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 whole thread is insane. This is happening in Venezuela. Anything that happens in that country is because of poverty and political corruption.
Sweden, Norway, France, and most of Western Europe are all fairly socialist countries, yet they all have higher standards of living than the US.
And instead of a progressive tax system like the U.S. has, they all have a regressive tax system: much flatter income tax structure and a VAT tax that everyone pays.
Most/all CEO's get their (overwhelming) majority of take home pay in the form of stock. But to be fully accurate some CEO's make millions of dollars in regular salary, but at the same time they get paid $10's of million of dollars in stock.
Quote:
Why on earth are you under the impression that CEOs don't have any salary income and don't pay federal income tax?
My dream coming to this thread was a conversation about changing America's tax system, and I put foreword Switzerland as an example for a country that has conservative tax principles in place. But clearly we are not having that conversation, and looking back I believe its both of our faults.
What can we do to have a political conversation without insults, changing the subject, or belittling the other person?
I admit the fighting and belittling the other side is fun, but shouldn't our main goal be open communication for the benefit of America?
You are correct. CEO's like Lawrence J. Ellison from Oracle make $63 million dollars in stock options, but they do get paid $1.00 salaries.
Even Mark Zuckerberg from Facebook makes a $1.00 salary while getting paid millions of dollars in stock.
You DO realize that stock is an unrealized value holding, no? If their actual cash income is $1, why shouldn't they pay exactly the same tax rate as anyone else who earns $1? They'll be taxed when they realize (sell) those assets. If the stock was paid as a form of compensation, they'll have no cost basis to deduct when they sell it. They'll be taxed on the entire amount. It's tax deferral, not tax avoidance. The taxman eventually gets his cut.
Quote:
What can we do to have a political conversation without insults, changing the subject, or belittling the other person?
If you truly believe a European/Scandinavian-style standard of living is better, emulate their systems: Tax regressively like they do. Repeal FATCA (they have no FATCA laws, and consequently it's easy to hide income/assets in a foreign account, etc., to avoid taxes.). Stop taxing Americans on foreign-earned income.
In regards to federal taxation and providing federal government benefits and services, it is.
In regards to publicly held corporations, the PUBLIC owns the means of production.
What does that tell you?
It tells me you find the U.S. to be "schizophrenic" with a "socialist" government and a publicly owned and controlled means of production.
Wait a minute. That's "socialism" too. So you approve of socialism but you oppose socialism. Gosh, I guess it's you who is schizophrenic.
Quote:
And what do you have to say about public employee union pension funds (not the "evil rich" ) pressuring corporations for MORE profits?
I say your stories have been shown to be worth questioning, and so this is worth questioning. In the first place, public employees work for government offices and agencies and operations. So a government employee pressuring corporations for "more profits" (as though corporations can just produce profits at will) strikes me as a conflict of interest, except as I've already explained to you more than once, employees don't manage or influence their pension funds. So I don't know what you're getting at.
It tells me you find the U.S. to be "schizophrenic" with a "socialist" government and a publicly owned and controlled means of production.
Not entirely publicly owned means of production. There are some privately held corporations.
Quote:
I say your stories have been shown to be worth questioning, and so this is worth questioning. In the first place, public employees work for government offices and agencies and operations. So a government employee pressuring corporations for "more profits" (as though corporations can just produce profits at will) strikes me as a conflict of interest, except as I've already explained to you more than once, employees don't manage or influence their pension funds. So I don't know what you're getting at.
So... your assertion is that union bosses and the people they direct to manage members' pension plans can't be trusted and are pressuring corporations for MORE profits to fund their pension plans, which is in DIRECT conflict with the workers' in such corporations desire to be paid more? Hmmm....
You DO realize that stock is an unrealized value holding, no? If their actual cash income is $1, why shouldn't they pay exactly the same tax rate as anyone else who earns $1? They'll be taxed when they realize (sell) those assets. If the stock was paid as a form of compensation, they'll have no cost basis to deduct when they sell it. They'll be taxed on the entire amount. It's tax deferral, not tax avoidance. The taxman eventually gets his cut.
But non-CEO's making over $1 million dollars a year are paying over 30% tax rates.
Quote:
If you truly believe a European/Scandinavian-style standard of living is better, emulate their systems: Tax regressively like they do. Repeal FATCA (they have no FATCA laws, and consequently it's easy to hide income/assets in a foreign account, etc., to avoid taxes.). Stop taxing Americans on foreign-earned income.
Your source lists Switzerland as the #1 regressive tax country on Earth. But your source fails to mention Switzerland has a progressive income tax system, and the fact that Switzerland charges wealthy citizens higher fees and fines for things like speeding tickets (literally giving out $1 million dollar speeding tickets.)
Should you trust/use that source in a conversation about how much money governments take from citizens based on income? (when it withholds information about progressive income tax systems and extra fees enforced on wealthy citizens.)
If their take-home pay is $1, it'll be taxed as such. You're not realizing that acquiring an unrealized value asset isn't a taxable event until it's sold. It'll be taxed then. And if there is no cost basis because the stock was part of a compensation package, the entire amount will be taxed when the stock is sold.
