Should The Rich Be Required To Pay Higher Taxes In the US?

[thereisnospoon]

How much do the rich pay in actual, personal income taxes?

That depends on their income for that year. A wealthy business owner, for example, could have a bad year in which he paid himself a very small or no salary at all, and thus would pay very little. If I made 10 mil one year and 100K the next, I would pay vastly different tax amounts, but would still be rich.

"but would still be rich"...
When I see stuff like this ^....My red flag goes to the top of the pole.
Such phrases are used as a means to paint a negative connotation on wealth.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Worked before

One thing we do know is that Supply Side Economics has been a failure

Supply side was not invented in the 1980's . From the days when the settlers traded with the Indians, that was supply side.
All those little frontier towns were examples of supply side working the best for the most.
And it continues today...
For example. Downtown Tampa.
The city proposes a site to build an entertainment and sports complex. This area was blighted and needed improvement.
Once the plans were publicized guess what happened. Land near the site became a hot commodity. People started buying the land. They built businesses and housing.
A friend of a friend bought this old run down sport bar. He took his own money and that of investors and borrowed from banks. He turned this place into a successful sports bar. Before and after every event held at the complex, his place is packed.
The loans were paid, the investors made a profit. Over 100 people are employed at the place. Not only that, there are dozens of newer businesses in the area as a direct result of the private investors who had a stake in the Complex.
So lots of new jobs were created. A once blighted area of the city is not a viable business and entertainment area. Once crime ridden and filthy. this is an area known for safety and security as well as prosperity.
So, you tell me, where's the problem with supply side?

 

[thereisnospoon]

Due to the enormous corruption and cronyism in our federal government, many wealthy use their expensive lawyers to get out of paying taxes. The current tax code is 70k pages...time for a change.

Let's go to a simple flat tax. That would eliminate the political class' efforts to enrich their donors/owners.

We could go to a simple progressive tax that would be fairer.

"Fairer"?....define "fairer"..BTW ...No such word. it is "more fair"..
Why should; anything be "fair"?.....It would be more accurate to say "just"....
In any event, I see no viable reason to tax someone more just because they earn more.
Let everyone pay the same percentage. The numbers still work out.
Lets say 10%.. If one earns the national median income of 45k, their tax would be $4,500....If another earns $200,000( 444% more), their tax is $20,000....That's 444% more....I'm struggling to see a problem there

 

[thereisnospoon]

Due to the enormous corruption and cronyism in our federal government, many wealthy use their expensive lawyers to get out of paying taxes. The current tax code is 70k pages...time for a change.

Let's go to a simple flat tax. That would eliminate the political class' efforts to enrich their donors/owners.

We could go to a simple progressive tax that would be fairer.

That would be?

Several rates instead of one, but all the complexity that the flat tax removes gets taken out as well.

I should say though that I don't agree with having an oversimplified tax plan. There should always be some room for one to reduce one's taxes by various worthwhile means.

"worthwhile"....Yeah, here we go....That requires a judgment of a subjective term. "Worthwhile"...Now we must deal with the opinions of many people who have their own perception of "worthwhile"....
Your idea just opens the same can of worms.
The best way is remove all the variables. Break it down to "you earned THIS..Therefore you PAY THIS"....

 

[hadit]

How much do the rich pay in actual, personal income taxes?

That depends on their income for that year. A wealthy business owner, for example, could have a bad year in which he paid himself a very small or no salary at all, and thus would pay very little. If I made 10 mil one year and 100K the next, I would pay vastly different tax amounts, but would still be rich.

"but would still be rich"...
When I see stuff like this ^....My red flag goes to the top of the pole.
Such phrases are used as a means to paint a negative connotation on wealth.

Just pointing out that "how much do the rich pay in actual, personal income taxes?" is a meaningless question.

 

[Dragonlady]

Should The Rich Be Required To Pay Higher Taxes In the US?

