The truth about taxes

[Ernie S.]

tax food stamps.

 

[syrenn]

The Times admits taxing the rich is not enough and calls for higher taxes for everyone.



http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/07/opinion/sunday/the-truth-about-taxes.html

flat tax for ALL! Rich. poor, corporation or what ever..... no exemptions, no loop holes.

I don't give a shit if you make $1 a year.... the government is going to take its cut.... what ever that % is.

Part of the problem is that 50% of the people in this country pay not one dime in federal tax... but its that same 50% that put their hand out for MORE.

Were you in favor or letting the Bush tax cuts expire? Funny because people love to rail against those who are in that 50% who "pay nothing" yet they were the strongest supporters of extending the tax cuts for them. Odd how that works.

I am in favor of everyone paying. Tax "cuts" does not mean not paying anything at all..... or tax exempt... just a bit less then what they pay.

I maintain.... flat tax... and the government can fuck everyone the same.

I am in favor of a fixing this country.... that means end of ALL tax cuts. So the evil rich don't get theirs... and the evil poor don't get theirs either. It also means cutting spending with no sacred cows, closing loop holes, and line item review of spending.

 

[American Horse]

The first thing that needs to be done ... For example tax breaks for companies to offshore jobs.

How do those tax breaks work USC? Please briefly describe the mechanism that creates the effect . . .

 

[imbalance]

The first thing that needs to be done is do away with loopholes that are contrary to US growth and stability.
For example tax breaks for companies to offshore jobs.

I'd be more in favor of implementing protectionist trade policies that make it more profitable to operate within the US than to export into the US. If you create jobs and expand the taxpayer base, you can reduce corporate taxes. The US is the world's greatest consumer, leverage that fact to force corporations to make an opportunity cost valuation and choose between the sales revenue generated via operating within the US or the reduction of operational expense overseas. There will be bidding wars for US commercial real estate.

 

[uscitizen]

The only person who said that is you.

You're full of shit.

Conservatives here at USMB won't state ONE sacrifice that the Rich should make among the sacrifices that need to be made to straighten out the fiscal mess.

The question has been asked in the past.

Why do you have such difficulty treating everyone equally? All people should pay the same percentage. Exempt the first 30k.

Why exempt the first 30k?
Tax all income equally. No deductions, etc.
Think of how much re could reduce the IRS headcount. smaller govt.

Filing would consist of verifying all your income was reported or reporting the extra income and paying the taxes on it.

 

[saveliberty]

Where is the logic in saying that because taxing the rich can't fix the entire problem, therefore the rich should be exempted from helping fix any part of the problem?

The only person who said that is you.

You're full of shit.

Conservatives here at USMB won't state ONE sacrifice that the Rich should make among the sacrifices that need to be made to straighten out the fiscal mess.

The question has been asked in the past.

Yet it stands that the article discusses tax increases for everyone as necessary to the goal. This included the rich. I have no problem with raising revenue as soon as ANY increase goes exclusively to pay off the debt and Congress is limited to spending within its annual revenues. Otherwise, it is just sending good money after bad.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

The Times admits taxing the rich is not enough and calls for higher taxes for everyone.

A week later and we are still amazed at how the Republicans in Congress pulled it off. They held the economy hostage, won some cheap political points, and all of us will spend the next decade paying the ransom as government programs — $900 billion over 10 years in the first round — are slashed and the recovery is put at risk. The only glimmer of hope is that the battle is not completely over — if President Obama is finally willing to fight.
Under the terms of the ill-conceived debt agreement, Congress has to propose another $1.5 trillion in deficit reduction measures by December. Just to ensure that rationality does not have a chance, Republican leaders said they would not put anyone on the deficit-cutting “super-committee” who might entertain the idea of raising taxes.
A week later and we are even more amazed by the failure of Mr. Obama and the Democratic leadership to stand up to this intransigence. If they do not start pushing back, with the same ferocity, the results will be disastrous.



LET THE BUSH CUTS EXPIRE
MAKE REAL REFORMS
TARGET TAX BREAKS AND LOWER RATES
OTHER TAXES

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/07/opinion/sunday/the-truth-about-taxes.html

So let's get this straight. You're now in favor of letting the Bush tax cuts expire?

I never opposed letting them expire, what I opposed was extending them for some people and cutting them off for others. Like I keep pointing out to people on the left, most of the so called cost of the tax cuts came from people who make less than $200,000.

 

[Full-Auto]

You're full of shit.

Conservatives here at USMB won't state ONE sacrifice that the Rich should make among the sacrifices that need to be made to straighten out the fiscal mess.

The question has been asked in the past.

Why do you have such difficulty treating everyone equally? All people should pay the same percentage. Exempt the first 30k.

Why exempt the first 30k?
Tax all income equally. No deductions, etc.
Think of how much re could reduce the IRS headcount. smaller govt.

