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 know a couple of brown Brazilians at my college who would have an opposite opinion. From what I've heard not everyone in Brazil has the ability to enjoy the benefits of the good economy to which you are speaking. But I do agree, President Lula DaSilva has done some pretty good things as a Populist on behalf of the common man.
I just wonder if it will be enough be to counter the unfair socio-economic power structure that's pervasive there, where skin-color can indeed play a role in one's ability to move upward in that society.
Oh yes, there is a huge economic gap and they do have racial issues. I didn't mean to imply that I thought otherwise.
I don't think it makes much economic sense to take out a mortgage only for the tax benefit... your payments will far outweigh your deductions.
Well you are right in a sense, the mortgage alone isn't worth it. However mortgages allows taxfilers to itemize and they can start counting state tax, donations, medical expenses, property taxes, etc. Without the mortgage this wouldnt have been possible. A taxpayer goes from a 5,700.00 standard deduction to 15,000.00 itemize deduction, it can make a big difference in tax liability for middle income filers.
Oh yes, there is a huge economic gap and they do have racial issues. I didn't mean to imply that I thought otherwise.
No problems. I just think that people throw words like "good economy" around too easily without really wondering what is that "good economy" doing for the average man, woman, or child. Even when the economy was supposedly booming during the mid to late 90's and from around 2003-2008 there were still those who for whatever reason was left out.
In my personal opinion, a country's "economy" is only great if everyone has the equal chance to share in its bounty. Otherwise, it's just an empty word, an artificial concept.
Sorry, but my income tax will go down with Obama as it will for most Americans. The teabaggers are fighting a cause that for most of them is against their own self-interests and against what is needed to improve this country.
I have no problem paying my fair share of taxes. I don't expect to get a free pass or a handout. But I know that at my modest income I'd like to have money after I pay my taxes to support myself and save for the future.
I have NO PROBLEM with the wealthy paying a higher percentage of taxes in 2011 when I know that they can still pay CPAs to hide some of that wealth "off-shore". I have NO PROBLEM knowing that after they pay their taxes they will still have plenty of money to buy multiple houses, investment property, luxury cars and lavish trips. I work hard, I save, and I plan to better myself. The freedom to be an American allows me these oopportunities and I have no problem contributing back to society so that others with that same drive can succeed.
You miss the point completely. First, if you buy energy, you will get a tax increase. If you pay income taxes, something which half of all Americans no longer do, you will see a tax increase. The so-called "Bush tax cuts" were cuts in the marginal rates at all levels. If they go up, they go up for everyone. Even if you're taxes don't increase in the short term, they will as a result of the raping of Social Security and the huge increase in debt.
To me, how about the selfish folks who pay no taxes and only want to take? That to me is more of an issue that someone who pays 50% of their income to the government. If 50% isn't enough, how much should it be before their hard work can be their own? A flat tax is the ONLY fair way to assess income tax. We all pay the same percentage of income...no deductions or exemptions....period.
Quote:
Originally Posted by back2dc
However as a citizen I have no problem paying taxes to help give people a start in the right direction.
I have no problem paying my taxes either, assuming they're fair and shared by all Americans. The problem is that the top wage earners pay almost all of the income taxes. This myth about the "rich" paying their "fair share" is such a load of crap. The "rich" don't pay their fair share....they pay their fair share and the fair share for a whole bunch of Americans who pay NOTHING.
You miss the point completely. First, if you buy energy, you will get a tax increase. If you pay income taxes, something which half of all Americans no longer do, you will see a tax increase. The so-called "Bush tax cuts" were cuts in the marginal rates at all levels. If they go up, they go up for everyone. Even if you're taxes don't increase in the short term, they will as a result of the raping of Social Security and the huge increase in debt.
A flat tax is the ONLY fair way to assess income tax. We all pay the same percentage of income...no deductions or exemptions....period.
I have no problem paying my taxes either, assuming they're fair and shared by all Americans. The problem is that the top wage earners pay almost all of the income taxes. This myth about the "rich" paying their "fair share" is such a load of crap. The "rich" don't pay their fair share....they pay their fair share and the fair share for a whole bunch of Americans who pay NOTHING.
1. With respect to energy, you are arguing against a concept that's not even close to being implemented... you should wait on that... and also realize that it's a tax you can control, unlike an income tax. You should not lump them together; it's disingenous.
2. You are just plain wrong about the Obama proposal in relation to the Bush tax cuts. He's going to let the tax cuts on the top 5% of American expire (from 36%, they will rise to 39% -- same as Clinton era and lower than under Reagan). The tax rates for those under that threshold WILL go down. All the estimates concede that fact.
