stevendedalus stevendedalus

Taxing The Rich

▼

Taxing The Rich

from JoeUser Forums

 

Exchanging ideas is essential to a free society. However, when on the tax system a letter writer who is a math teacher says the government ought not to penalize taxpayers who are wealthy owes to free speech the entire equation. The tax system does not nor should it consider a simplistic proportion as the writer advocates, for it is just another flat tax scam that sees no unfairness to one percentage fits all. Progressive tax is based on taxable income meaning income after one has had the ability and means to take care of himself reasonably well.

It is this differentiation between minimum essentials and play money left over that drives the concept of progressive tax. High income brackets are being taxed theoretically on nonessential income—income beyond basic creature comfort— but this is not as severe as it reads. In an enlightened society, even during the 90+% FDR era, loopholes were abundant for such things as capital gains, second homes, mortgage interest and real estate taxes, but primarily for business large and small to reinvest in their activity to maintain and create jobs, thus growing the economy.

As for charities the writer is worried about, FDR implied if you don’t extend the benefactor hand, the government will. That is why since then there have been so many partnerships of government and foundations that have substantially made life better for those in need.

partnerships government and taxation politics
63,553 views 135 replies
Reply #26 from JoeUser Forums Top

 If you want to have a big car and fancy house and all the rest whatever it may be, good for you. However most of the people in the country can't afford that.

I don't see why not.

Most people in the country have a work permit and work is all that is needed to make money to buy all those things.

 

You're upset because they took a good portion of your income away to pay for things such as roads, military, etc. It's understandable, but the money has to come from somewhere.

No, he isn't.

I have known Draginol/Frogboy for years. He is a supporter of taxes and even a progressive income tax system. What he is upset about, and maybe that is difficult to understand, is that other people, mostly those who contribute nothing or very little to the country's welfare, keep pretending that they ought to have the right to define how much is "enough".

I can only recommend that anyone who knows how much is "enough" work as much as is necessary to make that amount and leave it up to other people to decide for themselves how much is "enough" for them.

 

Reply #27 from JoeUser Forums Top

well welll still you all do not get it

there is an answer out there but you all are too blind to see it or you have been so brainwashed so much you can not accept the simple truth

what is this answer to all this well go to youtube.com checkout my channels at jdcriveau and there you will find the answers to all this hogwash you are complaining about

of course some of you are so brainwashed that you may find me amusing or comical but the truth is why do you all idots out there believe that a politician has to be the answers to our problems

OH YEA THE POLITICAL PARTIES HAVE TOLD YOU SO IT MUST BE TRUE    ah you are such a fool

so to all you who have a brain and are free thinkers checkout youtube.com jdcriveau and listen to what he is saying about taxes and how to deal with this problem

as the rest continue to go on complaining and do nothing

jd

Elemental: Reforged
Reply #28 from JoeUser Forums Top

In addition, one only has to make a little over $3 million to pay over a million in federal taxes.

Oh, c'mon, now--that's BS. No one in that bracket leaves themselves vulnerable without ferreting out every conceivable tax shelter.

3mil in taxable income would be closer to $10mil groaa. 

close that tax avoidance system and you've just removed a major incentive for people to donate money.
As FDR felt the greater the margin the greater the incentive to donate.:D

 

 

Reply #29 from JoeUser Forums Top

Oh, my such cynicism. Lions, and tigers and bears out there, oh, my!

Your half right this is the land of Oz, oblivious to what is happening. But it's not lions, tigers, and bears that concern me. It's Obama, Pelosi, and Reid oh my, that is the real nightmare.

Reply #30 from JoeUser Forums Top

I can only recommend that anyone who knows how much is "enough" work as much as is necessary to make that amount and leave it up to other people to decide for themselves how much is "enough" for them.

That's the problem... who should determine how much is enough. Should it be tax payers, should it be our representatives, should it be everyone of us individually? Current tax laws were put in place by people that were voted in by the general population. It's how the system works. If you want to change them, you elect someone who will. Does the system always work, no, but it's the best we got so far.

