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.

 

Why should the rich pay more taxes?

page: 5
10
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 02:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by wildtimes

The diff is that the top toppiest toppers are paying NOTHING, because they have off-shore accounts, foreign "income" bases, and numerous other "non-taxed" things like (if I remember correctly from NPR) capital gains.


I do agree that there needs to be changes here, and flat or fair tax may be the answer. The top toppiest still pay 20+% of all income tax so though changes need to be made I think a much straight forward tax system that doesn't allow for ANY credits or write-offs is our best bet. The percentages are much lower than many might think too.. Like 10% for the .01%ers

You bring up a good question...if the top .01 percent pay no taxes and the bottom 47% also do not pay any taxes what is the difference? Raising taxes, as Obama wants to do without changing how we figure taxes will still not touch the ones that use the loop holes to their benefit. BTW using loop holes is not a bad or evil thing to do. Raising taxes will only affect those who really should not have their taxes raised in the first place.




posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 02:03 AM
link   
reply to post by Hefficide
 


-SCOTUS does not uphold amendments, amendments are ratified by the Congress and state legislatures. If an amendment passes this process SCOTUS can't strike it down. It further took an amendment to give women the vote, not a court case.

-How is discriminating on tax, racist and sexist? Classist yes, but I don't think the dependent class should vote.

-I prefer a government that isn't socialist over your skewed "republic" You favor the idea that some can legally steal from others, that is wrong.

-What you describe is charity, not what should be the role of government

-You don't care about the 1st Amendment rights of people in business but are happy to endorse rights not mentioned in the Constitution

-The Chinese economy is in a slowdown, if it was more free market like ROC-Taiwan and South Korea they would be far richer.

-The purpose of the government is to prevent tyranny of the majority, not the other way around

-You give the rich too much credit, unless the eleceytions are all fraudulent (which given your left wing statements about "poll taxes" means you presumably don't like Voter ID) the people voted in the current governments. If they were too lazy to do research prior to voting, then they reap what they sow.

-Im from Ohio and I remember how Voinovich poisoned pilled the original tax cuts back in 2001, I want them renewed indefinitely barring full reform of the system.



posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 02:06 AM
link   
reply to post by watcher3339
 


I don't want to be reduced to dhimmi status, in effect the original term of apartheid.

(The terms kaffir in SA apartheid and Islamic Sharia share a very close relationship...)

The Brotherhood is killing Copts as we speak in Egypt, if we don't call them on the carpet NOW it will be genocide.

The Chinese are much nastier with Muslims than we are.



posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 02:15 AM
link   
reply to post by Xtrozero
 



You bring up a good question...if the top .01 percent pay no taxes and the bottom 47% also do not pay any taxes what is the difference? Raising taxes, as Obama wants to do without changing how we figure taxes will still not touch the ones that use the loop holes to their benefit. BTW using loop holes is not a bad or evil thing to do. Raising taxes will only affect those who really should not have their taxes raised in the first place.

I think we need to change how we figure taxes. Not arguing with you there. My household (for now) falls in the "paying taxes" category....but in the past I have lived in the "got a refund" world as well.....

A flat tax makes sense to me.
Someone who earns $1000 pays $150.
Someone who earns $1-million pays $150,000.

But, someone who earns $10 billion pays...nothing???? No. Nononono.
Someone who earns $10billion pays $150,000,000.

Fair and square.
And everyone in between!!...same thing....15%. Do away with all the bejillions of "code" tweaks....
:
Here is what you owe. 15% of your gross income. It just is what it is.

That way, we'd all pay a proportionate amount for the infrastructure and well-being of our community. No loopholes or breaks or off-shore protected accounts....if you are a citizen of the USA, you pay taxes to the USA in proportion to how much you earned regardless of in which country you 'earned' it!


Peace.



posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 02:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by wildtimes
while neglecting the dignity and standard of living of the people actually doing the work, and producing the profits. Why are they not entitled to a respectable and healthy share of the profits, but the "stock-holders" are??


Well most companies offer one or more of bonuses, stock options or matching 401ks. For me the uber rich might as well be living on a different planet, but for the rest of us what do you think a honest day pay should be?