Your source lists Switzerland as the #1 regressive tax country on Earth. But your source fails to mention Switzerland has a progressive income tax system, and the fact that Switzerland charges wealthy citizens higher fees and fines for things like speeding tickets (literally giving out $1 million dollar speeding tickets.)
Then don't speed. /shrug.
You need to read the authors' economic research to understand what's going on if you question the accuracy. Get a copy of the article.
I'm not going to argue with you because you're just flat out wrong.
If their take-home pay is $1, it'll be taxed as such. You're not realizing that acquiring an unrealized value asset isn't a taxable event until it's sold.
Then you should be able to understand the reason capital gains tax cuts temporally increase revenues is because people cash out their capital gains when the tax rate drops, and this causes large numbers of people to cash out at the same time (increasing revenues.)
But contrary to many republicans beliefs tax cuts on capital gains reduce revenues in the long run.
You need to read the authors' economic research to understand what's going on if you question the accuracy. Get a copy of the article.
Then explain this to me instead of telling me to read a source that I feel withholds important information.
Quote:
The top income tax bracket is 11.5%, and the spread between the lowest bracket and the top bracket is only 11.5 percentage points. I'll take that.
I'll take that as well. Lower income tax rates in America would give consumers more money to spend to stimulate the economy.
But the problem is quickly reducing America's income tax rates would create huge deficits and huge debt growth.
Quote:
Meanwhile, the spread in the U.S. is 29.6 percentage points, nearly 3 times as much.
But Switzerland has a VAT tax and other taxes/fees imposed on the wealthy, and those extra tax revenues allow them to have the government of a industrialized country like America's.
Then you should be able to understand the reason capital gains tax cuts temporally increase revenues is because people cash out their capital gains when the tax rate drops, and this causes large numbers of people to cash out at the same time (increasing revenues.)
But contrary to many republicans beliefs tax cuts on capital gains reduce revenues in the long run.
Yes, because those assets were cashed out and the taxes already paid. There are only so many assets.
Quote:
Then explain this to me instead of telling me to read a source that I feel withholds important information.
It's not my research work. Go to the source. If you have questions, ask the authors.
Quote:
I'll take that as well. Lower income tax rates in America would give consumers more money to spend to stimulate the economy.
But the problem is quickly reducing America's income tax rates would create huge deficits and huge debt growth.
Cut benefits. For example, 59% of families on food stamps simultaneously get benefits from 2 or more major free food programs for the exact same daily meals. That fact published by the USDA OIG. That needs to stop. It's a huge waste of money and it results in those on food stamps being disproportionately obese, ruining their health, which then also causes additional Medicaid costs.
But Switzerland has a VAT tax and other taxes imposed on the wealthy, and those extra tax revenues allow them to have the government of a industrialized country.
Everyone pays the VAT tax. And what taxes imposed on the wealthy? The top income tax bracket is 11.5%.
Cut benefits. For example, 59% of families on food stamps simultaneously get benefits from 2 or more major free food programs for the exact same daily meals. That fact published by the USDA OIG. That needs to stop. It's a huge waste of money and it results in those on food stamps being disproportionately obese, ruining their health, which then also causes additional Medicaid costs.
That's just the tip of the iceberg in regards to problems with our food stamp program. And part of the problem is our politicians are more concerned with getting campaign money, voter approval ratings, and party lines than they are creating solid laws.
The democrats do many stupid and wasteful programs, and party lines stop republicans from fine tuning these laws so they at least make some sense (like Sect 8 housing, Obamacare, or the "cash for clunkers" program.)
Then republicans do things like complain about welfare, but no republican president or congress from Reagan to today has done anything to actually fix our welfare system.
Quote:
Everyone pays the VAT tax. And what taxes imposed on the wealthy? The top income tax bracket is 11.5%.
Revenues from 11.5% income tax rates are somewhat substantial. And VAT taxes and things like $1 million dollar speeding tickets make up for Switzerland's low income tax rates.
And whats better for the economy, to tax someone at tax time or tax someone in the store?
- If you tax them at tax time that's money they can't spend in the store (and they buy less.)
But republican tax ideas like the "Flat Tax" are crafted by supply side economic principles giving huge tax cuts to the rich, and actually raising taxes on regular Americans. Flat Tax Will Benefit Only the Rich | US News Opinion
And current republican Donald Trump wants to do $12 trillion dollars in tax cuts. Giving the lowest earning 60% of American workers 13% of the tax cuts, and giving the richest 20% of Americans 70% of the tax cuts. Donald Trump's Tax Plan Would Cost $12 Trillion | CTJReports
Personally I would like a tax system like Switzerland's,
- Low business tax rates to attract and stimulate businesses.
- Lower progressive income tax rates to give people more money to spend in the economy.
- Taxes like VAT taxes to tax people when making a purchase.
- Charging the wealthy higher fines and higher fees for government services.
But I don't see Washington doing anything sensible to our tax system in the near future.
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.
) pressuring corporations for MORE profits?
