Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-01-2013, 12:55 PM
 
20,948 posts, read 19,054,479 times
Reputation: 10270

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
You know that is not true. 47% pay no federal income tax. These same people pay plenty of other taxes. Also, you are including many members of the military, many retirees, and lots of college students in your disdain.
Not true.

Why am I responsible for paying for infrastructure but you aren't?

Losers.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-01-2013, 12:58 PM
 
20,948 posts, read 19,054,479 times
Reputation: 10270
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivorytickler View Post
We're talking the federal government here. Do try to keep up.

It's not distain. It's practical. The problem isn't that the top 2% don't pay enough. It's that the bottom 47% of wage earners don't pay enough (last time I looked most seniors were not wage earners. I see no reason for SS to be taxed at all as it's a payout on taxes previously paid).

SS, capital gains.....what's the difference? SS should be taxed at the same rate as capital gains....since they are both earnings which have already been taxed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-01-2013, 01:03 PM
 
Location: Alaska
7,506 posts, read 5,753,469 times
Reputation: 4889
Quote:
Originally Posted by Old Gringo View Post
Blaming Bush is still an active and valid activity, though.
I agree and I also agree that since he was the cause we should end his tax cuts for everyone.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-01-2013, 01:07 PM
 
Location: Alaska
7,506 posts, read 5,753,469 times
Reputation: 4889
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffdoorgunner View Post
The rich just need to pay their fair share. Capital gains tax, which is where they make most of their money,needs to be taxed the same rate as income tax.
Ok so now that they do and it will have absolutley no impact on our deficit what do you propose next that will get us out of the mess Obama has us in. He's had 4 years and regardless of what the liberal media tells you the economy still sucks.

It's like being really drunk, having a good time and then you sober up and realize that there is pain that comes with the drunk and usually a hefty payment afterward.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-01-2013, 01:10 PM
 
Location: Portland, Oregon
46,001 posts, read 35,187,290 times
Reputation: 7875
Quote:
Originally Posted by alphamale View Post
Not true.

Why am I responsible for paying for infrastructure but you aren't?

Losers.
I know right, don't you just hate the retired, handicap, and military that haven't been paying their fair share and paying no taxes, the Cons really need to go after those tax dodgers.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-01-2013, 01:49 PM
 
Location: Central Texas
13,714 posts, read 31,180,231 times
Reputation: 9270
Quote:
Originally Posted by gmagoo View Post
Was Eisenhower a socialist? The rich paid a much higher tax rate when he was president.
Was he a racist? When he was president black people used separate bathrooms and rode in the back of the bus.

Historical comparisons on issues like this have little value when trying to decide what is good policy today.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-01-2013, 01:59 PM
 
Location: Central Texas
13,714 posts, read 31,180,231 times
Reputation: 9270
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ringo1 View Post
Surely, even you must realize that the bottom 47% are most certainly paying income taxes. IF you believe that they are paying "NOTHING!!!' - then you are sadly mistaken.
47% of Americans pay zero federal income taxes. Some of these 47% have negative federal income taxes.

These people MAY pay state income taxes, but I bet they don't pay much, even in states like California, because of the progressive rate structure.

These people pay payroll taxes, sales taxes, and if they own property pay property taxes at the state level.

I think all but the bottom 20% should pay at least some federal income taxes. Maybe just $100. They benefit from federal programs. They should contribute.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-01-2013, 02:00 PM
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
90,297 posts, read 120,779,853 times
Reputation: 35920
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivorytickler View Post
We're talking the federal government here. Do try to keep up.

It's not distain. It's practical. The problem isn't that the top 2% don't pay enough. It's that the bottom 47% of wage earners don't pay enough (last time I looked most seniors were not wage earners. I see no reason for SS to be taxed at all as it's a payout on taxes previously paid).
Oh, you. It is disdain. I see you didn't address the military. What about students who make so little they owe nothing? What about these minimum wage earners that the right so disdains b/c they have no skills? Many of them owe no income tax either.

Quote:
Originally Posted by alphamale View Post
Not true.

Why am I responsible for paying for infrastructure but you aren't?

Losers.
Watch your step pal! I probably pay more in income tax than you do!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-01-2013, 02:04 PM
 
Location: Central Texas
13,714 posts, read 31,180,231 times
Reputation: 9270
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffdoorgunner View Post
The rich just need to pay their fair share. Capital gains tax, which is where they make most of their money,needs to be taxed the same rate as income tax.
Warren Buffet had $17M in income last year, almost all of it capital gains. If they had taxed it at 50%, the federal government would have put a few million more in the treasury. It would do nothing for the deficit.

The formula to eliminate the deficit is to have more people working, so more people can pay taxes. Oh - and lets reduce spending a bit.

I want to see the entire tax code thrown in the trash. Radically simplify it. Over ten years, phase out all deductions. All of them. Deductions should not be used for behavior modification.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-01-2013, 02:04 PM
 
Location: Whoville....
25,386 posts, read 35,546,439 times
Reputation: 14692
Quote:
Originally Posted by alphamale View Post
SS, capital gains.....what's the difference? SS should be taxed at the same rate as capital gains....since they are both earnings which have already been taxed.
For the umpteenth time, with capital gains comes risk. There are people who are paying capital gains taxes this year who have yet to recoup what they lost in 2008. Their losses are not recognized because they happened too long ago. SS doesn't have losses some years and gains the next. However given that SS is a return on investment, I see no reason to pay taxes on it. It's not income. It's a pay out based on taxes previously paid. It is, in essence, a tax return.

I have no issue with taxing capital gains just like income PROVIDED the government allows someone to write off their losses against future gains for as long as it takes to cover the loss.

The way it works now, I can gain for 10 years, pay taxes all 10 years, have one year of catastrophic losses, followed by 10 years of gains just to recoup my losses and I'll be paying taxes on "gains" that are really just recouping previous losses. That's double taxation. That doesn't happen with SS (which is written off so it's not double taxation) but SS isn't income either. It's a pay out on taxes previously paid so it shouldn't be taxed at all.


I'll ask the question again (that keeps getting ignored), how much tax should someone pay this year on capital gains if they lost 1 million in 2008 and have made $100K in capital gains since then given it will take them 10 years just to recoup their losses? Answer that question and you'll have your answer as to what rate capital gains should be taxed. What is fair given that the losses taken in 2008 have not yet been recouped?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:46 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top