3. A flat tax, especially one without exemptions or deductions, is punishing for the middle and lower class. It does not make sense to tax the last $500 of an individual making $2M at the same rate as the individual making $25,000. The marginal value of the $500 to the millionaire is much lower than the marginal value to the person making $25K. Seriously, not even advocates of the flat tax agree with no exemptions or deductions. Further, it will severely reduce the revenues that the government takes in so the rate will have to be fairly high across the board, again punishing middle class and lower class folks. Where they used to pay 15% or 20%, they may now have to pay 30% for the government to get the same revenue. The income inequality under a flat tax will be even wider under such a system.
4. The rich do not pay all income taxes... they pay a higher percentage but that is because the rich control an inordinate amount of wealth in this country. The top 20% of wage earners are estimated to own about 80% of the wealth in this nation... so how is it inequitable that they pay more? Further, you are leaving out payroll taxes when you make the statement that so many pay no taxes. It's not a true statement.
1. With respect to energy, you are arguing against a concept that's not even close to being implemented... you should wait on that... and also realize that it's a tax you can control, unlike an income tax. You should not lump them together; it's disingenous.
I'm including the plans that Pres Obama and the Democrat Congress have proposed. Sorry if that is inconvenient for your argument.
2. You are just plain wrong about the Obama proposal in relation to the Bush tax cuts. He's going to let the tax cuts on the top 5% of American expire (from 36%, they will rise to 39% -- same as Clinton era and lower than under Reagan). The tax rates for those under that threshold WILL go down. All the estimates concede that fact.
The top 5% of wage earners...not 5% of Americans...pays 60% of the federal income taxes. Again, how much more do you want them to pay? Isn't 5% paying 60% a "fair share?" If not, what is fair? If the "Bush Tax cuts" expire...the marginal rates at lower levels will also increase. Look it up and review the facts. The lower rates were reduced under Bush and they will also increase. Don't take my word...do the research that you haven't done.
3. A flat tax, especially one without exemptions or deductions, is punishing for the middle and lower class. It does not make sense to tax the last $500 of an individual making $2M at the same rate as the individual making $25,000. The marginal value of the $500 to the millionaire is much lower than the marginal value to the person making $25K. Seriously, not even advocates of the flat tax agree with no exemptions or deductions. Further, it will severely reduce the revenues that the government takes in so the rate will have to be fairly high across the board, again punishing middle class and lower class folks. Where they used to pay 15% or 20%, they may now have to pay 30% for the government to get the same revenue. The income inequality under a flat tax will be even wider under such a system.
Um...no...a system where the bottom 75% of wage earners pay nothing or almost nothing is unfair. A system where we all pay the same % and the absolute value of our tax increases as our income increases is fair. A system that punishes people who work hard and are successful by taking not only a higher $$ amount but a higher percentage is unfair and works against productivity. If you can't get your head around that concept, then get a dictionary out and look up the words "fair" and "incentive."
4. The rich do not pay all income taxes... they pay a higher percentage but that is because the rich control an inordinate amount of wealth in this country. The top 20% of wage earners are estimated to own about 80% of the wealth in this nation... so how is it inequitable that they pay more? Further, you are leaving out payroll taxes when you make the statement that so many pay no taxes. It's not a true statement.
Look up the facts. Again, you seem to not know what you're talking about. The top 10% of wage earners pay 71% of the federal income taxes. The top 1% of wage earners pay 40% of the federal income taxes. The bottom 50% of wage earners pay less than 3% of federal income taxes. Payroll taxes are medicare and social security taxes, and have nothing to do with income taxes, except that they are being supported or will be supported by income taxes, given that the trust funds don't exist.
That chart you put there skews things just a bit. It ignores what % of total income each category makes. Bill Gates paid more in income tax this year than a large multiple of my income. Of course his earnings and investment returns are an even larger % of my income. Given he earns so much more than me, his contribution to income tax appears far greater but if you removed deductions and used his gross income his % to start his tax basis, he may pay a lower rate than me (given the vast majority of his income is likely in MSFT dividends taxed at 15%). Because I have almost no deductions right now, my effective tax rate is roughly 25-27% including federal/state/fica after taking the std deduction.
