Run, Run Millionaires (Merced, Montclair: insurance, lawyers, unemployment benefits)

[k374]

Originally Posted by NewToCA

Actually, if the folks in California favor "enhanced revenue" for the state, her ballot proposal is the one that would seem to be the most fair.

If you want to raise taxes, why not on all income?

Because someone making $17,000/yr is just trying to survive? Do you not get this simple concept??

[NewToCA]

Originally Posted by k374

Because someone making $17,000/yr is just trying to survive? Do you not get this simple concept??

Nah, too difficult.

Actually, if you look at my many postings on this topic, including earlier in this thread, you'd know I'm not in favor of any increases.

However, for those supporting raising taxes on the richer folks, I suggest they also be willing to contribute a bit more.

Now...do you get this simple concept??

[TrueTimbers]

Originally Posted by k374

Using your business as your personal tax shelter has become an industry in this country and needs to stop because the average man who does not have these kinds of shelters still has to pay 40% tax which is unfair.

Best be careful... I am a sole proprietor, Small business owners are likely to be the ones to get hurt, while wealthy folks and large corporations will continue to find loop holes.. Yes filing taxes as a business entity has it's advantages, but so does working for an employer and getting health insurance, and not having the headache and risks of entrepreneurship..

We surely do not want to stifle small family businesses now do we??
-----
New to CA.. Sorry I am not a flat tax fan... Tax the wealthy! What do you have to say about the concentration of wealth in the top 10% or even the top 1%. Do you think this is healthy for the country? Is not having tiered taxes a way to slow down the concentration of wealth?...

Can you imagine living in a country where 1% of the population holds 99% of the wealth? To me I think of medieval Europe, or some dictatorship in the jungle, like Burma.. History has shown us that quality of life is poor for the masses and productivity is low in models where wealth is highly concentrated...



I do not see how flat tax addresses this, matter of fact IMO it exacerbates the problem..!

[k374]

Originally Posted by NewToCA

Now...do you get this simple concept??

Frankly I don't... your suggestion is to ask people who are barely surviving to contribute more. I don't think that is in any way reasonable and could create more problems than it would solve.

As I said earlier taxing the rich more is the way to go since it is my opinion that they pay a pittance compared to what they are earning - by hiding income and clever accounting tricks.

[NewToCA]

Originally Posted by TrueTimbers

-----
New to CA.. Sorry I am not a flat tax fan... Tax the wealthy! What do you have to say about the concentration of wealth in the top 10% or even the top 1%. Do you think this is healthy for the country? Is not having tiered taxes a way to slow down the concentration of wealth?...

Can you imagine living in a country where 1% of the population holds 99% of the wealth? To me I think of medieval Europe, or some dictatorship in the jungle, like Burma.. History has shown us that quality of life is poor for the masses and productivity is low in models where wealth is highly concentrated...



I do not see how flat tax addresses this, matter of fact IMO it exacerbates the problem..!

Don't favor wealth concentration at all, never have and I believe it to be a significant economic problem in this country. In some cases I can support a flatter income tax structure, but this discussion is about expanding the state income tax on highest incomes.

However, since this discussion is only about state income tax proposals, I don't support the increase. Within that limited context I'd say that the very progressive income tax rates in California shouldn't go up on the wealthy at all. Take a look at the rates in the other 49 states, only Hawaii and Oregon (which has no sales tax at all) have higher tax rates on high income than California.

[k374]

Originally Posted by TrueTimbers

employer and getting health insurance, and not having the headache and risks of entrepreneurship..

Getting health insurance is increasingly becoming less common these days, employers are simply dropping this benefit or charging ridiculous amounts, for instance my employer gives me health insurance but my contribution is $300/month for it, what kind of health insurance is that? I'm in my mid 30s and that is the cost of a policy if I buy it on the open market.

Equal risks exist in a full time job as well, there is the constant threat of layoffs... this isn't any different than entrepreneurship, infact it is worse. In a business at least you can control your own boat, in a workplace you are at the mercy of imbeciles in management who quite often make boneheaded decisions - usually when the company loses it's the bottom level employees that lose their jobs, the people at the top who should be losing their jobs because it is their decision that ruined the company instead keep them.

Personally, I am not a fan of high taxes. I want government spending reduced instead...and we all know that it is a huge bureaucracy. What I am saying is that everyone pay their fair share, be it a business or an individual.

[ZhugeLiang]

Originally Posted by k374

Using your business as your personal tax shelter has become an industry in this country and needs to stop because the average man who does not have these kinds of shelters still has to pay 40% tax which is unfair.

Because opening a business is like totally free and has no risks whatsoever, DONT YOU KNOW. Let's punish investors and entrepreneurs so that way we won't create more jobs and then we can complain about how things aren't getting any better.

[user_id]

Originally Posted by Captain Obvious

I feel like all this money is just going to go towards union pensions and health care obligations.

All the things that are really great in California, like the climate and the geography have little to do with all the taxes that we pay.

Though I would certainly agree that today public worker salary and benefits are sucking up too much tax dollars, I find the other part of your comment outlandish. California didn't become the nations largest economy because its "climate and geography", there are many states in the US that are rather beautiful but have few people in them. Economic development requires more than just natural beauty and California greased the gears of commerce rather well.

Past infrastructure spending is what made California what it is today, for example its public university system is the best in the union....though that can certainly change if it keeps getting cut.

[k374]

Originally Posted by ZhugeLiang

Because opening a business is like totally free and has no risks whatsoever, DONT YOU KNOW. Let's punish investors and entrepreneurs so that way we won't create more jobs and then we can complain about how things aren't getting any better.

Because getting a new job and learning out a week later that you are laid off because the CEO has decided that his bonus should be a bit higher is like totally free and has no risks whatsoever, DONT YOU KNOW. Let's punish middle class individuals so that way they can be on the streets, lose their homes, have no health insurance when they get sick or provide for their kids and then we can complain how things aren't getting any better.

So yes, let's leave those poor rich people alone, don't you know they are already paying 10-14% in taxes, poor poor people, enough already.. let's leave them alone...TAX the poor and middle class more, 30-40% isn't enough, tax them 50%, heck 60%....

[user_id]

Originally Posted by movestoomuch

I don't believe that. Learn a trade. Become a doctor, dentist, engineer, lawyer, etc. If you learn an intelligent trade you will always find work and make enough money to succeed.

You're just ignoring the issue, learning an "intelligent trade" requires ahem....a good deal of intelligence.

But dentists, doctors, etc are not, at least typically, wealthy.