You know, both me and my husband were Army. We worked 24/7/265 for shit pay in order to do what we deemed necessary, help defend this country and it's rights, which are still unique in the world. Because we didn't make millions of dollars in income does that mean that we have no stake in the country and how it's run? My husband was injured on duty. He currently has a deterorating hip condition where his hip joint is literally eating itself away and has lost several inches of height because of this even though only one of his hips is affected. So in exchange for his military service he gets a progressive disability for the rest of his life and people acting like he's shit because he gets disability. And what does disability get us? Not enough to pay the bills. Not trying to whine, just trying to explain my story so you might better understand my point of view.

I am currently job hunting because the person I was working with decided two weeks ago to just not talk to us anymore and that's about the extent of it. I was working part time with him via computer which is why we still have internet access. I have military training which doesn't count for crap half the time because you don't actually get a certificate unless you pay the University of Maryland to get it for you. I have a partial degree in Accounting which I had to stop due to the fact that we couldn't afford gas to make it to and from the college in order to get my degree.

I'm sorry if I can't feel like someone who makes two million dollars after taxes a year is being cheated by the government because of the amount of taxes that he had to pay when my family has to work their butt off in order to get less than two thousand a month. I am more than willing to put my skills to use, just show me someone who will hire me and there we go. I haven't gotten that chance to make my millions, when I do I will jump all over it and will be more than happy to give the government what I can in order to help others who make less than I do.

I am an educated person who just doesn't have the slip of paper to make it official. My husband gets some payment for injuries that he got because of military service, but because we make that we don't qualify for help in other ways. Unfortunately it seems like we're stuck between a rock and a hard place. If the government wanted to set a flat tax rate and take a percentage of what we make fine with us, but if you make three million dollars you had better be prepared to pay your share evenly without the thought of tax breaks as well. I'm willing to bet though that he got out of paying more tax than we made last year in total.

Reply #31 from JoeUser Forums Top

That's the problem... who should determine how much is enough.

I don't see the problem.

I decide how much I work. I decide how much is enough for me.

Where is the problem?

 

Reply #32 from JoeUser Forums Top

But if each person decides only for themselves then we might have a problem. Let's say that we have people who decide they owe the government nothing, which I'm sure you can agree there's more than one person in this country who would decide that, and the government doesn't end up with enough money to support our defences for example. What kind of country would we be without a military that is equipped to handle what other countries would throw at us? Would we still have a country? I guess there would be no reason for us to argue this point then, now would there.

Reply #33 from JoeUser Forums Top

But if each person decides only for themselves then we might have a problem. Let's say that we have people who decide they owe the government nothing, which I'm sure you can agree there's more than one person in this country who would decide that, and the government doesn't end up with enough money to support our defences for example. What kind of country would we be without a military that is equipped to handle what other countries would throw at us? Would we still have a country? I guess there would be no reason for us to argue this point then, now would there.

You have changed the subject from deciding how much is enough for person to make to deciding how much is needed for the country to work.

Those are two different subjects.

Nobody here is saying that taxes should not be paid or aren't owed. The point of the "enough" is about how much people get to keep.

Let's put it this way: If we agree that government must be funded, who is allowed to say that SOME people have to contribute MORE than others?

 

Reply #34 from JoeUser Forums Top

Quoting Leauki, reply 8


You have changed the subject from deciding how much is enough for person to make to deciding how much is needed for the country to work.

Those are two different subjects.

Nobody here is saying that taxes should not be paid or aren't owed. The point of the "enough" is about how much people get to keep.

Let's put it this way: If we agree that government must be funded, who is allowed to say that SOME people have to contribute MORE than others?

