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.

 

Raising Taxes On The Rich (Or Well Off). A Matter Of Necessity.

page: 2
4
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 10 2010 @ 09:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by CowPatty
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 


I disagree. I believe ideally corporate taxes would be 0%. Now before you freak out let me explain. Corp taxes just get passed on to the consumer. Corps create jobs. Corps create wealth. Corps stockholders get taxed on their dividends.


So your ok with a company like let's say Microsoft, who make let's say 20 Billion a year in PROFIT, doesn't have to give anything back?

That's a very strange way of thinking.

~Keeper




posted on May, 10 2010 @ 09:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by tothetenthpower

I think your misunderstand, or perhaps I haven't made myself clear.

As it stands right now, in the way taxes are done, my idea is completely ridiculous.


yes it is.



You need to do a complete revamp of the taxation system. I agree that local taxes are far more important that Federal ones.


I agree to. Let's end all federal taxes.



No I don't agree with taxing small businesses, I was speaking of personal income.


Corporate is corporate. And many small business owner's get hit twice.



As for charity, I give about 20% of my income to charity, cause me and my family just don't need it.


Now we agree on something, and I admire your philanthropy. This is what makes a great Country.



I was stating on the grander scale, I understand why the rich don't give, cause money is addicting, and for a long time I horded money and was against taxation of the rich...


Completely your choice (and a popular one at that). Also, I have no problem with it...for you see, by 'hoarding' (I'll call saving or investing), you then become able to buy bigger things (when you feel up to it). You also can give back to the community MUCH better than any government could ever wish too.

It's a good thing.


until I realized how ridiculous it was that people who make less than I do pay more taxes.


That part I don't understand. The tax bracket's go up from 10% to 35% (this is pure income mind, you, the 'average' american pays another 15-20% of his income on everything he buys).
So you'd be in the 28% or 33% (depending if you were married). I'm in the 25% tax bracket.

You don't have to be a math wiz to know that 28% of 250k is more than 28% of 60k. So naturally 25% of 60k is even more less than 28% of 250k.

You pay more taxes, more unfairly than I pay. And I pay more unfairly than someone making less than 30k/yr.

How are you paying less in taxes? Oh, let's not forget Capital gains, somewhere around 50%....for what, investing and trying to help another company grow!!!?!!?




Do you think it's ok that YOU pay more taxes than I do?


I don't think I pay more than you do.



I probably do far less work that you do as well.


That's relative. Someone with an IQ of 95 would much rather work a construction site, than be responsible for landing a multi-billion dollar aircraft from orbit. Any sane person that is.

There is no such thing as fair. Some people just have it better off. It's that way for a reason.



posted on May, 10 2010 @ 09:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by tothetenthpower

So your ok with a company like let's say Microsoft, who make let's say 20 Billion a year in PROFIT, doesn't have to give anything back?

That's a very strange way of thinking.

~Keeper


I've been to Redmond. Holy Crap MS has some nice stuff up there. Very clean because of them too (I'm a C# developer). Their employees get paid damn well too (unfortunately I'm not one of them
). But you know what? They'd probably get paid even better if MS weren't taxed.



posted on May, 10 2010 @ 09:31 PM
link   
Every once in awhile, one of these "Who should pay what taxes" threads appear and I become instantly astounded that so few people can see the reality of the situation.

First of all, taxes, albeit evil, are a necessity to operate a society - period. However, that being said, what has happened is that "taxation" has become a cudgel of BOTH political parties in order for them to further their agendas. Whether that agenda is to divide people, create a western caste system, enrich connected political cronies or buy votes matters not. Both parties have wielded the great club of taxation against their enemies and for their allies - much to the detriment of society as a whole.

The solution? Remove the cudgel. How? It is so simple, so elementary that it continues to escape our political elite - or does it? An armed man who wields an effective weapon rarely gives it up willingly. It becomes OUR job, the people, to render them ineffective by voting them out and replacing them with people who are interested in the solution.

So, I digress, the solution you ask? A simple and universal flat tax sans deductions and loopholes. This is very, very simple and would increase revenues while significantly reducing costs. Post a direct 15% income tax and a direct 10% sales tax except for food and medicine. Those earning more, by default, will pay more but the SAME percentage as everyone else - last time I checked 15% of 1 million dollars was significantly more than 15% of $50,000. Next, one can control their taxes via their spending. A millionaire purchasing a yaught will pay 10% - the same as a pauper buying a rowboat - but the amount the millionaire will pay will be significantly higher due to the price tag of his toy.

