Let’s Roll Back The Tax Cuts Instead

[Mikeoxenormous]

Well, not necessarily, you can increase the personal income marginal tax rate without causing a hiccup in the economy. At one point in time (1944 to 1963) it was above 90%.

Why dont you actually tax the poor instead of giving them income tax credits? Make the poor pay a little more and soon the debt would be going down. Of course dont pay the poor welare and soon everyone will either by working, thus putting taxes into the government and not taking out, or stealing from others, thus being shot and then again, no more taking out.

Notice the poor who are 20% of the population only pay 2% of the total income tax, while the top 1% of the population pays in 24%. Fuck the poor, they need to get off their asses and work for a living, oh yeah, this is Joe Biden's America.

 

[BackAgain]

Roll back? ?? Hell no. Let’s get rid of corporate income taxation altogether. Let’s make all taxation absolutely flat. If you make anything over a certain basic cost of living level, you pay the damn income taxes on all income after that. If it’s 5% or 10 or 15 percent. Doesn’t matter. That is your tax bill.

If a married couple with two kids, each earns $65,000.00 dollars, totaling $130,000.00 for the married filing my jointly family, they pay a total of $13,000.00 federal income tax at 10%. If their corporate CEO earns $13,000,000.00
He pays $1,300,000.00.

The whining libtards will cry that the CEO can far more easily afford $1.3 million than the married couple can afford $13 thousand. While it’s true that the CEO isn’t hurt as much by taxes, he at least pays a vastly larger sum to our treasury.

And nobody would need a tax advisor or an accountant to prepare their tax return statements, either. Nor would we need to be hiring an additional army of tax collectors.

 

[jbrownson0831]

Apparently math, charts, facts, and relevant information aren’t your strong points.

The redistribution already happened. Go get an adult, and get them to explain the graphs to you. Apparently even pictures isn’t enough for you.

The people that actually work for a living, and create anything of value want their money back.

skewey taling about taxes and people who actually work for a living....
two topics he knows nothing about!
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

 

[BackAgain]

Actually my example is off.

Roll back? ?? Hell no. Let’s get rid of corporate income taxation altogether. Let’s make all taxation absolutely flat. If you make anything over a certain basic cost of living level, you pay the damn income taxes on all income after that. If it’s 5% or 10 or 15 percent. Doesn’t matter. That is your tax bill.

If a married couple with two kids, each earns $65,000.00 dollars, totaling $130,000.00 for the married filing my jointly family, they pay a total of $13,000.00 federal income tax at 10%. If their corporate CEO earns $13,000,000.00
He pays $1,300,000.00.

The whining libtards will cry that the CEO can far more easily afford $1.3 million than the married couple can afford $13 thousand. While it’s true that the CEO isn’t hurt as much by taxes, he at least pays a vastly larger sum to our treasury.

And nobody would need a tax advisor or an accountant to prepare their tax return statements, either. Nor would we need to be hiring an additional army of tax collectors.

My example is off. I overlooked the deduction for the basic cost of living. But in practical terms, the analysis still holds.

 

[leftwinger]

Actually my example is off. Neglected the sole deduction for the

My example is off. I overlooked the deduction for the basic cost of living. But in practical terms, the analysis still holds.

I knew that. But even the STD DEDUCTION would not affect the $1.3M high earner by any big amount. If it was at $50K it would affect the $130K double income taxpayer.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Roll back? ?? Hell no. Let’s get rid of corporate income taxation altogether. Let’s make all taxation absolutely flat. If you make anything over a certain basic cost of living level, you pay the damn income taxes on all income after that. If it’s 5% or 10 or 15 percent. Doesn’t matter. That is your tax bill.

If a married couple with two kids, each earns $65,000.00 dollars, totaling $130,000.00 for the married filing my jointly family, they pay a total of $13,000.00 federal income tax at 10%. If their corporate CEO earns $13,000,000.00
He pays $1,300,000.00.

The whining libtards will cry that the CEO can far more easily afford $1.3 million than the married couple can afford $13 thousand. While it’s true that the CEO isn’t hurt as much by taxes, he at least pays a vastly larger sum to our treasury.

