Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
What would be the effect of creating a over 5 million tax bracket that is taxed at 75% and nearly eliminate corporate tax?
If the argument for low taxes is investment/job creation wouldn't it be better directed towards companies that have greater interest in job creating than a single investor would?
I'm about as conservative as your average working class white male...which is to say, fairly conservative (I do recycle though, so maybe I'm part hippie too). Yes, there is a 1% who are getting disproportionate wealth without working for it, in fact stealing it through taxes and inflation (which is a hidden tax) and redistributing it to themselves through nepotism and cronyism.
Sorry, what does recycling have to do with conservative/liberal?
BTW we recycle/compost. Wife is liberal, I am conservative...
Sorry, what does recycling have to do with conservative/liberal?
BTW we recycle/compost. Wife is liberal, I am conservative...
Thanks for any clarification you can provide...
Mike
I suspect he was joking. Recycling is seen as a component of environmentalism, which is typically seen as the province of leftist hippies. In fact, though, recycling is certainly consistent with the "conserve" part of conservatism. I'm pretty far to the right, and I've been recycling for a good 25 years at least; long before the convenience of single-stream curbside recycling reared its lovely head.
As far as the topic of this thread, I have no desire to "punish" those who earn more than I do, as I believe that a redistributionist mindset is borne of envy; and envy is an unattractive character trait that I try to avoid.
We hear endless complaining from all the "progressives" and Left-leaners here that some "one per cent" -- sommewhere - is getting a disproportionaate share of the "nation's" wealth, and that it should e "redistributed".
I would love to hear some to these delusionists tell us all exactly how you would accomplish this.
To begin with, the Constitution doesn't permit seizure of the lawful property of an honest citizen without "due process of law". "Rule bythe peple" can't be allowed to degenerate into rule by the mob.
So we'll just tax those high incomes -- right?
That's part of it, though not the whole story.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2nd trick op
Except that those who are self-employed, or have a share in a growing buisness (partnership, S-corp, etc) often can formulate strategies to drive the incomes of those enterprises down when taxes go up.
On the other hand, the guys anfd gals with mortgages and growing families usually have no choice but to give it everything they've got -- which puts them in a higher tax bracket where they have no choice but to pay a disproportionate share of the freight.
Are you talking about using off-shore corporate locations as a tax haven to avoid paying taxes on corporate earnings? I do think there needs to be some closing of loopholes here but it is indeed a tricky question as to how to do it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2nd trick op
But what about Bill Gates, or Sergei Brin, or Jeff Bezos .... or so many of those "villains" on the Forbwes 400?
The wealth of a lot of these individuals is usually represented by the high value of common stock in an enterprise they created.Until they sell and actually realize any gain (and the value of that stock would drop considerably if the Lefties rattle thir sabers too loudly).
This benefit is not only for the wealthy, it's for the middle class and working class too. My income is low enough to put me solidly in the working class (~$23k/year in a HCOL area), and I still save on taxes by holding onto investments for a long time. I may not be wealthy or upper income but I still get to use this nonetheless - so where is the problem?
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2nd trick op
I fully understand that the American econmy is stagnant; that is mostly due to the fact that our real heavy industry can't compete in many global markets -- and that is due to the burden of too much regulatiory, environmental, and egalitarian dreams. We can afford the basics everyone agress upon, but there are limits.
so go ahead, you guys and gals over there on the left side of the aisle; tellus how you woulld "right" what you perceive to be a "wrong" without a field day for the shiftless and irresponsible who take advantage of what was intnded tfor the truly disadvantaged
Because what we've got right now clearly is not working.
A bit of a confused rant there, not quite sure exactly what you're getting at apart from guessing based on your previous comment that you are asking about income and wealth inequality. I do think that there needs to be a shift away from Reaganomics, but it will need to be gradual, not sudden. A sudden tax increase will cause a lot of people to default on their debts (all kinds, credit card, student loan, auto loan, mortgage) and thus harm the economy.
What would be the effect of creating a over 5 million tax bracket that is taxed at 75% and nearly eliminate corporate tax?
You'd need to be very diligent about closing off other ways for them hide income.
Quote:
If the argument for low taxes is investment/job creation wouldn't it be better directed towards companies that have greater interest in job creating than a single investor would?
Total nonsense. Investment was greatest when income taxes were high. The rich are now sitting on piles of cash! They aren't investing because there are no good opportunities. They've spent 35 years screwing the US economy and consumer while they got rich via globalization, and our debt is maxed out. Demand will be low for a long time.
The argument of job creation for low income taxes for the wealthy is used frequently. I don't agree with it, which is why I am asking, if job creation is a goal why isn't corporate tax reduced instead of individual taxes.
The goal would be to minimize stockpiling of cash and instead directing investment into reinvestment. Anything removed from an investment vehicle for personal use would be taxed as regular income. The system should be designed to promote investment and job growth.
This is why corporate tax doesn't make too much sense to me, why are we taxing entities that are solely about investment and job growth.
No, it's a deliberate policy. When you are the largest economy on the planet, you have both global needs and interests of your own and global responsibilities to attend to with regard to others.
We have a deliberate policy of developing China of all places at the expense of the US economy, and the living standards of 99.9% of US citizens?! Meanwhile there are many poor countries very near to us and all over the world that we don't give a **** about. The difference? Oh ya... a few people are getting massively wealthy off the China program. Follow the money.
If you were capable of rational thought, I'd have fun decimating your argument. But I know it would be a waste of time.
Lets flip the coin around. "You want the 1% to thrive while the rest of the 99% are struggling harder and harder every year?"
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