A straight % income tax becomes very regressive b/c the diminishing marginal utility on money. $100,000 increase in Bill Gates' income would affect his lifestyle less than a $100,000 increase in yours or my income. Even on a straight % basis, a 10% bump in Bill Gates salary would be dramatically less effective in changing his desire to work than it would in ours despite a 10% increase in his income would be many times more than most of us earn in a lifetime. You may not work very hard for at the offer of an additional $100/mon in income but the person earning $10/hr likely would since they
I'm not saying we should base income purely on a marginal utility basis...Bill would get taxed at 99.999% for each extra dollar he earns. Instead what we have is an amalgamated mess but it hasn't ripped out the ingenuity of the American businessman since that top 1% continues to grow in its portion of the total income pie at the expense of the middle class. That bottom % of people have never paid much in income tax b/c they make something like 6% of the income. You also forget that most people on SS only take in that much in income which is a portion of that tax which is something like 50M people at this point. Also, they still pay payroll taxes which are capped at the first 100k of income...meaning Bill's payroll tax bill is infinitely small % of his income vs. the 7.65% for those of us earning 100k or less.
If nothing else I would actually argue that the growing income disparity is leading to class warfare. The top 1% is making the largest chunk of the total income pie in history(far worse than the days of Rockefeller, JP Morgan, Vanderbilt et al). Every time this disparity gets too large you wind up w/ rebellion of some kind. In the end there is always an us vs. them aspect regardless on which side of the chart you fall on. Just like you abhor those useless people under you on the tax scale for not paying your share...those above you (unless you're Warren Buffet in disguise) likely abhor you getting discounts for housing, tuition, student loans, or any other deductions you may get. Another thing you have to realize is as your income goes up so does your ability to hire people to manage your money effectively to minimize your tax bill. The guy making 300k AGI more than likely makes significantly more but can afford to pay someone to structure their income to be tax friendly.
Good morning People's Republic of Georgia! Glad to see so much liberal tolerance for opposing views, as well as an acceptance for different (dare I say...alternative?) viewpoints.
What?
No surprise at all to me.. City data forum is full of liberal elitists. Notice how many of them spout off their wishlists of big spending government projects, but they can never explain how or who is going to pay for it all. The fact is Obama, and the democratic congress in just 3 months has nearly tripled our debt. Yes, Bush got us started, but now it is truly getting out of hand. We have never seen this kind of debt before, and I don't care what political persuasion you are, you have to be seriously concerned about tacking this much debt onto future generations and the Chinese owning us lock stock and barrel. You can't just put everything on the magic credit card or pay for it from the magical money tree, or from unicorn dust.
Until you understand that the disparity in taxes paid is as a result of the disparity of wealth in this country, we are really not going to see eye to eye so no need to continue.
That chart you put there skews things just a bit. It ignores what % of total income each category makes. Bill Gates paid more in income tax this year than a large multiple of my income. Of course his earnings and investment returns are an even larger % of my income. Given he earns so much more than me, his contribution to income tax appears far greater but if you removed deductions and used his gross income his % to start his tax basis, he may pay a lower rate than me (given the vast majority of his income is likely in MSFT dividends taxed at 15%). Because I have almost no deductions right now, my effective tax rate is roughly 25-27% including federal/state/fica after taking the std deduction.
A straight % income tax becomes very regressive b/c the diminishing marginal utility on money. $100,000 increase in Bill Gates' income would affect his lifestyle less than a $100,000 increase in yours or my income. Even on a straight % basis, a 10% bump in Bill Gates salary would be dramatically less effective in changing his desire to work than it would in ours despite a 10% increase in his income would be many times more than most of us earn in a lifetime. You may not work very hard for at the offer of an additional $100/mon in income but the person earning $10/hr likely would since they
I'm not saying we should base income purely on a marginal utility basis...Bill would get taxed at 99.999% for each extra dollar he earns. Instead what we have is an amalgamated mess but it hasn't ripped out the ingenuity of the American businessman since that top 1% continues to grow in its portion of the total income pie at the expense of the middle class. That bottom % of people have never paid much in income tax b/c they make something like 6% of the income. You also forget that most people on SS only take in that much in income which is a portion of that tax which is something like 50M people at this point. Also, they still pay payroll taxes which are capped at the first 100k of income...meaning Bill's payroll tax bill is infinitely small % of his income vs. the 7.65% for those of us earning 100k or less.
If nothing else I would actually argue that the growing income disparity is leading to class warfare. The top 1% is making the largest chunk of the total income pie in history(far worse than the days of Rockefeller, JP Morgan, Vanderbilt et al). Every time this disparity gets too large you wind up w/ rebellion of some kind. In the end there is always an us vs. them aspect regardless on which side of the chart you fall on. Just like you abhor those useless people under you on the tax scale for not paying your share...those above you (unless you're Warren Buffet in disguise) likely abhor you getting discounts for housing, tuition, student loans, or any other deductions you may get. Another thing you have to realize is as your income goes up so does your ability to hire people to manage your money effectively to minimize your tax bill. The guy making 300k AGI more than likely makes significantly more but can afford to pay someone to structure their income to be tax friendly.
Thanks for this.. I lost my energy to respond.
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.
