Class Envy

[Tim]

What income range per household do you consider "middle class"

I would say the two middle bars are a good representation of the middle class

 

[BadBoy@TheWheel]

I would say the two middle bars are a good representation of the middle class

So by that chart (which is 4 years old) you would consider 100-150,000 rich:eek

 

[Tim]

But how do you take away the biggest "loop hole", which is them simply sending money out of our country? You can't mandate what people do with their money. The only way I see to solve that is to lower the tax rate so that money comes back into America.

Remove the loop hole that allows them to legally move their money off shore.

Let me ask you a question, can you avoid paying your taxes by moving it off shore? Why not? So why should they be able to?

If you are an American company making money in America, I don't care where your offices are located, you need to pay your FAIR share of taxes. Period.

 

[Tim]

So by that chart (which is 4 years old) you would consider 100-150,000 rich:eek

No. I would consider that upper middle class

 

[dt3]

Remove the loop hole that allows them to legally move their money off shore.

Let me ask you a question, can you avoid paying your taxes by moving it off shore? Why not? So why should they be able to?

If you are an American company making money in America, I don't care where your offices are located, you need to pay your FAIR share of taxes. Period.

So you would make it illegal to send money out of our country? I honestly can't fathom that. The government shouldn't have that kind of power, in my opinion.

The answer to your question is I have no idea. I have no savings account, and what's in my checking account is laughable. I don't have anything I could move offshore. So I have no idea.

Who decides what's fair? Whoever happens to be in power at the time?

 

[Tim]

So you would make it illegal to send money out of our country? I honestly can't fathom that. The government shouldn't have that kind of power, in my opinion.

The answer to your question is I have no idea. I have no savings account, and what's in my checking account is laughable. I don't have anything I could move offshore. So I have no idea.

Who decides what's fair? Whoever happens to be in power at the time?

Yes, make it illegal to move money off shore to avoid paying taxes. That loop hole exists and needs to be plugged.
If we had powerful lobbyists working for us, maybe we could get a loop hole where we wouldn't have to pay any taxes on any money we store in oatmeal boxes. So if we take our money and move it all into oatmeal boxes, we wouldn't have to pay taxes on it. And if they lowered our tax rates, maybe we would take it out of the oatmeal boxes... well, maybe not.

close the loop holes. Everyone pays their fair share.

 

[BadBoy@TheWheel]

Yes, make it illegal to move money off shore to avoid paying taxes. That loop hole exists and needs to be plugged.
If we had powerful lobbyists working for us, maybe we could get a loop hole where we wouldn't have to pay any taxes on any money we store in oatmeal boxes. So if we take our money and move it all into oatmeal boxes, we wouldn't have to pay taxes on it. And if they lowered our tax rates, maybe we would take it out of the oatmeal boxes... well, maybe not.

close the loop holes. Everyone pays their fair share.

Store all the cash you want to

Who's gonna stop you? Besides, you've already been taxed on it at some point if you're holding it

 

[Tim]

Store all the cash you want to

Who's gonna stop you? Besides, you've already been taxed on it at some point if you're holding it

You're right, at a higher rate than the wealthy...


Do you guys really have a problem with the wealthy paying the same tax rate that you pay? Really?

 

[BadBoy@TheWheel]

You're right, at a higher rate than the wealthy...


Do you guys really have a problem with the wealthy paying the same tax rate that you pay? Really?

A: you don't actually know where I fall in that bracket:ninja

B: I have always thought a "flat tax" would be the best solution

 

[dt3]

Yes, make it illegal to move money off shore to avoid paying taxes. That loop hole exists and needs to be plugged.
If we had powerful lobbyists working for us, maybe we could get a loop hole where we wouldn't have to pay any taxes on any money we store in oatmeal boxes. So if we take our money and move it all into oatmeal boxes, we wouldn't have to pay taxes on it. And if they lowered our tax rates, maybe we would take it out of the oatmeal boxes... well, maybe not.

close the loop holes. Everyone pays their fair share.