Filing would consist of verifying all your income was reported or reporting the extra income and paying the taxes on it.

I have no difficulty helping the less fortunate. You could reduce the IRS numbers now as they concentrate on lower incomes anyway.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Where is the logic in saying that because taxing the rich can't fix the entire problem, therefore the rich should be exempted from helping fix any part of the problem?

The only person who said that is you.

It's called an inference, and I agree with his assesment. You and your kind want to tax those who net less than $30,000 a year, yet protect those who net $250,000 a year, and you call that a fair tax. Every bit of extra revenue, yes taxes, helps, but not if doing so puts the working poor on supplemental aid paid for by the states.

Me and my kind? I have never said anything like that, and you know it. I just keep pointing out the truth you do not like, that trying to run this country by going after the "rich" is not going to work. If you want a country that has a massive welfare system, universal health care, "free" education for everyone, and all the other things you think is necessary to make a perfect world, everyone is going to pay for it.

If you cannot accept that then you are as deluded as Breivik.

 

[Immanuel]

The Times admits taxing the rich is not enough and calls for higher taxes for everyone.

A week later and we are still amazed at how the Republicans in Congress pulled it off. They held the economy hostage, won some cheap political points, and all of us will spend the next decade paying the ransom as government programs — $900 billion over 10 years in the first round — are slashed and the recovery is put at risk. The only glimmer of hope is that the battle is not completely over — if President Obama is finally willing to fight.
Under the terms of the ill-conceived debt agreement, Congress has to propose another $1.5 trillion in deficit reduction measures by December. Just to ensure that rationality does not have a chance, Republican leaders said they would not put anyone on the deficit-cutting “super-committee” who might entertain the idea of raising taxes.
A week later and we are even more amazed by the failure of Mr. Obama and the Democratic leadership to stand up to this intransigence. If they do not start pushing back, with the same ferocity, the results will be disastrous.



LET THE BUSH CUTS EXPIRE
MAKE REAL REFORMS
TARGET TAX BREAKS AND LOWER RATES
OTHER TAXES

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/07/opinion/sunday/the-truth-about-taxes.html

Let'em all expire. Are we serious about fixing this problem? Or only to the extent that "someone else" pays for it?

Who do you mean when you say "we"?

If you are talking about the people then I would say for the most part we are serious. If you are talking about the people whom we put in power, I would have to laugh at anyone that actually thought either party gave a shit about the debt issue or the downgrade.

Immie

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Where is the logic in saying that because taxing the rich can't fix the entire problem, therefore the rich should be exempted from helping fix any part of the problem?

The only person who said that is you.

You're full of shit.

Conservatives here at USMB won't state ONE sacrifice that the Rich should make among the sacrifices that need to be made to straighten out the fiscal mess.

The question has been asked in the past.

Give me links to every place anyone has said anything like that.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

The only person who said that is you.

It's called an inference, and I agree with his assesment. You and your kind want to tax those who net less than $30,000 a year, yet protect those who net $250,000 a year, and you call that a fair tax. Every bit of extra revenue, yes taxes, helps, but not if doing so puts the working poor on supplemental aid paid for by the states.

He's denying that anyone here has ever said that taxing the rich is not the answer because even if you took all their money it wouldn't balance the budget.

That has only been said here, in various ways, about a zillion times.

No, I am denying that anyone said that, since taxing the rich will not fix the problem, they should not pay any taxes at all.

 

[whitehall]

The Times admits taxing the rich is not enough and calls for higher taxes for everyone.

A week later and we are still amazed at how the Republicans in Congress pulled it off. They held the economy hostage, won some cheap political points, and all of us will spend the next decade paying the ransom as government programs — $900 billion over 10 years in the first round — are slashed and the recovery is put at risk. The only glimmer of hope is that the battle is not completely over — if President Obama is finally willing to fight.
Under the terms of the ill-conceived debt agreement, Congress has to propose another $1.5 trillion in deficit reduction measures by December. Just to ensure that rationality does not have a chance, Republican leaders said they would not put anyone on the deficit-cutting “super-committee” who might entertain the idea of raising taxes.
A week later and we are even more amazed by the failure of Mr. Obama and the Democratic leadership to stand up to this intransigence. If they do not start pushing back, with the same ferocity, the results will be disastrous.



LET THE BUSH CUTS EXPIRE
MAKE REAL REFORMS
TARGET TAX BREAKS AND LOWER RATES
OTHER TAXES

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/07/opinion/sunday/the-truth-about-taxes.html

My God, you people are so dense you couldn't survive in the real world. If you don't recognize that republicans forced Barry to come to grips with spending you might as well surf with the sharks.