Next, fixed government costs are reduced because it is no longer necessary to have the bloated IRS for logging and enforcement. A fraction of the peple can manage this very simple and elementary system.

This works and satisfies EVERYONE's needs. EVERYONE contributes an EQUAL share of their income to ensure that society can continue to operate. And NO ONE can game the system to escape paying their fair share, yet no one get's gouged paying more than they should. See? Simple!



posted on May, 10 2010 @ 09:33 PM
link   
Some of you have no clue just how filthy rich some Americans are. Most wealth can be traced back to less than ethical methods of acquisition. Look at the Rockefellers. Look at Bernie Madoff. You think just because they caught Bernie Madoff there aren't thousdands out there like him. Look at Frank Mcourt owner of the Dodgers. The guy's wife is trying to collect $1 million dollars a month in living expenses. There is no reason why one person deserves to be a multimillionaire. If that's the case why stop with that? Why not one day have one human being own all the real estate in the world. What's wrong with that? I mean let's not cut ourselves short. One man owning the whole world. Why not?



posted on May, 10 2010 @ 09:34 PM
link   


I agree to. Let's end all federal taxes.


Yup.



Corporate is corporate. And many small business owner's get hit twice.


Not all small businesses are corporations.



Now we agree on something, and I admire your philanthropy. This is what makes a great Country.


Agreed. I wish everybody who made this much did the same.



Completely your choice (and a popular one at that). Also, I have no problem with it...for you see, by 'hoarding' (I'll call saving or investing), you then become able to buy bigger things (when you feel up to it). You also can give back to the community MUCH better than any government could ever wish too.


Let's be honest here, if you are a multi millionaire, which I will admit I am, you can afford anything, or mostly anything, a few times over.

Why the excess? Why does one need to have SO much. I mean I could quit my job right now, give my businesses to my employees and continue living the ridiculously comfortable lifestyle I have till the day I died and never have to worry about money.

So in a logical sense, you should not be bothered with perhaps paying a little more in taxes. I'm not saying tax them 90%, I mean tax them a fair rate based on what they make and remove these ridiculous tax breaks.



That part I don't understand. The tax bracket's go up from 10% to 35% (this is pure income mind, you, the 'average' american pays another 15-20% of his income on everything he buys).
So you'd be in the 28% or 33% (depending if you were married). I'm in the 25% tax bracket.

You don't have to be a math wiz to know that 28% of 250k is more than 28% of 60k. So naturally 25% of 60k is even more less than 28% of 250k.

You pay more taxes, more unfairly than I pay. And I pay more unfairly than someone making less than 30k/yr.

How are you paying less in taxes? Oh, let's not forget Capital gains, somewhere around 50%....for what, investing and trying to help another company grow!!!?!!?

I don't think I pay more than you do.


You do pay more taxes. Once you factor in all the tax breaks and cuts I get, sales tax and every other tax from bottle deposits the most minute of fees, YOU pay more.

YOU have less in your pocket at the end of the day. It's really sad.

As for fairness, I agree there's nothing that's "fair", but I'm sure we could develop a system that's "fair" most of the time for "most" people.

~Keeper



[edit on 5/10/2010 by tothetenthpower]



posted on May, 10 2010 @ 09:37 PM
link   
reply to post by kozmo
 


I'm not all against that. Though I think 10% is far too high for sales tax if you're already skimming people by making them work for 3 months out of the year for free (15% income)...

I believe Hong Kong had a flat income tax of 12% for individuals, and 15% for business. No matter the net profit for the individual, nor the business. And that was the only tax......in that country.......EVER.

They seemed to get along just fine. I think that was during British rule, not sure how it's set up now...



posted on May, 10 2010 @ 09:41 PM
link   
reply to post by kozmo
 


That actually makes a lot of sense. I guess flat taxes would work if they were carried out in this way.

Although I think people would have a problem with the sales tax portion.

I'm use to it cause Canadians have a set sales tax or GST for each province, mine's currently 14% I think.

Except for food...

