What happens when we tax the rich.

[my2¢]

Which is why I say ALL income above a reasonable fairly low threshhold should be taxable. Those who vote people into office to lead us should have some skin in the game when those people are dealing with the tax code.

I am a flat tax person that everybody, above that reasonable threshold, should pay.

I'm for a single tax rate for all money received (regardless of source) minus any expenses paid to earn any part of that income. So I don't believe were all that far apart in thought but have just 3 questions to get a better understanding.

1. Would you get rid of itemizing deduction for costs in excess of that low threshold?

2. If we keep the ability to itemize deductions, would the threshold adequately account for costs laid to derive any part of that income?

If so, I'd hate it to be so low that it becomes an accounting nightmare forcing taxpayers to track and itemize all those costs.

For tax year 2025, the standard deduction amounts are $31,500 for married couples filing jointly, $15,750 for single filers, and $23,625 for heads of households.

3. I believe the current standard deductions are certainly adequate but am wondering what your notion is about how low that threshold should be?

If you care to respond, thanks in advance.

 

[Woodznutz]

You keep moving the goal posts here so quickly it's dizzying.

There are many reasons people are poor, and each reason needs to be addressed. But if there is a single fix, it's money.
Ecclesiastes. 10:19

 

[task0778]

There are many reasons people are poor, and each reason needs to be addressed. But if there is a single fix, it's money.
Ecclesiastes. 10:19

NO. This is totally wrong. Money is just the medium through which transactions are made, and it has NOTHING to do with why people are poor. And flooding the economy with more money fixes absolutely nothing.

The truth (IMHO) is that we have created a nanny state of dependency on the gov't to take care of us, and that relieves people of the responsibility to take care of themselves. It's one thing to help disabled people who simply cannot take care of themselves, but another to help capable people get a free ride. Many poor people are that way cuz they want to be, they weren't brought up to be responsible people.

We hear about jobs that nobody wants to do, right? Well, WTF is that all about? We need illegal immigrants to do stuff that American citizens refuse to do? WTF is that? Used to be if you didn't have a job you were looked down on; now we look at a working person who makes at or near the minimum wage as a fool, a sucker. I had no problem working m-wage jobs coming out of high school, right up until I enlisted in the military. I took care of myself and I bettered myself; too many people these days don't do that, or more accurately won't do that. The jobs are there, but we gotta get rid of the attitude that some work is beneath us. For many people, being poor is a choice. Maybe we should be changing the calculus for that choice to make it more difficult to make the wrong decision.

 

[Woodznutz]

NO. This is totally wrong. Money is just the medium through which transactions are made, and it has NOTHING to do with why people are poor. And flooding the economy with more money fixes absolutely nothing.

The truth (IMHO) is that we have created a nanny state of dependency on the gov't to take care of us, and that relieves people of the responsibility to take care of themselves. It's one thing to help disabled people who simply cannot take care of themselves, but another to help capable people get a free ride. Many poor people are that way cuz they want to be, they weren't brought up to be responsible people.

We hear about jobs that nobody wants to do, right? Well, WTF is that all about? We need illegal immigrants to do stuff that American citizens refuse to do? WTF is that? Used to be if you didn't have a job you were looked down on; now we look at a working person who makes at or near the minimum wage as a fool, a sucker. I had no problem working m-wage jobs coming out of high school, right up until I enlisted in the military. I took care of myself and I bettered myself; too many people these days don't do that, or more accurately won't do that. The jobs are there, but we gotta get rid of the attitude that some work is beneath us. For many people, being poor is a choice. Maybe we should be changing the calculus for that choice to make it more difficult to make the wrong decision.

Times have changed since we got out of high school. The job market has changed drastically.

Any city will tell you that if they had more money they could do more things. Think about the drug treatment centers that are needed. There is no money for them. No money for new prisons. No money for teacher hires, or law enforcement. Cities can hardly afford to fill potholes.

More money will solve all those problems.

 

[task0778]

Times have changed since we got out of high school. The job market has changed drastically.

Any city will tell you that if they had more money they could do more things. Think about the drug treatment centers that are needed. There is no money for them. No money for new prisons. No money for teacher hires, or law enforcement. Cities can hardly afford to fill potholes.

More money will solve all those problems.

I doubt more money will solve anything, we'll still have just as many druggies, criminals, idiots, and potholes as before. Maybe I'm too pessimistic, but all those things will get you is [maybe] more people in jail/prison or in treatment/mental health centers. I don't believe more money will move the needle as far as poor people though.

