tax Rate - Forbes.com

 

[Vaard]

So why don't we do away with taxes all together?

we should take all money spent by the federal government for the year... add a bit to pay down some of the debt.... divide by the number of people over 18 and send each a bill for the exact same amount.....


this would eliminate all federal taxes at all levels.....

and it would force people to face the true cost of govenrment instead of passing it down to future generations.......

sure, the first bill will be high, but you can bet that there will be serious spending reforms before the next bill comes........

Lets see some figures for your plan. How much would this be per person?

well,...

spending for 2010 was approx 3.5 trillion...

add a trillion of debt to that

4.5 trillion

there are approximately 220 million people over 18 in the us......

that comes out to about 20,000 per person per year........

 

[M14 Shooter]

WASHINGTON, D.C.--The 400 highest-earning taxpayers in the U.S. reported a record $105 billion in total adjusted gross income in 2006, but they paid just $18 billion in tax, new Internal Revenue Service figures show. That works out to an average federal income tax bite of 17%--the lowest rate paid by the richest 400 during the 15-year period covered by the IRS statistics. The average federal tax bite on the top 400 was 30% in 1995 and 23% in 2002.

Richest 400 Earn More, Pay Lower Tax Rate - Forbes.com

Thank you for this "fact".
Is there a point attached?
What is it and how does your post support it?

 

[Navy1960]

In the United States, wealth is highly concentrated in a relatively few hands. As of 2007, the top 1% of households (the upper class) owned 34.6% of all privately held wealth, and the next 19% (the managerial, professional, and small business stratum) had 50.5%, which means that just 20% of the people owned a remarkable 85%, leaving only 15% of the wealth for the bottom 80% (wage and salary workers).
Who Rules America: Wealth, Income, and Power

While it's true that there is a large gap in this nation between the have's and the have not's will simply raising taxes on the have's cure the above mentioned gap? In my humble opinion the constitution is a wonderful document in that it gives the Govt. the power to do such things as give us the rights we enjoy, provide for our defense, build and maintain roads, regulate commerce, etc. and for more than a few of these things they do it through levying taxes. Those taxes are in a way how we the "people" as a whole contribute to this nation, while some may say, yes, but only the top 53% pay taxes thats not exactly true because income tax is not the only way the Govt. collects taxes, if anyone has put gas in their car knows. The wealthy are no less American than the poor in this nation and as such do not deserve to be seen as a different group as if they were not. However, those person's be they wealthy or not who wish to enjoy the benefits of this nation need to understand that there is a cost involved in it. I would submit that, simply raising taxes on the wealthy and not changing such laws that allow for Corporations to ship jobs overseas and yet enjoy the same benefits of our tax system would solve little if anything. Having said that, I do believe our society has obligations as Americans and as such those obligations are not free and for years we have been led to believe that we can live with tax cuts, and at the same time fight war's, give healthcare to everyone, and do all the above and we are finding out now that just is not the case. As the ultimate arbiters of our Government it is up to us to decide through our vote what we deem is important for our nation and what is not, as for me, I would simply like to see a nation that spends more of it's time on itself and it's own people be they rich or poor, and making itself strong and independent and provide once again a place where our children and grandchildren can live with more opportunity than any nation on earth.

 

[Chris]

WASHINGTON, D.C.--The 400 highest-earning taxpayers in the U.S. reported a record $105 billion in total adjusted gross income in 2006, but they paid just $18 billion in tax, new Internal Revenue Service figures show. That works out to an average federal income tax bite of 17%--the lowest rate paid by the richest 400 during the 15-year period covered by the IRS statistics. The average federal tax bite on the top 400 was 30% in 1995 and 23% in 2002.

Richest 400 Earn More, Pay Lower Tax Rate - Forbes.com

Thank you for this "fact".
Is there a point attached?
What is it and how does your post support it?

The rich pay taxes at a much lower rate than the rest of us?

Is that fair?