 

Actually, I haven't changed the subject at all. If we want the country to work then "ENOUGH" must be what ends up making the ends meet. That's why we elect representatives who get together and help make up the laws that determine how much is "ENOUGH" for each of us to pay. It's the logical thing to do, isn't it? I mean that's one of the reasons why we have elections for House and Senate representatives, to decide what needs to be done with all factors considered. If you don't like the outcome then elect someone who will vote for the outcome you do want, that's how the system works.

Reply #35 from JoeUser Forums Top

Does it really matter if people aren't "hurt" by higher taxes.  The point is, they worked for their money, and other people think that they are entitled to the work of others.  That's called slavery.

Reply #36 from JoeUser Forums Top

Oh, c'mon, now--that's BS. No one in that bracket leaves themselves vulnerable without ferreting out every conceivable tax shelter.

So you are calling him a liar? Do you really think there are magical "tax holes" for rich people? rich people pay the most taxes. TV is not an accurate source of information, and draginol and his tax firm can not find those magical tax holes you proclaim to exist.

Reply #37 from JoeUser Forums Top

We worked 24/7/265 for shit pay in order to do what we deemed necessary, help defend this country and it's rights, which are still unique in the world.

Wow, things sure have changed in the military...I was on duty 365 day (except for leave)! I should have read my contract closer to get that 100 days off! :grin:

That's almost half as good as congress 

Couldn't resist.

Reply #38 from JoeUser Forums Top

That's why we elect representatives who get together and help make up the laws that determine how much is "ENOUGH" for each of us to pay.

Therein lies the problem. Once the representative is elected, his/her salary becomes far larger than the majority of their constituents (not to mention the perks). Since their future wealth is loosely tied to what the government brings in. It is in their interest for plenty of money coming in, as it is much easier to justify bigger raises (but they will take them regardlessly). Also, if the current batch cabinet appointees are any indicator, seem like a lot of these folks don't pay all their owed taxes until they get caught as they move up the chain. The percentage must be high if the latest small sampling is an indicator.

Everyones worried about the what the rich pay, but nobody wants to address the fact that if you want more money, why not work harder and earn it. Why take your own limitations out on someone else. Why do we lie to our children and tell them study hard and do well so they will get a good job and be successful. According to the current administrations philosophy, we should tell the kids, let someone else study hard, and it will be their responsibility to take care of you. Everyone gets an "A", all athletes get gold medals, a true celebration of mediocrity. Everyone gets the same, regardless of the effort put forth. 

Reply #39 from JoeUser Forums Top

Your half right this is the land of Oz, oblivious to what is happening. But it's not lions, tigers, and bears that concern me. It's Obama, Pelosi, and Reid oh my, that is the real nightmare.
Touche! to the man behind the curtain.

Reply #40 from JoeUser Forums Top

So in exchange for his military service he gets a progressive disability for the rest of his life and people acting like he's shit because he gets disability.
In spite of all the grandstanding about supporting our troops, these hardship scenarios are still prevalent. #:(   Disgusting.

Reply #41 from JoeUser Forums Top

According to the current administrations philosophy, we should tell the kids, let someone else study hard, and it will be their responsibility to take care of you.
Ho-hum, Just another tired rant against the alleged nanny state.:annoyed:

Reply #42 from JoeUser Forums Top

So you are calling him a liar?
Certainly not, nor do I know who Frogman is. The fact remains he must have lousy tax consultants.:pig:

Reply #43 from JoeUser Forums Top

Actually, I haven't changed the subject at all. If we want the country to work then "ENOUGH" must be what ends up making the ends meet.

That's the change of subject. I wasn't talking about the country. I was talking about the individual and liberals' tendency to decide for others how much is "enough" for them to own.

 

Reply #44 from JoeUser Forums Top

The fact remains he must have lousy tax consultants.

Well, he asked. Please tell him of those loopholes.

 

Reply #45 from JoeUser Forums Top

Wow, things sure have changed in the military...I was on duty 365 day (except for leave)! I should have read my contract closer to get that 100 days off!

That's almost half as good as congress 

Couldn't resist.

