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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-10-2015, 04:50 PM
 
Location: Corona del Mar, CA - Coronado, CA
4,477 posts, read 3,297,118 times
Reputation: 5609

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by greywar View Post
Ahh and now we get to it. their "fair" share. what is fair? thats the question.
Fair is the mantra from your side.

Fair is everyone pays the same percentage. You earn $1.00 you pay $0.10, you earn $10,000,000, you pay $1,000,000. Fair and simple.

In CA there is no tax on food items from the grocery store or on rent.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-10-2015, 04:52 PM
 
Location: Great State of Texas
86,052 posts, read 84,436,896 times
Reputation: 27720
Quote:
Originally Posted by greywar View Post
Ahh and now we get to it. their "fair" share. what is fair? thats the question. So....

Fair would be that they get in exactly what they pay out. Guess what? the value of a functioning government is higher. Ohhh so lets say "equally apportioned". Why? I mean whats fair about taxing that which is needed to survive? Most people would rightly argue that taxing food, shelter, etc is unfair. it risks a persons survival. And lets be honest, the billionaire benefits FAR FAR FAR more then the little people.

Or would taxing be fair that each pays according to his abilities?

Or maybe we could use a civilized norm?

Get this, life isnt fair. I pay far more then the average person in taxes, its the price of living in a civilized society that doesn't tax that which is needed to survive.
More like the price you pay for not getting better investment advice
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-10-2015, 05:05 PM
 
34,278 posts, read 19,356,421 times
Reputation: 17261
Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyTexan View Post
More like the price you pay for not getting better investment advice
Shrug. I have different spending and taxation requirements then most. I expect to do better in the future. But then, don't we all. I don't apparently make enough to afford the investment advice that the rich get. I think of this is the hump in income. Theres another one below me involving getting off the public dole and losing all assistance, theres another in front regarding being able to afford and use things like that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-10-2015, 05:07 PM
 
34,278 posts, read 19,356,421 times
Reputation: 17261
Quote:
Originally Posted by TimTheEnchanter View Post
Fair is the mantra from your side.

Fair is everyone pays the same percentage. You earn $1.00 you pay $0.10, you earn $10,000,000, you pay $1,000,000. Fair and simple.

In CA there is no tax on food items from the grocery store or on rent.
LOL. ok the median income is 50K on a family. Remove the median rent, food, water, and things neccesary to earn that income.

OK pay X% of that. Ohhh.....hey being fair, thats probably better then the current deal. Course for the truly rich....lol....thats not a good deal.

If anything you are making a argument that we should have a higher tax rate because the average folks and below are paying too much.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-10-2015, 05:14 PM
 
24,385 posts, read 23,041,608 times
Reputation: 14971
And the 1%( The 1/10 of 1%, really) owns the government and both parties work for them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-11-2015, 09:31 AM
 
Location: Corona del Mar, CA - Coronado, CA
4,477 posts, read 3,297,118 times
Reputation: 5609
"Average" folks have been removed from paying any federal income taxes and that has shifted the burden up and given them less of a stake in the federal government and federal government spending.

You might want to review the Simpson Bowles Commission report that talks about broadening the tax base, which means more people in the bottom 75% paying the federal income tax.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-11-2015, 10:20 AM
 
Location: Billings, MT
9,885 posts, read 10,965,657 times
Reputation: 14180
" Property taxes (with renters getting that credit),"

do you mean REAL ESTATE taxes?
"property taxes" can apply to anything, including "Personal Property".
Surely you aren't one of the foolish people who think that a real estate owner doesn't figure the real estate taxes into the amount he charges for rent?

As for the OP, this chart has been promulgated every tax season for years, and the same arguments for and against are always presented. Nothing ever changes.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-11-2015, 04:36 PM
 
2,499 posts, read 2,625,250 times
Reputation: 1789
Income tax only makes up 46% of the revenue for the US budget. The other 54% of the revenue may have a greater impact on lower wage earners. For example fica makes up 32% of the revenue and that impacts lower income earners much more than it does higher income workers.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-11-2015, 04:52 PM
 
33,016 posts, read 27,440,907 times
Reputation: 9074
Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyTexan View Post
Sure they do. Property taxes is totally local.

You want to address the total tax burden which is not the point of this thread.
If you don't want to discuss FEDERAL INCOME TAXES then don't partake in this thread..plain and simple.

Michigan has a statewide school property tax.

https://www.michigan.gov/taxes/0,160...5079--,00.html
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-11-2015, 04:56 PM
 
33,016 posts, read 27,440,907 times
Reputation: 9074
Quote:
Originally Posted by greywar View Post
Ahh and now we get to it. their "fair" share. what is fair? thats the question. So....

Fair would be that they get in exactly what they pay out. Guess what? the value of a functioning government is higher. Ohhh so lets say "equally apportioned". Why? I mean whats fair about taxing that which is needed to survive? Most people would rightly argue that taxing food, shelter, etc is unfair. it risks a persons survival. And lets be honest, the billionaire benefits FAR FAR FAR more then the little people.

Or would taxing be fair that each pays according to his abilities?

Or maybe we could use a civilized norm?

Get this, life isnt fair. I pay far more then the average person in taxes, its the price of living in a civilized society that doesn't tax that which is needed to survive.

Is that like, to whom much is given, of him much will be required?
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

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:20 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