I think the rich should ABSOLUTELY pay more

Just how much more would you have rich people pay? Wealthy people already pay over half the total personal federal income taxes collected.

That's because they have now impoverished over half of the people to the point that they pay no taxes. Once they completely wipe out the middle class, they'll pay 100% of the taxes paid because no one else has any money. That still doesn't mean they're paying enough of their income in taxes.

 

[hadit]

Worked before

One thing we do know is that Supply Side Economics has been a failure

Supply side was not invented in the 1980's . From the days when the settlers traded with the Indians, that was supply side.
All those little frontier towns were examples of supply side working the best for the most.
And it continues today...
For example. Downtown Tampa.
The city proposes a site to build an entertainment and sports complex. This area was blighted and needed improvement.
Once the plans were publicized guess what happened. Land near the site became a hot commodity. People started buying the land. They built businesses and housing.
A friend of a friend bought this old run down sport bar. He took his own money and that of investors and borrowed from banks. He turned this place into a successful sports bar. Before and after every event held at the complex, his place is packed.
The loans were paid, the investors made a profit. Over 100 people are employed at the place. Not only that, there are dozens of newer businesses in the area as a direct result of the private investors who had a stake in the Complex.
So lots of new jobs were created. A once blighted area of the city is not a viable business and entertainment area. Once crime ridden and filthy. this is an area known for safety and security as well as prosperity.
So, you tell me, where's the problem with supply side?

"Supply side" is just incentivizing the wealthy to use their wealth instead of locking it away. It's a much superior method of getting the money moving around and benefitting everyone than the "liberal" approach, which is to demonize the wealthy and attempt to confiscate it.

 

[hadit]

Should The Rich Be Required To Pay Higher Taxes In the US?

I think the rich should ABSOLUTELY pay more

Just how much more would you have rich people pay? Wealthy people already pay over half the total personal federal income taxes collected.

That's because they have now impoverished over half of the people to the point that they pay no taxes. Once they completely wipe out the middle class, they'll pay 100% of the taxes paid because no one else has any money. That still doesn't mean they're paying enough of their income in taxes.

And how did the wealthy accomplish this feat of impoverishing so many?

 

[thereisnospoon]

Due to the enormous corruption and cronyism in our federal government, many wealthy use their expensive lawyers to get out of paying taxes. The current tax code is 70k pages...time for a change.

Let's go to a simple flat tax. That would eliminate the political class' efforts to enrich their donors/owners.

I would be behind a progressive consumption tax, that way everybody has a dog in the race. A flat tax doesn't work for a lot of people. For instance, I'm a landlord and I have tons of expenses I have to write-off. Without those write-offs, I would be forced to sell because the property wouldn't produce any profit. Either that or I would have to raise rents so high that people wouldn't be able to afford to live here.

How would your receipts versus expenses change under a Flat Tax system?
You would still be able to account for costs versus revenues under a flat tax system. Unless you are using loop holes, which everyone does, to find ways of paying less tax.

How would this force you to raise rents?

Much of the rent collected goes towards bills. Yes, you write that money off because you used the rent money to pay those bills. A flat tax system (the way I've always understood it) would eliminate those write-offs. That means I would have to pay tax on all rental collections even though it merely passed through my hands to another entity. That could put me in a higher tax bracket as well when you add my income from work.

I don't see that as a problem under the Flat Tax. As you would still calculate the final profit the same way with net receipts and expenses anyway.

Ray is stating, as I understand it, his tax would be figured on his GROSS receipts. Which to a business owner is unjust. We believe that because even though the money for our work is passed form our customers to our hands, we must then pass most( most businesses operate on margins of around 10%) of along to the people from whom we purchase items and equipment necessary to operate the business. In effect, this is NOT income.
Business owners would want to have a flat tax ONLY if the tax were based on NET income. If a business turns a 10% profit, the owners pay a flat tax based on that amount.
To tax gross receipts would be devastating for the economy. People with means would stop investing and stop spending.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Should The Rich Be Required To Pay Higher Taxes In the US?

