A challenge for the "Tax the rich more" crowd.

[Nostra]

Since I have thoroughly answered your question, please answer mine: If not tax increases, what is your solution to our crushing federal debt.

Even though you didn’t answer, I will answer yours.

Only allow the Feds to spend money on the very few things specifically allowed in the Constitution.

 

[LoveKimWexler]

Long winded non-answer.

You only say that because you have no intelligent response to my answers.

You misunderstand the purpose of starting a thread.

 

[Nostra]

You only say that because you have no intelligent response to my answers.

You misunderstand the purpose of starting a thread.

‘More” isn’t an answer, moron.

 

[LoveKimWexler]

Even though you didn’t answer, I will answer yours.

Only allow the Feds to spend money on the very few things specifically allowed in the Constitution.

Great idea in theory. But no politician in Washington has the balls to suggest that, much less author an actual spending bill like that and take the heat for the cuts.. The wealthy would be the first ones to make sure that policy can never be implemented and to get rid of the Kamakaze lawmakers who suggest it. Since the rich won't allow spending cuts, they can pay more of the freight for the extra-constitutional spending.

 

[Nostra]

You only say that because you have no intelligent response to my answers.

You misunderstand the purpose of starting a thread.

I asked for numbers, not “more”.


How much? Give is some numbers:

The top 1% should pay _____% of the total income taxes.

The top 10% should pay _____% of the total income taxes.

The top 50 should pay _____% of the total income taxes.

 

[Nostra]

Great idea in theory. But no politician in Washington has the balls to suggest that, much less author and actual spending bill like that and take the heat for the cuts.. The wealthy would be the first ones to make sure that policy can never be implemented and to get rid of the Kamakaze lawmakers who suggest it. Since the rich won't allow spending cuts, they can pay more of the freight for the extra-constitutional spending.

You didn’t ask for something the idiots in DC would approve of, Short Bus.

You asked how I would do it.

 

[LoveKimWexler]

‘More” isn’t an answer, moron.

Name calling.

Cute.

Are you in third grade or did they finally promote you to 4th.

How does your plan of never raising taxes on the wealthy pay down the debt?

 

[Nostra]

Name calling.

Cute.

Are you in third grade or did they finally promote you to 4th.

How does your plan of never raising taxes on the wealthy pay down the debt?

I already explained how I would pay down the debt.

Still waiting on your answer, Simp.

 

[LoveKimWexler]

I already explained how I would pay down the debt.

Still waiting on your answer, Simp.

I missed it then.

Oh, well if isn't any more intelligent than the rest of your posts, I didn't miss much.

 

[Nostra]

I missed it then.

Oh, well if isn't any more intelligent than the rest of your posts, I didn't miss much.

You miss a lot, Short Bus.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Just reverse the Trump, Bush and Reagan tax cuts. Problem solved.

Clinton and the Dems controlled the House and Senate after he was elected, why didn't he?
Obama and the Dems controlled the House and Senate after he was elected, why didn't he?
Biden and the Dems controlled the House and Senate after he was elected, why didn't he?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

This is wrong in spades. You need to reverse the Republican tax cuts for the wealthy, starting with the Reagan tax cuts which destabilized the markets leading to the 1987 stock market crash.

Then the Bush 43 tax cuts which helped destabilize the markets leading to the 2008 economic crash.

Last but not least, reverse both of the Trump tax cuts which are doubling your deficit.

Add up all of the tax cuts passed by Republican Presidents, and their effect on the deficit and your national debt will be non-existent.

Problem solved, without cutting a dime in spending.

This is wrong in spades. You need to reverse the Republican tax cuts for the wealthy, starting with the Reagan tax cuts which destabilized the markets leading to the 1987 stock market crash.

The Dow was about 950 when Reagan took office.
After the 1987 crash it dropped to 1738.
When Reagan left office, it was about 2235.

Is that your evidence his across-the-board tax cuts were bad?

 

[struth]

The facts show revenue goes up after every major income tax cut, and morons like Dragonlady can't figure out how deficits keep going up.

People like Dragonlady don’t care

They live of the tits of people that work

 

[LoveKimWexler]

There is no hard and fast answer to the OP's question. It's a gotcha because he is hoping to challenge anyone who takes it seriously by grilling them as to why that this number instead of that number. He will never - ever - offer his own number to defend it and certainly will never offer meaningful spending cuts across the board.

My answer is this: The top 10% should pay all of the needed* federal income tax, with some sliding scale that causes someone in the 92nd percentile to pay a little more than someone in the 91th percentile and so on, until the top 1% pay more than all those making less. The reason for that should be patently obvious. To spread the "pain" (so painful being a billionaire!) it could be expanded to the top 20%, but no more than 25% should be paying.

Since I know some people don't see the obvious, the reasons to have the top incomes pay the taxes are that first and foremost they can afford it, that they benefit the most by far from government and that they have the power of political donations so if they think their taxes are too high, they can lobby for an actual reduction in the budget so they pay less.

 

[Nostra]

There is no hard and fast answer to the OP's question. It's a gotcha because he is hoping to challenge anyone who takes it seriously by grilling them as to why that this number instead of that number. He will never - ever - offer his own number to defend it and certainly will never offer meaningful spending cuts across the board.

