We seriously need to increase taxes on the wealthy (stats, brainwash, dollars)
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.
I have posted a few threads about how the rich are NOT paying their fair share and some of the responses here have been amazing! People seem to think that taxes on the rich are a bad idea. In my view this line of thinking is absolutely absurd.
There is so much CLARITY that the rich in this country are paying virtually NO taxes because of loopholes in the tax code. Mitt Romney earned $45 million dollars yet paid 14% tax yet the common bloke making $100,000 is paying a marginal rate of close to 50% (in California with payroll taxes included). This is the biggest injustice there is and it needs to stop. Obama has proposed a 30% minimum tax on $1 million+ earnings and that is an EXTREMELY good start.
I believe most on this forum are part of the 99%, so please explain to me why their heart is bleeding for the likes of Mitt Romney who is getting away scott free without paying his fair share?
Subsidizing the rich has become a cottage industry in this country and it needs to STOP
And what is the effective rate of that bloke in CA, ignoring CA taxes, with payroll taxes included? Even a single filer in CA earning $100,000 without any itemized deductions would not exceed the 28% marginal rate, and would have an effective rate of 21%. If you look at Romney's tax returns, he paid self-employment taxes (FICA) on his earned income, and his earned income was taxed at the highest marginal rate of 35%. The reason his effective tax rate is lower is because his capital gains income is so much larger. But for dollar of earned income he pays the exact same marginal rates as the bloke in CA on like income, and on his higher earnings (directors fees and speaking fees were over $500,000) he pays even more than the bloke.
On an apple-to-apple comparison, Mitt pays a higher marginal rate. If the bloke in CA was married and had two kids, his effective rate would fall to less than 15%, assuming again he didn't itemize. If our bloke itemized his rate would be even less than Mitt.
You can't compare a 50% marginal rate in CA with a 15% effective federal rate. Mitt paid state taxes in Utah which are not in that 15% figure, so you can't include CA taxes in your comparison. Your bloke on a comparative basis (federal taxes, married fileing) pays about the same effective rate as Mitt.
I pulled my data from the IRS website. Show me your math. Show me that a married couple from CA pay a 50% marginal rate on earned income, including payroll taxes, but excluding CA state taxes. You can't. Myth busted.
No more carried interest. LT cap gains rate around 25% past a certain point.
No more turning yourself into a corporation and never realizing cap gains to live forever. Abolish the inheritence tax and replace it with a NO ESCAPE forced realization of ALL gains made over a lifetime allow only a subraction of say $3MM per married estate. The rest MUST be realized and taxed.
The true uber rich have created a feedback cycle of wealth that has now become a self sustaining circle.
>This idiotic notion that success must be punished by paying HIGHER tax rates should be punishable by death.< Intolerance much?
"success" has become detached from contribution. Im not going to argue the couch potato class deserves a nickel, but on the other end of the scale; until someone cures cancer and ugliness in the same year NOONE contributes enough to the economy to actually "earn" a billion dollars.
Current top top earners even above CEO's are hedge fund managers which make a billion or more in ONE YEAR. They did this moving money around for other hyper rich. Eddie Lampert made the club. He has been failing in EPIC style for 5 years yet somehow made over a billion dollars. The deck is not stacked?
Sorry, they may have MADE $1B+ but they sure as heck did not earn it. That is a feedback loop. 100 years ago Jay Gould the robber baron was a dirt bag. At least when he assumed room temperature there was still a railroad left behind.
We don't need more taxes collected. We need fiscal responsibility in Washington.
A balanced budget amendment is the only way. If the money is not there, don't spend it. That's how American households work (at least the ones bright enough NOT to live on credit cards). This romantic notion that America was better in the 50s because of higher taxes is supremely ignorant of the facts. People did not live in debt up to their eyeballs back then... and neither did the country.
There will be tough cuts in entitlements (which account for 60+% of our budget) but it is not Washington's job to see to it that the public has money.
I have posted a few threads about how the rich are NOT paying their fair share and some of the responses here have been amazing! People seem to think that taxes on the rich are a bad idea. In my view this line of thinking is absolutely absurd.
There is so much CLARITY that the rich in this country are paying virtually NO taxes because of loopholes in the tax code. Mitt Romney earned $45 million dollars yet paid 14% tax yet the common bloke making $100,000 is paying a marginal rate of close to 50% (in California with payroll taxes included). This is the biggest injustice there is and it needs to stop. Obama has proposed a 30% minimum tax on $1 million+ earnings and that is an EXTREMELY good start.
I believe most on this forum are part of the 99%, so please explain to me why their heart is bleeding for the likes of Mitt Romney who is getting away scott free without paying his fair share?
Subsidizing the rich has become a cottage industry in this country and it needs to STOP
I think mit pay ed 15% and that is on capital gians. witch is totaly differant then pay roll taxes. the common bloke your talking about is paying pay roll taxes. now if that common bloke was to invest his money, the money he already payed 50% tax, and made some money in the stock market, that money would be tax at a lower rate just like mit. you dont have any clarity what so ever!!
Would you like to see a prosperous America, just like the one we had in the 50's and 60's? I sure would. But after doing plenty of research, I have to say the Republican ideology is simply NOT going to achieve this. Ever.
