Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Why should the rich pay more taxes?

page: 3
10
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 12:27 AM
link   
reply to post by TheCoolKids
 


whining about the distribution of wealth and demanding Hollande level taxation is what the left does

Whining and demanding??

I don't know how you obtained your concept of "the left", and frankly I can't tell for sure, but now see that you are probably American....
who said anything about legalizing 20 million illegal immigrants? (Not that I oppose it -- they work hard and are generally very decent people, in my experience)

I wish people would stop referring to the "left" as "communists"..... it's just not so.




posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 12:28 AM
link   
reply to post by TheCoolKids
 


So... to be clear. You now want to tie rights to an ability to purchase them?

If you aren't *this rich* then you can't vote? Am I understanding?

That's a slippery slippery slope. One which totally avoids addressing the crux of my statements... these were temporary tax cuts - not tax hikes.

~Heff



posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 12:28 AM
link   
reply to post by wildtimes
 


The debate is over whether or not the Bush tax cuts on the top bracket should be extended permanently, therefore a discussion solely of federal income tax.

47% of the people either get more back in benefits, EITC, or come out even. 53% pay the frieght. The top 1% pays 40% of all the taxes.

The 47% not paying net income federal tax still gets to vote for Congress, and votes mostly for left wing representatives who are fans of transfer payments and large government.

That isn't fair. The only reason why it isn't worse *(until 2014 when the obamacare surtaxes go into effect) is because most of the dependent population doesn't vote.



posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 12:34 AM
link   
reply to post by Hefficide
 


Voting is not a right, nor should it be one.

The basis of representation is taxation, that is what the revolution was fought over. We wanted representation in Parliament, they did not grant us that, so we left.

The founders feared democracy because it is tyranny of the majority, while in time restrictions on race and sex went away (rightly because they can pay taxes) it was wrong to remove the property classification (which should be modernized to restrict those voting for Congress dependent on payment of net income tax as long as we have such as system)

People who are takers vote to take from the makers, that is the ideology of the left in this country. They do not like individual achivement and responsibility.

People who do not pay net taxes to a governing district should not have the privilege of voting for representatives for said district.

Of course we could fix this by using a flat tax of 15% for all.



posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 12:38 AM
link   
reply to post by TheCoolKids
 


The debate is over whether or not the Bush tax cuts on the top bracket should be extended permanently, therefore a discussion solely of federal income tax.

Okay, fine. Got it.
Answer to whether or not to extend the top bracket cuts: No.

Do you realize how many people have lost their jobs due to out-sourcing and foreign bank accounts/tax shelters? It is a myth to think that the top bracket is not working the system (and bribing the "system"......representation, eh?? Yeah, sure. I have this PAC I'd like you to donate to. . It's for a worthy cause)......



posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 12:39 AM
link   
reply to post by wildtimes
 


Most illegal aliens are paid under the table and use fraud to obtain welfare payments. It is also highly integrated with the cartels.

Not to mention a permanent left wing majority because Texas will be flipped into the blue column.

The left has an ugly historical record of being too chummy with communism, the pulitzer awarded to the NYT in WWII for being a Stalin mouthpiece is one of the ugliest.

I don't think the left wants to replicate Marxism-Leninism, but in this country they want the same stupid policies of Jimmy Carter and the tax rates of Francois Hollande of France.



posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 12:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheCoolKids
reply to post by Hefficide
 


Voting is not a right, nor should it be one.

The basis of representation is taxation, that is what the revolution was fought over. We wanted representation in Parliament, they did not grant us that, so we left.

The founders feared democracy because it is tyranny of the majority, while in time restrictions on race and sex went away (rightly because they can pay taxes) it was wrong to remove the property classification (which should be modernized to restrict those voting for Congress dependent on payment of net income tax as long as we have such as system)

People who are takers vote to take from the makers, that is the ideology of the left in this country. They do not like individual achivement and responsibility.

People who do not pay net taxes to a governing district should not have the privilege of voting for representatives for said district.

Of course we could fix this by using a flat tax of 15% for all.


While your last point calms me slightly the rest of what you say I find abhorrent. We don't live in a democracy. We live in a Constitutional Republic so there is no tyranny of the majority there is the rule of law. And without that last quick comment on the flat tax it sounds very much like you advocate an entrenched nobility. People pay sales tax, driver's license fees (which let's be honest are a tax on driving), car inspections, and all other many of government dues. To endorse any kind of disenfranchisement takes us back hundreds of years to an age that was ended by revolutions. And it would just happen all over again.



posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 12:43 AM
link   
reply to post by TheCoolKids
 


Most illegal aliens are paid under the table and use fraud to obtain welfare payments. It is also highly integrated with the cartels.

Incorrect. Another misconception. I worked with that population for 8 years; they receive paychecks from which taxes are withheld; they fill out their forms and receive welfare (food assistance) ONLY for the citizen children who live with them. And they don't like the cartels any more than we do.

sigh

Last I heard, Texas wanted to enact legislation to limit the education of children, thus shoring up the Christian Right Wing Conservatives....(Gov Perry)...



posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 12:46 AM
link   
reply to post by wildtimes
 


Outsourcing led to foreign economic development that brought more Chinese and Indians out of poverty than the entire EU population, it isn't as bad as described.

