Zone1 Tax the Rich! Make them Pay their Fair Share!

[candycorn]

Ss is not a Tax, not under the Tax code? It is a contractual retirement plan.

Coming from the guy who thinks slavery was a jobs program...your opinion means very little.

 

[candycorn]

I’d be for a flat tax rate as long as there was absolutely zero tolerance for any loopholes of any kind whatsoever

Rich people do not have the right to hire accounts to get them out of paying taxes

No to the first part, yes to the 2nd part.

The flat tax is too strenuous to vastly different income levels in my view.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Ss is not a Tax, not under the Tax code? It is a contractual retirement plan.

Just to clarify, ya, SS is a tax.

WW

26 U.S. Code § 3101 - Rate of tax

law.cornell.edu

 

[hadit]

Amazing what happens when you stop lying about the other side. You should try it more often.

As I have had to point out in your posts about me.

 

[leftwinger]

I’d be for a flat tax rate as long as there was absolutely zero tolerance for any loopholes of any kind whatsoever

Rich people do not have the right to hire accounts to find ways to get them out of paying taxes

Few "get out" of paying taxes. It is basically math. No one can cheat a calculation.

Business taxes are wholy complicated other matter with deductions. No big company is going to risk much "cheating".

This is hogwash Leftist talking points.

The cheats are in the GOVT, not paying because they all look out for each other. No one will bring them in on fraud.

 

[leftwinger]

Just to clarify, ya, SS is a tax.

WW

View attachment 1173137

26 U.S. Code § 3101 - Rate of tax

law.cornell.edu

Lol! Got it. Where is the 6.2% employer match required? Maybe you cut it off.

But got it. They call it a tax.

 

[Care4all]

I forgot about that one. But only for ministerial income if they object on religous reasoning.

WW

My father was USAF and did not pay in to SS, but before he retired USAF, he was given an option to pay in the 10 years of 3% I believe, (and not the 6% it was changed to)because that is what it was when he first joined ....and the next few decades before taxes for it were raised, and it made him and mom, eligible.... Or something like that....

 

[WorldWatcher]

My father was USAF and did not pay in to SS, but before he retired USAF, he was given an option to pay in the 10 years of 3% I believe, (and not the 6% it was changed to)because that is what it was when he first joined ....and the next few decades before taxes for it were raised, and it made him and mom, eligible.... Or something like that....

That's a long time ago. Military started paying into SS in 1957. That was 68 years ago.

WW

 

[leftwinger]

My father was USAF and did not pay in to SS, but before he retired USAF, he was given an option to pay in the 10 years of 3% I believe, (and not the 6% it was changed to)because that is what it was when he first joined ....and the next few decades before taxes for it were raised, and it made him and mom, eligible.... Or something like that....

Always with a story. Smh.

 

[Care4all]

That's a long time ago. Military started paying into SS in 1957. That was 68 years ago.

WW

He's almost 95...but I could have gotten it wrong on what the pay in to SS was for...it could have been for the years he did not pay in before 1957, so to receive more years credit to SS for a higher benefit amount....?

****At 95, he and mom, who never worked, got his money's worth.

 

[Care4all]

He's almost 95...but I could have gotten it wrong on what the pay in to SS was for...it could have been for the years he did not pay in before 1957, so to receive more years credit to SS for a higher benefit amount....?

****At 95, he and mom, who never worked, got his money's worth.

WorldWatcher

Okay, just looked it up, it was the USAF that paid in for the years he did not pay in prior to 1957 to make his SS retirement more money...

https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.ssa.gov/pubs/EN-05-10017.pdf&sa=U&ved=2ahUKEwiI_caN16OQAxXbhIkEHR0AEw4QFnoECAgQAw&usg=AOvVaw1Fa2omjD654lhW3q879PYG

 

[Grumblenuts]

Show me where the OP said anything about Social Security.

Especially about Social Security exclusively.

Yes, you dragged Social Security in here, kicking and screaming, in your second post..

Who creates the jobs and (required by law) matches every dollar that employees pay in for Social Security?

 

[Grumblenuts]

Just to clarify, ya, SS is a tax.

That too. The OP's thread title being, "Tax the Rich! Make them Pay their Fair Share!"

 

[Mrkelly]

What Ronnie said about this

 

[Grumblenuts]

What Ronnie said about this

And then he declared war on gubmint and increased the debt like crazy.

 

[leftwinger]

Everyone should be treated the same under the tax code

Forgot this gem. Then you are for a flat tax? Got it.

You want the low income earners to pay the same rate as the $1M guys. Good to know.

 

[there4eyeM]

Of course labor has value

But so does management, ownership, entrepreneurs, ect

Both need each other

"Managing" is working (labor). "Owning" is labor (believe me, I've owned and run businesses). Working as an entrepreneur is "labor". Work/labor is what creates wealth. Wealth, real goods and services, are not produced from thin air. We may regard "money" as wealth, but just creating money is the best way to reduce its value.

 

[BackAgain]

Simply not true.

Labor is the value...

Labor makes the money exist....

First we bartered our labor...
I'll cut down the trees to build your house if you dig the clay and shape the bricks for my house.

When our labor created more than what we could barter with another man over...our excess gain from our labor, we began a widespread trade....spread worldwide...excess goods from labor in India, made it to Europe and visa versa.... No coin money had even been created yet...that wasn't until around 600 B.C.....and prior to coin when the gains from our labor was busting at the seams we created commodities as a means to hold wealth...like the invaluable at the time...Salt....(the base word for salary), or cattle.

Labor...actually ....excesses made from our labor...began it all.... (along with having natural resources such as forests, and granite mountains and red clay earth etc etc etc)

And the excesses made from our labor, is the business's profit.

Simply not true.

Labor is one of the values.

But without the concept of a business, no product is created.

And, without the raw materials for a business, no product is created.

And, without the refining of raw materials for a business, no product is created.

And, without the machinery to put the refine the materials together for a business, no product is created.

And without the plan to acquire all the needed components for a product, no product is created.

I agree that without the labor, all of the above is meaningless.

But, still, without the acquisition of the plots of land to build the plants and offices and then the construction of those plants and offices, no product is created.

Then we can talk about the obviously necessary distribution and sales of the product without which, the creation of the product is pointless. And if it’s pointless, the company ceases to exist because no income flows in.

And if the company goes out of business, no labor force for the company can be maintained; and, labor becomes unemployed.

 

[Chuz Life]

Yes, you dragged Social Security in here, kicking and screaming, in your second post..

Which was only a response to someone else's comments about Social Security and only to make them aware that "the rich" not only pay their own social security, they pay HALF of their employees' social security, also.

 

[toobfreak]

The subject was mostly about the economy and Trump (again, it wasn't me), and one of my in-laws said something about "tax cuts for the rich," or "the rich not paying their fair share."

Actually, the rich pay most of the taxes. If not for the top 5%, the rest of us would probably be paying double what we are now.

But I love the tax the rich argument! Tax them until they are poor and give it all to the poor so they can be rich.

Now, taxing the rich becomes taxing the poor.

Meanwhile, the poor never hire no one, and no poor person ever created a job nor business. So, in effect, taxing the rich just makes more people poorer.