~Keeper



posted on May, 10 2010 @ 09:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Arcane Demesne
 


Agreed, but I think your math may be a little off... It's not 3 months, it's 1.8 months at 15% - or 1 month, 3 weeks and 2 days.



posted on May, 10 2010 @ 09:45 PM
link   
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 


So we're more or less basically in agreement except for one issue. The issue of forcibly stealing more from some one, than from some one else.

I don't disagree that there's no point in making more money once you've reached a certain level....But if you're not running a slave trade, and you're paying fair salaries...it is your right to keep the rest and do what you wish.

There is no morality issue there. It's your money. You do with it what you wish. I don't believe in taxing people differing amounts.

There should be ONE tax. At the state level, at the end of the fiscal year. And you should only pay 15% of your net profit (so you do not pay taxes on anything else). Then the Fed Gov can beg the states for money. The way it was meant to be set up.



posted on May, 10 2010 @ 09:47 PM
link   
reply to post by Arcane Demesne
 


In that case we agree on everything. I just think if were going to go the progressive tax route, we should be taxing those who make more, more.

To me it was pretty simple, although I can see your point and it's a good one at that.

As for the fair wages, I do run them like slaves, although I pay 50% more than what they would make doing the same job for Microsoft or another of the big companies.

I believe that you pay your people by what they provide you. Well paid employees work harder and more efficiently.

~Keeper



posted on May, 10 2010 @ 09:48 PM
link   
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 


Nah, 10% sales tax would be a piece of cake. Remember, you are exempting essentials like food and medicine. Most states have somewhere between 5% and 8.5% already. You have to remember also that a portion of this would derive your state and local taxes.

So, in essence, the taxation is straight-forward with no room to escape. Most people would be poscketing much, much more of their earnings and could afford a few extra percentage points on non-essentials. This would also help to contribute to saving as people would think carefully before making large purchases. I believe that could aid in stabalizing the economy and take some of the ciolent swings out of the equation.



posted on May, 10 2010 @ 09:49 PM
link   
reply to post by kozmo
 


Perhaps your right.

Another bonus is how simple and easy it would be to keep track of such things, making corruption and cheating the system much harder.

~Keeper



posted on May, 10 2010 @ 10:02 PM
link   
reply to post by kozmo
 


Oh, I agree we'll be pocketing more. It' just a matter of what's reasonable. And I don't believe our government needs to run on 80% of what they take right now. It's all mismanagement, insider trading, and really bad decisions.

I'll bite for the Fair Tax if it was low enough.

www.youtube.com...

Stossel is my hero, and he makes a persuasive argument for it.



posted on May, 11 2010 @ 12:39 AM
link   
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 


You hoard your money? What do you do? Put it in a mattress or dig a hole and place it in there inside a can?

You don't invest? You don't spend it?

How about you take that money you hoard and, gee, maybe loan some to somebody to open a business? Or, give it all away. Yeah, that's the ticket!

I know there needs to be some balance between the have nots who cannot seem to get "it", and the haves, who seem to have it "all".

But there needs to be an earning process for the have nots.

A flat tax is nice, I suppose. But there would need to be some sort of exemptions, you know, for those that only have enough income to pay for basic life supporting items. Food is one of them, for sure. And those expemptions would also apply to the person who has 3 trillion dollars, too, instead of just 20,000 dollars. That would be fair. Yes?

I recall GHWB helped engineer a luxury tax on yachts. What happened? People who could afford yachts, didn't buy them. And the guys who worked at the companies who built yachts, lost their jobs. Great job in helping the underdog!! Sarcasm, for sure on my part.

I recall some clown who was filthy rich who claimed that he paid less taxes then his poorly paid secretary. Well, nobody was stopping this guy from paying more. Except himself, yet he wanted government to step in and make him pay more taxes, LOL LOL. Like he has no control over himself. LOL LOL

Let's make it simple. Flat tax, or, a progressive tax. No deductions. No reductions for expenses, no reductions for interest paid on house loans, etc. You made a million dollars, you pay 30 percent. You made 10,000 dollars, you pay 30 percent. Oh, that would be unfair. So, a ready made exemption, based upon inflation and number of family members, on a simple half page income tax report form,

Meanwhile, I am really tired of progressives complaining about they don't have to pay enough taxes. WTF? Pay more!! Leave the other guy alone. Let his conscience be his guide. Let your conscience guide you, or don't you have the moral strength to guide yourself?



posted on May, 11 2010 @ 01:05 AM
link   
reply to post by CowPatty
 


They printed more money, but it went into the wrong hands(and back pockets on the hill). The printed money(our tax money) should have been given back to the american people.



posted on May, 11 2010 @ 01:20 AM
link   
I have a business and don't consider my self rich by any means.

