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.
Originally posted by The_Oracle
Originally posted by neoholographic
I'll answer with another question, that is: Why do people want more money then they need? When is enough exactly?
Originally posted by wittgenstein
Should gambling be rewarded more then work and creativity?
Originally posted by wittgenstein
I agree! The super rich are incredibly unsophisticated. Owning a en.wikipedia.org... satisfies their ego more then contributing to society. I personally would get a bigger thrill ( ego, nothing noble about it) from solving world hunger then be known for owning a real cool looking egg!
Originally posted by Hefficide
I've found your argument both cogent and compelling. But I have one reservation still...
Simply enforcing a flat tax would surely prove problematic without a total rewrite of tax code and a slew of laws to prevent money from bypassing taxes through offshore entities.I realize that these same problems exist today - but it seems to me that they'd be exacerbated in a system where society only got one swing at the ball. Currently even if a person becomes wealthy enough to funnel their funds around the laws... well if they buy an private jet - they're still paying taxes on the purchase, fuel, permitting, licensing, etc...
In honesty do you think that the wealthy would trade away the openness of our current banking and business laws - regarding all scopes of income - in exchange for far less opportunity to game the system but with a solid flat tax?
~Heff
"The people who were doing this were economically several levels below Romney," Shaviro says. "Kind of affluent people, with their own businesses, say. Cash businesses, things like that."
Originally posted by wittgenstein
Agreed! All I am saying is that if you gamble on a stock (lets say) you should pay the same % on the profit as you would if you had actually worked for that money. Note, that I am not saying that starting a small business is not work. What I am saying is that one should pay the same % for ANY money one makes!
The analogy still holds. Winning money by gambling is still ganbling if the money is won by betting on a stock or gambling at Vegas.
Agreed! What’s your point? All I am saying is that that Wal-Mart worker should pay the same % in taxes as one that makes his money via gambling ( capital gains etc).
Originally posted by meticulous
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.
Originally posted by Xtrozero
I don't understand your point...
Are you saying there should not be a cap and the richer you are the more you pay into it? Does this mean the more you pay into it then the bigger your SS check will be when you retire. REAL WORLD is that the SS system is really for those who make under 110,000. I wish I had the choice to pay into that retirement system, but I didn't even though I never wanted to, but it is a retirement system that is totally different than typical Taxes.
With SS geared for the lower tax brackets then a man at 66 who made 50k would get an SS of 45% of his earnings, and a man who made 150k would get 20% of his earnings in SS at age 66.
Another thing... I will never use Medicare too, but I paid into it my whole life. Should we also raise this up so more people at the top should pay more into it and will never use it?
I really don't understand this idea of pushing everything off on the top 6% (over 105k in earnings).
edit on 19-8-2012 by Xtrozero because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by meticulous
Yes, you missed the point completely that Social Security is still a form of “TAX” that every legal citizen pays into. It was used as JUST ONE EXAMPLE of imbalances in the tax code that do not scale with higher incomes. The people below that $110,100 cap pay in a much higher percentage of their TOTAL wages to taxes in general.
Originally posted by HEYJOSE
Lets not call them rich anymore, lets call them what they really are thieves. So your question makes perfect sense in that regard, why ask a thief to pay taxes on what he has stolen? And don't give me that crap that they're smarter or they work harder....that is complete bollocks. You are living in a Kleptocracy, they are stealing everything that isn't nailed down and then everything that is nailed down. They don't work harder, they're not smarter they just STEAL and get rewarded for it by a rotten, corrupt, evil and sadistic system. But you know what the three gates of hell are Lust, anger and GREED. If you will now excuse me, I will take a step back from the middle door because I do not want to get too close.edit on 19-8-2012 by HEYJOSE because: Passive-Aggressive answer is no answer.
Originally posted by cfnyaami
reply to post by neoholographic
"To whom much is given, much is required."
New Testament
--look it up.
It feels good to help your fellow beings...seven generations!