GOP support a raise in taxes

[DiamondDave]

We would have to get into some philosophy to take this any further; we as a people decided some time ago that there's a financial difference between just living, living comfortably, and at some point, just playing with the excess - Hence the tax brackets. I don't have a problem with that generally, although it does get taken advantage of.

But again, if everyone is on the same scale, you can't really call it unfair. I think there seems to be some discrimination on how one earns his money, and I'm abhorred at the fact that un-earned income is taxed so lightly or not at all (Long term capital gains, inheritance), whereas earned income such as wages and business income are taxed at higher rates. That I find unfair.

If ALL income was treated as income, perhaps I could get behind a flat tax - But I think there should be a threshold of income that's not taxed at the very bottom.

Let's say 16,000 tax free, after that flat tax on ALL income, no deductions, to whatever percentage is necessary to run this place. Deal?

No... We are set up on the premise of equal treatment by government.. no matter how our power hungry government has tried to corrupt the system in the false guise of "we the people"

You can call it unfair on an 'equal' sliding scale.... it is what it is, and you know it.... just makes your unequal treatment easy to justify to those who don't mind having the wool pulled over their eyes

And therein lies the problem. We can't agree on shit, so nothing gets done.

I think there should be no threshold for income.. dollar 1 of person X is no different from dollar 10000000 from person Y.... because your little false basement is yet another way for a differing % or amount paid per dollar overall

So no deal... I will not be fooled with parlor tricks

There is a difference, as I explained, and I think you'll find that most people agree with me.

No... you subjectively want there to be a difference... to try and equalize outcome, or put subjective 'fairness' into the equation, or whatever else

A dollar, is a dollar, is a dollar... simply tax the dollar and not the individual... keeping subjectivity out of it.... much like you don't have a 15% sales tax for a person because they make 100K and a 3% sales tax because they make 25K...
Just like you don't have milk at $1 a gallon for a person making 10K and milk at $10 a gallon for a person making 90K

The people that agree with you would be the people getting over on a lesser rate... passing the buck on to someone else

But I know ones like you will certainly scream for completely equal treatment by government when it benefits you, now won't ya??

 

[Cuyo]

No... We are set up on the premise of equal treatment by government.. no matter how our power hungry government has tried to corrupt the system in the false guise of "we the people"

You can call it unfair on an 'equal' sliding scale.... it is what it is, and you know it.... just makes your unequal treatment easy to justify to those who don't mind having the wool pulled over their eyes

And therein lies the problem. We can't agree on shit, so nothing gets done.

I think there should be no threshold for income.. dollar 1 of person X is no different from dollar 10000000 from person Y.... because your little false basement is yet another way for a differing % or amount paid per dollar overall

So no deal... I will not be fooled with parlor tricks

There is a difference, as I explained, and I think you'll find that most people agree with me.

No... you subjectively want there to be a difference... to try and equalize outcome, or put subjective 'fairness' into the equation, or whatever else

A dollar, is a dollar, is a dollar... simply tax the dollar and not the individual... keeping subjectivity out of it.... much like you don't have a 15% sales tax for a person because they make 100K and a 3% sales tax because they make 25K...
Just like you don't have milk at $1 a gallon for a person making 10K and milk at $10 a gallon for a person making 90K

The people that agree with you would be the people getting over on a lesser rate... passing the buck on to someone else

That's true only axiomatically, because the vast majority of people are 'getting over on a lesser rate,' including you and me.

But I know ones like you will certainly scream for completely equal treatment by government when it benefits you, now won't ya??

I don't follow. But I've already explained that we have equal treatment. It's not my fault if your head full of Hannity et al refuses to let it sink in.

 

[Missourian]

eliminate all deductions... that is a bullshit part of our tax system as well...

As long as we are talking about tax on profits, I agree. But you have to allow deductions for expenses.

If you don't, you'll kill business, especially small business.

 

[Sallow]

Two top Republican lawmakers said Wednesday they don't support extending a payroll tax cut as a way to stimulate the economy -an idea the White House is weighing– because they don't believe it helped create jobs and that money is needed to shore up Social Security and Medicare.

- Sen. Lamar Alexander, R-Tennessee, and Rep. Jeb Hensarling, R-Texas

GOP lawmakers say no to a payroll tax cut extension – CNN Political Ticker - CNN.com Blogs

uh oh! you mean tax cuts dont stimulate the economy?

No no no.

Tax cuts for the little people don't stimulate the economy.

The Ryan plan had tax cuts for the "producers"!

