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.
This year, we hit the 33% marginal tax bracket - alternative minimum tax and all of that. We don't own a home or have kids, so we don't really get to deduct anything.
I'm grateful for our income, and I'm not fundamentally complaining about having to work hard for it and pay my fair share. I know that we're very fortunate.
But why is it fair for my personal share to be up to TWICE the rate of the fair share of people with gargantuan incomes like Romney and Buffett who will never have real financial worries again in their lives? We're doing well, but unlike those guys, we do depend heavily on our cash flow to generate our critical savings for future needs as well as to cover our day-to-day expenses. We get hurt by the loss of that marginal dollar A LOT more than the multi-millionaires and billionaires ever would be.
And why is it "class warfare" whenever I point this out? How is it not "class warfare" for me to be reamed porportionally so much more than the super rich - many of whose enterprises I also have to pay to bail out of their bad business decisions?
I'm not saying that the Buffett rule is the way to go, but why can't we have a tax system that institutes some sense of consistent fairness relative to income all the way across the income spectrum? Why is this concept so fundamentally controversial and anti-American for conservatives?
Blame the greedy S.O.B.s in government for bad tax policies, not Romney.
the make-believe world you have delusionally created in your "mind" doesn't exist in the real world, and wouldn't survive one quarter, if it did. It would collapse into its own malaise.
Seriously, it is time for a complete and total re-evaluation of the world. Take another look, but pay attention - especially to what works, and what doesn't. You're heavily invested, dare I say completely invested, on the "doesn't work" side of the ledger.
Ok, so when in the real world has reducing taxes on the rich resulted in greater economic activity or greater prosperity?
What we find in the real world is that when we reduce taxes on the rich, the government has less revenue and the income disparity between the very wealthy and everyone else grows.
I would suggest it is you who is invested in that which doesn't work.
well, there are lots of economists (even politically liberal ones) who will say that captial gains rates (even more than income tax rates) impact employment.
However, the OP was talking about guys like Romney and Buffet. guys like that arent simply buying a stock hoping it goes up. they are buying companies, getting them going on solid ground and making money on the increased value of the company.
Ok, so when in the real world has reducing taxes on the rich resulted in greater economic activity or greater prosperity?
What we find in the real world is that when we reduce taxes on the rich, the government has less revenue and the income disparity between the very wealthy and everyone else grows.
I would suggest it is you who is invested in that which doesn't work.
It always works, because they have all the juice, ad if they take their ball and bat, there is no game. Works every time its tried. Workds when JFK tried it, when Reagan tried it, when Bush tried it. Our problems are spending problems.
If you earn $1M a year and you keep going bankrupt, you have a spending problem, not an income problem. One characteristics of spending problems is that spending always expands to soak up any and all increases in revenue, and even more to boot, so you end up farther behind, the more you bring in.
Everyone paying different tax rates relative to their incomes?
Everyone paying the same tax rate?
Everyone paying the same amount of tax in dollars disregardful of their income?
And how do you define (and supervise) someone's income?
What fairness is is entirely subjective and thus it is impossible to make the tax system fair. The only fair tax system would be NO tax system, but with everybody wanting something from everybody else that is not going to happen anytime soon.
This is an excellent post. Politicians from both parties, but especially Dems, argue "fairness" constantly. As if it is somehow written in the galaxy as a defined and accepted term.
A good friend of mine believes it would be fair for everyone to pay the same $$ amount per year in federal taxes. His reasoning is that every taxpayer has fundamentally identical services from the federal government. If the federal budget is $3.5Trillion, and we have 200Million taxpayers that is $17,500 per taxpayer. Is that fair?
I think the answer is to radically simplify the tax code. Taxes should not vary so much because of activities we choose to take. The constant fiddling done by Congress to get people to do things because of taxes doesn't produce fairness (whatever that is). I think it causes people to do unnatural things by distorting the true cost of living.
Warren Buffett is a poor person to compare to. He is the 0.0001% case. He is massively wealthy with almost all of his wealth tied to stock in Berkshire Hathaway. BRK doesn't pay any dividends. Buffett's salary is a pittance. And he lives pretty cheap so he doesn't spend much money. He probably sells a few shares of stock every year for spending money. He also gives $1B in stock per year to Bill Gates' foundation. His tax return probably isn't very complicated. Instead look at someone like Steve Jobs or Larry Ellison. Big income, lots of stock options, lots of living high on the hog. Complex tax returns.
well, there are lots of economists (even politically liberal ones) who will say that captial gains rates (even more than income tax rates) impact employment.
However, the OP was talking about guys like Romney and Buffet. guys like that arent simply buying a stock hoping it goes up. they are buying companies, getting them going on solid ground and making money on the increased value of the company.
I was speaking to the later not the former.
Which economists and what did they say?
As for "the OP was talking about guys like Romney and Buffet (sic)," this is what Buffett himself said:
Quote:
Back in the 1980s and 1990s, tax rates for the rich were far higher, and my percentage rate was in the middle of the pack. According to a theory I sometimes hear, I should have thrown a fit and refused to invest because of the elevated tax rates on capital gains and dividends.
I didn’t refuse, nor did others. I have worked with investors for 60 years and I have yet to see anyone — not even when capital gains rates were 39.9 percent in 1976-77 — shy away from a sensible investment because of the tax rate on the potential gain. People invest to make money, and potential taxes have never scared them off. And to those who argue that higher rates hurt job creation, I would note that a net of nearly 40 million jobs were added between 1980 and 2000. You know what’s happened since then: lower tax rates and far lower job creation.
...
I would leave rates for 99.7 percent of taxpayers unchanged and continue the current 2-percentage-point reduction in the employee contribution to the payroll tax. This cut helps the poor and the middle class, who need every break they can get.
But for those making more than $1 million — there were 236,883 such households in 2009 — I would raise rates immediately on taxable income in excess of $1 million, including, of course, dividends and capital gains. And for those who make $10 million or more — there were 8,274 in 2009 — I would suggest an additional increase in rate.
My friends and I have been coddled long enough by a billionaire-friendly Congress. It’s time for our government to get serious about shared sacrifice.
When the top 400 wealthiest Americans earn more than the bottom 150 million Americans, those top earners should pay more taxes and the evidence suggests that it won't harm the economy a bit.
If Buffett were taxed at 50% he would still only pay a few million more than he did last year. He is massively wealthy, but doesn't have a lot of income (of any kind).
...
A good friend of mine believes it would be fair for everyone to pay the same $$ amount per year in federal taxes. His reasoning is that every taxpayer has fundamentally identical services from the federal government. If the federal budget is $3.5Trillion, and we have 200Million taxpayers that is $17,500 per taxpayer. Is that fair?
...
Do not the rich benefit much more by the fact that the government educates their corporation's employees for free?
Does not the legal system protected corporation's intellectual property and contracts?
Do not safe roads foster their ability to ship goods?
Does not the tax-supported financial infrastructure enabled the wealthy to access capital markets and trade stock in a market in which investors have confidence?
Does not tax-funded research help develop technology that their businesses benefit?
Does not the trade laws negotiated and enforced by the government protect their ability to sell products abroad?
Bill Gates Sr. used to say this: 'Suppose you were given the choice of being born in America or in Ethiopia. What proportion of your eventual fortune would you be willing to give to be born in America? Given the great good fortune of getting to live and run a business in this country that has all the advantages an advanced country with a decent system provides, how can you think it’s all you? And then, how can you feel you don’t have any obligation to pay it back?'
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.