And nobody would need a tax advisor or an accountant to prepare their tax return statements, either. Nor would we need to be hiring an additional army of tax collectors.

Finally something we can agree on.

No more deductions for kids or houses or college or anything else.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

Finally something we can agree on.

No more deductions for kids or houses or college or anything else.

Must be a lonely life you live.

Do you know why they have deductions for kids? So people will have children that will keep this country going, but then you dont like this country and want to see it destroyed with all the illegal aliens and their anchor babies. What then for you? If the country is shit, do you move out, or just be a poor miserable wretch that has speak Hispanic press 2.

 

[BackAgain]

Finally something we can agree on.

No more deductions for kids or houses or college or anything else.

But in exchange, the government would have to adjust the formula for the basic cost of living so that homeowners get some deserved break for the monthly mortgage. (Renters could also benefit if the basic cost of living formula includes rent costs.)

Once that initial exception is firmly planted in the flat tax law, there could be no subsequent alterations to the formula. And further, if the government ever seeks to raise the flat rate (say from an across the board 10% to a new flat rate of 12%), it will have to be passed by a supermajority in both houses of Congress and must await two or more years before taking place.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Well, not necessarily, you can increase the personal income marginal tax rate without causing a hiccup in the economy. At one point in time (1944 to 1963) it was above 90%.

Well, not necessarily, you can increase the personal income marginal tax rate without causing a hiccup in the economy.

No hiccup if we raised rates to 90%?

 

[Mexicano]

Well, not necessarily, you can increase the personal income marginal tax rate without causing a hiccup in the economy.

No hiccup if we raised rates to 90%?

No.
It is not the regular tax rate, it is the marginal tax rate: the rate for all income above a threshold ( e.g the tax on all income above 10,000,000).
It didn't cause a problem then and it will not cause a problem in the future, most of that money goes into non-productive investments: stock options, crypto, derivatives, money markets.

 

[Mexicano]

Why dont you actually tax the poor instead of giving them income tax credits? Make the poor pay a little more and soon the debt would be going down. Of course dont pay the poor welare and soon everyone will either by working, thus putting taxes into the government and not taking out, or stealing from others, thus being shot and then again, no more taking out.

Notice the poor who are 20% of the population only pay 2% of the total income tax, while the top 1% of the population pays in 24%. Fuck the poor, they need to get off their asses and work for a living, oh yeah, this is Joe Biden's America.

Because, poor people are consumers (20% of the population). If you tax them, consumption goes down.
That doesn't happen with the top 1% because most of the extra money goes into financial assets which contribute 0% to production and consumption.
Some macroeconomics comes handy when making those harsh decisions.

 

[Mexicano]

Cutting government spending is the way to get out of a recession. Especially when you could cut 50% of the workforce(those are non essential anyway) this year, and cut another 50% next year, and you would be having surplus of taxes.....

No, not really ,
The amount of money circulating in an economy is given by the following formula
Money created in a period = ( government spending - taxes ) + interests on bonds + ( loans - loan payments ) )
So , if you cut spending you must also cut taxes in the same proportion and hope the private sector is able to cope with the layoffs.
Alas, many corporations are probably more interested in financial assets than increasing output.
If you cut spending before cutting taxes you end up in a recession.

 

[Mexicano]

They have never been able to "COLLECT" more than 20% * GDP no matter where that rate is that you mention. 100 yr chart shows that fact. Money moves, GDP drops? whatever.

Hardly surprising....

 

[leftwinger]

Mexifornia is not clear what posting about? Rich income earners? Athletes? Movie stars? CEOS? very complicated. CEOS get a smaller base salary and a truckload of stock generally. Until they sell the stock....they are not taxed. Then taxed at 12% Capital gains I believe? The others (Athletes & movie stars are not many making RICH levels). Like i said if you raise it 90%....these rich find a way around it or quit making income when they hit the threshold. Easy for them. "Money moves". They could move to Ireland for 4 yrs.

There is a group of Wealthy out there that no longer make income. They might day-trade? Buy sell companies. All covered by taxes. Most Really Rich don't draw weekly paychecks from McDonalds.