The thing about more teachers, I do not see that as much of a positive either. Right now, we do not teach our kids how to think, we teach them what to think and even that is questionable. Having more teachers teaching the wrong stuff doesn't fix the problem. If anything, I'd advocate for more technical schools and training starting in high school as a way of offering kids a shot at a way to earn a decent living. More opportunities, but you gotta want it and work at it.

 

[Woodznutz]

I doubt more money will solve anything, we'll still have just as many druggies, criminals, idiots, and potholes as before. Maybe I'm too pessimistic, but all those things will get you is [maybe] more people in jail/prison or in treatment/mental health centers. I don't believe more money will move the needle as far as poor people though.

The thing about more teachers, I do not see that as much of a positive either. Right now, we do not teach our kids how to think, we teach them what to think and even that is questionable. Having more teachers teaching the wrong stuff doesn't fix the problem. If anything, I'd advocate for more technical schools and training starting in high school as a way of offering kids a shot at a way to earn a decent living. More opportunities, but you gotta want it and work at it.

I do maintenance work for a residential rental company. I have an unlimited budget for making improvements and upgrades, which I have done for many years. Trust me, money makes it possible to do most things. Without this money the building I manage would still be a cockroach infested shithole.

 

[task0778]

I do maintenance work for a residential rental company. I have an unlimited budget for making improvements and upgrades, which I have done for many years. Trust me, money makes it possible to do most things. Without this money the building I manage would still be a cockroach infested shithole.

I get what you're saying, more money allows a city, state, or federal gov't to do more and better programs, but the question is whether it actually fixes the problem or maybe reduces it. Look at our education system, we've been pouring incredible amounts of money into it for what, 60 years? And what do we have to show for it? More teachers does not necessarily mean better teachers or an improved educational system.

Would more cops, judges, jails, and prisons result in less crime? It doesn't appear so. I think it could mean more criminal defense lawyers, for one thing. In some places, you can shoplift (steal stuff) without penalty; will more money to enhance LE and incarceration change that? I don't think so. We got people beating up other people on the street, why are they doing that? And more people murdering other people will more money change that? I am unconvinced.

Drug treatment and mental health centers would be a good thing, but will more of them move the needle regarding poverty? I'm not saying we shouldn't be trying to do these things, but I do not see anything changing much by throwing more money at it. IMHO, our society has problems that money cannot fix; mitigate it maybe, just a little bit though. Maybe what we really need is another 1930s style depression, which I think is a good possibility of happening. Maybe we need to re-orient ourselves as individuals and as a society to who we want to be.

 

[DGS49]

As many have pointed out, the path out of poverty is fairly straightforward. (1). Get as much free education as you can. (2). Get a job, any job, and don't quit until you have found a better one. (3). Don't have kids until you are married. There it is. Note that this is not necessarily a path to wealth, or even to the middle class, it is merely a path out of poverty.

But the culture has changed, and not for the better. American young men have devolved dramatically since the 1950's. Work is out there, but they are not interested in doing it. Jobs are there. Roofers, landscapers, painters, HVAC companies, small contractors, are all desperate to find young men who are simply willing to reliably put in a day's work for a day's pay. They can't find them. The Yoots come to work for a couple days, then call off, come back for a day or two, and are never heard from again. The idea that you have to work every day until you reach retirement age is so odious to this population that they would rather live with their parents until they are dragged out of the house by the local constabulary.

Obviously this is a broad generalization, not applicable to all, but applicable to enough of them that bringing in twenty million third-world wretches who are willing to work is a major threat to our society.

And why would any woman want to hook up with such a man? I can't imagine. The statistics back that up. Single, employed, self-supporting women are an exploding demographic, while adult males living with parents explode at the same rate.

Democrat pols tell their gullible constituents that if only The Rich would pay more in taxes, they could give us more free stuff. But that is an illusion. Your life will never be improved by someone else paying more in taxes.

The Tax Code doesn't really impact the taxes paid by The Rich for long. After a year at higher rates, they adjust their operations to recognize less taxable income each year and soon they are back to paying 15-18% of AGI, which is what they have been paying for a long, long time. The only ones getting screwed are the professional athletes, who just pay the high rates and can't really get around it (other than by deferred compensation, which few of them choose).

 

[Woodznutz]

I get what you're saying, more money allows a city, state, or federal gov't to do more and better programs, but the question is whether it actually fixes the problem or maybe reduces it. Look at our education system, we've been pouring incredible amounts of money into it for what, 60 years? And what do we have to show for it? More teachers does not necessarily mean better teachers or an improved educational system.