Doh! Well, you knew what I meant. lol I was simply explaining my circumstances as he explained his. We're opposite ends of the spectrum, that's all I was getting at.

Well, he asked. Please tell him of those loopholes.

As for what exactly he could do as far as taxes is concerned, unless he was willing to show me his complete financial records I can't tell you what he does or does not qualify for, and I'm not going to ask for that information.

 

Reply #46 from JoeUser Forums Top

Are you an accountant, mommie4life?

I don't mean to offend anyone here but the whole "rich people don't pay much in taxes because of the loopholes" is the fairly typical ignorant claptrap one can expect to hear at the family Thanksgiving dinner from the uncle or aunt whose day job is working at the mill or driving a truck or some other job that has nothing to do with managing large sums of income.

Unless there is someone else in this thread who's making $3M+ in income, I would think a little bit of modesty might go a long way before someone starts saying I have "lousy" tax accountants (I mentioned that I use a big 8 firm for my taxes). 

There are certainly means to reduce ones tax liabilities in terms of payroll taxes and the like. But in terms of actually reducing ones real tax liability, it's very difficult to legally do this and make substantial (as in a significant %) differences in taxes being paid.

I certainly don't mind paying for roads, schools, police. That's where my property taxes and the 4% that goes to the state largely goes to. 

The federal governmnent, however, is taking 35% of the income over $357,000 (Which means, most of it).  And what are they doing with it? Mostly, it gets paid directly to other people for all manners of social programs.

And do those people appreciate this free boon? No. Instead, they sit around rationalizing the money they received by saying that "the rich" don't "need" that money or that "the rich" have loopholes from paying their fair share or that they are merely getting back what they "paid into the system" (when in reality the tiny amunt in net taxes they paid wouldn't cover a fraction of what they're getting back) whatever and thus vote for politicians who promise to give them even more free money taken forcibly from other people.

People have an immense capacity for rationalizing the unpaid use of someone else's labor. I see this in software piracy threads all the time where it's even more clear cut than the modern welfare state. So it's not surprising to see serious people trying to honestly justify the wholesale theft of other people's labors in order to pay for "essential" government programs that largely amount to other people getting free money.

Reply #47 from JoeUser Forums Top

I wish I had the current credentials to be a full fledged accountant. I am working on that, as I said further up in this thread. Honestly if it was up to me we'd take the huge salaries that the politicians give themselves and cut those down to pay for the special programs they want funded. California did that and it helped them out tremendously, one of the million things that Schwartzeneger fixed from Grey Davis' stupidity. I appreciate every penny of income that we get and always have. I'm not trying to say that the rich don't need money what I'm trying to say is it's a lot easier for you to pay that high of a rate than it would be for me.

It goes along with what someone said about our poor not being poor. They upped welfare, they upped food stamps and all sorts of other government programs to excess. Yes, I agree. Do I think they do the military right, well, could probably start another thread on that, but that doesn't have to do with the current thread.

Want a flat tax rate? I'm all for it, I've said that before. But when you have families trying to come up with that other $30 to make the ends meet and then other people complaining because they lost out on $357,000 that they don't need for survival, sorry I don't care if I was the one who made the three million or whatever I wouldn't complain about paying it forward. Sorry, maybe just my point of view, but it is. I'm not here to argue with you over whether or not the rich should pay taxes, that's not what I started out to do. Do some people take advantage of government programs? Most definately. Do some people acutally need the help? Yep, they do.

Reply #48 from JoeUser Forums Top

Ho-hum, Just another tired rant against the alleged nanny state.

Tiring for the perp's maybe, Doesn't wear me out bringing it up. Of course if you support that kind of thing, I can see you like liking someone speaking harshly of your nanny.

Certainly not, nor do I know who Frogman is

Richard it only good sense to know who your host on this site is, of course you may know him as Draginol of Stardock fame. Member # can be a good indicator. ;)

Reply #50 from JoeUser Forums Top

The Onion rules.