'Taxing the Rich'

[elvis]

LOL. Well surely they did. Ol' Madoff and his cronies just sweated themselves on how to cheat more people. Those CEO's that engineered the crash of 2008 worked so very hard for their hundreds of millions, while the lazy people in the factories deserved to lose their jobs, health care, and homes.

Yeah, that is sure the GOP mantra.

You mean GOPers like Lawrence Summers, Chris Dodd, and Bill Clinton?

Rich liberals got that way from hard work, determination, skill, and the kindness and grace of a beneficient Gaea. Rich conservatives got that way from lying, cheating, stealing, and whipping poor children in sweatshops.

well, i was referring to the fact that the deregulation happened under Clinton with Summers' approval. the Glass Steagall repeal being the centerpiece.
Glass

 

[daveman]

You mean GOPers like Lawrence Summers, Chris Dodd, and Bill Clinton?

Rich liberals got that way from hard work, determination, skill, and the kindness and grace of a beneficient Gaea. Rich conservatives got that way from lying, cheating, stealing, and whipping poor children in sweatshops.

well, i was referring to the fact that the deregulation happened under Clinton with Summers' approval. the Glass Steagall repeal being the centerpiece.
Glass

And I was referring to the common leftist blind spot regarding wealthy Democrats.

 

[Old Rocks]

Whats so wrong with being successful??

Besides, creating wealth is not a bad thing.

IMO, in modern times the government is guilty of racketeering.

Not a thing wrong with being successful or with creating wealth. The issue is that when you add in all federal taxes, those uber wealthy are paying a much lower tax rate then the middle class. Something is seriously wrong with that, don't you think? Or do you support the idea of the more you make, the lower your tax rate should be?

Whats 10% of $50,000? $5,000

Whats 5% of $5,000,000? $250,000

Who pays more in taxes?

Who provides the jobs?

Do you like the private sector economy???

Also, do people not realize that businesses take losses?? how do you tax a loss??

There are numerous reasons why the "rich" have a different tax bracket.

Now, as individuals they pay out the ass. They have a lot of stuff because they're rich and they pay taxes on the stuff you don't have...

I'll say. And they buy more of them every Congressional Election.

 

[Mr.Nick]

How about you stop being retards and we go back to what worked before?

Get rid of redundant bureaucracy, return to the pre-Carter marginal tax rates and close tax loopholes, stop subsidizing big business, and end capitalist free trade (eg: NAFTA, CAFTA) and return to the social democracy under which America once thrived.

I agree the government needs to stop "subsidizing business" - especially the way Obama subsidizes businesses that play ball with his bullshit.

States do it too, only because of the 10th Amendment. Businesses will go where they're welcome and there is competition amongst states tax code.

If you tax businesses too much they will pack their operation up and move it to a state that welcomes them, taking thousands of jobs with them in the process.

Free trade is good, but its been abused.

 

[Old Rocks]

You mean GOPers like Lawrence Summers, Chris Dodd, and Bill Clinton?

Rich liberals got that way from hard work, determination, skill, and the kindness and grace of a beneficient Gaea. Rich conservatives got that way from lying, cheating, stealing, and whipping poor children in sweatshops.

well, i was referring to the fact that the deregulation happened under Clinton with Summers' approval. the Glass Steagall repeal being the centerpiece.
Glass

No arguement from me on that point. That needs to be put back into place, or we will see another crash.

 

[boedicca]

Whenever politicians talk about raising taxes on The Rich, it's a prelude for increasing them on the broad middle class....because that is where the money is.

And not just that, my sweet..... It's a prelude for going after accumulated wealth next, not just income.

Oh, Fo Shizzle.

The Obama Administration is working on an idea to NATIONALIZE 401K and IRA accounts. Now that they've spent our SS contributions, they want the pitiful amounts workers have been able to save on their own.

 

[boedicca]

LOL. Well surely they did. Ol' Madoff and his cronies just sweated themselves on how to cheat more people. Those CEO's that engineered the crash of 2008 worked so very hard for their hundreds of millions, while the lazy people in the factories deserved to lose their jobs, health care, and homes.

Yeah, that is sure the GOP mantra.

You mean GOPers like Lawrence Summers, Chris Dodd, and Bill Clinton?

Rich liberals got that way from hard work, determination, skill, and the kindness and grace of a beneficient Gaea. Rich conservatives got that way from lying, cheating, stealing, and whipping poor children in sweatshops.

And kicking DOGS! Don't forget that they KICK DOGS!