Unless the tax evasion really amounts in the trillions (foreign profits don't count because I don't believe a government has the legitimate moral authority to tax things earned outside its jurisdiction), then welfare clearly outweighs it.

2/3rds of the budget is entitlement spending. Medicare is no longer sustainable after 2018, Social Security is terrible ROI and is broke in 2041. Neither program actually funds through current taxes, which makes them welfare in my eyes.

www.forbes.com...

We need to simplify the tax code to either a flat income tax of 15% or the FairTax plan. And limit fed gov spending to 20% of GDP when not in a declared war.

If it was up to me the top 10% which pays 90% of all taxes would control that same proportion of seats, the country would be far better run that way.



posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 12:49 AM
link   
reply to post by watcher3339
 


If you pay state sales tax, then you get the right to vote for state reps and Governor.

If you pay local property tax, you can vote for city council and school board.

If you pay fed income tax you can vote for the president elector slate and for Senators and Reps.

47% don't pay net fed income tax, what they "pay" is payroll tax which is supposed to be a mandatory savings account not a tax.

I don't think unless people pay fed tax they can vote in fed elections. The basis of representation is taxation, nothing else.

Rule of Law?

You must be joking here, Obama just granted executive amnesty and unilaterally attacked Libya.



posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 12:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheCoolKids
The debate is over whether or not the Bush tax cuts on the top bracket should be extended permanently, therefore a discussion solely of federal income tax.


Can someone explain to me what tax cuts the top bracket 5% gets that the bottom 95% do not get? I'm top 5% and I don't get the child tax credit... a credit that basically makes the typical family of 2 or 3 kids of around 60% range pay no taxes, AND actually pays INCOME to those with kids that make under 50k per year.
I also cannot use IRAs either so I can't lower my gross by packing money into a IRA.

On top of that I'm in the 28%+ club for taxes. Why does everyone think that all in the top brackets make their money from the stock market? That is such a far left (successful) talking point that is truly far from the truth.

Talking about investments...so let's say you have 100k to invest and you might end up with 50k at the end of the year or you might end up with 150K at the end of the year... if it the 50K gains was taxed at 50% would you ever even risk you money in the first place... I wouldn't.

Lastly...if EVERYONE paid 10% on their gross per year would not the top bracket still pay more no matter what? How much does it cost in federal income tax to be an American? For 47% of the country it cost nothing and if they have kids they actually get paid by the federal government to be an American.




That isn't fair. The only reason why it isn't worse *(until 2014 when the obamacare surtaxes go into effect) is because most of the dependent population doesn't vote.


A few truisms...

If someone gets a credit it is money in their pocket from nothing...

If someone gets huge tax breaks they need to pay huge taxes in the first place to get the breaks...

If Government subsidies are created then everyone and their brother will want to get on the bandwagon...forever, it's human nature to get something for nothing....

Why is Obama so popular?...see the line above....

The end result is.......wait for it.......... Greece....



edit on 19-8-2012 by Xtrozero because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 12:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheCoolKids
reply to post by wildtimes
 


Outsourcing led to foreign economic development that brought more Chinese and Indians out of poverty than the entire EU population, it isn't as bad as described.

Unless the tax evasion really amounts in the trillions (foreign profits don't count because I don't believe a government has the legitimate moral authority to tax things earned outside its jurisdiction), then welfare clearly outweighs it.

2/3rds of the budget is entitlement spending. Medicare is no longer sustainable after 2018, Social Security is terrible ROI and is broke in 2041. Neither program actually funds through current taxes, which makes them welfare in my eyes.

www.forbes.com...

We need to simplify the tax code to either a flat income tax of 15% or the FairTax plan. And limit fed gov spending to 20% of GDP when not in a declared war.

If it was up to me the top 10% which pays 90% of all taxes would control that same proportion of seats, the country would be far better run that way.


Outsourcing may be great for developing countries but it isn't great for this one. Elected leaders in this country should have an obligation to do what is right and best for *this* country and this country only regardless of how it impacts the profits of their largest campaign donors. You know the people who *want* developing countries to suddenly experience a huge increase in disposable income because then the people will all run out to buy tv's, refrigerators, and cars. Which consumers in developed nations only do at replacement value. So we are less profitable to them...

And, no offense, but I am going to use my vote to make sure that your idea of controlling seats based on wealth never comes to pass.

Now, on the spending and declared war thing we have more agreement. However, let's put all the wars, declared or not, on the books. And let's stop using our military in ways that benefit certain companies, and the rich men who run them.



posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 12:52 AM
link   
reply to post by wildtimes
 


If Obama (Democrats) grant amnesty, the newly legal voters will reward them in 2016, there are enough illegal aliens of voting age in Texas to flip it next time if it happens.

Amnesty is nothing but raw power, GWB wanted it because he wanted to flip California red, and Arnold could succeed him if the Constitution was amended (proposed in 2005 by Senator Hatch of UT)

One can use ID theft to get welfare benefits, not as hard as thought.