I think the rich should ABSOLUTELY pay more

Just how much more would you have rich people pay? Wealthy people already pay over half the total personal federal income taxes collected.

That's because they have now impoverished over half of the people to the point that they pay no taxes. Once they completely wipe out the middle class, they'll pay 100% of the taxes paid because no one else has any money. That still doesn't mean they're paying enough of their income in taxes.

And how did the wealthy accomplish this feat of impoverishing so many?

You are posting to someone who believes wealth is not earned. "Lady" believes as many class warfare libs that wealth is "stolen"....
This belief has several theories.
1. the belief in the Keyensian theory of the zero sum game. That if one has more, then another MUST have less
2. That those who have achieved wealth are recipients of awards through the so called "lottery of life"
3. That those who have found a niche and created something have done so only because they were able to victimize others

 

[danielpalos]

How much do the rich pay in actual, personal income taxes?

Define rich. 150k? 250k?

the one percent.

Forbes defines that as earning $717,000 per year. Is that a fair number to work with? How much of that money should the government take?

as much as it takes to fund government.

Good Capitalists merely insist their public servants merely purchase the finest Republic money can buy.

The federal government receives more than it requires to run efficiently. Let them figure out how to spend wisely.
Those of you who don't think government gets enough are free to write a check

I am advocating for ending our War on Drugs, instead.

 

[danielpalos]

How much do the rich pay in actual, personal income taxes?

That depends on their income for that year. A wealthy business owner, for example, could have a bad year in which he paid himself a very small or no salary at all, and thus would pay very little. If I made 10 mil one year and 100K the next, I would pay vastly different tax amounts, but would still be rich.

The one percent can afford to have artificial persons, "work hard" and pay their tax, for them.

 

[usmbguest5318]

Should The Rich Be Required To Pay Higher Taxes In the US?

I think the rich should ABSOLUTELY pay more

Just how much more would you have rich people pay? Wealthy people already pay over half the total personal federal income taxes collected.

That's because they have now impoverished over half of the people to the point that they pay no taxes. Once they completely wipe out the middle class, they'll pay 100% of the taxes paid because no one else has any money. That still doesn't mean they're paying enough of their income in taxes.

Show me the figures that indicate over half the working population, or even over half the population is "impoverished to the point that they pay no taxes."

 

[danielpalos]

How much do the rich pay in actual, personal income taxes?

That depends on their income for that year. A wealthy business owner, for example, could have a bad year in which he paid himself a very small or no salary at all, and thus would pay very little. If I made 10 mil one year and 100K the next, I would pay vastly different tax amounts, but would still be rich.

"but would still be rich"...
When I see stuff like this ^....My red flag goes to the top of the pole.
Such phrases are used as a means to paint a negative connotation on wealth.

How much of an actual Burden is the personal income tax on the one percent, as a percentage of income, when compared to the poor?

 

[danielpalos]

How much do the rich pay in actual, personal income taxes?

That depends on their income for that year. A wealthy business owner, for example, could have a bad year in which he paid himself a very small or no salary at all, and thus would pay very little. If I made 10 mil one year and 100K the next, I would pay vastly different tax amounts, but would still be rich.

"but would still be rich"...
When I see stuff like this ^....My red flag goes to the top of the pole.
Such phrases are used as a means to paint a negative connotation on wealth.

Just pointing out that "how much do the rich pay in actual, personal income taxes?" is a meaningless question.

It is just as meaningless as, "the poor pay no income taxes".

 

[danielpalos]

Should The Rich Be Required To Pay Higher Taxes In the US?

I think the rich should ABSOLUTELY pay more

Just how much more would you have rich people pay? Wealthy people already pay over half the total personal federal income taxes collected.