My answer is this: The top 10% should pay all of the needed* federal income tax, with some sliding scale that causes someone in the 92nd percentile to pay a little more than someone in the 91th percentile and so on, until the top 1% pay more than all those making less. The reason for that should be patently obvious. To spread the "pain" (so painful being a billionaire!) it could be expanded to the top 20%, but no more than 25% should be paying.

Since I know some people don't see the obvious, the reasons to have the top incomes pay the taxes are that first and foremost they can afford it, that they benefit the most by far from government and that they have the power of political donations so if they think their taxes are too high, they can lobby for an actual reduction in the budget so they pay less.

So just tax those making $187k +

Doesn't sound like your plan just hits the millionaires and billionaires.

My number: The same % of your income for everyone. No deductions. Seems fair to me. I've seen estimates anywhere from 15%-25%. Whatever it is, everyone should have some skin in the game. In your scenario the 90% will continue to vote for more and more of the 10% money until there is none left.

 

[Nostra]

There is no hard and fast answer to the OP's question. It's a gotcha because he is hoping to challenge anyone who takes it seriously by grilling them as to why that this number instead of that number. He will never - ever - offer his own number to defend it and certainly will never offer meaningful spending cuts across the board.

My answer is this: The top 10% should pay all of the needed* federal income tax, with some sliding scale that causes someone in the 92nd percentile to pay a little more than someone in the 91th percentile and so on, until the top 1% pay more than all those making less. The reason for that should be patently obvious. To spread the "pain" (so painful being a billionaire!) it could be expanded to the top 20%, but no more than 25% should be paying.

Since I know some people don't see the obvious, the reasons to have the top incomes pay the taxes are that first and foremost they can afford it, that they benefit the most by far from government and that they have the power of political donations so if they think their taxes are too high, they can lobby for an actual reduction in the budget so they pay less.

If the rich can lobby to get lower taxes explain why the top 10% pays 70% of the income taxes while the bottom 50% pay almost 3.3%. They must suck at it.

 

[Concerned American]

There is no hard and fast answer to the OP's question. It's a gotcha because he is hoping to challenge anyone who takes it seriously by grilling them as to why that this number instead of that number. He will never - ever - offer his own number to defend it and certainly will never offer meaningful spending cuts across the board.

My answer is this: The top 10% should pay all of the needed* federal income tax, with some sliding scale that causes someone in the 92nd percentile to pay a little more than someone in the 91th percentile and so on, until the top 1% pay more than all those making less. The reason for that should be patently obvious. To spread the "pain" (so painful being a billionaire!) it could be expanded to the top 20%, but no more than 25% should be paying.

Since I know some people don't see the obvious, the reasons to have the top incomes pay the taxes are that first and foremost they can afford it, that they benefit the most by far from government and that they have the power of political donations so if they think their taxes are too high, they can lobby for an actual reduction in the budget so they pay less.

Sure that's a way to penalize success while promoting parasites. SMH.

 

[LoveKimWexler]

So just tax those making $187k +

Doesn't sound like your plan just hits the millionaires and billionaires.

Did I say that it would? The 10% was your number. Pick the percent that would hit only millionaires and billionaires, if that is your premise.

My number: The same % of your income for everyone. No deductions. Seems fair to me. I've seen estimates anywhere from 15%-25%.

You seriously think that paying 20% of income means the same to a single parent (say a widow of a sailor who died fighting Iran) waitress who makes $30K per year as it does to a CEO making $3M per year?

Whatever it is, everyone should have some skin in the game.

To take your "skin" analogy, 20% for a waitress making 30K would mean six thousand dollars, leaving her with $24K. That's skin, muscle and bone for a woman trying to feed and educate children by herself. 20% for a millionaire making 3M is six hundred thousand dollars, leaving him with $2.4 Million. He'll get by much easier on that, even if he has three or for ex wives, each younger than the previous.

In your scenario the 90% will continue to vote for more and more of the 10% money until there is none left.

If the 90% have that kind of power, they could have already voted that only the ten percent pay taxes. As far as increasing the amount that 10% pays, that is a size of government question, not a how to distribute the tax burden question. As I said, no Republicans have the political will and the political clout to reduce the growth in government, much less the size of existing government.

 

[Bad Bob]

All we hear from Democrats regarding the debt is TAX THE EVIL RICH MORE.

They never say what is "rich", and how much of the total tax bill the evil "rich" need to pay for their utopia.

Here is your chance to provide some specifics.


How much? Give is some numbers:

The top 1% should pay _____% of the total income taxes.

The top 10% should pay _____% of the total income taxes.

The top 50 should pay _____% of the total income taxes.

https://www.usdebtclock.org/

Democrats have been screaming "Tax the Rich" ever since Reagan proclaimed the "Trickle Down" theory.

How's that working out? Is it raining rain or piss?

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

All we hear from Democrats regarding the debt is TAX THE EVIL RICH MORE.

They never say what is "rich", and how much of the total tax bill the evil "rich" need to pay for their utopia.

Here is your chance to provide some specifics.


How much? Give is some numbers:

The top 1% should pay _____% of the total income taxes.

The top 10% should pay _____% of the total income taxes.

The top 50 should pay _____% of the total income taxes.

https://www.usdebtclock.org/

You want libs to do math? Wow