We need better students.

Would more cops, judges, jails, and prisons result in less crime? It doesn't appear so. I think it could mean more criminal defense lawyers, for one thing. In some places, you can shoplift (steal stuff) without penalty; will more money to enhance LE and incarceration change that? I don't think so. We got people beating up other people on the street, why are they doing that? And more people murdering other people will more money change that? I am unconvinced.

More prisons and longer sentences will reduce crime.

Drug treatment and mental health centers would be a good thing, but will more of them move the needle regarding poverty? I'm not saying we shouldn't be trying to do these things, but I do not see anything changing much by throwing more money at it. IMHO, our society has problems that money cannot fix; mitigate it maybe, just a little bit though. Maybe what we really need is another 1930s style depression, which I think is a good possibility of happening. Maybe we need to re-orient ourselves as individuals and as a society to who we want to be.

Compulsory drug treatment will go a long way to solving the drug problem.

All this said we gotta start somewhere. Any improvement in one area will likely take pressure off of other areas. Most problems are somewhat interconnected. Example, lack of education/broken home, drugs/crime/ health are all manifested in the poor.

 

[Woodznutz]

As many have pointed out, the path out of poverty is fairly straightforward. (1). Get as much free education as you can. (2). Get a job, any job, and don't quit until you have found a better one. (3). Don't have kids until you are married. There it is. Note that this is not necessarily a path to wealth, or even to the middle class, it is merely a path out of poverty.

But the culture has changed, and not for the better. American young men have devolved dramatically since the 1950's. Work is out there, but they are not interested in doing it. Jobs are there. Roofers, landscapers, painters, HVAC companies, small contractors, are all desperate to find young men who are simply willing to reliably put in a day's work for a day's pay. They can't find them. The Yoots come to work for a couple days, then call off, come back for a day or two, and are never heard from again. The idea that you have to work every day until you reach retirement age is so odious to this population that they would rather live with their parents until they are dragged out of the house by the local constabulary.

Obviously this is a broad generalization, not applicable to all, but applicable to enough of them that bringing in twenty million third-world wretches who are willing to work is a major threat to our society.

And why would any woman want to hook up with such a man? I can't imagine. The statistics back that up. Single, employed, self-supporting women are an exploding demographic, while adult males living with parents explode at the same rate.

Democrat pols tell their gullible constituents that if only The Rich would pay more in taxes, they could give us more free stuff. But that is an illusion. Your life will never be improved by someone else paying more in taxes.

The Tax Code doesn't really impact the taxes paid by The Rich for long. After a year at higher rates, they adjust their operations to recognize less taxable income each year and soon they are back to paying 15-18% of AGI, which is what they have been paying for a long, long time. The only ones getting screwed are the professional athletes, who just pay the high rates and can't really get around it (other than by deferred compensation, which few of them choose).

Many youths suffer from a sense of entitlement and an attitude of nihilism. I began to see this back in the 1960's with the 'beat' generation. Another big problem is unrealistic expectations, especially among college students.

 

[task0778]

We need better students.

More money won't fix that.

More prisons and longer sentences will reduce crime.

Maybe. I don't see that happening though, either more prisons and longer sentences or that such will reduce crime.

Compulsory drug treatment will go a long way to solving the drug problem.

I doubt that would be ruled constitutional, you can't legislate compulsory medical treatment.



I know you're pretty much talking about a hypothetical situation where we had enough money to do all these wonderful things. But it's questionable whether it would actually make a difference. I doubt it would, even in theory. IMHO, more money just isn't the panacea to fix society's problems.

 

[Woodznutz]

Amazon, Target, Menard's, Home Depot, are all hiring, starting pay $18/hr. and up. The problem is the physical work involved in these jobs and being looked down on by societies elites.

 

[hadit]

We already have a tariff tax, and a sales tax on every item. How about politicians stop overspending?

What a radical concept. We tried with DOGE and look how far that got us.

 

[Woodznutz]

More money won't fix that.

Depends on how it's spent. Students often bring their failed lifestyles into the schools in the form of sloppy dress. Maybe a clothing allowance so they can buy the appropriate attire for serious learning would help.

Maybe. I don't see that happening though, either more prisons and longer sentences or that such will reduce crime.

Longer sentences and jail time beginning with the first offense will certainly reduce crime. Many young offenders have committed several crimes before they're finally jailed. Jail 'em the first time.