 

[Cuyo]

The Times admits taxing the rich is not enough and calls for higher taxes for everyone.



http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/07/opinion/sunday/the-truth-about-taxes.html

Let'em all expire. Are we serious about fixing this problem? Or only to the extent that "someone else" pays for it?

Who do you mean when you say "we"?

If you are talking about the people then I would say for the most part we are serious. If you are talking about the people whom we put in power, I would have to laugh at anyone that actually thought either party gave a shit about the debt issue or the downgrade.

Immie

IMO any politician is terrified to propose tax increases, no matter how drastically and obviously necessary they are. In today's climate they'd be run out of town with torches and pitchforks.

 

[auditor0007]

The only person who said that is you.

You're full of shit.

Conservatives here at USMB won't state ONE sacrifice that the Rich should make among the sacrifices that need to be made to straighten out the fiscal mess.

The question has been asked in the past.

Why do you have such difficulty treating everyone equally? All people should pay the same percentage. Exempt the first 30k.

I would have no problem with that at all. But what we see here on USMB are a lot of people who want a flat tax with zero deductions, because otherwise it is not fair in their eyes.

 

[auditor0007]

The Times admits taxing the rich is not enough and calls for higher taxes for everyone.

A week later and we are still amazed at how the Republicans in Congress pulled it off. They held the economy hostage, won some cheap political points, and all of us will spend the next decade paying the ransom as government programs — $900 billion over 10 years in the first round — are slashed and the recovery is put at risk. The only glimmer of hope is that the battle is not completely over — if President Obama is finally willing to fight.
Under the terms of the ill-conceived debt agreement, Congress has to propose another $1.5 trillion in deficit reduction measures by December. Just to ensure that rationality does not have a chance, Republican leaders said they would not put anyone on the deficit-cutting “super-committee” who might entertain the idea of raising taxes.
A week later and we are even more amazed by the failure of Mr. Obama and the Democratic leadership to stand up to this intransigence. If they do not start pushing back, with the same ferocity, the results will be disastrous.



LET THE BUSH CUTS EXPIRE
MAKE REAL REFORMS
TARGET TAX BREAKS AND LOWER RATES
OTHER TAXES

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/07/opinion/sunday/the-truth-about-taxes.html

My God, you people are so dense you couldn't survive in the real world. If you don't recognize that republicans forced Barry to come to grips with spending you might as well surf with the sharks.

Barry proposed more in cuts than the Republicans wanted because it involved a small amount of tax increases.

 

[8537]

I'd be more in favor of implementing protectionist trade policies that make it more profitable to operate within the US than to export into the US. If you create jobs and expand the taxpayer base, you can reduce corporate taxes. The US is the world's greatest consumer, leverage that fact to force corporations to make an opportunity cost valuation and choose between the sales revenue generated via operating within the US or the reduction of operational expense overseas. There will be bidding wars for US commercial real estate.

I'd be more in favor of implementing protectionist trade policies that make it more profitable to operate within the Eurozone than to export into the Eurozone. If you create jobs and expand the taxpayer base, you can reduce corporate taxes. The Eurozone is the world's 2nd greatest consumer, leverage that fact to force corporations to make an opportunity cost valuation and choose between the sales revenue generated via operating within the Eurozone or the reduction of operational expense overseas. There will be bidding wars for Eurozone commercial real estate.

I'd be more in favor of implementing protectionist trade policies that make it more profitable to operate within the China than to export into the China. If you create jobs and expand the taxpayer base, you can reduce corporate taxes. China is soon to be the world's greatest consumer, leverage that fact to force corporations to make an opportunity cost valuation and choose between the sales revenue generated via operating within the China or the reduction of operational expense overseas. There will be bidding wars for Chinese commercial real estate.

I'd be more in favor of implementing protectionist trade policies that make it more profitable to operate within the Brazil than to export into the Brazil. If you create jobs and expand the taxpayer base, you can reduce corporate taxes. Brazil is one of the world's greatest consumers, leverage that fact to force corporations to make an opportunity cost valuation and choose between the sales revenue generated via operating within Brazil or the reduction of operational expense overseas. There will be bidding wars for Brazilian commercial real estate.

What could possibly go wrong!

 

[Steelplate]

The Times admits taxing the rich is not enough and calls for higher taxes for everyone.

A week later and we are still amazed at how the Republicans in Congress pulled it off. They held the economy hostage, won some cheap political points, and all of us will spend the next decade paying the ransom as government programs — $900 billion over 10 years in the first round — are slashed and the recovery is put at risk. The only glimmer of hope is that the battle is not completely over — if President Obama is finally willing to fight.
Under the terms of the ill-conceived debt agreement, Congress has to propose another $1.5 trillion in deficit reduction measures by December. Just to ensure that rationality does not have a chance, Republican leaders said they would not put anyone on the deficit-cutting “super-committee” who might entertain the idea of raising taxes.
A week later and we are even more amazed by the failure of Mr. Obama and the Democratic leadership to stand up to this intransigence. If they do not start pushing back, with the same ferocity, the results will be disastrous.