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DfMgUkuftLI]YouTube - ‪The Producers - Blue Blanket‬‏[/ame]

 

[Wonky Pundit]

It is unequal treatment for it brings in loopholes and subjectivity.. what is different about dollar 60000 and 60001??? Nothing....

It is a disguised way of differing treatment... you know it, I know it, and most logical thinking people know it

We would have to get into some philosophy to take this any further; we as a people decided some time ago that there's a financial difference between just living, living comfortably, and at some point, just playing with the excess - Hence the tax brackets. I don't have a problem with that generally, although it does get taken advantage of.

But again, if everyone is on the same scale, you can't really call it unfair. I think there seems to be some discrimination on how one earns his money, and I'm abhorred at the fact that un-earned income is taxed so lightly or not at all (Long term capital gains, inheritance), whereas earned income such as wages and business income are taxed at higher rates. That I find unfair.

If ALL income was treated as income, perhaps I could get behind a flat tax - But I think there should be a threshold of income that's not taxed at the very bottom.

Let's say 16,000 tax free, after that flat tax on ALL income, no deductions, to whatever percentage is necessary to run this place. Deal?

No... We are set up on the premise of equal treatment by government.. no matter how our power hungry government has tried to corrupt the system in the false guise of "we the people"

You can call it unfair on an 'equal' sliding scale.... it is what it is, and you know it.... just makes your unequal treatment easy to justify to those who don't mind having the wool pulled over their eyes

Do some self-education for a change. Progressive tax brackets are not "unequal treatment."

The level of scrutiny with which the Supreme Court reviews claims of discrimination depends on whether the victims belong to a so-called "suspect class." A suspect class is a group in society whose characteristics are immutable, like race or national origin, who suffer from a long history of discrimination, who are politically powerless, and who are a distinct group. Earning a high income is definitely not immutable, and it does not make you politically powerless. I also doubt that high-income-earners have been suffering from a long history of discrimination.

 

[Sallow]

I don't support tax cuts, and I am a staunch conservative

I say raise the taxes on everyone on every dollar earned to be the exact same as the very top rate.... but somehow, with everyone having an equal stake in the game of taxation on every dollar earned.. I think you would see an extreme call for lower taxation and reduced government spending

Especially since Revenue isn't the problem.

Spending is.

Naw.

Revenue is part of the problem.

 

[DiamondDave]

We would have to get into some philosophy to take this any further; we as a people decided some time ago that there's a financial difference between just living, living comfortably, and at some point, just playing with the excess - Hence the tax brackets. I don't have a problem with that generally, although it does get taken advantage of.

But again, if everyone is on the same scale, you can't really call it unfair. I think there seems to be some discrimination on how one earns his money, and I'm abhorred at the fact that un-earned income is taxed so lightly or not at all (Long term capital gains, inheritance), whereas earned income such as wages and business income are taxed at higher rates. That I find unfair.

If ALL income was treated as income, perhaps I could get behind a flat tax - But I think there should be a threshold of income that's not taxed at the very bottom.

Let's say 16,000 tax free, after that flat tax on ALL income, no deductions, to whatever percentage is necessary to run this place. Deal?

No... We are set up on the premise of equal treatment by government.. no matter how our power hungry government has tried to corrupt the system in the false guise of "we the people"

You can call it unfair on an 'equal' sliding scale.... it is what it is, and you know it.... just makes your unequal treatment easy to justify to those who don't mind having the wool pulled over their eyes

Do some self-education for a change. Progressive tax brackets are not "unequal treatment."

The level of scrutiny with which the Supreme Court reviews claims of discrimination depends on whether the victims belong to a so-called "suspect class." A suspect class is a group in society whose characteristics are immutable, like race or national origin, who suffer from a long history of discrimination, who are politically powerless, and who are a distinct group. Earning a high income is definitely not immutable, and it does not make you politically powerless. I also doubt that high-income-earners have been suffering from a long history of discrimination.

Yes they are... just as loopholes are, even though each person can use them if they follow whatever guidelines...

The progressive rate is merely a disguised way of hiding the differing treatment under the premise of 'fairness'

 

[DiamondDave]

eliminate all deductions... that is a bullshit part of our tax system as well...

As long as we are talking about tax on profits, I agree. But you have to allow deductions for expenses.

If you don't, you'll kill business, especially small business.

Understood.. as there is a difference between personal and business 'income'

 

[DiamondDave]

And therein lies the problem. We can't agree on shit, so nothing gets done.



There is a difference, as I explained, and I think you'll find that most people agree with me.