I doubt that would be ruled constitutional, you can't legislate compulsory medical treatment.

Of course you can. The test is whether you are a danger to yourself or others. Based on overdose deaths I'm guessing that drug users are certainly a danger to themselves.

 

[task0778]

What a radical concept. We tried with DOGE and look how far that got us.

It's a step in the right direction though. I don't think there's any doubt that a ton of money is being misspent and wasted or by fraud.

 

[leftwinger]

Tax the rich leads to prisoners and drug talks? Huh?

Think outside the box.

1. Outsource almost prisoners overseas by level. Most violent to Africa. Pay them to deal with them. Save huge money.

2. Lesser criminals closer.

3. Only way you come back is great behavior.

Yeah....change the rules. So what. Shoot me. Shoot them dead if yhe act up.


Use the now open jail space for homeless and druggers. Force them clean. Released only to a job with restricted living.


Do something. Do it fast. Don't care who doesn't like it. These criminals lost rights to complain.

 

[Foxfyre]

I'm for a single tax rate for all money received (regardless of source) minus any expenses paid to earn any part of that income. So I don't believe were all that far apart in thought but have just 3 questions to get a better understanding.

1. Would you get rid of itemizing deduction for costs in excess of that low threshold?

2. If we keep the ability to itemize deductions, would the threshold adequately account for costs laid to derive any part of that income?

If so, I'd hate it to be so low that it becomes an accounting nightmare forcing taxpayers to track and itemize all those costs.

For tax year 2025, the standard deduction amounts are $31,500 for married couples filing jointly, $15,750 for single filers, and $23,625 for heads of households.

3. I believe the current standard deductions are certainly adequate but am wondering what your notion is about how low that threshold should be?

If you care to respond, thanks in advance.

I do believe in allowing deductions for financial activity that benefits Americans over all. Charitable deductions, mortgage interest, deductions for medical savings accounts, IRAs, 401Ks etc. all make sense as they encourage, and many cases allow, people to do those good things for themselves and others that government should not be doing. So long as those deductions are indiscriminate in any way, they fall under the constitutional definition of 'promoting the general welfare.'

Of course the cost of operating a business should be deductible as it cannot be realistically be considered income lest nobody start up, run, expand businesses that provide products, service, jobs, income for others. Tax policy should always distinguish between revenue and income which is not necessarily the same thing.

But with a reasonable flat tax--the Lord suggests a 10% tithe and that seems like it might be a reasonable amount for the government to take as well--the threshold above which income would be taxed could be pretty low. You would want a reasonable threshhold so the kids' lemonade stand or paper route or proceeds of a one time bake sale fund raiser would not be taxable income.

 

[Woodznutz]

Tax the rich leads to prisoners and drug talks? Huh?

Think outside the box.

1. Outsource almost prisoners overseas by level. Most violent to Africa. Pay them to deal with them. Save huge money.

2. Lesser criminals closer.

3. Only way you come back is great behavior.

Yeah....change the rules. So what. Shoot me. Shoot them dead if yhe act up.


Use the now open jail space for homeless and druggers. Force them clean. Released only to a job with restricted living.


Do something. Do it fast. Don't care who doesn't like it. These criminals lost rights to complain.

Make all criminals serve their complete sentences. As it is criminals pretty much know how long they will actually be incarcerated. They play the system like a fine violin. Instead of early release for good behavior give them perks within the prison.

 

[leftwinger]

Make all criminals serve their complete sentences. As it is criminals pretty much know how long they will actually be incarcerated. They play the system like a fine violin. Instead of early release for good behavior give them perks within the prison.

Downgrading to lesser charges for speed and cost makes it worse. Commit murder yet do 3 yrs only downgraded to involuntary manslaughter. After 20 count rap sheet of other felonies.

The system is failing the decent citizens.

I've been mad, upset, belligerent since stolen 2020. It's a war. Decent people vs. Deep State. I used to be polite, a more civil poster. Now? They deserve whatever.

 

[Woodznutz]

Downgrading to lesser charges for speed and cost makes it worse. Commit murder yet do 3 yrs only downgraded to involuntary manslaughter. After 20 count rap sheet of other felonies.

The system is failing the decent citizens.

I've been mad, upset, belligerent since stolen 2020. It's a war. Decent people vs. Deep State. I used to be polite, a more civil poster. Now? They deserve whatever.

At the risk of sounding like a religious nutjob, I believe our failures are by design. Powerful malignant spirit forces are running things.