NakedPuts Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > You fail at sarcasm. Welcome to the Internet, where sarcasm doesn’t work.
akanska Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > NakedPuts Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Well generally these people underpaid their > share > > during the Bush years, so this is just > catch-up. > > > what- by what calculation is this? Can you please > define your term “overpaid” ?? > > Sorry- I am not rich but I get thoroughly > frustrated by completely baseless comments like > this. Over time the proportion of all tax > receipts paid by the “rich” has been growing. I > have nothing against a progressive tax system but > its starting to get a bit out of control- is there > any other area where this would fly? Do the rich > use marginally more roads or military or medicare? > They don’t typically participate in entitlements. > Can you think of how it would fly if the “rich” > were charged in a way that meant they ended up > covering 80% percent of the cost of various > private services- ie have “rich” parents cover 80% > of a schools annual budget. > > Maybe I’m retarded, but I sure think that its > unfair to the rich when they cover pretty much the > whole budget and everyone is still using them to > prop their populist rhetoric. > > In 1987 the top 1% paid 24.81% of total > receipts- in 2007 it was 40.42%!! > In 1987 the top 5% paid 43.26% of total > receipts- in 2007 it was 60.63% !! > In 1987 the bottom 50% paid 6.07% of total > receipts- in 2007 it was 2.89% !! > > who needs to catch up again?? > > btw this is from www.taxfoundation.org and doesn’t > account for those who actually pay negative taxes > (refundable credits ) While I get your point, does anyone care about what these people actually do or produce? Do they add to the economy or take away from it? I dont care who you are, if you are getting paid a ton of money to stare at a screen and push a button on an up arrow and down arrow, I have no sympathy for you complaining about your taxes. Banks paying record bonuses in the midst of this financial mess? I think many are under the misperception that higher incomes = more work, which I simply dont believe. There are many professions that didnt require hard work to get into. Ask Warren Buffet what he thinks, he knows he pays to little and doesnt care if he has to pay more. Man of high integrity IMHO.
BizBanker Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > AlphaSeeker Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > NakedPuts Wrote: > > > -------------------------------------------------- > > > ----- > > > Well generally these people underpaid their > > share > > > during the Bush years, so this is just > > catch-up. > > > > Nakedputs, that’s nonsense!.. 
> > > > Example, You and I have dinner at a certain > nice > > place once week. You make more than I do, so > you > > alway pay 2/3 of the bill. One day, the > resturant > > gives cash back on the bill. You took 2/3 of > the > > cashback. Now, do I have a right to complain > that > > I didn’t get half of the cashback? > > > > The point is - high earners pay higher taxes to > > begin with… > > > Good analogy, but those who pay more also benefit > greatly from a system that protects that wealth > and offers services that only the wealthy can > afford. Ever dealt with an insurance company > without a lawyer? I have. Not fun. You dont want > to pay taxes? Move to a country that has low or no > income tax rates. See how long your SL500 lasts in > your driveway. Oh, wait, its only libruls who hate > America, not those who are living comfortably > whining about paying more. wow- I’m not even going to try to argue with you because you clearly have massive baggage that will prevent any reason or data from pushing that massive chip off your shoulder. Maybe we should make SL500 pay triple tolls instead of multi axle vehicles that actually destroy the road.
@akanska: although I probably fall on your side of this issue. I need to point out that the numbers you have presented are biased because you fail to control for the growing income disparity between the rich and poor that has taken place over the same period; i.e. while the rich were paying more (their taxes were going up) they were also making more (their total earnings were also going up) when considered in light of these facts the growth in income was slightly greater than growth in taxes paid implying the rich paid out a smaller portion of their income over the time period (which is a great thing, I only wish the difference was larger:)
BizBanker - let me ask you this? do you think its “fair” that 30+% of federal tax return paid zero or negative taxes? Are 30% of americans really financially incapable of providing for the services they receive? Or do you really think that only the “rich” benefit for the federal budget?