No... you subjectively want there to be a difference... to try and equalize outcome, or put subjective 'fairness' into the equation, or whatever else

A dollar, is a dollar, is a dollar... simply tax the dollar and not the individual... keeping subjectivity out of it.... much like you don't have a 15% sales tax for a person because they make 100K and a 3% sales tax because they make 25K...
Just like you don't have milk at $1 a gallon for a person making 10K and milk at $10 a gallon for a person making 90K

The people that agree with you would be the people getting over on a lesser rate... passing the buck on to someone else

That's true only axiomatically, because the vast majority of people are 'getting over on a lesser rate,' including you and me.

But I know ones like you will certainly scream for completely equal treatment by government when it benefits you, now won't ya??

I don't follow. But I've already explained that we have equal treatment. It's not my fault if your head full of Hannity et al refuses to let it sink in.

Nice but typical way to try and use an assumption in order to twist the argument..

Sorry, son... I don't listen to hannity, nor rush, or whomever else... I'm not in to entertainment talk shows

 

[Missourian]

There is no way to justify the progressive tax rate as fair.

I've heard many explanations, but none hold water.

Every American shares the opportunity to use the services of the government equally.

Every American should shoulder a portion of the burden in providing those services.

 

[The Rabbi]

Not all tax cuts are equal.
Tax cuts designed to "put more money in people's hands" do nothing to stimulate the economy. We have seen this over and over.
Tax cuts that change the desirability of working and saving do stimulate the economy. We have seen that over and over too.

Ditto for eliminating the mortgage deduction. Most people take standard deduction anyway so they lose whatever benefit there is.

 

[Wonky Pundit]

There is no way to justify the progressive tax rate as fair.

I've heard many explanations, but none hold water.

Every American shares the opportunity to use the services of the government equally.

Every American should shoulder a portion of the burden in providing those services.

Neither a system of progressive tax tiers nor a flat tax is "fair."

The ONLY goal of taxation is to bring in enough to sustain government activity while minimizing the damage to a country's ability to create revenue. Fairness in wealth distribution hasn't been attempted since the days of communism.

 

[Wonky Pundit]

No... We are set up on the premise of equal treatment by government.. no matter how our power hungry government has tried to corrupt the system in the false guise of "we the people"

You can call it unfair on an 'equal' sliding scale.... it is what it is, and you know it.... just makes your unequal treatment easy to justify to those who don't mind having the wool pulled over their eyes

Do some self-education for a change. Progressive tax brackets are not "unequal treatment."

The level of scrutiny with which the Supreme Court reviews claims of discrimination depends on whether the victims belong to a so-called "suspect class." A suspect class is a group in society whose characteristics are immutable, like race or national origin, who suffer from a long history of discrimination, who are politically powerless, and who are a distinct group. Earning a high income is definitely not immutable, and it does not make you politically powerless. I also doubt that high-income-earners have been suffering from a long history of discrimination.

Yes they are... just as loopholes are, even though each person can use them if they follow whatever guidelines...

The progressive rate is merely a disguised way of hiding the differing treatment under the premise of 'fairness'

The 'nuh-uh' defense won't get you anywhere.

 

[DiamondDave]

Do some self-education for a change. Progressive tax brackets are not "unequal treatment."

The level of scrutiny with which the Supreme Court reviews claims of discrimination depends on whether the victims belong to a so-called "suspect class." A suspect class is a group in society whose characteristics are immutable, like race or national origin, who suffer from a long history of discrimination, who are politically powerless, and who are a distinct group. Earning a high income is definitely not immutable, and it does not make you politically powerless. I also doubt that high-income-earners have been suffering from a long history of discrimination.

Yes they are... just as loopholes are, even though each person can use them if they follow whatever guidelines...

The progressive rate is merely a disguised way of hiding the differing treatment under the premise of 'fairness'

The 'nuh-uh' defense won't get you anywhere.

Jesus Christ, you are dense even for a liberal

Person X makes 50K and ends up paying an income tax burden of 19% of his income... Person Y makes 270K and ends up paying an income tax burden of 27% of his income... this by definition is unequal treatment by government... even if both person X and person Y paid only 10% on the first 16K... that is subjectively categorizing people with unequal burden in the name of fairness...

As I said.. what next?? Differing sales tax depending on income??? differing parking meter prices based on income?? differing milk prices based on income??
Get into class warfare much?

 

[Skynet]

Yes they are... just as loopholes are, even though each person can use them if they follow whatever guidelines...

The progressive rate is merely a disguised way of hiding the differing treatment under the premise of 'fairness'

The 'nuh-uh' defense won't get you anywhere.