The policies of FDR and his New Deal was what made the U.S. the envy of the world. His policies actually led to a true widespread middle class society, with some poor and rich households here and there. How did he achieve this? He sharply increased taxes on the wealthy. In fact, at one time, the highest tax rate was 91% for the wealthiest earners. Trickle down economics don't work as well as Republicans want you to believe.
I think Obama needs to be more aggressive at taxing the rich, otherwise we are doomed as a nation. I just don't see how we are going to have the tax revenue to pay off the debt and move forward with other projects. Something's gotta give. I mean, even with a 91% tax rate, someone who earns $1 billion a year, such as Warren Buffet, would be left with a whopping $90 million AFTER taxes. Who seriously needs or wants more than that to live happily?
If a Republican is elected, god help us. We can't afford to have anymore tax breaks for the wealthy.
Raising taxes during a recession will be a huge mistake, one as big as Smoot-Hawley. If Obama has his way, we will likely see another collapse coupled with several percentage points increase in unemployment as companies lay millions of people off. Taxes were 91% during the 1950s but those were also prosperous times.
Would you like to see a prosperous America, just like the one we had in the 50's and 60's? I sure would. But after doing plenty of research, I have to say the Republican ideology is simply NOT going to achieve this. Ever.
The policies of FDR and his New Deal was what made the U.S. the envy of the world. His policies actually led to a true widespread middle class society, with some poor and rich households here and there. How did he achieve this? He sharply increased taxes on the wealthy. In fact, at one time, the highest tax rate was 91% for the wealthiest earners. Trickle down economics don't work as well as Republicans want you to believe.
I think Obama needs to be more aggressive at taxing the rich, otherwise we are doomed as a nation. I just don't see how we are going to have the tax revenue to pay off the debt and move forward with other projects. Some thing's gotta give. I mean, even with a 91% tax rate, someone who earns $1 billion a year, such as Warren Buffet, would be left with a whopping $90 million AFTER taxes. Who seriously needs or wants more than that to live happily?
If a Republican is elected, god help us. We can't afford to have anymore tax breaks for the wealthy.
what happens when the rich are tax out of their wealth,and the government squander it away like they have been doing ever since that idiot FDR. there are only 1% of them. where would we get money from? China!! we have been printing money and borrowing it from china! don't think its any one's business to say what should people be allowed to own including money!!
Perhaps it's because we like truth. When someone makes the idiotic claim that people who pay twice the percentage of their income are not paying their "share", we just tend to be a bit bothered. Honestly....I just don't understand the liberal mindset.
Maybe you can clarify what this means (bold above). Really have no idea what you mean.
Mittens paid about 14% last year, I just did the first pass on my taxes, my effective tax rate this year was 9.5% of my adjusted gross income of less than $58k. That didn't include FICA payroll taxes, I'm retired.
For the record, mittens' 14% effective tax rate included his self employment (payroll) tax.
Maybe you can clarify what this means (bold above). Really have no idea what you mean.
Mittens paid about 14% last year, I just did the first pass on my taxes, my effective tax rate this year was 9.5% of my adjusted gross income of less than $58k. That didn't include FICA payroll taxes, I'm retired.
For the record, mittens' 14% effective tax rate included his self employment (payroll) tax.
It also included income that was taxed at a marginal rate that is twice the average taxpayer.
I don't have a problem with somebody arguing that his income should be taxed at a higher rate. I have a problem with people arguing that the average American pays a higher marginal or effective rate than Mitt. It's false. By the way, 13.9% of $25 million or 9.5% of $58k - which is the larger number?
I have posted a few threads about how the rich are NOT paying their fair share and some of the responses here have been amazing! People seem to think that taxes on the rich are a bad idea. In my view this line of thinking is absolutely absurd.
There is so much CLARITY that the rich in this country are paying virtually NO taxes because of loopholes in the tax code. Mitt Romney earned $45 million dollars yet paid 14% tax yet the common bloke making $100,000 is paying a marginal rate of close to 50% (in California with payroll taxes included). This is the biggest injustice there is and it needs to stop. Obama has proposed a 30% minimum tax on $1 million+ earnings and that is an EXTREMELY good start.
I believe most on this forum are part of the 99%, so please explain to me why their heart is bleeding for the likes of Mitt Romney who is getting away scott free without paying his fair share?
Subsidizing the rich has become a cottage industry in this country and it needs to STOP
Because....
Most rich folks either worked their rears off for what they have or they inherited it from someone that did.
Rich folks provide jobs, excuse me, most of them do.
Many folks are envious of the rich. Others are lazy and feel they are entitled to much of what the rich have, but without themselves having to bust their own rears to get it like the rich have done.
If we overtax the rich what we do is ultimately harm ourselves, all of us. We then destroy the incentive to work hard, and produce much. We then, eventually have less taxable income anyway. (mama used to call this "cutting off your nose to spite your face.)
Imagine how much more productive all 300 million of us could be if we focused on what we could accomplish, instead of whining "Johnny got more ice cream than me", the latter is what this raise taxes on all but me threads are truly saying.
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.