What about the small business owner that pays himself via the profits that his company makes (s corp)? I don’t think he’s going to take a cut in after-tax pay, while continuing to run his business as usual. Instead, he’ll get rid of an employee or two. The business owner will be unaffected while the workers are the ones that are impacted. It’s not necessarily the wealthy that are impacted by tax increases on the wealthy…And there are a hell of a lot of small business owners that fall in the $250+ category.
I’m in the “tax the rich” camp. BO is not proposing anything too drastic. Many points have already been made, but basically the rich can afford to pay a little more.
^^this is but one of many reasons that taxes are inefficient and distort markets.
BizBanker Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > akanska Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > NakedPuts Wrote: > > > -------------------------------------------------- > > > ----- > > > Well generally these people underpaid their > > share > > > during the Bush years, so this is just > > catch-up. > > > > > > what- by what calculation is this? Can you > please > > define your term “overpaid” ?? > > > > Sorry- I am not rich but I get thoroughly > > frustrated by completely baseless comments like > > this. Over time the proportion of all tax > > receipts paid by the “rich” has been growing. > I > > have nothing against a progressive tax system > but > > its starting to get a bit out of control- is > there > > any other area where this would fly? Do the > rich > > use marginally more roads or military or > medicare? > > They don’t typically participate in > entitlements. > > Can you think of how it would fly if the > “rich” > > were charged in a way that meant they ended up > > covering 80% percent of the cost of various > > private services- ie have “rich” parents cover > 80% > > of a schools annual budget. > > > > Maybe I’m retarded, but I sure think that its > > unfair to the rich when they cover pretty much > the > > whole budget and everyone is still using them > to > > prop their populist rhetoric. > > > > In 1987 the top 1% paid 24.81% of > total > > receipts- in 2007 it was 40.42%!! > > In 1987 the top 5% paid 43.26% of > total > > receipts- in 2007 it was 60.63% !! > > In 1987 the bottom 50% paid 6.07% of total > > receipts- in 2007 it was 2.89% !! > > > > who needs to catch up again?? > > > > btw this is from www.taxfoundation.org and > doesn’t > > account for those who actually pay negative > taxes > > (refundable credits ) > > > While I get your point, does anyone care about > what these people actually do or produce? Do they > add to the economy or take away from it? I dont > care who you are, if you are getting paid a ton of > money to stare at a screen and push a button on an > up arrow and down arrow, I have no sympathy for > you complaining about your taxes. Banks paying > record bonuses in the midst of this financial > mess? I think many are under the misperception > that higher incomes = more work, which I simply > dont believe. There are many professions that > didnt require hard work to get into. Ask Warren > Buffet what he thinks, he knows he pays to little > and doesnt care if he has to pay more. Man of high > integrity IMHO. This is easy for Warren Buffett to say when he is a multi billionaire and has more money than he knows what to do with. Sure, he will pay more tax, what does he care, no skin off his nose.
They need to raise taxes as much as possible. Then everyone can get cushy government jobs, work 9-5 and have great pensions.
good point- but it does not cover the entire spread. Over the same time period the top 1 % effective rate has fallen 15%- but its fallen 40% for the bottom 50%. I’m just trying to explain that the idea of “making up for underpaying” is a baseless concept considering the last quarter century. I have a pet peeve about ppl just saying crap like this when it has 0 basis.
They paid less than their share means they were the beneficiaries of tax breaks which we (the US) couldn’t afford. Now it’s time to pay the piper! Obama comin for ya, and I love to watch you squirm! Rich people (not defining what that level is) definitely use more resources. Flying around in that private plane = FAA to keep the skies safe. Lake front home = DNR to keep the lake clean. Ski vacation? Better thank the Forest Service. Are you a business owner with hundreds of highly skilled employees? Thank you, public high schools and universities.
