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.
What is wrong with the rich paying a larger portion of their income to taxes? Under Eisenhower the tax rate for the rich was 90%. Bernie is giving the rich a break at 50% or 70%.
BTW, I am puzzled why anyone here at CD would side with the super rich. The Reagan idea of "trick down" economics never trickled even a drop and still hasn't. The recent trillion dollar tax cut to corporations and the rich mainly went to buy by their stock. It did not produce any expansion and few jobs. Of the expansion it did create most was limited to automation and robotic resulting in job cuts.
Why does this OP continue to support the rich?
why do liberals constantly discriminate??
yes I said discriminate
no one should be paying a higher rate than anyone else
tax everyone at 15%
but no liberals, the o so compassionate liberals want to discriminate
no one should be paying a higher rate than anyone else
tax everyone at 15%
but no liberals, the o so compassionate liberals want to discriminate
Because 15% is all of or more than the margin po’ Folk have.
But punitive tax rates on people who earn a lot isn’t the solution either.
Fairer means fewer side doors out of taxes. Paying a fair share isn’t about big tax rates, it’s about not using clever investments to avoid a given rate. The highest incomes could probably be at 25 or 30% marginal rates without the myriad write offs.
Remember, the wealthy already pay the lion’s share of taxes even with the creative accounting they can employ.
why do liberals constantly discriminate??
yes I said discriminate
no one should be paying a higher rate than anyone else
tax everyone at 15%
but no liberals, the o so compassionate liberals want to discriminate
15% of gross wages to a person who is earning $7.25 an hour is a hell of a lot more of a burden than 15% is to a millionaire. The millionaire will still live very well on $850,000 while the minimum wage worker will be left with $12,818 to feed clothe and house himself.
I see you quietly shifted from your "Europe recovered from WW2 in an instant" to now this.
Anyway, ask any employer and they will tell you that paying for employee's health insurance is a BIG burden. Of course since they have profits it isn't as big of a burden on them as it would be for the private individual, who is only going by a wage or a salary.
This is exactly what Bernie's bad plan is going to do: make the individual pay instead of the employer, who is at least in a better position to afford to pay it.
His plan is wack.
Yes, they are "burdened" by paying wages too. In reality, they shift their burden onto the employees and that is the reason why no developed country has as many medical bankruptcies as America. Ordinary folks pay the price. Countries who fund their system similarly like we fund Medicare, through a payroll tax on the employer and employee do not burden their people with obscene medical costs.
It’s literally in your own post, he will tax corporations. Amazon literally paid nothing in corporate taxes in 2018, which would have been billions in that year alone, and that is even before raising corporate tax rates to the level they were in the 1950s. Meanwhile all of the other corporations that are likewise paying nothing in federal corporate taxes will be paying their fair share.
Companies don't pay taxes silly! They are a cost of doing business and are passed on in their product or service.
15% of gross wages to a person who is earning $7.25 an hour is a hell of a lot more of a burden than 15% is to a millionaire. The millionaire will still live very well on $850,000 while the minimum wage worker will be left with $12,818 to feed clothe and house himself.
Someone told me when I was young that "life's not fair".
Bernie knows all about the cost of his program, his friend and political ally Shumlin (D) when Governor, promised universal healthcare for all residents of Vermont. Four years later, he said it couldn't be done, would require raising taxes on individuals by 9% and raising taxes on businesses 11%. Would be an economic disaster for the state.
Yep. Vermont already tried to enact universal healthcare. It failed due to its catastrophic economic consequences.
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.