That's because they have now impoverished over half of the people to the point that they pay no taxes. Once they completely wipe out the middle class, they'll pay 100% of the taxes paid because no one else has any money. That still doesn't mean they're paying enough of their income in taxes.

And how did the wealthy accomplish this feat of impoverishing so many?

Misguided public policies.

Jim Crow is one, egregious example.

 

[regent]

Perhaps the rich should not pay any taxes, after all they made America and did the hard work. Next time you see a worker digging up the street, sweating in labor, think of how could we expect him to pay taxes?

 

[usmbguest5318]

Should The Rich Be Required To Pay Higher Taxes In the US?

I think the rich should ABSOLUTELY pay more

Just how much more would you have rich people pay? Wealthy people already pay over half the total personal federal income taxes collected.

That's because they have now impoverished over half of the people to the point that they pay no taxes. Once they completely wipe out the middle class, they'll pay 100% of the taxes paid because no one else has any money. That still doesn't mean they're paying enough of their income in taxes.

And how did the wealthy accomplish this feat of impoverishing so many?

You are posting to someone who believes wealth is not earned. "Lady" believes as many class warfare libs that wealth is "stolen"....
This belief has several theories.
1. the belief in the Keyensian theory of the zero sum game. That if one has more, then another MUST have less
2. That those who have achieved wealth are recipients of awards through the so called "lottery of life"
3. That those who have found a niche and created something have done so only because they were able to victimize others

the belief in the Keyensian theory of the zero sum game.

I don't think anyone -- liberal or conservative -- who actually understands economics and wealth creation sees Keynesian or any other economic model as a zero-sum proposition. For that proposition/assumption to be so, the increases in GDP would have to attributable entirely to inflation as the total sum of money and resources available to be owned by anyone would have to be fixed from time immemorial and forever into the future. The very fact that the middle class emerged while wealthy people's wealth continued to increase is clear evidence that the zero-sum idea is utter poppycock.

Might there be people who actually do think any economic models are indeed zero-sum "games?" I suppose there are, but why would anyone who actually does understand economics and wealth creation, and who isn't a teacher of economics/finance, waste their time discussing economic, fiscal and financial policy with those people? I mean, really. At some point, one must realize one is interacting with an economic ignoramus and just "cut bait" and move on. As Rothbard said:

It is no crime to be ignorant of economics, which is, after all, a specialized discipline, and one that most people consider to be a ‘dismal science.’ But it is totally irresponsible to have a loud and vociferous opinion on economic subjects while remaining in this state of ignorance.
― Murray N. Rothbard​

 

[thereisnospoon]

Define rich. 150k? 250k?

the one percent.

Forbes defines that as earning $717,000 per year. Is that a fair number to work with? How much of that money should the government take?

as much as it takes to fund government.

Good Capitalists merely insist their public servants merely purchase the finest Republic money can buy.

The federal government receives more than it requires to run efficiently. Let them figure out how to spend wisely.
Those of you who don't think government gets enough are free to write a check

I am advocating for ending our War on Drugs, instead.

The war on drugs? Deflect much?

 

[thereisnospoon]

How much do the rich pay in actual, personal income taxes?

That depends on their income for that year. A wealthy business owner, for example, could have a bad year in which he paid himself a very small or no salary at all, and thus would pay very little. If I made 10 mil one year and 100K the next, I would pay vastly different tax amounts, but would still be rich.

"but would still be rich"...
When I see stuff like this ^....My red flag goes to the top of the pole.
Such phrases are used as a means to paint a negative connotation on wealth.

Just pointing out that "how much do the rich pay in actual, personal income taxes?" is a meaningless question.

It is just as meaningless as, "the poor pay no income taxes".

Not meaningless. Because the poor DO NOT pay net income taxes.
They are the recipient class. They have no skin in the game. The poor have a right to vote. And with that, they also have the ability to vote for their pwn pay raises by electing the people to government with the power to give them something.
it is about time those who can vote themselves more handouts be made part of the system.