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.
Instead of raising the normal income tax rates. How about a flax tax of X% for all incomes above $XXX,XXX. This tax would be collected separately and would ONLY go toward DEBT REDUCTION. This tax would be on top of the already existing marginal rate.
Think of it like this. "Sorry rich people, the Bush tax cuts were a bad idea, so we are effectively reversing them."
This way the government doesn't have extra money to waste because it only goes toward one thing.
Instead of raising the normal income tax rates. How about a flax tax of X% for all incomes above $XXX,XXX. This tax would be collected separately and would ONLY go toward DEBT REDUCTION. This tax would be on top of the already existing marginal rate.
Think of it like this. "Sorry rich people, the Bush tax cuts were a bad idea, so we are effectively reversing them."
This way the government doesn't have extra money to waste because it only goes toward one thing.
Interesting concept..how would you prevent cost shifting....we would need a budget amendment to keep from blowing out the budget and then having our politicians coming back to say....oh, we need that revenue to pay for "needed services"
Of course If someone is asked to pay for others debts..they should get some incremental benefit from it.....
Interesting concept..how would you prevent cost shifting....we would need a budget amendment to keep from blowing out the budget and then having our politicians coming back to say....oh, we need that revenue to pay for "needed services"
Of course If someone is asked to pay for others debts..they should get some incremental benefit from it.....
I'm an accountant so yes, it took me about 35 seconds to find a way to legally circumvent that after posting the idea, but I think theoretically it has some merit: the concept of a "Bush tax cut reversal."
Again.. why are you using the word "taxation" when what you really want to say is "stealing"... you want to go after "rich" people who are celebrities, athletes, and CEOs... they ALL have loopholes out of paying income tax... instead, you let them through the loopholes and then punish the rest... so stop stealing from others and pronounce it as taxing the rich when in fact, you are doing none of it...
How do we decrease taxes on the 42% who don't pay a dime? The 58% that pay taxes already pay enough. The top 5%, who pay 70% of the taxes, are mobile and will continue to become expats if they get hammered anymore than they are now.
We need to fix the corporate tax problems first. GE not paying a dime in taxes, yet getting billions in subsidies should have people pi$sed more than they seem to be.
Instead of raising the normal income tax rates. How about a flax tax of X% for all incomes above $XXX,XXX. This tax would be collected separately and would ONLY go toward DEBT REDUCTION. This tax would be on top of the already existing marginal rate.
Think of it like this. "Sorry rich people, the Bush tax cuts were a bad idea, so we are effectively reversing them."
This way the government doesn't have extra money to waste because it only goes toward one thing.
Does this include capital gains? Lets say that they pay 15% now and that it is raised to 50% with the additional 35% to go to the deficit. I like that.
Again.. why are you using the word "taxation" when what you really want to say is "stealing"... you want to go after "rich" people who are celebrities, athletes, and CEOs... they ALL have loopholes out of paying income tax... instead, you let them through the loopholes and then punish the rest... so stop stealing from others and pronounce it as taxing the rich when in fact, you are doing none of it...
Explain how it is punishment? The wealthy pay alot on either capital gains and actual tax rate....and your suggestion that high earner keeping more of their own money is in some way taking from others? Please explain -
are you going to tell me that low earners should be exhempt from paying for services they recieve, and that high earners should pay for their services...tand that by keeping more on one's wn money that is stealing?
If you want to blame, blame the Govt for spending and getting us in this mess...
Explain how it is punishment? The wealthy pay alot on either capital gains and actual tax rate....and your suggestion that high earner keeping more of their own money is in some way taking from others? Please explain -
are you going to tell me that low earners should be exhempt from paying for services they recieve, and that high earners should pay for their services...tand that by keeping more on one's wn money that is stealing?
If you want to blame, blame the Govt for spending and getting us in this mess...
EXACTLY! The new pro-taxation trip phrase (talking point) is "we give them too much money". Definition: We spend your money to buy supporters, court lobbyists, and pay off special interests under the guise of subsidies, and we want more of your money to help perpetuate our swindle. The fleecing of Americans is alive and well.
"We let give them too much money" is a rediculous spin on reality.
If you want to blame, blame the Govt for spending and getting us in this mess...
Bingo!
Reduce government spending a lot; reduce taxes a little less; use the difference to pay off the national debt.
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.
after posting the idea, but I think theoretically it has some merit: the concept of a "Bush tax cut reversal."
