Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 02-06-2012, 12:56 AM
 
Location: somewhere in the woods
16,880 posts, read 15,201,197 times
Reputation: 5240

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by k374 View Post
I have posted a few threads about how the rich are NOT paying their fair share and some of the responses here have been amazing! People seem to think that taxes on the rich are a bad idea. In my view this line of thinking is absolutely absurd.

There is so much CLARITY that the rich in this country are paying virtually NO taxes because of loopholes in the tax code. Mitt Romney earned $45 million dollars yet paid 14% tax yet the common bloke making $100,000 is paying a marginal rate of close to 50% (in California with payroll taxes included). This is the biggest injustice there is and it needs to stop. Obama has proposed a 30% minimum tax on $1 million+ earnings and that is an EXTREMELY good start.

I believe most on this forum are part of the 99%, so please explain to me why their heart is bleeding for the likes of Mitt Romney who is getting away scott free without paying his fair share?

Subsidizing the rich has become a cottage industry in this country and it needs to STOP

1st. what do you consider his fair share?

2nd. remember when you make and are taxed on 10-20 million, then 15% is still paying alot more in taxes than you or I make in a lifetime.

3rd. even if the rich do pay more in taxes, i do not see the federal goverment paying down the debt not balancing the budget.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-06-2012, 12:59 AM
 
29,981 posts, read 42,939,504 times
Reputation: 12828
Quote:
Originally Posted by rbohm View Post
so have i, and you are right it doesnt sink in, but we must keep trying to educate those who dont understand economics.
There are those who don't understand, and those who won't understand. Most in this forum who blindly adhere to the school of Keynesian economics are among those who won't rather than don't. The use of the word don't indicates the willingness or ability to learn.

"The masses do not like anyone who surpasses them in any regard. The average man envies and hates those who are different."

"What pushes the masses into the camp of Socialism is, even more than the illusion that more Socialism will make them richer, the expectation that it will curb all those who are better off than they themselves are...There will no longer be any more room for innovators or reformers."

- Ludwig Von Mises, The Ultimate Foundation of Economic Science, p 123.

Last edited by lifelongMOgal; 02-06-2012 at 01:10 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-06-2012, 01:01 AM
 
Location: somewhere in the woods
16,880 posts, read 15,201,197 times
Reputation: 5240
Quote:
Originally Posted by nep321 View Post
Would you like to see a prosperous America, just like the one we had in the 50's and 60's? I sure would. But after doing plenty of research, I have to say the Republican ideology is simply NOT going to achieve this. Ever.

The policies of FDR and his New Deal was what made the U.S. the envy of the world. His policies actually led to a true widespread middle class society, with some poor and rich households here and there. How did he achieve this? He sharply increased taxes on the wealthy. In fact, at one time, the highest tax rate was 91% for the wealthiest earners. Trickle down economics don't work as well as Republicans want you to believe.

I think Obama needs to be more aggressive at taxing the rich, otherwise we are doomed as a nation. I just don't see how we are going to have the tax revenue to pay off the debt and move forward with other projects. Something's gotta give. I mean, even with a 91% tax rate, someone who earns $1 billion a year, such as Warren Buffet, would be left with a whopping $90 million AFTER taxes. Who seriously needs or wants more than that to live happily?

If a Republican is elected, god help us. We can't afford to have anymore tax breaks for the wealthy.

actually, we need to lower the cost of goverment by firing more federal employees, lowering taxes so that they are non existant and repeal the 16tn Amendment. now that would be real change and good for the USA.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-06-2012, 01:17 AM
 
994 posts, read 725,152 times
Reputation: 449
Quote:
Originally Posted by k374 View Post
well, you are the one being ignorant here.

I am not saying that Mitt Romney is doing anything illegal. What I am saying is that the tax code is such that someone who EARNS $45 million is paying 14% in taxes which in my opinion is WRONG because income no matter how it is earned is INCOME.

No caps on the amounts that can be taxed at the capital gains rate is a system to make sure the rich are subsidized, nothing more!

BTW, it's CAPITAL not CAPITOL... your lack of english language skills is what is embarrasing!
Okay, so let's change things to your proposal here and throw capital gains in as standard taxable income, and we just ignore risk vs reward.

Now, Mr Rich says to you "Well, I was going to invest $5 million in my company to buy new equipment and hire new people, but I could lose that money and if I don't you're going to take half of whatever profits I earn anyway. So instead I'm going to not hire anybody and I'm going to take my money and put it in a bank in the Bahamas where you can't tax any of it."

And your answer is.........?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-06-2012, 05:27 AM
 
Location: NE Ohio
30,419 posts, read 20,311,358 times
Reputation: 8958
Quote:
Originally Posted by shorebaby View Post
Huh? Are you suggesting the tax code is responsible for income equality?
Income inequality is the result of too many people with too little ambition to do what is necessary to raise their living standard by hard work.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-06-2012, 05:31 AM
 
Location: NE Ohio
30,419 posts, read 20,311,358 times
Reputation: 8958
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zembonez View Post
Tax everybody equally. Rich and poor alike... and I'll listen to a talk about taxes.

Let everybody pay the same percentage. The rich will still pay far more taxes than the middle class or poor.

This idiotic notion that success must be punished by paying HIGHER tax rates should be punishable by death.
The leftists have a twisted definition of "fairness".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-06-2012, 05:38 AM
 
Location: NE Ohio
30,419 posts, read 20,311,358 times
Reputation: 8958
Quote:
Originally Posted by nep321 View Post
I'm just basing my facts on a book I am reading by Paul Krugman. Calm down.
LOL!!! Paul Krugman and facts are an oxymoron! Throw that damn book away! Sheesh!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-06-2012, 05:41 AM
 
Location: Silver Springs, FL
23,416 posts, read 37,007,099 times
Reputation: 15560
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hercule Poirot View Post
FDR's policies turned a recessing into the Great Depression, Mon Ami. When tax rates are high, income is sheltered, not invested, and we all pay the price - especially those of us on the lower rungs such as yourself.

Study JFK who erased those high taxes and created economic boom.
One can only suppose that homeless camps were called Hoovervilles in honor of the great job Hoover did.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-06-2012, 05:49 AM
 
Location: Dallas
31,290 posts, read 20,744,889 times
Reputation: 9325
Quote:
Originally Posted by Savoir Faire View Post
So anyone that doesn't want to be super wealthy is a loser? What about people that strive to be wealthy but not super wealthy? If you consider someone who is the top 5% but not 0.1% a loser, I can imagine what you think the average American.
I didn't see "super wealthy" anywhere in the post you responded to.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-06-2012, 06:09 AM
 
Location: NE Ohio
30,419 posts, read 20,311,358 times
Reputation: 8958
Quote:
Originally Posted by silas777 View Post
nuff said............. If you would like to be taken a bit more seriously, read a little more , perhaps , something by Milton Freidman, Art Laffer or Stephen Moore.
There ya go!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:34 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top