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.
What is absolute BS is that we tax at ordinary salary -- labor -- at the highest actual rates while Richie Rich CEO pays very little on his stock options and various tax shelters, all financially engineered by his accountants.
So tax everyone the same percentage, the same way.
"Surveys are showing overwhelming support for raising taxes on top earners, including a new POLITICO/Morning Consult poll released Monday that found 76 percent of registered voters believe the wealthiest Americans should pay more in taxes. A recent Fox News survey showed that 70 percent of Americans favor raising taxes on those earning over $10 million — including 54 percent of Republicans."
That made Schultz spit up some coffee.
Just more idiocy from the left.....the rich know they are already soaked for most of the taxes.....look for U hauls leaving your state when the rich get fed up.......
Lol. So, do comment why (in my billion + example above) a hedge fund manager pays SMALLER percentage than a lot of the middle class, including me. I'll wait.
Oh, and as opposed to the middle class, no need to spend 5-10% of the income on health insurance, or say 10% on daycare, say ....% on college and so on, all of which can be viewed effectively as taxes. Suddenly those "crazy" income tax rates in some of the European countries, don't look as high anymore. Considering what's included.
So move to Europe.
Investments are taxed at lower rates because:
1. They're not "income" in the traditional sense.
2. Low taxes help encourage investment.
3. There is no guarantee of profit, and indeed a substantial risk of loss.
But I'd be fine with them being taxed at the same rate as everyone else...10% flat on profits.
Oh and BTW your question is asking me to explain why things are the way they are presently when I'm not endorsing the way things are presently.
A Libertarian response, to which I am not entirely unsympathetic.
Tell me, do you endorse complete anarchy?
Because unless you are suggesting a complete dismantling of government, it still requires a certain amount of revenue to fufill it's Constitutionally authorized functions.
Location: Live:Downtown Phoenix, AZ/Work:Greater Los Angeles, CA
27,606 posts, read 14,587,616 times
Reputation: 9169
Quote:
Originally Posted by FatBob96
A Libertarian response, to which I am not entirely unsympathetic.
Tell me, do you endorse complete anarchy?
Because unless you are suggesting a complete dismantling of government, it still requires a certain amount of revenue to fufill it's Constitutionally authorized functions.
So let me repeat a 1 billion hedge fund manager compensation would be taxed at 23.8% under the carried interest loophole. Much lower than the top income tax bracket.
3. There is no guarantee of profit, and indeed a substantial risk of loss.
But I'd be fine with them being taxed at the same rate as everyone else...10% flat on profits.
Oh and BTW your question is asking me to explain why things are the way they are presently when I'm not endorsing the way things are presently.
Just in case that slipped by you.
Nope, I'm not talking about investments. I guess that slipped by you.
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.
