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.
This assumes the earner is self employed and that somehow everything magically becomes a business expense. I don't think so.
Those high income corporate employees might have a total comp package of > $1M a year. That could be $100K in salary and the rest in uncertain incentive/bonus comp and not all of it is in cash.
My brother makes about 125,000/yr as a bank President. When he comes to visit me and drives his truck 1000 miles each way, he always sets up brief meetings with potential clients in Omaha, NE and writes off most of travel expenses. Says it pays for fuel and wear and tear on truck. He is not self employed!!
Another self employed friend of mine who owns a large company that gross's 75 million plus yearly, writes off all his play traveling which is done most every week to all parts of states and countries by setting up clients also.
I have never been able to do that when I was a Truck driver making 60,000.00/yr.
I'm referring to the charity events in every town USA that are sponsored by business and attended by the social and corporate elite. Everything is a write off, even the sitter.
If the purpose is to raise money for a charity, why is the incentive a charity ball? Can't people just donate to their favorite charity and do without the dinner dance, golf tournament or polo match? It is a racket pure and simple.
Many of the people who are attending don't even want to be there. Been there, done that. And it had nothing to do with salary and everything to do with social events favored by the boss's wife.
How many tickets would be sold to any ballgame if there were not corporate buyers? Country club memberships, boats, vacation homes? I could go on and on. Everybody I know does it.
Anybody with a brain can set up a business for not much money. All you need to do is think like a Republican.
So NO Democrats have at least a brain? that explains a lot!!
Lets see now!! If someone earns 1,000,000.00 a year they pay 20.4% which is 204,000.00 and leaves them a small amount of 796,000.00 to barely survive on.
Someone, my Wife, makes 25,000.00/yr with overtime, pays 4.8% which is 1200.00 and leaves a whopping 23,800.00 to buy all the cheap living expenses on and invest the rest in stocks etc.
I think to be fair the 1,000,000.00 earner should only pay .12% which is 1200.00 just like my lowly, non paying, moocher that pays not her fair share.
Then we can all be equal and the wealthy person will have an extra 202,800.00 to put towards his investments and say they can only give my wife a .25 cent raise this year compared to that mega .50 cent increase last year.
Ahh, I feel so much better that we are all so even in tax paying now!! Now quit yer B@#$%tching!!
I have long stated that liberals measure the level-ness of the playing field, not at the field, but at the scoreboard. In other words, they TILT the field to their advantage, until the score is tied. Only then, in their pea-brains, are things "fair".
This above post is an example. When it is proven that the rich ARE paying far more than their fair share, they cop a "well, the score isn't tied (the rich still have more money left over after taxes), so things still aren't fair" ultra-whine. Truth is, they won't be satisfied until tax rates are so structured that the wealthy are taxed into the same poverty the poorest among us live in.
Then, in their "minds" things will finally be "fair".
Only a liberal/progressive would use such twisted thinking that is necessary to describe a thread about how the rich ARE paying their fair-share and more, as "Another bash the middle class thread".
As you can see from the above posts, it's not how much the rich pay in taxes, it's how much they get to keep.
And these people think the rich get to keep too much.
So, it's not really a debate of how much to tax them. It's really a debate of how much to let them keep while handing all the rest over to Uncle Sam.
The rich are keeping too much money for the likes of the left.
How much they keep vs how much they pay?? There's no difference. The less they pay the more they keep and the more they pay the less they keep. The two come as a set
Ok, before I even open the link let me take a wild guess here. You're only counting income taxes
What was your first iindication? That the info came from the IRS that deals with Fed. Income Tax?????
And since Income Tax is the overwhelmingly-largest tax we, as individuals, pay, AND that the debate is whether Federal Income Taxes should be raised for the well-to-do, it is nothing but APPROPRIATE.
Of course, that doesn't stop you from tossing in a hug, rotten, smelly RED HERRING into the debate.
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.