I think it is a slippery slope in how one raises the standard of living for the "worker". Is the worker's standard of living low because they do not make enough or is it because we have 15 trillion dollars of debt and everything costs too much due to an out of control Government? When I was young I complained to my dad that I bust my butt and make crap. He asked me what was the job worth and I said about what I make....

With that I made sure later in life to get the skills and education needed for the higher paying jobs. A job's worth is really in what skill is needed to do it. A low skill job, even if you do it your whole life is still a low skill job and will not pay very well. The reason it doesn't pay very well is because it is easy to fill and train people to do it, even when it is really hard work.

The Government we have right now wants to put the blame on the private sector (as in workers are not being paid enough) even when the problems are mostly staring us right in the face with an out of control Government.

We get into hyper inflation like Germany was before WWII and a wheel barrow of money might get you a loaf of bread, so just think of a America with a much smaller Federal Government and a fair tax system that benefits all, wouldn't that be nice, but it all starts and ends with the Government.











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



posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 02:32 AM
link   
reply to post by TheCoolKids
 



Originally posted by TheCoolKids

-SCOTUS does not uphold amendments, amendments are ratified by the Congress and state legislatures. If an amendment passes this process SCOTUS can't strike it down. It further took an amendment to give women the vote, not a court case.


You stated that the SCOTUS has not upheld voting as a right.I proved that statement to be factually inaccurate. Maybe we're misunderstanding one another one some level.


Originally posted by TheCoolKids

-How is discriminating on tax, racist and sexist? Classist yes, but I don't think the dependent class should vote.


Because women and minorities make less money than white males do? Seems like a good answer to me... And one that is researchable and supported here.


Originally posted by TheCoolKids

-I prefer a government that isn't socialist over your skewed "republic" You favor the idea that some can legally steal from others, that is wrong.


You seem to prefer a nation that is not the United States? I don't understand the concept of acting as if you idealize the very thing you are seemingly trying to destroy? You put the word "Republic" in quotations and also lower cased it. You do realize that you pledge allegiance to the flag and to the Republic for which it stands?


Originally posted by TheCoolKids

-What you describe is charity, not what should be the role of government


This is your opinion. Others share it, but obviously not the majority because the laws of the land say that these things are the role of government.


Originally posted by TheCoolKids

-You don't care about the 1st Amendment rights of people in business but are happy to endorse rights not mentioned in the Constitution


That's quite an assumption. When did I state that I don't care about any right? Heck... I'm the one who's here protecting our enumerated rights in this debate. You accuse me of cherry picking - but I think that might be a tad bit of projection on your part.


Originally posted by TheCoolKids

-The Chinese economy is in a slowdown, if it was more free market like ROC-Taiwan and South Korea they would be far richer.


That's arguable but it remains that China has a strong economy.


Originally posted by TheCoolKids

-The purpose of the government is to prevent tyranny of the majority, not the other way around


That's actually strikingly similar to the statements made by members of the Confederacy previous to and during the Civil War.

It didn't work out too well for them.


But still - this is why we have a bicameral legislature and separation of the powers.


Originally posted by TheCoolKids

-You give the rich too much credit, unless the eleceytions are all fraudulent (which given your left wing statements about "poll taxes" means you presumably don't like Voter ID) the people voted in the current governments. If they were too lazy to do research prior to voting, then they reap what they sow.


See... Now... this is what I was waiting for. An ad-hom argument. You've not only labeled me but you've also planted seeds insinuating that I must lack character or intellect. Poor, poor sportsmanship Sir.

I give the rich credit for many things. Many of them earned their money - others didn't. Many are generous, others aren't. Many give back to society, others don't.

My point is I am not generalizing and painting with a wide brush. Doing so can only lead to incorrect conclusions.


Originally posted by TheCoolKids

-Im from Ohio and I remember how Voinovich poisoned pilled the original tax cuts back in 2001, I want them renewed indefinitely barring full reform of the system.