Jesus Christ, you are dense even for a liberal

Person X makes 50K and ends up paying an income tax burden of 19% of his income... Person Y makes 270K and ends up paying an income tax burden of 27% of his income... this by definition is unequal treatment by government... even if both person X and person Y paid only 10% on the first 16K... that is subjectively categorizing people with unequal burden in the name of fairness...

As I said.. what next?? Differing sales tax depending on income??? differing parking meter prices based on income?? differing milk prices based on income??
Get into class warfare much?

the opposite is actually true as well. as in if someone who makes $75K pays 30% and someone who make $200k pays 20%. it should be an equal proportion of your income (all income including capital gains)

the only write off that should be even considered is to write off investment losses. if you are taxed on gains, when those gains disappear, you should be able to claim them as lost income. (although i dont technically consider that a write off)

 

[Valerie]

Yes they are... just as loopholes are, even though each person can use them if they follow whatever guidelines...

The progressive rate is merely a disguised way of hiding the differing treatment under the premise of 'fairness'

The 'nuh-uh' defense won't get you anywhere.

Jesus Christ, you are dense even for a liberal

Person X makes 50K and ends up paying an income tax burden of 19% of his income... Person Y makes 270K and ends up paying an income tax burden of 27% of his income... this by definition is unequal treatment by government... even if both person X and person Y paid only 10% on the first 16K... that is subjectively categorizing people with unequal burden in the name of fairness...

As I said.. what next?? Differing sales tax depending on income??? differing parking meter prices based on income?? differing milk prices based on income??
Get into class warfare much?

But $270k and $50k income are not equal. The money is taxed based on the amount of taxable income and is blind to the individual. ANY individual who earns $270 would be taxed equally.


When people talk about "equal treatment under the law" that is in reference to the 14th amendment which relates to state laws, not taxation.


"No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. "

 

[Skynet]

The 'nuh-uh' defense won't get you anywhere.

Jesus Christ, you are dense even for a liberal

Person X makes 50K and ends up paying an income tax burden of 19% of his income... Person Y makes 270K and ends up paying an income tax burden of 27% of his income... this by definition is unequal treatment by government... even if both person X and person Y paid only 10% on the first 16K... that is subjectively categorizing people with unequal burden in the name of fairness...

As I said.. what next?? Differing sales tax depending on income??? differing parking meter prices based on income?? differing milk prices based on income??
Get into class warfare much?

But $270k and $50k income are not equal. The money is taxed based on the amount of taxable income and is blind to the individual. ANY individual who earns $270 would be taxed equally.


When people talk about "equal treatment under the law" that is in reference to the 14th amendment which relates to state laws, not taxation.


"No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. "

so in terms of equal do you think everyone should pay the same dollar amount of taxes or the same percentage?

 

[Valerie]

Jesus Christ, you are dense even for a liberal

Person X makes 50K and ends up paying an income tax burden of 19% of his income... Person Y makes 270K and ends up paying an income tax burden of 27% of his income... this by definition is unequal treatment by government... even if both person X and person Y paid only 10% on the first 16K... that is subjectively categorizing people with unequal burden in the name of fairness...

As I said.. what next?? Differing sales tax depending on income??? differing parking meter prices based on income?? differing milk prices based on income??
Get into class warfare much?

But $270k and $50k income are not equal. The money is taxed based on the amount of taxable income and is blind to the individual. ANY individual who earns $270 would be taxed equally.


When people talk about "equal treatment under the law" that is in reference to the 14th amendment which relates to state laws, not taxation.


"No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. "

so in terms of equal do you think everyone should pay the same dollar amount of taxes or the same percentage?

Not the same dollar amount, but the same tiered percentages...

 

[Skynet]

But $270k and $50k income are not equal. The money is taxed based on the amount of taxable income and is blind to the individual. ANY individual who earns $270 would be taxed equally.


When people talk about "equal treatment under the law" that is in reference to the 14th amendment which relates to state laws, not taxation.


"No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. "

so in terms of equal do you think everyone should pay the same dollar amount of taxes or the same percentage?

Not the same dollar amount, but the same tiered percentages...

give you reasoning why there needs to be tiers? vs a flat tax.

 

[Wonky Pundit]

so in terms of equal do you think everyone should pay the same dollar amount of taxes or the same percentage?

Not the same dollar amount, but the same tiered percentages...

give you reasoning why there needs to be tiers? vs a flat tax.

A progressive-tiered system that brings in the same revenue as a flat tax counterpart will result in more consumer spending.