Did you know in 2006, the bottom 50% of people paid only 2.99% of the overall taxes? The top 10% paid 70.79% of the overall taxes. What isn't fair about that?
Who Pays Income Taxes? See Who Pays What

In 2005, 32.6% of all tax returns filed PAID NOTHING in taxes!
Who Doesn't Pay Taxes

And again, who decides what's fair?

 

[Tim]

Did you know in 2006, the bottom 50% of people paid only 2.99% of the overall taxes? The top 10% paid 70.79% of the overall taxes. What isn't fair about that?
Who Pays Income Taxes? See Who Pays What

In 2005, 32.6% of all tax returns filed PAID NOTHING in taxes!
Who Doesn't Pay Taxes

And again, who decides what's fair?

Who pays taxes? Those numbers sound great unless you actually put them into perspective...

Let's take 2 people.

Person 1 works at McDonalds and makes $22,000 a year. If his tax rate was 15% for 2008. He will pay $3,300 in taxes.

Person 2 is the CEO of a large corp and makes $750,000 a year. If his tax rate was 15% for 2008. He will pay $112,500 in taxes.

Now if the government only received revenue from these two individuals, it would have $115,800 total.

So now you crunch your numbers and come at me with the argument that the poor (person #1) only pays 2% of the tax burden while the rich (person #2) pays 97% and that it isn't fair... why not? In this example they are paying the exact same rate. So it's very fair... yet the numbers show he only pays 2% of the tax burden...
So showing what percentage of what income level pays what percentage of the tax burden means absolutely nothing. It's a straw man argument that means nothing without looking at the percent of taxes paid by each group. And I mean the real taxes paid, not what your tax rate is before the numerous deductions and loop holes.

 

[Minor Axis]

You guys are so worried about how much taxes the rich pay... why? Do you really think they are unfairly taxed?



Here is the second richest man complaining that he pays too little. And he goes by the book. Can you imagine how much more he could benefit by playing the loop-hole game?



Do you think for one second that any of these mega rich are paying 40%? You have got to be kidding me if you think they are.

And as far as what Hannity says about only getting jobs from the rich. How do you think they got rich?

The division of classes is growing wider by leaps and bounds. The rich are getting profanely rich while the middle class keeps slipping further and further behind. Trickle down economics doesn't work. If it did, we wouldn't have any unemployment right now. The rich have been enriched to the point of being able to employ everyone of us... but that isn't the case. We keep seeing them get further and further ahead while the middle class slips behind.
Never at any point in history have their been so many mega rich, while their wealth is horded... Trickle down is a proven failure

Buffet is a straight shooter and one of the few rich cats who is not afraid to speak out while pissing off all the greedy bastards. As Buffet illustrated there is no way a fair system would be making his secretaries pay a higher tax rate than he does. Conservative forces in this country are spending a lot of their time worrying about the poor little rich folks. Trickle down theory is BS, just another way to pander to the rich, by the rich.

BTW, is the amount of money you make the yardstick of success as a human being? I don't think so. And no, I am not envious, living a comfortable life.

 

[dt3]

Who pays taxes? Those numbers sound great unless you actually put them into perspective...

Let's take 2 people.

Person 1 works at McDonalds and makes $22,000 a year. If his tax rate was 15% for 2008. He will pay $3,300 in taxes.

Person 2 is the CEO of a large corp and makes $750,000 a year. If his tax rate was 15% for 2008. He will pay $112,500 in taxes.

Now if the government only received revenue from these two individuals, it would have $115,800 total.

So now you crunch your numbers and come at me with the argument that the poor (person #1) only pays 2% of the tax burden while the rich (person #2) pays 97% and that it isn't fair... why not? In this example they are paying the exact same rate. So it's very fair... yet the numbers show he only pays 2% of the tax burden...
So showing what percentage of what income level pays what percentage of the tax burden means absolutely nothing. It's a straw man argument that means nothing without looking at the percent of taxes paid by each group. And I mean the real taxes paid, not what your tax rate is before the numerous deductions and loop holes.

