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.
If 30% of income tax income for the state come from less than 1% of the population, doesn't that mean that the 1% is subsidizing the standards of living for everybody else? These people are the only reason countries like the UK can even afford things like universal healthcare and welfare. If it weren't for them, people would benefit NOTHING from those things because they would suck (or should I say, suck harder).
If 30% of income tax income for the state come from less than 1% of the population, doesn't that mean that the 1% is subsidizing the standards of living for everybody else? These people are the only reason countries like the UK can even afford things like universal healthcare and welfare. If it weren't for them, people would benefit NOTHING from those things because they would suck (or should I say, suck harder).
In the uk the top 10% if households earned roughly 32% of all income I don't have data for the 1%ers do you?
If 30% of income tax income for the state come from less than 1% of the population, doesn't that mean that the 1% is subsidizing the standards of living for everybody else?
No, it doesn't. As you seem already to have forgotten, only income taxes are progressive. And let's note as well that whatever Mr. Fat-Cat's income tax is, it is based on his PERSONAL income only -- as sheltered and hidden in as many ways as he and his tax advisors can manage to think of. Mr. Fat-Cat and his company in fact have a long history of being subsidized by the government. The government does this deliberately in order to help provide a robust economic environment in which jobs and productivity can flourish. That's just the way the world works, but some refuse to see it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hakkarin
These people are the only reason countries like the UK can even afford things like universal healthcare and welfare. If it weren't for them, people would benefit NOTHING from those things because they would suck (or should I say, suck harder).
What a load of absolute rubbish. Unlike the US, the bulk of Europe has taken care to assure that the middle and working classes are paid well enough to be able to afford the taxes necessary to support the welfare programs that the middle and working classes themselves ultimately need. We have not done that here. It is ONLY the wealthy in the US who can now afford to pay for the programs that the middle and working classes need, and like a bunch of worthless ungrateful little gits, they balk at doing so. "Off with their heads!" the Queen of Hearts would say, and well said indeed it would be!
Perhaps you could care to provide an actual counter-argument instead of just insulting me?
there's really not much reason to counter your points, since they're pretty much based on a false premise, in your last line. "They are also the only reason they exist"
So how did those people, who you've later posted pay 30% of income taxes (which means that 70% of income taxes are paid by EVERYONE ELSE), get their money? What's the only reason their wealth exists?
In Michigan, an owner-occupied primary residence qualifies for a homestead exemption, while a rental property does not (even if it is the tenant's primary residence) The school property tax rate without a homestead exemption is 4x the rate with a homestead exemption; this works out to a tax break for a homestead exemption in the neighborhood of $1,500 per year.
No, it is not a tax break for one group. It is a method of charging non-owner-occupied residences a higher tax rate
Across the country, local communities seek to find ways to raise money on people who don't vote, including vacation home owners, tourists, and the like. I've never been in a hotel that didn't have an extra line item for a tax or two - as a visitor, I have no representation & hence I must pay if I stay.
In Park City, UT if the house you own is your primary residence, you pay one property tax rate. If the house is a long-term rental with a minimum 1 year lease, the property owner pays one property tax rate. If, however, the house is a daily or weekly rental, the property tax rate is 3 times higher. This is to encourage full-time residency - people with a commitment to the local community, and to provide a disincentive to prevent the community from turning into just a giant VRBO / airbnb destination full of people with no commitment to the community.
Wow. i have never posted on here before today but i had to laugh at this.... I would like for you to show me some sort of statistic to support this ridiculous claim?
He doesn't like data. It tends to interfere with his world view.
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.
