It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
An income tax taxes INCOME, not wealth already owned.
Originally posted by charles1952
Perhaps the fact that the income tax fails to produce all the revenue the government wants accounts for the interest in raising the estate tax. That would be a way to get some of the wealth, but soon the market for offshore, secret accounts would be booming.
I have heard "fair share" over and over again. Would someone tell me what that means? Can you fairly pay yourself a certain per centage of everything your company makes? Is "fair share" when everyone has the same income? Is it that the highest paid person in the country can make no more than X times the lowest paid person?
The sandwich maker example looks at only one side of the equation. The government got the money that it gave to the sandwich maker by taking it from someone else who now doesn't have enough money to pay his employees, so they lose their jobs.
I wonder if this is a rant.
Originally posted by mnemeth1
Further, we must consider how billionaires become billionaires in the first place - largely through obtaining tax breaks, government contracts, bailouts, and other fascist interactions with government politicians who they own.
Any projected revenue gains from tax increases are a fantasy. The rich will simply move their money out of the US, and the jobs they create with their investment capital along with them.
Originally posted by CosmicCitizen
reply to post by sligtlyskeptical
Wealth is taxed in many forms. IF you own a big home you have a big property tax bill annually...same for other forms of property. IF you invest in stocks and bonds then you pay a tax on their gain but it seems unfair that you should be taxed 10% when the rate of return for low risk (relatively) investment income (ie Treasuries) is so low. It seems especially unfair to tax some one for what they have when it is less than the year before (imagine what would happen to the nation's weath if we had a prolonged depression like the 30s and you got hit for another 10% per year over the decade).
Originally posted by sligtlyskeptical
The solution is simple. Tax wealth and not income. Exempt anything below $5 million per person and tax the rest at 10% a year. If they aren't investing their wealth in productive means, eventually they will lose most of it. What have you done for us lately?
What strikes me as odd is that most of the people who make a case for tax cuts for the uber-rich are not uber-rich, and don't know anyone who is.
The truth is, most are middle class, and they are actively losing their lifestyle to benefit the top 2%.
Seems a little odd to me.