I'm fine with you wanting things. I'm not judging your greed or lack thereof. But I am calling it as I see it and the expiration of temporary tax cuts is NOT a tax increase.

If somebody gives me a coupon for a free can of soup - am I being "robbed blind" the next time I want a can and have no coupon? Of course not. This is an invalid argument.

~Heff
edit on 8/19/12 by Hefficide because: clarity



posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 02:54 AM
link   
reply to post by Xtrozero
 


The Government we have right now wants to put the blame on the private sector (as in workers are not being paid enough) even when the problems are mostly staring us right in the face with an out of control Government.

We get into hyper inflation like Germany was before WWII and a wheel barrow of money might get you a loaf of bread, so just think of a America with a much smaller Federal Government and a fair tax system that benefits all, wouldn't that be nice, but it all starts and ends with the Government.

Totally agree with this ^^^.

The government is so not for the people and by the people....
it is an embarrassment. IMHO.



posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 03:14 AM
link   
reply to post by neoholographic
 


Sadly the whole first post is an exercise in trying to convince us why the rich should be allowed to get richer by utilizing loopholes created by - the rich.



posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 04:01 AM
link   
Here’s 100% proof for this discussion:

The 2012 MAXIMUM taxable earnings for the Social Security caps is $110,100. Any person that makes $110,100 pays in the exact same amount in taxes to Social Security as someone making over $1,000,000+.
Anything made over that first $110,100 is tax free for the rich because the current tax rate does NOT scale along with the higher income because of the cap.

REAL WORLD: Most low to middle income families don’t even clear $110,100 in wages a year. They will end up paying that tax on 100% of their income whereas the people that make over $110,100 scale less and less tax % with the more money they make.



posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 06:06 AM
link   
so much of the problems the local, state, and federal gov'ts are experiencing now are a direct result the events caused by the little wall street game that was playing with the real estate, slicing and dicing the notes up, and bundling them up, selling them around the world as AAA worthy securities... when the knew danged well they were not!!

increase the capital gains tax!!! let those who profited the most pay for their own mistake. maybe if you did that, some of the money that is flowing into the wall street casino will be redirected to main street and these rich people will again start investing in businesses and people instead of playing hot potato with phony paper with empty promises!



posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 06:19 AM
link   

Why should the rich pay more taxes?

Answer - they shouldn't have to. Not at all.

- EVERYONE should pay the same percentage no matter how much or little they make. That's the only 'fair tax' .. the only way that everyone will be 'paying their fair share'.

- Looting from those who have earned more is nothing more than stealing. It's jealousy in the extreme and, saying that it's okay to rob successful people simply because they are more successful is using excuses for theft because of that jealousy.

- Get spending under control and no one would have to pay nearly as much as they do now in taxes. Reign in government handouts .. entitlements .. union payoffs .. bailouts .. etc etc etc ...

- People deserve to keep what they earn. If they earn more .. it's THEIRS. You have no right to it.

- This 'soak the rich' bull is nothing more than class warfare .. it's looting .. it's stealing ... it's WRONG.

Thats the truth. Something that cheerleaders in class warfare don't like to face.



posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 06:27 AM
link   
reply to post by wildtimes
 

Who do you think you are? Who are you to arbitrarily decide how much is 'too much' and how much someone should be able to earn or keep? A salary cap? A savings cap? A property cap? :shk:



posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 06:39 AM
link   
I think the question is,

why does the single mother making $26,000 a year have to pay $2,000 dollars in taxes, while the person making $3,000,000.00 only has to pay $2,000 in taxes?

explain that to me and i'll agree the rich shouldnt have to pay more in taxes.



posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 06:53 AM
link   
Q: Why should the rich pay more taxes?

A: Because they have more money.



posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 07:31 AM
link   
When your really rich, the idea is that you're using money to make more money. So that it, at best turns into a loop, or you see a return on investment simply by moving money into something that sees a return.

Instead of working hard for it, doing a hard slog day in day out barely surviving after bills like a poor person.


Originally posted by sligtlyskeptical
It is because people don't get rich without riding the backs of others. I think profits made on the backs of other people should be taxed higher than profits made through one's own sweat.

