What Ought the Progressive Individual Taxes Be?

Discussion in 'Economy' started by CentristFiasco, Oct 4, 2011.

  1. CentristFiasco
    Offline

    CentristFiasco Member

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2011
    Messages:
    240
    Thanks Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Ratings:
    +16
    Hey Fellow Man:

    I've been pondering on this for a while and have decided to go through a decent tax policy in terms of progressive taxes for individuals and what I figured out that our current policy for the last twenty years is so half-assed and plain ole' illogical. Have you guys felt this too? You know as an up and coming politician I've decided to create my own tax policy on the likes of progressive taxes for individuals. Take a Look at My Proposal: Progressive Change: A Federalist's Approach on Progressive Taxes. Anyway, I would like to continue this conversation with you guys and hopefully you'll take a read when you have the time.

    Petitions in the Process:

    On Change.org: Support the Balance of Progressive Taxes for Prosperity!
    On the White House's "We the People: Balance the Progressive Income Taxes for Prosperity
     
    Last edited: Oct 5, 2011
  2. Wiseacre
    Offline

    Wiseacre Retired USAF Chief Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2011
    Messages:
    6,025
    Thanks Received:
    1,192
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    San Antonio, TX
    Ratings:
    +1,194
    I took the time. Let me ask you a honest question: do you really think a rich person will pay taxes at those rates? Cuz I don't think so, I would say you'd have the following outcomes:

    1. Rich people would make huge donations to tax free foundations, municipal bonds, and any other tax shelters, instead of investing that money in new businesses that are main driver for creating jobs. Result: at best more of what we got now, skating along on the cusp of another recession. I think it'd be more likely that a new tax policy such as you outline would be enough to crater our economy.

    2. Or maybe they invest overseas, creaing new businesses and jobs somewhere else and keep the profits over there to avoid your high taxes. Same result. Some of 'em even sell out, pack up, and leave the US altogether. You sure as hell aren't going to attract foreign investors to come here, I can tell you that.

    3. Some rich people would defer compensation to the future when your tax rates are reduced by a super majority on both houses of Congress and a republican president. Which would be as soon as the next election, and the democratic party would be set back for a generation.


    Many liberals think fondly back to the days in the 1950s when the marginal tax rate was 91% and dream about returning to those wonderful days of abundant revenue. Think of all that extra money we could spend! Only one problem - total federal revenue during those years hovered between 18% and 20% of GDP, and the lib/dems want to spend closer to 25%. So, you raise the rates but guess what, you ain't going to get the extra money you think you are. The rich people just ain't going to pay it, they'll hide it, put it overseas, or whatever.
     
  3. bripat9643
    Offline

    bripat9643 Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2011
    Messages:
    67,949
    Thanks Received:
    8,101
    Trophy Points:
    2,030
    Ratings:
    +27,472
    You must be joking.
     
  4. bripat9643
    Offline

    bripat9643 Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2011
    Messages:
    67,949
    Thanks Received:
    8,101
    Trophy Points:
    2,030
    Ratings:
    +27,472

    Many people who have amassed their fortunes and no longer need to work would simply move overseas and take their money with them.
     
  5. editec
    Offline

    editec Mr. Forgot-it-All

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    41,427
    Thanks Received:
    5,598
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Maine
    Ratings:
    +5,618
    Apparently like you I believe that we have too few tax brackets.

    I won't argue with your proposed rates since neither of us has crunched the numbers to see how much money either of our proposals would generate.

    But I can agree with you in principle that we need to rethink the tax rates.

    I do think, however, that imposing any taxes on folks making $10K is a mistake.

    I understand, I suspect, WHY you propose to do that, and am somewhat sympathetic, too.

    But nobody can really live on $10K in this nation. Taxing the destitute just doesn't seem like a good idea.

    And I am not sure that we'd need a 48% top bracket, either.

    We're really need to crunch the numbers to see what rates we'd need to pay the bills.

    What we'd need is a proforma spread sheet where we could plug in the real reported incomes to see if your system would generate enough dough.
     
  6. editec
    Offline

    editec Mr. Forgot-it-All

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    41,427
    Thanks Received:
    5,598
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Maine
    Ratings:
    +5,618
    Some would do that, I do not doubt.

    But the stupendously wealthy really wouldn't be able to divest all their US holdings to completely evade US taxation.

    They could move offshore, they could become citizens of some tax shelter, too.

    But the US based investments that they couldn't turn into foreign investments would still be taxed.

    Atlas isn't quite ready to entirely shrug off the USA.
     
  7. CentristFiasco
    Offline

    CentristFiasco Member

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2011
    Messages:
    240
    Thanks Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Ratings:
    +16
    I agree with your statements and to be honest with you I have calculated how much revenue would bring; it's a must to tax those who make 10,000 USD but at much lower rate which is what I proposed at 4%. I've did the math countless times and mirrored the tax brackets we've had in the past but balanced them. I hope that you sign the petition anyway because they don't necessary have to take my specific tax proposal but just take my words, the words of the People about balancing our progressive taxes into account.
     
  8. Wiseacre
    Offline

    Wiseacre Retired USAF Chief Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2011
    Messages:
    6,025
    Thanks Received:
    1,192
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    San Antonio, TX
    Ratings:
    +1,194

    True, sort of. I suspect the uberrich have already divested themselves of much of their US holdings when Obama got elected, I know I would have. I suspect these guys would've moved a big pile of their money into long term investments that you don't pay tax on until your realize the capital gains. Or, as I said they invested overseas in foreign companies.

    Could they completely evade the higher tax rate? Probably not, but the gov't is not going to get nearly as much extra revenue as they think, nowhere near as much as they would if they left the current rates as is and made other changes to improve the business climate here. Lib/dems want a bigger slice of the same pie; I want the same size slice out of a bigger pie.
     
  9. PLYMCO_PILGRIM
    Offline

    PLYMCO_PILGRIM Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2009
    Messages:
    17,416
    Thanks Received:
    2,855
    Trophy Points:
    183
    Location:
    America's Home Town
    Ratings:
    +2,863
    I was looking at the chart....i think they are all too high.

    The most should be 50% at the very top, thats half of what people EARN.

    Those making under 50k should have their rate under 10% but over 5%. Maybe cut back accodingly on all the brackets in-between to fit into my two end brackets and, even though its not uniform like the constitution's language says taxes ought to be, I could support it.
     
  10. CentristFiasco
    Offline

    CentristFiasco Member

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2011
    Messages:
    240
    Thanks Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Ratings:
    +16
    Example:

    Let's Say You're Single without Children Dependent on You.

    You Make $174,000 a Year Because You're a Congressman.

    The Common Calculations that the IRS Uses is This:

    $174,000 times 44% = $76,560 (This is How Much the Federal Government Gets)
    $76,560 - $174,000 = $97,440(This is How Much You'll Have Left)

    Now, how many members in the House and the Senate? 435.

    $76,560 times 435 = $33,303,600
     
    Last edited: Oct 5, 2011

Share This Page