Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

Does Taxing the Wealthy Hurt the Lower Class ?

Page 6 of 7 [ 97 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

SilverStar
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 May 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,058
Location: Ohio, USA

24 Jul 2012, 8:23 pm

simon_says wrote:
Many got rich because we dropped their rates substantially in the 1980s and never replaced the revenue stream. Hello debt.

The same reason that so many don't pay federal income taxes. Under Clinton the rate was only 34% not paying. Today it's 47%. That's the Bush cuts. When you cut taxes and increase credits you put more people into that zone. It's funny that it's a GOP talking point today. They voted for it. lol.

Everyone needs to pay more. Cold hard facts. But it's not a pretty thing to run on.




I agree. The amount of money coming in should at least be equal to the amount going out, and that doesn't even cover paying off the debt. The problem with those people that aren't paying enough, or any taxes, is that they will pitch a fit if they have to pony up, even though they should have been paying more all along. :D



Vexcalibur
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Jan 2008
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,398

24 Jul 2012, 11:24 pm

Why does it seem that only the US gives shelter to people that actually believe something as crazy as this?


_________________
.


GoonSquad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 May 2007
Age: 54
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,748
Location: International House of Paincakes...

27 Jul 2012, 12:25 pm

SilverStar wrote:
marshall wrote:
You're confusing simplicity with fairness and real-world practicality. Having everyone pay the same "flat" percentage is just as arbitrary a standard as having everyone pay the same exact amount. The real issue is how do you structure the tax code to generate the needed revenue to support those government functions the nation agrees are vital.



Actually, when people talk about a flat tax plan, reducing, and/or eliminating deductions, credits, and exemptions, are a big part of it. In that instance, I was referring mostly to the deductions, credits, and exemptions part of it. Flat tax plans combine fairness and simplicity. With this plan, the intention is to reduce the overall tax rate, which would make it easier for lower income people to pay. Also, with a simpler tax code, efficiencies should increase, which would mean less time and money is wasted.

Also, having everybody paying the same percent isn't the same as paying the same exact amount.

Example at a 10% flat rate:

Person A makes $20,000 per year - they would pay $2,000
Person B makes $200,000 per year - they would pay $20,000
person C makes $2,000,000 per year - they would pay $200,000

...


Let's say basic expenses--necessities, such as food, shelter, clothing, medical care--cost $19000.00/year.

For the person making $20,000.00/year, basics + taxes would be $21,000.00, meaning this person would have an annual debt of $1000.00.

The person making $200,000.00 would only have a minimum burden of $39,000.00 (basics + taxes) for a net discretionary income of $161,000.00..... etc.


Now, can you see why some people might think this is not fair?


_________________
No man is free who is not master of himself.~Epictetus


ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 87
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

27 Jul 2012, 12:29 pm

GoonSquad wrote:
SilverStar wrote:
marshall wrote:
You're confusing simplicity with fairness and real-world practicality. Having everyone pay the same "flat" percentage is just as arbitrary a standard as having everyone pay the same exact amount. The real issue is how do you structure the tax code to generate the needed revenue to support those government functions the nation agrees are vital.



Actually, when people talk about a flat tax plan, reducing, and/or eliminating deductions, credits, and exemptions, are a big part of it. In that instance, I was referring mostly to the deductions, credits, and exemptions part of it. Flat tax plans combine fairness and simplicity. With this plan, the intention is to reduce the overall tax rate, which would make it easier for lower income people to pay. Also, with a simpler tax code, efficiencies should increase, which would mean less time and money is wasted.

Also, having everybody paying the same percent isn't the same as paying the same exact amount.

Example at a 10% flat rate:

Person A makes $20,000 per year - they would pay $2,000
Person B makes $200,000 per year - they would pay $20,000
person C makes $2,000,000 per year - they would pay $200,000

...


Let's say basic expenses--necessities, such as food, shelter, clothing, medical care--cost $19000.00/year.

For the person making $20,000.00/year, basics + taxes would be $21,000.00, meaning this person would have an annual debt of $1000.00.

The person making $200,000.00 would only have a minimum burden of $39,000.00 (basics + taxes) for a net discretionary income of $161,000.00..... etc.


Now, can you see why some people might think this is not fair?


Apply the flat tax rate of 10% to amounts over $20,000. Problem solved.

A household with invomr of $20,000 would pay zero.

ruveyn



GoonSquad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 May 2007
Age: 54
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,748
Location: International House of Paincakes...

27 Jul 2012, 1:11 pm

That's a step in the right direction.


I'd like to see a system like this:

$1-$50,000= tax exempt



For income after the initial $50,000-


$1-$200,000= 20% tax
$200,001-$600,000= 30% tax
$600,001-$1,000,000= 35% tax
$1,000,000+= 50% tax

No deductions or exemptions.


_________________
No man is free who is not master of himself.~Epictetus


SilverStar
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 May 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,058
Location: Ohio, USA

30 Jul 2012, 8:22 pm

ruveyn wrote:
GoonSquad wrote:
SilverStar wrote:
marshall wrote:
You're confusing simplicity with fairness and real-world practicality. Having everyone pay the same "flat" percentage is just as arbitrary a standard as having everyone pay the same exact amount. The real issue is how do you structure the tax code to generate the needed revenue to support those government functions the nation agrees are vital.



Actually, when people talk about a flat tax plan, reducing, and/or eliminating deductions, credits, and exemptions, are a big part of it. In that instance, I was referring mostly to the deductions, credits, and exemptions part of it. Flat tax plans combine fairness and simplicity. With this plan, the intention is to reduce the overall tax rate, which would make it easier for lower income people to pay. Also, with a simpler tax code, efficiencies should increase, which would mean less time and money is wasted.

Also, having everybody paying the same percent isn't the same as paying the same exact amount.

Example at a 10% flat rate:

Person A makes $20,000 per year - they would pay $2,000
Person B makes $200,000 per year - they would pay $20,000
person C makes $2,000,000 per year - they would pay $200,000

...


Let's say basic expenses--necessities, such as food, shelter, clothing, medical care--cost $19000.00/year.

For the person making $20,000.00/year, basics + taxes would be $21,000.00, meaning this person would have an annual debt of $1000.00.

The person making $200,000.00 would only have a minimum burden of $39,000.00 (basics + taxes) for a net discretionary income of $161,000.00..... etc.


Now, can you see why some people might think this is not fair?


Apply the flat tax rate of 10% to amounts over $20,000. Problem solved.

A household with invomr of $20,000 would pay zero.

ruveyn



The thing about only taxing people over a certain amount, is that some people (especially teenagers) only work part time jobs, or just part of the year...many by choice, so how would the government know if they really needed the extra money in their pockets, or not? I think that people with lower incomes should at least pay some taxes. Maybe around 5%? How about changing the code to 5, 10, 15, and 20% tax brackets, with no exemptions, deductions, or credits? How about a national sales tax, with exemptions on the basic necessities? This would allow them to purchase the things that they really need, and deter them from spending on other items that they don't really need.



xenon13
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 Dec 2008
Age: 48
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,638

31 Jul 2012, 7:16 am

Corporate taxes are only on profits so why not have the same principle with income taxes? The money required for "operating costs" should not be taxed, only the surplus. This is best expressed with a progressive income tax. This idea that everyone MUST pay income tax is utter nonsense. This pay to play the game of citizen idea is quite new and insidious and dreamed up by billionaires to justify increasing the inequality and taking all the power for themselves.