^^Oh I don’t disagree with you at all (in fact you’re preaching to choir here). “making up for underpaying” is retarded statement to begin with. i don’t even know why we are talking about it. Its like saying welfare is making up for the fact that we kidnapped Africans to work on tobacco plantations.
topher Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I’m in the “tax the rich” camp. BO is not > proposing anything too drastic. Many points have > already been made, but basically the rich can > afford to pay a little more. If the high earners voluntarily pay more or better yet, give to charities of their choices, that’s fine. But for the government to TAX them more simply because they make more and can afford more, isn’t this discouraging entrepreneurship and anti-capitalism?
eureka Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > They need to raise taxes as much as possible. > Then everyone can get cushy government jobs, work > 9-5 and have great pensions. thats a large part of the issue too- its not just that taxing side- its the spending side too. I personally would like bill gates to decide what efforts to support via his foundation than though the inefficient and corrupt mess that is the federal budget .
Agreed, F 'em. I have my self-interest firmly in mind. There’s a very big national debt and if someone making more than $250k has to pay a higher share of taxes, that’s fine, because it might mean less taxes for me down the road. And I’d be curious how many people complaining about the debt and spending and taxes now were also thinking it was a very bad idea to get into a war in 2003. That war cost $2 trillion and counting, not to mention its other, extremely tangible costs.
^Hand raised. In fact that’s what made Bush such a sh!tty “Republican;” he never held true to the fiscal conservatism that is often associated with the party line. Furthermore, I think its disingenuous of you to try to quote the more extreme/implied costs of the war (this nearly doubles the actual total spent): http://costofwar.com/
> > In 1987 the top 1% paid 24.81% of total > receipts- in 2007 it was 40.42%!! > In 1987 the top 5% paid 43.26% of total > receipts- in 2007 it was 60.63% !! > In 1987 the bottom 50% paid 6.07% of total > receipts- in 2007 it was 2.89% !! This is more a measure of an increase in wealth disparity than a change in the tax code.
On raising taxes: I think it makes sense because we have a deficit and at least we are seeing some semblance of consideration for this, however politicized it may be. On spending: Think about ROI, please government. I am totally non-partisan, but I have to say that of all of the expensive messes the government has to address the Iraq war is the dumbest. I think there is no way we get out of there before we’ve spent at least $1T, probably more…basically a sh!t ton of money by any measure. I get angry just thinking about it. Meanwhile, all they people I know in government consulting were raking it in during that pointless spending spree, not to mention the human cost.
akanska Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > BizBanker Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > AlphaSeeker Wrote: > > > -------------------------------------------------- > > > ----- > > > NakedPuts Wrote: > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > ----- > > > > Well generally these people underpaid their > > > share > > > > during the Bush years, so this is just > > > catch-up. > > > > > > Nakedputs, that’s nonsense!.. > > > > > > Example, You and I have dinner at a certain > > nice > > > place once week. You make more than I do, so > > you > > > alway pay 2/3 of the bill. One day, the > > resturant > > > gives cash back on the bill. You took 2/3 of > > the > > > cashback. Now, do I have a right to complain > > that > > > I didn’t get half of the cashback? > > > > > > The point is - high earners pay higher taxes > to > > > begin with… > > > > > > Good analogy, but those who pay more also > benefit > > greatly from a system that protects that wealth > > and offers services that only the wealthy can > > afford. Ever dealt with an insurance company > > without a lawyer? I have. Not fun. You dont > want > > to pay taxes? Move to a country that has low or > no > > income tax rates. See how long your SL500 lasts > in > > your driveway. Oh, wait, its only libruls who > hate > > America, not those who are living comfortably > > whining about paying more. > > wow- I’m not even going to try to argue with you > because you clearly have massive baggage that will > prevent any reason or data from pushing that > massive chip off your shoulder. > > Maybe we should make SL500 pay triple tolls > instead of multi axle vehicles that actually > destroy the road. Yeah thats what they told me all through school that would prevent me from understanding logic or math. My massive chip. I dont like to make personal attacks but Ill take a page from Adavydov and say you are a complete and utter moron. I love it when people say they wont argue and make a statement that has no basis in what was stated. Go f*** yourself. I would suggest for my state an extra fee for drivers of sports cars who want to drive faster in the fast lane and I for one would pay it. Extra $100 to $200 a person, 500k-100M takers.