It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Tax the rich? A cautionary tale ...

page: 1
3

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 13 2009 @ 09:40 AM
link   
Taxes are NOT the answer - reduced spending IS!

Obama does not seem to have the mental capacity to understand this simple concept. Although the following excerpt is illustrating the results of increasing personal income tax to raise revenues, it follows that this example is also very related to the flight of corporations to other countries and when we lose corporations operating in the U.S., we lose jobs. Lose jobs, we lose even more tax revenue.

Increasing taxes to the rich in Maryland resulted in a $100 million dollar REDUCTION in tax revenues.

We should all learn from Maryland's mistake and Obama should go back to school.


Take Maryland for instance. Faced with governmental overspending and a need to balance the budget, the Governor there, with the help of the legislature, decided it would be a good idea to create a special bracket for the top 0.3% of the taxpayers in the state. The “millionaires bracket” applied to about 3,000 taxpayers in the state and raised the marginal tax to 6.25%. With cities able to add local taxes, they can go as high as 9.45%

In 2008, the top 0.3% included 3,000 taxpayers. However in 2009, that number had dropped to 2,000. Of course, the recession may have taken some out of that category, but a third is too steep a drop to attribute those lower numbers to decreased income alone. Instead of a $106 million dollar gain in state revenue, the state has received $100 million less.




posted on Jun, 13 2009 @ 11:14 AM
link   
Moving a business to another state is not at all the same as moving it to another country. Anyway most talk about raising taxes is directed at individuals not corporations and i'm all for that. Most rich people are useless parasites like lawyers and politicians and entertainers and athletes and if they want to leave america, good riddance. Tax personal income over $500,000 a year at 50% is fine with me.



posted on Jun, 13 2009 @ 12:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Make Speed Limit 45
 


I'm just wondering who pays your pay checks?

Yea then job losses sky rocket and before you know it we live in a third world country.

Isn't greedy capitalism great? It has allowed you to trash the very system that allows you to live very comfortably. Obama keeps going the country will look like Somalia.



posted on Jun, 13 2009 @ 12:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Make Speed Limit 45
Moving a business to another state is not at all the same as moving it to another country.


Of course it is. At least to the state they moved from.


Anyway most talk about raising taxes is directed at individuals not corporations and i'm all for that. Most rich people are useless parasites like lawyers and politicians and entertainers and athletes and if they want to leave america, good riddance. Tax personal income over $500,000 a year at 50% is fine with me.


Envy is one of the deadly sins and is quite evidence in your response. You didn't even address the impact of doing that, you just want to punish people who have more than you.



posted on Jun, 13 2009 @ 12:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hastobemoretolife
Isn't greedy capitalism great? It has allowed you to trash the very system that allows you to live very comfortably. Obama keeps going the country will look like Somalia.


So, basically there is no middle solution which benefits both sides (working people and those who own the USA) ?

Either ruthless capitalism or Somalia like third world country (whatever that means) situation ?

Lol. They are plenty shades of gray between black and white IMO



posted on Jun, 13 2009 @ 12:56 PM
link   
I don't understand the big backlash against the rich.They already pay most of the taxes in our country.Also isn't it the American dream to become rich? Gey rid of the corporate tax so jobs will stay here in U.S. so some of that money will trickle down to me



posted on Jun, 13 2009 @ 01:28 PM
link   
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.



posted on Jun, 13 2009 @ 07:44 PM
link   
reply to post by 5thElement
 


Of course there is a good solution TPTB just don't want it to come about because it threatens them. It is called the Fair Tax.



posted on Jun, 13 2009 @ 10:47 PM
link   
reply to post by Hastobemoretolife
 


We have to pay out-the-arse in taxes because we're running a very real risk of having our Ponzi-scheme-we-call-the-federal-budget collapsing with us still being hundreds of billions of dollars in debt. Our best bet of getting out of this mess is to raise taxes, especially on tax-inelastic goods (the recent tobacco tax).

Look up the history of nations that run a large deficit and then default. It ain't pretty. The end-game looks pretty close to "third-world country" status. Oh, but "deficits don't matter" because Cheney and Obama say so.

