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 Yesterday, 11:27 AM
 
Location: Las Vegas & San Diego
333 posts, read 55,204 times
Reputation: 333

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tominftl View Post
They make more thus they should pay more. Simple. Make it fair.
"They" already pay more - currently 48% pay NO income taxes. The top 1% pays significantly more (38%) than the bottom 90% combined (30%).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old Yesterday, 11:49 AM
 
5,589 posts, read 1,396,488 times
Reputation: 4336
Quote:
Originally Posted by ddeemo View Post
"They" already pay more - currently 48% pay NO income taxes. The top 1% pays significantly more (38%) than the bottom 90% combined (30%).
It's 45 percent but we get the idea.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 12:20 PM
 
Location: Las Vegas & San Diego
333 posts, read 55,204 times
Reputation: 333
Quote:
Originally Posted by katharsis View Post
Give ME a break. I didn't say that they were dying on the street -- I asked if that is something that people would like to see happen to the poor if given a choice between that or continuing to subsidize them with one's own money in the form of taxes. In short, if you are given a choice between forking over, say, an extra thousand a year in taxes vs. having someone go without food and starving to death (which, granted, is not very likely but it could happen, which is why I brought up the Irish Potato Famine), which would you choose?
The "literally die in the street" was your words

Quote:
Originally Posted by katharsis View Post
what if people cannot afford to buy the things that they need and are now provided by taxes, and they are without relatives who are able to help them? Are you willing to have them literally die in the street, starving and homeless?
You did not specify what you meant by "now is provided by taxes" but currently many things that are not basic needs are already provided or subsidized by taxes; Obama phones are provided and College debt is subsidized by taxes and proposed to be forgiven - taxes already cover basic needs for the indigent (if they will take it).

No one is seriously trying to cut providing basic needs for those US citizens that can not work. But do not propose more taxes for stuff that is not basic needs, US welfare already provides several times more support than the worlds average income. What needs to happen is to fix issues with providing subsidies for those that can work but don't, permanent welfare should not be a career option.

Most of the democratic proposed items are NOT basic needs but are money transfers. Giving basic services for illegal aliens is idiotic and not compassionate, they have no right to be here and it will just continue to attract the wrong ones to make the journey - we should NOT put up with being the worlds social welfare system.

Last edited by ddeemo; Yesterday at 12:57 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 12:25 PM
 
172 posts, read 34,643 times
Reputation: 182
[quote=Motion;55807319]When politicians say that the rich should pay more in taxes I ask pay more for what reason[quote]


I don't get progressive taxation. Just pick a flat tax rate, and everyone pays the same from the first to last dollar. Penalizing success is anti-american
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 12:52 PM
 
7,115 posts, read 1,531,920 times
Reputation: 17563
Quote:
Originally Posted by ddeemo View Post
The "literally die in the street" was your words
Yes, but the relevant part were the words immediately preceding that. Go back and read my post #275. But here is the copy and paste from it (although I have now italicized it for clarity, and I bolded and underlined the relevant part):

"But, to ask my question again (albeit in a different way) -- what if people cannot afford to buy the things that they need and are now provided by taxes, and they are without relatives who are able to help them? Are you willing to have them literally die in the street, starving and homeless? To just name one example, have you heard of the Irish potato famine? There was almost no government or private aid, and approximately one million people died."

Anyway, I am through with debating with you since you obviously have no compunction about taking words out of context just to try to make your point. Consider yourself "ignored" from me from now on!

Last edited by katharsis; Yesterday at 01:03 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 12:54 PM
 
8,929 posts, read 10,963,828 times
Reputation: 12988
Quote:
Originally Posted by reed067 View Post
If I get a raise that ours me into a higher income bracket I have to pay more taxes. So why shouldn’t the rich have too? What makes them special?
They actually do feel "special," like they did something so extraordinarily right to have such a special fate. Truth is they probably did some stuff right and some stuff wrong and had lots of help along the way to get where they are. Humility is one of the best traits to have when you're on top.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 04:15 PM
 
2,212 posts, read 861,957 times
Reputation: 3096
Quote:
Originally Posted by desertdetroiter View Post
Because they have more. That’s why.

You do realize that makes absolutely no sense, right? If taxes were fair, everyone would pay an equal share of what it costs to run the government. Progressive taxes are inherently unfair. Why should any one pay more than any one else? You've not only swallowed the Kool-aid, you're bathing in it.



I suppose you believe the price of consumer products should vary based on the purchaser's income?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 04:17 PM
 
2,212 posts, read 861,957 times
Reputation: 3096
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tominftl View Post
They make more thus they should pay more. Simple. Make it fair.

Neither fair nor simple. Answer the question: Why should a high earner pay more for the exact same government services as a low earner? Try not to use circular logic.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 05:08 PM
 
Location: *
8,172 posts, read 2,469,652 times
Reputation: 2257
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
Yes. Adam Smith is a proponent of a flat tax rate. As seen in my prior example, the higher income earner would pay more in proportion to their respective income.
From The Wealth of Nations

"The subjects of every state ought to contribute towards the support of the government, as nearly as possible, in proportion to their respective abilities."

― Adam Smith, The Wealth of Nations

Income is not the same thing as abilities.

Also, 'mucho trabajo poquito dinero' universal translation.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 05:14 PM
 
Location: *
8,172 posts, read 2,469,652 times
Reputation: 2257
Quote:
Originally Posted by middle-aged mom View Post
Congress could have replaced the progressive tax with a flat tax in 2017.

Congress could have eliminated intentional loopholes in 2017.

Congress could have cut costs to offset cuts in 2017.

Congress could deny appropriations.

Makes no diff which party sits the oval or holds the majority.

Despite this, incumbents have an advantage when it comes to elections.
Ockham's razor: Congress simply does not believe the rich should pay more.
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

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
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - 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 - Top