 

[Bern80]

The adjusted gross income of the wealthiest 400 taxpayers jumped 277 percent in real terms between 1992 and 2008, nearly four times the increase for everyone else. Over that same period, the effective tax rate on the richest 400 taxpayers (note: not necessarily the same people year-to-year) fell from 30 percent in 1995 to the 18 percent rate in 2008

TaxVox » Blog Archive » The Very Rich Really Are Different

Another one of those threads I just don't get. What is it we are supposed believe? That some people earned more than others is bad? That everyone's income is supposed to rise at the same rate? You idot liberals have no grasp of economics and are financially illiterate. You will never get it. THAT is going to be the biggest contributor as to why someone elses income outpaces yours.

 

[daveman]

You mean GOPers like Lawrence Summers, Chris Dodd, and Bill Clinton?

Rich liberals got that way from hard work, determination, skill, and the kindness and grace of a beneficient Gaea. Rich conservatives got that way from lying, cheating, stealing, and whipping poor children in sweatshops.

And kicking DOGS! Don't forget that they KICK DOGS!

 

[auditor0007]

Whats so wrong with being successful??

Besides, creating wealth is not a bad thing.

IMO, in modern times the government is guilty of racketeering.

Not a thing wrong with being successful or with creating wealth. The issue is that when you add in all federal taxes, those uber wealthy are paying a much lower tax rate then the middle class. Something is seriously wrong with that, don't you think? Or do you support the idea of the more you make, the lower your tax rate should be?

Whats 10% of $50,000? $5,000

Whats 5% of $5,000,000? $250,000

Who pays more in taxes?

Who provides the jobs?

Do you like the private sector economy???

Also, do people not realize that businesses take losses?? how do you tax a loss??

There are numerous reasons why the "rich" have a different tax bracket.

Now, as individuals they pay out the ass. They have a lot of stuff because they're rich and they pay taxes on the stuff you don't have...

Paying 18% is not paying out the ass, especially when the middle class is paying closer to 30% when you include all federal taxes. And here is the truth about who provides the jobs; it's the consumers. Without them, there is no reason to produce anything because there is nobody to sell to. Demand for goods is what drives the economy and creates wealth. Without demand, there is no wealth.

 

[DiamondDave]

fine... simplify the tax system... no loopholes or deductions anywhere... say a flat and straight 12% tax on every dollar earned by every citizen, NO EXCEPTIONS... problem solved, right OP?

 

[Uncensored2008]

And unicorns will once more roam the meadows.

You don't understand. After 15 years of writing audit reports for the Federal Bureau of Floor Tile standards for a pittance of a salary of $90K, only 7 weeks of annual vacation and 35 holidays, JBeukema faces a challenge in his coming retirement, only five years in the future. He worked a little at a job no one wanted done which produced no results, he worked at a FEDERAL job! Dammit, he in entitled to 90% salary for the rest of his life once he finishes his 20 years of feeding from the public trough!

Tax the "rich," there are public workers to support in opulent style!

If we don't offer high wages, extravagant benefits and retirement at 45, how will we ever fill the important jobs like "Marmot Counselors?" Can you imaging the suicide rate among marmots should this post go unfilled?

 

[Mr.Nick]

Not a thing wrong with being successful or with creating wealth. The issue is that when you add in all federal taxes, those uber wealthy are paying a much lower tax rate then the middle class. Something is seriously wrong with that, don't you think? Or do you support the idea of the more you make, the lower your tax rate should be?

Whats 10% of $50,000? $5,000

Whats 5% of $5,000,000? $250,000

Who pays more in taxes?

Who provides the jobs?

Do you like the private sector economy???

Also, do people not realize that businesses take losses?? how do you tax a loss??

There are numerous reasons why the "rich" have a different tax bracket.

Now, as individuals they pay out the ass. They have a lot of stuff because they're rich and they pay taxes on the stuff you don't have...

I'll say. And they buy more of them every Congressional Election.

I would suggest instead of being angry, try to understand.

If people only knew the truth.

Example in layman terms.

Imagine you own a business, your business takes losses year after year in a bad economy, yet you still have to pay taxes on assets among other things.

So you not only didn't make any money, yet you owe uncle sam money... But yet you provide thousands of people with jobs and everyone calls you a rich asshole, and everyone wants your money.

This is a horrible business environment BTW, many businesses went defunct..

 

[daveman]

And unicorns will once more roam the meadows.

You don't understand. After 15 years of writing audit reports for the Federal Bureau of Floor Tile standards for a pittance of a salary of $90K, only 7 weeks of annual vacation and 35 holidays, JBeukema faces a challenge in his coming retirement, only five years in the future. He worked a little at a job no one wanted done which produced no results, he worked at a FEDERAL job! Dammit, he in entitled to 90% salary for the rest of his life once he finishes his 20 years of feeding from the public trough!

Tax the "rich," there are public workers to support in opulent style!

If we don't offer high wages, extravagant benefits and retirement at 45, how will we ever fill the important jobs like "Marmot Counselors?" Can you imaging the suicide rate among marmots should this post go unfilled?