I'm fairly certain that the "fair tax" -- or "consumption tax" or whatever we're calling these ideas, these days -- would fail horribly, given our current state. And I've supported this idea, in the past.

There isn't a pretty way out of our current situation, no matter how much right and left wing ideologues like to think that there is.

[edit on 13-6-2009 by theWCH]



posted on Jun, 13 2009 @ 11:59 PM
link   

Obama does not seem to have the mental capacity to understand this simple concept.


Obama is a go along to get along politician. He is (ironically) owned, and his masters are the same crooks who caused the problems we currently face. All they want is to keep the gravy train rolling, so Obama will do nothing regardless of what he understands.

He is a fraud.



posted on Jun, 14 2009 @ 12:23 AM
link   
How Taxes Work


Let's put tax cuts in terms everyone can understand. Suppose that every day, ten men go out for dinner. The bill for all ten comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:

The first four men the poorest would pay nothing,
the fifth would pay $1,
the sixth would pay $3,
the seventh $7,
the eighth $12,
the ninth $18,
and the tenth man the richest would pay $59.

That's what they decided to do. The ten men ate dinner in the restaurant every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement until one day, the owner threw them a curve (in tax language a tax cut).

"Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily meal by $20." So now dinner for the ten only cost $80.00.

The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes. So the first four men were unaffected. They would still eat for free. But what about the other six the paying customers? How could they divvy up the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his "fair share?"

The six men realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would end up being PAID to eat their meal. So the restaurant owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay.

And so the fifth man paid nothing,
the sixth pitched in $2,
the seventh paid $5,
the eighth paid $9,
the ninth paid $12,
leaving the tenth man with a bill of $52 instead of his earlier $59.

Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to eat for free.

But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings. "I only got a dollar out of the $20," declared the sixth man who pointed to the tenth. "But he got $7!"

"Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man, "I only saved a dollar, too . . . It's unfair that he got seven times more than me!".

"That's true!" shouted the seventh man, "why should he get $7 back when I got only $2? The wealthy get all the breaks!"

"Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison, "We didn't get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!"

The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up. The next night he didn't show up for dinner, so the nine sat down and ate without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered, a little late what was very important. They were FIFTY-TWO DOLLARS short of paying the bill! Imagine that!

And that, boys and girls, journalists and college instructors, is how the tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up at the table anymore.

Where would that leave the rest? Unfortunately, most taxing authorities anywhere cannot seem to grasp this rather straightforward logic!




posted on Jun, 14 2009 @ 12:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by Iamonlyhuman
Taxes are NOT the answer - reduced spending IS!

Obama does not seem to have the mental capacity to understand this simple concept. Although the following excerpt is illustrating the results of increasing personal income tax to raise revenues, it follows that this example is also very related to the flight of corporations to other countries and when we lose corporations operating in the U.S., we lose jobs. Lose jobs, we lose even more tax revenue.

Increasing taxes to the rich in Maryland resulted in a $100 million dollar REDUCTION in tax revenues.

We should all learn from Maryland's mistake and Obama should go back to school.


Take Maryland for instance. Faced with governmental overspending and a need to balance the budget, the Governor there, with the help of the legislature, decided it would be a good idea to create a special bracket for the top 0.3% of the taxpayers in the state. The “millionaires bracket” applied to about 3,000 taxpayers in the state and raised the marginal tax to 6.25%. With cities able to add local taxes, they can go as high as 9.45%

In 2008, the top 0.3% included 3,000 taxpayers. However in 2009, that number had dropped to 2,000. Of course, the recession may have taken some out of that category, but a third is too steep a drop to attribute those lower numbers to decreased income alone. Instead of a $106 million dollar gain in state revenue, the state has received $100 million less.


wrong conclusion based on accurate info. over 50,000 people lost their job on wall street, not counting all the money lost in the market. actually i'm suprised it wasn't more.

[edit on 14-6-2009 by jimmyx]



posted on Jun, 14 2009 @ 12:37 PM
link   
reply to post by Alxandro
 


Excellent example. Thank you!



posted on Jun, 14 2009 @ 12:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by jimmyx

wrong conclusion based on accurate info. over 50,000 people lost their job on wall street, not counting all the money lost in the market. actually i'm suprised it wasn't more.