Each year FED govt is spending $2T (even $2T) into debt. Constantly growing as the INTEREST PAYMENT is now up to $600B annually. Find that much money to pull from the economy w/o doing damage. I'll wait. (psssttt....notice the DEMS were 100% in charge and they did not do it)

 

[leftwinger]

Hardly surprising....

"Hardly surprising..." nice dodge. Income taxes basically flat forever at 8%*GDP. Another (2% - 4%)*GDP from corporate taxes forever.
Where did the other 8%*GDP come from? SS? MEDICARE? OTHER TAXES? Something is short? your point?

Spending goes up. Now up to 25%*GDP.

Try as they may.....they just can't get revenue over 20%*GDP. Yet they have no problem over-spending by 5%?

This subject has been gone over pretty good for decades kid. No one can explain why.
Money moves, Rich vanish, They stop working, they quit investing.
Why do it if there is no return for them in the USA>?

 

[Mexicano]

Mexifornia is not clear what posting about? Rich income earners? Athletes? Movie stars? CEOS? very complicated. CEOS get a smaller base salary and a truckload of stock generally. Until they sell the stock....they are not taxed. Then taxed at 12% Capital gains I believe? The others (Athletes & movie stars are not many making RICH levels). Like i said if you raise it 90%....these rich find a way around it or quit making income when they hit the threshold. Easy for them. "Money moves". They could move to Ireland for 4 yrs.

There is a group of Wealthy out there that no longer make income. They might day-trade? Buy sell companies. All covered by taxes. Most Really Rich don't draw weekly paychecks from McDonalds.

Each year FED govt is spending $2T (even $2T) into debt. Constantly growing as the INTEREST PAYMENT is now up to $600B annually. Find that much money to pull from the economy w/o doing damage. I'll wait. (psssttt....notice the DEMS were 100% in charge and they did not do it)

Just in case you want my take on the tax issue:
Increase the marginal tax rate on personal income to 1960 levels; that way you get rid of a good portion of financial asset speculation.
Reduce the loopholes in corporate taxes so that actual taxes are closer to the 4% of the 60's.
They might find ways around it... that's the main task of lobbies. The above is the "nice" approach. I've heard more radical options: tax all the wealth above a threshold (e.g all wealth above 10 million with a 2% tax rate).
You don't need to run a balanced budget, you just have to pull out the money that goes into the FIRE sector because it is non-productive; in the best case scenario it causes a financial bubble , in the worse case it inflates land and housing prices.

By the by , you don't sound like a left-winger.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

No.
It is not the regular tax rate, it is the marginal tax rate: the rate for all income above a threshold ( e.g the tax on all income above 10,000,000).
It didn't cause a problem then and it will not cause a problem in the future, most of that money goes into non-productive investments: stock options, crypto, derivatives, money markets.

It doesnt cause a problem? Did you see what happened to France when they tried to do this? All the millionaires left the country. You must still be in 3rd grade to think that rich people will stay around to be punished.

 

[leftwinger]

Actually my example is off.

My example is off. I overlooked the deduction for the basic cost of living. But in practical terms, the analysis still holds.

what about the high earners with $1mil income....but given $25mil annual stock packages? I hate to label them grants? It is very confusing? Gates? COOK? do you tax them on todays value? Cannot. they have not sold it yet? Unrealized gain until they sell shares. Then only 12% Capital gains? perhaps? I don't know. I am asking.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

Just in case you want my take on the tax issue:
Increase the marginal tax rate on personal income to 1960 levels; that way you get rid of a good portion of financial asset speculation.
Reduce the loopholes in corporate taxes so that actual taxes are closer to the 4% of the 60's.
They might find ways around it... that's the main task of lobbies. The above is the "nice" approach. I've heard more radical options: tax all the wealth above a threshold (e.g all wealth above 10 million with a 2% tax rate).
You don't need to run a balanced budget, you just have to pull out the money that goes into the FIRE sector because it is non-productive; in the best case scenario it causes a financial bubble , in the worse case it inflates land and housing prices.

By the by , you don't sound like a left-winger.

You must be a welfare puke going to college on daddies dime.

 

[Orangecat]

Let’s Roll Back The Tax Cuts Instead​

Nah, let’s cut taxes more and cut spending to a greater degree.