LET THE BUSH CUTS EXPIRE
MAKE REAL REFORMS
TARGET TAX BREAKS AND LOWER RATES
OTHER TAXES

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/07/opinion/sunday/the-truth-about-taxes.html

flat tax for ALL! Rich. poor, corporation or what ever..... no exemptions, no loop holes.

I don't give a shit if you make $1 a year.... the government is going to take its cut.... what ever that % is.

Part of the problem is that 50% of the people in this country pay not one dime in federal tax... but its that same 50% that put their hand out for MORE.

Other than Fuel taxes, FICA, Medicare, Tobacco, Alcohol, and probably a dozen more that I can't think of.

 

[Immanuel]

Let'em all expire. Are we serious about fixing this problem? Or only to the extent that "someone else" pays for it?

Who do you mean when you say "we"?

If you are talking about the people then I would say for the most part we are serious. If you are talking about the people whom we put in power, I would have to laugh at anyone that actually thought either party gave a shit about the debt issue or the downgrade.

Immie

IMO any politician is terrified to propose tax increases, no matter how drastically and obviously necessary they are. In today's climate they'd be run out of town with torches and pitchforks.

Sorry I am not catching your drift. Do you mean tax increases on the rich or tax increases on everyone else? In some ways I agree that they are terrified of announcing increases on the rich. I am not so certain that holds true for the rest of us.

Unfortunately, the same remains true for proposing spending cuts. The general areas where spending cuts have even been discussed are entitlements and defense. Now you are not going to believe this but I, as a conservative, agree that there should be cuts in the defense budget. I simply don't understand why the Republican morons in Congress won't even discuss such cuts. It's not like there are any real threats of a military invasion against us. I haven't looked this up but if I remember correctly we already spend a considerable amount more than the rest of the world combined. There is room to cut in the defense.

I also believe that entitlements should be looked at and cut. I think we give away way too much money to individuals, corporations, unions, and foreign governments. In times when our economy is healthy, I don't have so much of a problem with the giveaways but we are not healthy today and we should not be giving wealth away. We are a rich enough nation that we should not be allowing our poor to go hungry and without shelter. We should not be giving $4 billion to the oil industry etc. etc. etc.

Note: in both of those paragraphs the word "cut" does not mean elimination. I think many of our programs need to be modified and improved. But cutting does not mean eliminating in its entirety.

And this may be another shocker to you all. As a conservative, I do not oppose tax increases either on the rich or on the rest of us. I see no reason why people who have money should not pay a higher percentage of their wealth to help out this country. What I can't stand is the progressive attitude of vilifying the rich! Honestly, there is little that pisses me off about the progressive movement more than that. I don't blame the rich for my problems and I sure as hell don't blame them for the success or luck that has put them into their situation. I made my choices and I am where I am today because of those choices. It has nothing to do with the fact that Bill Gates succeeded in life.

That being said, I think our current tax code is a piece of shit. I think the Fair Tax would be a hundred times better than what we have now if for no other reason than it would simplify all of our lives. If the fair tax doesn't satisfy the rest of the country and they can show me that it would truly as they say be detrimental to the poor (which I completely disagree with) and the Fair Tax proposal could not be modified to satisfy everyone then I think a flat tax system would be ten times better than what we have today.

Our current tax code does one thing... it encourage the unscrupulous to cheat! Come to think of it, that is why I think so many defend it.

I think two things need to be done to save our economy. 1) we need to become fiscally responsible meaning increase revenue and decrease spending to a point where we can actually reduce the debt (meaning a surplus for the time being) and that will require some damned tough decisions and compromises on both sides of the political spectrum and 2) we need to make America corporate friendly again.

Those two things sound contradictory. How can you make America corporate friendly and increase taxes on them at the same time? I don't believe taxes are the major reason employers are fleeing this country in droves. They are leaving because of the political climate and an environment that is hellbent on strangling them with more and more regulations. Face it. The Obama administration has given an appearance of being anti-business. Whether they are or not, it is the way they come off with their favoritism towards their buddies in the unions.

If we want to save this country we... the unemployed (and I am one of those) need jobs. Politics (and I am not only blaming Democrats) needs to start working on ways to bring those jobs back.

Note: reducing regulations does not mean eliminating them in their entirety. We can all live with reasonableness. What we have today is not reasonable.

This post ended up being a hell of a lot longer than I intended!

Immie

 

[Sactowndog]

Part of the problem is that 50% of the people in this country pay not one dime in federal tax... but its that same 50% that put their hand out for MORE.
[/COLOR]

This isn't quite true. Your number applies to income tax but payroll taxes are a very different story and are very high relative to historical levels.