[edit on 14-6-2009 by jimmyx]


Can you honestly say that higher taxes on the rich will NOT result in reduced tax revenues? If so, I'd really love to hear you say those words.

See Alxandro's response above on How Taxes Work..

If you can comment on the thread's intent - to argue that higher taxes on the rich are not in the best interest of higher tax revenues - then please do try and make your case.



posted on Jun, 15 2009 @ 01:04 AM
link   
reply to post by theWCH
 


Hrmm, I disagree the problem is that there is too much debt to even begin to payback. Not only that, but every develop nation in the world is facing the same exact situation we are. In fact believe it or not we are doing better than most countries.

So what happens when the worlds reserve currency collapses? The rest of the fiat currencies collapse. The problem is with what we call money. No fiat system has every worked it has always failed.

The whole world is about to look like a third world country. Of course the world banks are going to step in and offer their "solution" of a global currency but when people are starving and there is no leadership and therefore no mechanism for the currency to circulate, what do you get?

Again liars always lose. And the liars are about to lose. We are all going to have to suffer for it, but in the end we will come out better.



posted on Jun, 15 2009 @ 12:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Make Speed Limit 45
Moving a business to another state is not at all the same as moving it to another country. Anyway most talk about raising taxes is directed at individuals not corporations and i'm all for that. Most rich people are useless parasites like lawyers and politicians and entertainers and athletes and if they want to leave america, good riddance. Tax personal income over $500,000 a year at 50% is fine with me.


This thinking is exactly what would ruin this country. Say good riddance to many of the most productive members of society, and you'll lose more than there production.

Good quote to keep in mind:



Some people regard private enterprise as a predatory tiger to be shot. Others look on it as a cow they can milk. Not enough people see it as a healthy horse, pulling a sturdy wagon." ~Winston Churchill



posted on Jun, 15 2009 @ 06:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by debz325
I don't understand the big backlash against the rich.They already pay most of the taxes in our country.Also isn't it the American dream to become rich? Gey rid of the corporate tax so jobs will stay here in U.S. so some of that money will trickle down to me


Ironically we would assume the rich pay more..

In fact it is the Middle Class, particularly those making between 40k-150k a year individually that supports the bulk of the Governments Spending..

There being millions of Middle Class, and a relatively smaller handful of Millionaires even if the Millionaires pay out hundreds of thousands in taxes, the Middle Class by volume alone pays more..

Also, the Middle Class pays 39% as a "max" for Federal Taxes .... Millionaires DO NOT pay the same percentage, but because they pay "more" they shouldn't have to pay the same percentage as it would be an abnormally high number..

So the Rich pay less percentage of their income.. they pay the same taxes as the middle class, just not as much in proportion to their income

The poor pay NO taxes aside from SS and property

The middle class pays SS, Medicare, State, Local, Property, and a whopping 39%. .. when you only make 50k a year, your left with a fraction of what you made, regardless of how hard you worked to make it.

The tax system in our country is flawed in every way imaginable.. We should not target the rich, but we should not target the Middle Class either, just as the poor should pay the same percentage of their income to Uncle Sam since they drain the most on society..

The simplest answer to the tax problem.. is get rid of the Income Tax(es) and implement a National Sales tax (or VAT) that way we pay on what we consume. And it would be constitutional at that.. not that many care.



posted on Jun, 15 2009 @ 06:47 PM
link   
The rich would never get taxed that much; it is just a sound-bite for His adoring supporters (yes i did capitalise the 'H' because He is a God...isn't He??
)

I remember they were going to restrict wages for execs who received TARPs, yet all that would happen is they invent a new caveat in their memorandum of understanding (company contract) and their monies are held in stocks and shares. After X number of years they become redeemable, once restrictions are lifted, so in essence they won't loose a penny/dime.

As smart as MP's & executives are, they have even smarter contract lawyers and accountants


[edit on 15-6-2009 by PrisonerOfSociety]




top topics



 
3

log in

join