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.
The rich states massively subsidize the poor states. Places like Alabama and West Virginia would be much poorer and more desperate if not for places like California and New York.
The rich states are supposed to subsidize the poor ....and they need to do more, Cali & NY aren't paying enough.
Don't forget the evil corporations. They would have to pay too - no more loopholes or whatever those are for them.
"Don't forget the evil corporations'
I would like to see EVERY corporation the the United States shut down for 6 months and then watch all those haters like yourself whine and cry because you can't get what they provide.
Also, there is NO SUCH THING as a "loophole".
There are laws, I wouldn't be surprised to find out it was the dems who passed them, and smart people apply whichever law is applicable to their situation.
Just as MILLIONS of people do when they fill out their tax forms and claim the marriage deduction and the child deductions.
In a way I also agree. You read of so many people fleeing high tax states.
Lots of people in CA up an move when they retire and/or sell their homes because of CA taxes.
NY is no better.
By eliminating this deduction people may take a closer look at their state taxes and push for them to be lowered.
It's not just the Federal government that eats away at your paycheck.
"Lots of people in CA up an move when they retire and/or sell their homes because of CA taxes.
NY is no better."
My area is FILLED with people from the north retired and CAN'T AFFORD the taxes and have moved south.
NY LOST so many people that because of the Census LOST a seat in the House of Representatives and SC GAINED 1 seat. NC came very close to gaining 1.
"Rich" is a matter of net worth, and there are no statistics showing who pays what as a % of their net worth.
You're trying to use income as a measurement of "who is rich" and that doesn't make any sense. it is one of the reasons our tax code is so unfair in the first place, that the truly wealthy don't necessarily have high taxable incomes.
"the truly wealthy don't necessarily have high taxable incomes"
So you think the elderly on Social Security should start paying 20% federal income taxes on their SS?
The rich have it good in America. They pay significantly less taxes than in comparable developed countries and get massive benefits from those taxes like no-bid government contracts, a huge boon to the rich with contacts in high places, gifts to big pharma as the government allows the pharma companies to engage in price gouging, Wall Street bailouts and too-big-to-fail government insurance policy allowing big banks to earn tens of billions of dollars per year, weakened anti-trust laws across the economy so big corporations and their rich owners can rip off the people and the people are captive customers.
If the ruling elite of America want to pay lower taxes at least all of these gifts should come to an abrupt end.
"They pay significantly less taxes than in comparable developed countries and get massive benefits from those taxes like no-bid government contracts"
PLEASE STOP with wild outrageous exaggerations.
You act as if E VERY rich person is involved in gov't contracts and every single one of the get no-bid contracts.
I doubt you know very much about gov't contracts, much less no bid contracts.
Why DON'T you back up your rhetoric with ACTIONS and BOYCOTT EVERY SINGLE CORPORATION you do not like.
Exactly. We aren't taxed on what we have; we're taxed on what we make.
And we aren't specifically taxed on what we make, but rather, we put the burden on salaried income, not investment income, further screwing average families.
Unless you're an NBA star or hedge fund guru, if you are wealthy you are very likely to be making more in investment income than salaried income. Not too many people are making $1 million a year, but plenty of people have $10 million+ in investments.
"And we aren't specifically taxed on what we make, but rather, we put the burden on salaried income, not investment income, further screwing average families."
I don't think you know a DAMNED thing about taxes.
Investment income IS TAXED.
The gov't WANTS people to invest. THAT is why the taxes are lower so as to ENCOURAGE investment.
You need a course in finance and business..
the "average" family usually works for a company ( something like 85% of ALL working people work for a company) that has a 401K plan, so YES they CAN invest.
+1. This is where the wealthy laugh all the way to the bank and stick it to the little guy.
Our tax system is set up to tax salaried people who WORK for a living at higher rates than the wealthy who collect passive income. While no doubt many wealthy do work hard managing businesses or whatever, the truth is many do not. They just kick back at the beach condo doing nothing while collecting dividends and interest. And they pay a lower rate of taxes than Sally Salary who puts in 40+ hours a week.
The government is in deficit. What we should do is RAISE tax rates on passive income so there's parity with tax on salary income. We need to stop punishing people who work.
Let me ask you a simple question.
WHY do you think investment taxes are LOWER then regular income taxes?
People don't pay taxes, businesses pay taxes, because when a person gets taxed, they don't use that money that they pay on taxes to purchase goods or services from a bid-ness, so in essence the business loses the income they would have received because of taxes.
....and the discussion spirals down the drain with more talk radio talking points a la Larry Kudlow wannabes.
Apparently this basic logic I put out there blew the minds of the Larry Kudlow/Rush Limbaugh wannabes with their gilded age magnate sound alike rhetoric about the "takers".
So much so that these apparent BOTS just go right back to their same old BS about how everyone should pay something including people who have nothing. Brilliant.
but but but, they pay sales taxes.. thats the response you're gonna get, as if that pays for things like the military, schools and other benefits of living in our society..
the left will never ever discus this seriously
Quote:
Originally Posted by NOLA101
All of the above is fakenews. Everyone pays taxes.
Yes, not everyone pays federal income taxes, as long as they have the appropriately super-low incomes, but they are still paying state, city, sales, property, and user taxes.
Is the OP arguing that a single mom making 15k needs to pay more taxes, to subsidize tax cuts for billionaire corporate raiders who could not spend all their money even if they tried? LOL.
It only took one post to prove pgh right.
To the left, fair share means if you’re wealthy you pay 90% taxes. You really want fair share, then do a flat tax.
Status:
"Smartened up and walked away!"
(set 21 days ago)
11,770 posts, read 5,781,921 times
Reputation: 14187
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tall Traveler
The rich states are supposed to subsidize the poor ....and they need to do more, Cali & NY aren't paying enough.
Don't know why you think NY is rich - we're taxed to death and that's why we're moving in the next few years. Where they spend it - who knows - but it's not on the middle class upstate.
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.