Please...think of the marmots!

 

[Mr.Nick]

Quite frankly we should have a "consumption tax" system.

Tax everything but necessities at 20%.

States wont like that because their little sin-tax bullshit goes out the window on some products.

A pack of cigarettes in Chicago would go from 12 dollars a pack down to 3 dollars.

 

[JBeukema]

How about you stop being retards and we go back to what worked before?

Get rid of redundant bureaucracy, return to the pre-Carter marginal tax rates and close tax loopholes, stop subsidizing big business, and end capitalist free trade (eg: NAFTA, CAFTA) and return to the social democracy under which America once thrived.

And unicorns will once more roam the meadows.

You're right- conservatism is a fairy tale; there's no going back...

 

[JBeukema]

You mean GOPers like Lawrence Summers, Chris Dodd, and Bill Clinton?

Rich liberals got that way from hard work, determination, skill, and the kindness and grace of a beneficient Gaea. Rich conservatives got that way from lying, cheating, stealing, and whipping poor children in sweatshops.

well, i was referring to the fact that the deregulation happened under Clinton with Summers' approval. the Glass Steagall repeal being the centerpiece.
Glass

Anyone who believes there is any meaningful difference between the 'democratic' and 'republican' factions is a fool.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Quite frankly we should have a "consumption tax" system.

Hear hear!

Direct taxation is anathema to liberty. The most startling oxymoron is a leftist speaking of a supposed "right to privacy." There is NO infringement of privacy that equals the requirement of the 1040/

A pack of cigarettes in Chicago would go from 12 dollars a pack down to 3 dollars.

They are that much? Dayum... The black market must be hopping.

 

[daveman]

How about you stop being retards and we go back to what worked before?

Get rid of redundant bureaucracy, return to the pre-Carter marginal tax rates and close tax loopholes, stop subsidizing big business, and end capitalist free trade (eg: NAFTA, CAFTA) and return to the social democracy under which America once thrived.

And unicorns will once more roam the meadows.

You're right- conservatism is a fairy tale; there's no going back...

Yes. A system that rewards achievement and encourages personal responsibility is so passé.

 

[boedicca]

Quite frankly we should have a "consumption tax" system.

Tax everything but necessities at 20%.

States wont like that because their little sin-tax bullshit goes out the window on some products.

A pack of cigarettes in Chicago would go from 12 dollars a pack down to 3 dollars.

Bad idea. The definition of "necessity" is fungible and ripe for abuse by politicians and bureaucrats to reward cronies.

The tax sounds simple, but don't be fooled. Because both upper- and lower-income families pay the tax at an equal rate, the VAT is considered regressive; that is, it hits the poor harder than the better-off. So it is the practice in countries such as Britain to exempt food, which lower-income families spend a greater proportion of their income on. The technical term is "zero rating," meaning that exempt items are taxed at a "zero rate."

However, wait until the folks at the IRS get their hands on the regulations for the application of the new tax. They will undoubtedly turn to their more experienced British counterparts for guidance.

"Food of the kind used for human consumption," to a British bureaucrat, is something "the average person, knowing what it is and how it is used, would consider it to be food or drink; and it is fit for human consumption. . . . The term includes . . . products like flour, which, although not eaten by themselves, are generally recognized food ingredients . . . [but] would not usually include . . . dietary supplements, food additives and similar products, which, although edible, are not generally regarded as food."

And so, in the United Kingdom, according to the regulations of Her Majesty's Inland Revenue Service, crackers made from tapioca starch carry no tax; prawn crackers made from cereals do. Frozen yogurt that needs to be thawed before eating is zero rated, frozen yogurt bears the tax. Get it? If you don't, too bad—Her Majesty's tax collectors are not in the habit of offering an explanation for their regulations.

Food for animals creates other problems. If it is "suitable for all breeds" it is taxed, but if "it is held out for sale exclusively for working dogs" it is not, unless, of course, "it is biscuit or meal," in which case it is taxed.

So dog food for "sheepdog breeds" is taxed, but dog food for "working sheep dogs of any breed" is not; food for greyhounds is taxed, food for "racing greyhounds" is not. This may be the only tax in Britain that favors work over leisure.

Clothing also presents a problem for the British tax man. Two problems, actually.

First, what is clothing? Well, sailors' lifejackets are clothing because they "have the form and function of clothing," but "buoyancy aids" are not. Second, since children's clothing is zero-rated, what fits into that category?

Bras up to and including size 34B; body stockings that measure no more than 27½ inches shoulder to crotch; babies' shawls but not "mother-and-baby shawls intended to wrap around both mother and child." There's more, lots more, but you get the idea.

Irwin Stelzer: Small Bras and the Value-Added Tax - WSJ.com