Tim, I think you took my argument wrong (the part I bolded). I didn't say I think it's unfair. I'm confused here. Are you saying that it is fair for the poor person to only pay 2% of the overall taxes, and that it only seems unfair based on the percentage? Becuse I agree with that. I'm lost. :confused

Based on the links I posted, half the country is damn near getting a free ride. Do you want to tax the top more, so we can increase the number of lower class people who don't have to pay taxes?

 

[BadBoy@TheWheel]

Well something else that crossed my mind....


Why does the wealthy getting wealthier mean there's a conspiracy in place allowing them to do so? To be in that top category, there might be a very large percentage of people who put it all on the line to get there, that doesn't mean that the lower are being punished, it just means they risk less, and don't progress.

Or am I missing something?

 

[Minor Axis]

Well something else that crossed my mind....


Why does the wealthy getting wealthier mean there's a conspiracy in place allowing them to do so? To be in that top category, there might be a very large percentage of people who put it all on the line to get there, that doesn't mean that the lower are being punished, it just means they risk less, and don't progress.

Or am I missing something?

You really are worried about them. :nod: There is a saying it takes money to make money. Who has been talking about conspiracy anyway? They just don't need all of the giant tax cuts the previous and McCain Administrations have and would be giving them.

 

[dt3]

You really are worried about them. :nod: There is a saying it takes money to make money. Who has been talking about conspiracy anyway? They just don't need all of the giant tax cuts the previous and McCain Administrations have and would be giving them.

If you read the links I've posted, you'd see that over the last several years the top 10% has increasingly paid a higher percentage of the taxes. Damn evil Bush tax cuts.

 

[Tim]

If you read the links I've posted, you'd see that over the last several years the top 10% has increasingly paid a higher percentage of the taxes. Damn evil Bush tax cuts.

They are paying a higher percentage of the total tax, yet they are paying a lower percentage of their income. Showing that they are making MUCH more money than before.

Do you not understand that if the top 2% make 90% of the wealth in this country that they will bare 90% of the tax burden. Yet they pay only 70% of the countries tax... That's fair? We need to kick in more to make up some of their share?

If I pay 25% in taxes, why should they be allowed to pay substantially less by percentage????

 

[Hans]

From a Taxation point, it needs to be equal. They have earned that money from supply and demand, and they used their natural abilities to earn that money. Every person who wants money strides their hardest to get it, some fail and some dont. I just think if EVERYONE had 500,000,000, they would think its unfair to be taxed 5% more than a normal person.

 

[dt3]

They are paying a higher percentage of the total tax, yet they are paying a lower percentage of their income. Showing that they are making MUCH more money than before.

Do you not understand that if the top 2% make 90% of the wealth in this country that they will bare 90% of the tax burden. Yet they pay only 70% of the countries tax... That's fair? We need to kick in more to make up some of their share?

If I pay 25% in taxes, why should they be allowed to pay substantially less by percentage????

Again, for the third or fourth time, I ask: who decides what's fair? Personally, I think the fact that the top 10% pay 70% of the taxes is more than fair. Hell, if I was one of those 10% I'd say it's downright unfair.

Did you skip the part where I showed 30 something % of people paid NOTHING in taxes? If you wanna play the fairness card, how is it fair that they DON'T pay anything and you do? Fairness is a totally subjective concept.

And I'll say this again too: The tax system was created to pay for the necessary expenditures of running a government. Not redistributing wealth.

 

[Minor Axis]

If you read the links I've posted, you'd see that over the last several years the top 10% has increasingly paid a higher percentage of the taxes. Damn evil Bush tax cuts.

Really, so with the tax cuts, how would you explain why the rich are paying a higher % of taxes (on their income) over the last couple of years?

What I find amazing is that from a philosophical point, I'm in this forum arguing for helping the little guy and others are arguing for helping the poor rich. They need to have a decent yacht!

YouTube - The Widening Gap Between America's Rich and Super-Rich