I disagree, merely because it's a generalization but I can see where you're coming from.



posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 07:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by neoholographic
Can you blame Steve Jobs (R.I.P.) for being rich because people line up around the world to buy iPhones and iPads?

Can you blame Mark Cuban for being rich because Yahoo acquired Broadcast.com for 5.9 billion?

This class warfare nonsense needs to stop.


No, but I can despise the insane greed and hoarding of wealth that will never be used in a lifetime.

I can believe that it is morally repugnant that a rich person "avoids" contributing to their society, and I recognize that an education system will cost the same regardless, so if those wealthy people choose to avoid paying their fair share then it has to come from somewhere else - you and I.

The class warfare exists because many recognize that for every wealthy person who chooses to pay less back into their communities the poor and middle classes have to pick up the tab.

Those who are completely able to pay their fair share of tax and refuse to because of their own greed are forcing you and I to bail them out on a daily basis. Not only are they the wealthiest people in society, with tax hardly affecting them at all even if they did pay what they should, they expect US to pay their taxes for them too.

You're suggesting that the poor and middle classes should just pay less, so how do you propose that a failed education system be supported? How about the military? What about social programs? And lets remember that under this unbalanced system the USA has grown trillions of $'s in debt too. How do you propose that be paid without raising taxes on anyone?

The system is unbalanced. Those who can afford to pay their fair level of tax should not have an opportunity to avoid it.

This is one of the fundamental problems, and it will come to the surface when the US is forced to enact austerity measures after November.

Wait until early next year - that's when you'll see the REAL class war starting as millions of Americans find themselves suddenly thrust into poverty, companies shutting down every day, states going bust one after another... that is what is going to happen unless the US government grows a pair and actually changes the tax laws so that those who can pay DO PAY.



posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 08:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheCoolKids
reply to post by watcher3339
 


The Brotherhood is killing Copts as we speak in Egypt, if we don't call them on the carpet NOW it will be genocide.


Are we talking Alidan. Maybe steppenwolf

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



posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 08:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheCoolKids
reply to post by Hefficide
 


Why not start taxing the 47% not paying income tax and ending the waste of the welfare system?

The tax cuts are only temporary because George Voinovich inserted the language as a poison pill back in 2001.

They should have always been permanent as Bush campaigned on.


These people are paying taxes this is just what the GOP says to make it seem like the bottom half are freeloaders. The reason why the bottom half get so much back at tax time is because they are living below the poverty line. Why bother taxing people that make beneath the poverty line anyway.

We should start a 99% death tax because most of the people crying about taxes inherited their wealth anyway so why shouldn't money that you didn't work for be taxed more?



posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 08:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan
reply to post by wildtimes
 

Who do you think you are? Who are you to arbitrarily decide how much is 'too much' and how much someone should be able to earn or keep? A salary cap? A savings cap? A property cap? :shk:


Food cap rations because starving people, education cap because of dumb ass's.

If everyone was capped at a million, not long after
everyone has a million, then what is it w0rth. $0



posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 08:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Why should the rich pay more taxes?

Answer - they shouldn't have to. Not at all.

- EVERYONE should pay the same percentage no matter how much or little they make. That's the only 'fair tax' .. the only way that everyone will be 'paying their fair share'.

- Looting from those who have earned more is nothing more than stealing. It's jealousy in the extreme and, saying that it's okay to rob successful people simply because they are more successful is using excuses for theft because of that jealousy.

- Get spending under control and no one would have to pay nearly as much as they do now in taxes. Reign in government handouts .. entitlements .. union payoffs .. bailouts .. etc etc etc ...

- People deserve to keep what they earn. If they earn more .. it's THEIRS. You have no right to it.

- This 'soak the rich' bull is nothing more than class warfare .. it's looting .. it's stealing ... it's WRONG.

Thats the truth. Something that cheerleaders in class warfare don't like to face.


Why is it when people want to tax the wealth it's class warfare? And people seem to ignore the war the wealthy has waged against the poor and the middle class which they have almost already destroyed.



new topics




 
10
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join