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.
The wealthy have benefitted by far the most in the last twenty years; they should pay more than the middle class. Middle/lower class earnings have become stagnant. The wealthy have had their incomes rise disproportionate to the rest of the population.
The wealthy DO pay more. The top 10% of American earners pay 70% of this countries tax bill. The middle/lower class pay a lower % of taxes now than any other time in history. I believe the figure is about 40% of "taxpayers" pay none or a negative amount in taxes (i.e. some get money BACK after owing no taxes).
I don't want America to be a country that has to regulate the "wealthy" to ensure they don't get too far ahead of the rest of us. That smacks of envy and socialism and would impinge on ALL our freedoms.
The wealthy have benefitted by far the most in the last twenty years; they should pay more than the middle class. Middle/lower class earnings have become stagnant. The wealthy have had their incomes rise disproportionate to the rest of the population.
Intersting ideas. Where do you get your information? I always read the same information that the other poster stated. 10% of the earners pay 70% of all taxes. What makes you think that the "wealthy' do nto pay more than middle class now? What makes you think that the "wealthy" have had their incomes rise? Personally, my income has fallen for the past four years. Last year I earned 18% less than in 2007. My benefits have been cut and my insurance deductible doubled. Meanwhile my tax burden has gone up. Yet I see various union workers, particularly public workers, threatening strikes or going on strike becuase they want a raise or more benefits, or they protest a 3% pay cut. I think that you have it backwards. Unless you are referring only to the uber wealthy who generally pay no taxes and in many cases show little or no income, the "wealthy" have probably taken more of a hit than any group in this recession.
You would probably consider me wealthy, but during most of the past 20 years I was the middle class or even low income that you feel were so opressed. Now that I have achieved some level of success, you think that I should be taxed to death becasue people 20 years ago paid less taxes? What has that got to do with the people who are "wealthy" today?
About 50% of my income goes to various taxes (I count Social Security as a tax since I will never recieve any). Perhaps a bit higher when factoring in sales taxes and other taxes that I am forgetting about. Now we are going to be taxed on our health insurance benefits, the exemption for our kids is cut in half and our tax burden will increase another 5-10%. How much more taxes would you like me to pay? In addition, I try to donate 10% of my income to charities and churches. That does not leave very much of my income to pay the bills. I work my tail off; that is why I have a good income. Why should I keep working so hard if it is just going to go to the government? It would be much easier for me to just quit, declare bankruptcy and become a leech rather than an earner. I am already at the point where it would be more beneficial for me to work less and make less in order to avoid certain levels of taxes. At some point it becomes worthless to earn more. Any additional earnings are so heavily taxed that you end up getting next to nothing for the extra hours of work. Is that what we want? Discourage people from working hard? If they significantly increase my taxes, I will not be able to keep our house and will go into default. The bank wll lose hundreds of thousands of dollars other creditors will lose tens of thousands of dollars. Creditors will take every penny that I am able to earn. Me and my family will end up turning to government assistance. We will not generate any more property tax dollars, we will gerneate little sales tax dollars, our house will sit empty, and someone will end up paying for us. How does the government gain a net benefit from that? Is that what you want to accomplish by increasing tax on the "rich"? If we make the "rich" no longer "rich" we will create another wave of foreclosures and a net decrease in government income.
As I mentioned before, if they want to punish people for having wealth, punish them for holding it, not for earning it. Tax the pools of money just sitting there not being used.
Last edited by Coldjensens; 02-17-2011 at 08:04 AM..
Intersting ideas. Where do you get your information? I always read the same information that the other poster stated. 10% of the earners pay 70% of all taxes. What makes you think that the "wealthy' do nto pay more than middle class now? What makes you think that the "wealthy" have had their incomes rise? Personally, my income has fallen for the past four years. Last year I earned 18% less than in 2007. My benefits have been cut and my insurance deductible doubled. Meanwhile my tax burden has gone up. Yet I see various union workers, particularly public workers, threatening strikes or going on strike becuase they want a raise or more benefits, or they protest a 3% pay cut. I think that you have it backwards. Unless you are referring only to the uber wealthy who generally pay no taxes and in many cases show little or no income, the "wealthy" have probably taken more of a hit than any group in this recession.
You would probably consider me wealthy, but during most of the past 20 years I was the middle class or even low income that you feel were so opressed. Now that I have achieved some level of success, you think that I should be taxed to death becasue people 20 years ago paid less taxes? What has that got to do with the people who are "wealthy" today?