The cartels control the smuggling routes, they are in a symbiotic relationship.



posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 12:55 AM
link   
I just wish we could get our spending down in the gov and go back to the tax rate we had when it all began.

The problem isn't that their isn't enough revenue in the current tax system. The issue is we need to fix whats broken.

Once we cut out all the spending that's not necessary we can limit the amount the feds get and then have the states decide on the taxing on their own. I guarantee that if a law was passed that if a budget that worked wasn't passed by the next election cycle that the members of both the house and senate could be charged with treason, then we would have this fixed.

This is besides the arbitrary made up system of money.



posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 12:57 AM
link   
reply to post by TheCoolKids
 


Outsourcing led to foreign economic development that brought more Chinese and Indians out of poverty than the entire EU population, it isn't as bad as described.

Well, not for the Chinese and Indians, it isn't so "bad".....
I'm a tad more concerned at the number of unemployed who lost their jobs so those Chinese and Indians (and their governments and stock market traders) could benefit. While the "corporate kings" collect huge bonuses as they lay off more and more Americans, who want nothing but to be able to make ends meet and feed/clothe their kids...and maybe keep their houses. Ya know. Stuff like that.



posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 12:59 AM
link   
reply to post by watcher3339
 


Hogwash, the development of China and India saved the steel industry here among many others. If East Asia did not develop at the rate it did many jobs in export driven industries would never have existed.

Why do you want them to remain poor? Keep them dependent on foreign aid, you neocolonialist?

Most of our wars are to support foreign governments, the Saudis being the most notable and powerful.

Our oil compaines never did that well in the Iraq contracts and it will be years before the Afghan minerals get developed even if we win there, with the Chinese likely winning the contracts.

Profiteering is a sad reality of war, but I question why exactly Saddam should have been left in power and the same with the Taliban.

Now I do believe the wars were fought with poor strategy, but the cause wasn't wrong. A stable, democratic Middle East will secure the oil supply and with it the century's economic growth.



posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 12:59 AM
link   
reply to post by calnorak
 


I only get to give you one star, but think of it as 100...

thanks for chiming in.



posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 01:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by calnorak
I just wish we could get our spending down in the gov and go back to the tax rate we had when it all began.



This is true...we can tax the crap out of the rich and it would mean nothing...it is not how much you tax, but how much the Government spends. We will reach the point where we will have more people working for the Government (getting paid with taxes), and on Government subsidies (getting paid with taxes) then those who actually make money in the private sector and actually pay the taxes for all the others...once again Greece is our blue print for exactly this problem, and we are not too far behind.

If they cut the Government by 30% I would say it was a good start.......



posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 01:02 AM
link   
reply to post by wildtimes
 


When did a house in the burbs become a right?

Labor is a commodity, why exactly should an American be paid 10x and Indian for doing the same thing?

US cost of living is the problem, and East Asian labor costs are going up with their costs of living, the advantage there won't last much longer before the train moves again.

By dollar power and QoL we are better off than we were 20 years ago, just not in as a percentage of the global economy. It is hard to expect that we could continue being 20x productive that of East Asia forever.



posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 01:05 AM
link   
reply to post by TheCoolKids
 



Originally posted by TheCoolKids

Voting is not a right, nor should it be one


We both know that the Fifteenth Amendment says otherwise. But as a refresher:


The Fifteenth Amendment (Amendment XV) to the United States Constitution prohibits each government in the United States from denying a citizen the right to vote based on that citizen's "race, color, or previous condition of servitude" (for example, slavery). It was ratified on February 3, 1870.


If that is not enough, the Twenty Fourth Amendment fairly well specifically forbids what you suggest - by forbidding poll taxes. Let's define poll taxes:


poll tax noun

Definition of POLL TAX

: a tax of a fixed amount per person levied on adults and often linked to the right to vote


That's strike two against your statements.


Originally posted by TheCoolKids

The basis of representation is taxation, that is what the revolution was fought over. We wanted representation in Parliament, they did not grant us that, so we left.


This is absolutely true. But to argue that the inverse must then, also be true, is misleading and disingenuous. We all learn, early, that while all wogs are wags, not all wags are wogs.


Originally posted by TheCoolKids

The founders feared democracy because it is tyranny of the majority, while in time restrictions on race and sex went away (rightly because they can pay taxes) it was wrong to remove the property classification (which should be modernized to restrict those voting for Congress dependent on payment of net income tax as long as we have such as system)


Again - Fifteenth and Twenty Fourth Amendments totally negate this argument.


Originally posted by TheCoolKids

People who are takers vote to take from the makers, that is the ideology of the left in this country. They do not like individual achivement and responsibility.


While you're entitled to your opinions and to use whatever rhetoric you choose to - it is still opinion and rhetoric.


Originally posted by TheCoolKids

People who do not pay net taxes to a governing district should not have the privilege of voting for representatives for said district.


Again opinion, contrary to law and the rights of others.


Originally posted by TheCoolKids

Of course we could fix this by using a flat tax of 15% for all.


Flat taxes tend to favor the rich... And if they ever do pass? Well I guess the end is nigh


~Heff





new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join