I pay an average of 240k in taxes every year.

I don't think I should EVER have to pay that much money to the gov't.

I hate paying taxes. I hate donating my money to charity.

I work and many other's work hard to attain the things in life they want and need.

To say you give away 20 percent of your income cause your family just " doesn't need it" is completely ignorant. Everyone needs the money in their pocket...it might not be today.....but that day always comes. (this is directed at the guy who claims to be "rich")

I wish we had a flat tax across the board. I don't use the roads, or public services anymore than the next guy!

If you are so up and ready to "give away" your own money then go write a check to your tax authority and in that little blank spot on the check where you fill out what it's for put "GIFT" Maybe you could write a little note about how you don't need it.



posted on May, 11 2010 @ 01:21 AM
link   
Alright, I will kind of Okay kozmo's idea.

But with one difference. No income tax what so ever.

Raise the sales tax across the board to say 20%. Hell, even 30-40% would be okay.

Here is the difference. There is no other tax what so ever. No property tax, no user fees, license fees etc etc etc to the millions of different taxes placed on us.

Now, with this, no tax on food, clothing to a certain dollar value and if renting, no tax on domicile.

One tax equally on everyone. Now, on business something could be adjusted like kozmo stated. BUT equally upon the big to the small.

The only reason we have income tax, property tax and all the other myriad of taxes is one thing and one thing only-CONTROL.

The right to Life, Liberty and Property is inherent to a free people. The taxation of our very labor and property removes these rights. Sales tax is the only fair and equitable taxation. The more you spend, the more you pay. Period.

That is how the super rich have created this chasm. Where they build all these huge schemes like foundations, charities, trusts, LLC's, partnerships, etc etc etc.

Equity is not that hard to do. The elite just make it seem so.



posted on May, 11 2010 @ 01:45 AM
link   
While taxes are indeed necessary to keep the grinding wheels of government moving, even with outrageous taxation, government moves slowly. What astound me, is even though a perpetual income tax had not been imposed upon the People for close to 150 years of the United States of America's history, and given that history begins with a tax revolt, not on income, but on tea for Christs sakes, and given that prior to the Revolution there was no income tax at all, and such a thing would be unthinkable to early American's, today any discussion about what is fair revolves around keeping this so called income tax in tact, but the debate rages on who should pay what amount. Why is income taxation even considered to be fair. Do not People have the Right to earn income? Is it fair that a Right be taxed?

Income taxation has facilitated a nation that is now in perpetual wars, whether it be the official undeclared wars now raging in Afghanistan and Iraq, or the unofficial declared wars on drugs, crime and poverty, not to mention "terror". Income taxation has facilitated the prison nation we've become in this "freest country in the world", and the U.S. now imprisons more People per capita than any other industrialized nation in the world, and per capita is now imprisoning more that the Soviet Union and China combined in their hey day of totalitarianism. Income taxation has facilitated the welfare nation we've become, and even with this government sponsored welfare, Americans remain charitable. Imagine how charitable they would be if their incomes weren't taxed.

Income taxation has facilitated the rise of the alphabet agencies, which of course includes the I.R.S., and that agency, unbelievably makes decisions on what constitutes a bona fide charity and even more unbelievably makes decisions on what constitutes a bona fide religion, which seems to be wholly abhorrent to the Establishment Clause, but let's talk about how we can keep this repugnant form of taxation and make it fair, instead of talk about what we can do to reign in the government and their thoughtless and reckless spending. Taxes are indeed necessary, but income taxation is not.



posted on May, 11 2010 @ 09:25 AM
link   
reply to post by MexicanTexan
 


No, it's not ignorant.

I don't need more money than what we have in savings.

I support 5 people.

4 children and my husband. My husband is a doctor so you can imagine he does pretty good without my income.

We don't live beyond our means and we don't buy huge, expensive things. We live comfortably, but we live modest.

What's the problem with that?

I"m sorry that you don't have the heart to give to those who aren't as fortunate as you are, but I do.

~Keeper



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join