Taxing the rich will it really work? (regular, examples, laws)
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.
Are you suggesting that higher taxes on the rich and middle class make them better off? So let's raise taxes on the middle and upper class so they will all be ecstatic.
That's creative.
No, that is a creative conclusion of the whole argument on your part. Tax rates as an excuse are for the incompetent, the crooks and the politicians (a subset of the crooks). As for me, I never noticed "tax cuts", I wouldn't notice repeal of tax cuts for my income bracket. What about you?
Oh goodie, look: Another flawed argument. Know what those other countries get for their higher tax rates? Free health insurance. Free education. Etc. Which the US does not receive.
How is this indicative of a flaw?
Quote:
And before you turn this into a "well, that means we should get those things, too!", that's not necessarily what I'm saying.
I'm not going to turn this into anything, because your point is lost on me.
Quote:
I'm saying that we pay only marginally less in taxes than most of those countries (and many of those countries on that chart are facing imminent collapse or are too small to be used in an apples-to-apples comparison...I mean really, Denmark? New York City has more people), and are already receiving significantly less. So no, we're not a tax haven.
The number of people living in Denmark is completely irrelevant. What's important is that at the top end of the wealth and income scale we pay far less than those countries.
Here are some other facts for you:
a. Tax revenue is at its lowest level, as a share of GDP, since 1950.
b. The U.S. has much lower tax revenues, as a share of GDP, than other developed countries.
c. Today's top marginal tax rates are historically low.
d. Taxes on investment income is historically low.
e. Taxation of large estate has almost disappeared
f. The share of taxes paid by the "top 400 taxpayers" has continually dropped since 1992.
g. The U.S. corporate tax revenue as a share of GDP has steadily declined since WWII.
h. The U.S. raises fewer taxes from business, as a % of GDP, than other countries.
i. Tax deductions have doubled, in real terms , since 1980
So yeah, if you're going to say that my argument is "flawed", you need to bring something a little stronger to back it up with.
Last edited by Cletus Awreetus-Awrightus; 12-20-2011 at 11:51 AM..
Not sure how anyone can still defend the present tax system for the top earners when it has failed.
This mentality that by keeping taxes low for the top earners and giving them huge tax loopholes so that they can pay ZERO tax so that they can increase employment is obviously a "sham".
We keep hearing how that if we increase the tax on the big corporations, this would stop their ability to hire more workers. Here's a newsflash for you all.......... Keeping their taxes low has NOT helped employment but it has helped give huge payouts and bonuses to the chosen few at the top.
Increasing taxes on the wealthy will not hurt the economy or cause more unemployment, unless the "fat cats" decide their bonuses come first and employment comes last. Not taxing the top earners is a negative as far as getting revenue to help put the Country back on its feet....... the top 1% want the middle class to pay for Americas recovery and bear the brunt of huge cut backs while the "elite" carry on as normal.
The law makers in Washington lose absolutely nothing if the Country is brought to a standstill and will still get payed high salaries, so why should they care about getting bi-partisan agreements when they will still "eat cake".
The way the tax system is being used today is definately NOT working and for that reason alone it must be changed........ Higher taxes for the wealthy will not on its own cure the economy but it will not harm the economy either..... in fact it will bring much needed revenue in to help America go forward.
I'm not sure what to say to this. I guess we shouldn't be giving them so many outs. I don't try to get out of the taxes I owe now. I am gathering I wouldn't try to get out of them as I grew either. I guess people are different, I guess this is why we need to have a new set of rules for big business to follow.
So, you don't take any deductions? Not even the personal deduction?
See, you're the one preaching foolishness instead of understanding (much less professing) the need to work as a people. Besides, it is living in complete denial that this country can get away without any tax increase.
There is no need to raise taxes on anybody. We just need to cut spending. Government is already way too big.
The highest marginal rates have been going down since the Johnson administration, and were most recently lowered under Bush. Which makes posts like this silly:.
The OP title is "Taxing the rich will it really work?"
We have always taxed the rich.
And marginal rates are meaningless. Actual taxes paid are what's important.
There is no need to raise taxes on anybody. We just need to cut spending. Government is already way too big.
I'm sure you can do better than spew the age old rhetoric. I told you that I didn't notice tax cuts in the 2000s (only that the income was growing at a pace no better and often lower than inflation). I certainly won't notice if the tax rates went back to pre-Bush era. And I asked you, would you?
Taxing them to pay the same percentage as everyone else, apsolutely it will work.
I will gladly pay the same percentage as those making less than the median income. Tell me how to vote for that law.
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.