About 50% of my income goes to various taxes (I count Social Security as a tax since I will never recieve any). Perhaps a bit higher when factoring in sales taxes and other taxes that I am forgetting about. Now we are going to be taxed on our health insurance benefits, the exemption for our kids is cut in half and our tax burden will increase another 5-10%. How much more taxes would you like me to pay? In addition, I try to donate 10% of my income to charities and churches. That does not leave very much of my income to pay the bills. I work my tail off; that is why I have a good income. Why should I keep working so hard if it is just going to go to the government? It would be much easier for me to just quit, declare bankruptcy and become a leech rather than an earner. I am already at the point where it would be more beneficial for me to work less and make less in order to avoid certain levels of taxes. At some point it becomes worthless to earn more. Any additional earnings are so heavily taxed that you end up getting next to nothing for the extra hours of work. Is that what we want? Discourage people from working hard? If they significantly increase my taxes, I will not be able to keep our house and will go into default. The bank wll lose hundreds of thousands of dollars other creditors will lose tens of thousands of dollars. Creditors will take every penny that I am able to earn. Me and my family will end up turning to government assistance. We will not generate any more property tax dollars, we will gerneate little sales tax dollars, our house will sit empty, and someone will end up paying for us. How does the government gain a net benefit from that? Is that what you want to accomplish by increasing tax on the "rich"? If we make the "rich" no longer "rich" we will create another wave of foreclosures and a net decrease in government income.
As I mentioned before, if they want to punish people for having wealth, punish them for holding it, not for earning it. Tax the pools of money just sitting there not being used.
"My information" is available in any Google search. It's not even debatable that the wealthy have made gains the last ten years while the middle/lower classes have remained stagnant or backslid.
The wealthy should pay more because they HAVE more. When Warren Buffett pays 12% income tax, the wealthy ARE NOT paying their fair share. Period. Overexaggerating taxation on the rich is an amusing tactic, but it's not relevant to the discussion. We're talking paying a flat 38% that's already on the books, not 12% with all the little deductions, exceptions and corner-cuts the wealthy currently enjoy.
The alternative is increasing the crushing debt.
If you read the post, I said EVERYONE has to pay more, the wealthy need to pay more than everyone else. It's only fair.
Whenever it's suggested that the rich pay their fair share, people go absolutely bonkers, not realizing nearly everyone pays a higher percentage of their income in taxes than the rich do. Cracks me up.
Last edited by AlohaHuey; 02-17-2011 at 09:57 AM..
The wealthy DO pay more. The top 10% of American earners pay 70% of this countries tax bill. The middle/lower class pay a lower % of taxes now than any other time in history. I believe the figure is about 40% of "taxpayers" pay none or a negative amount in taxes (i.e. some get money BACK after owing no taxes).
I don't want America to be a country that has to regulate the "wealthy" to ensure they don't get too far ahead of the rest of us. That smacks of envy and socialism and would impinge on ALL our freedoms.
BS they do.
Warren Buffett pays 12% income tax because he can get away with it.
They need to pay their fair share, like everyone else.
The alternative is to cut spending and get the government out of things that it does not belong in.
Like education, community services, and mental health (wait, that is already DOA), so they can get on with the business of big business. The stuff that really matters..
The alternative is to cut spending and get the government out of things that it does not belong in.
Yeah, right. If you think that a balanced budget can be achieved by cutting discretionary spending, well, I have a bridge to sell you. It cannot be done. Cutting and tax increases are inevitable; a high school economics class could tell you that.
The alternative is to cut spending and get the government out of things that it does not belong in.
Yes, and the alternative is to also get the lazy bums off of their butts and make them contribute instead of leeching off of the government. I know jobs can be hard to come by right now, but how much common sense does it take to do the math: I don't have a job, I don't have any marketable job skills, I sit on my butt all day, I already have a child, I definitely should not be having any more to add to the burden that I am on the government and the decent, hardworking tax payers who support me. Oh, and thanks, thanks for supporting me. I really appreciate it. I will do my best to show my appreciation by not using my Bridge Card to buy useless items like popsicles and Mountain Dew and my welfare check to buy beer, cigarettes, and illegal street drugs.
If more people were forced to contribute to the system instead of draining it, that would make a huge difference. You didn't hear about things like staggeringly out of control national debt before America became a welfare state with more people taking than giving. Most people who would be considered wealthy worked hard to get what they have, and they have a right to reap the rewards of their hard work. Others who don't have as much and are jealous of their success want to even the playing field and "spread the wealth". Socialism at its worst.
The wealthy DO pay more. The top 10% of American earners pay 70% of this countries tax bill. The middle/lower class pay a lower % of taxes now than any other time in history. I believe the figure is about 40% of "taxpayers" pay none or a negative amount in taxes (i.e. some get money BACK after owing no taxes).
I don't want America to be a country that has to regulate the "wealthy" to ensure they don't get too far ahead of the rest of us. That smacks of envy and socialism and would impinge on ALL our freedoms.
I love when people bring up the top % pay x% of taxes. The top 2% in the country own 50% of the wealth.
I'm curious what freedoms do we lose if we are socialists? What freedoms do Americans have that Canadians don't? What freedoms have the Germans, French, British lost?
I love when people bring up the top % pay x% of taxes. The top 2% in the country own 50% of the wealth.
I'm curious what freedoms do we lose if we are socialists? What freedoms do Americans have that Canadians don't? What freedoms have the Germans, French, British lost?
I think he draped himself in the American flag when he wrote that post.
It's utter nonsense.
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.
