Tax the Rich!

[Openmind]

Thanks, its nice to be back. Vacations are nice but I really do them for my wife. For me there is that house we bought; the place that we spent so much time and money making just right - so we can live in it rather than spend our time living elsewhere.

Funny, my husband and I have exactly the same dilemma!
We had a house built exactly the way we wanted to, in a beautiful area, surrounded by a private golf course. . ..
and still, I want to go on vacation! It defeat the purpose, but ANY house is boring if that's all you see!

 

[Dr.Who]

Funny, my husband and I have exactly the same dilemma!
We had a house built exactly the way we wanted to, in a beautiful area, surrounded by a private golf course. . ..
and still, I want to go on vacation! It defeat the purpose, but ANY house is boring if that's all you see!

Ha. Thanks for sharing. I suppose you are new so welcome to the board.

 

[Openmind]

It is not the young ones who are the barbarians. It is the old rich ones who must be "forced" to abandon their deceitful ways.

The young ones are merely useful idiots.

Young or old, I would rather be a called a "Barbarian" by old, stiff neck, traditional people than to waste my life with all the limitation that seems to be included in the "tea Party" motto!


I'm pretty old, but I love to live. And I love the way European live their life, not tied down to an ideology, but eager to play, to enjoy life. Not focused on ACCUMULATING wealth, but eager to ENJOY and USE wealth. Not tied down by "productivity over quality of life," but eager to USE productivity to INCREASE their quality of life.


So, call me a "barbarian," and I will take it as a compliment!

 

[Openmind]

Unfortunately for the leftists, history proves that cutting taxes increases revenues, because "allowing" people to keep more of their money is the simplest and most effective of all economic "stimulus" plans.

Presenting a bunch of left wing Keynesian "economists" with fancy titles and a bunch of partisan hacks as the ultimate arbiters of good and bad economic policies is dishonest, disingenous, and sleazy.

I would expect nothing less from the leftist Keynesian zombies.

So wrong again!

What school did you go to?

Obviously it was on the East Coast, and giving very succint Economics 101!

But I'm tired of arguing with you.

In fact, it is true that "allowing SOME people to keep more of their money" is a simple way to stimulate the economy.

But only SOME people. Those who can't wait to go and spend that money. Those who live from one pay check to the next, or who are waiting for that "down fall" to purchase that new small car, or that new fridge!

Given "extra money" to people who are worth millions or billions in wealth is like adding a drop of water to their bath tub. . .they don't care, they'll just book another world wide cruise, where they'll be able to spend that "extra money" in Fiji, or New Zealand, or on a $30,000 safary in Africa, killing elephants, and giraffes (only to control the population, of course!).

It is the money that is left to the poor, and the middle class that brings DEMAND WITHIN the US economy! Not the millions left to the top 1%!

But, why am I even pointing that out! I know I'm wasting my time!

 

[dahermit]

Imagine a couple who makes $250,000 a year. They are the "rich", apparently.

That couple is going to pay 48% (being generous again) in taxes, leaving them with roughly $125,000 before any bills are accounted for.

Excluding all property taxes etc, that leaves a couple (in reality a family of four probably) with basically $10,000 a month to cover everything...the mortgage, car note, food, clothes, kid schools, etc.

Let us face it, $125,000 does not go very far, and certainly does not make a person "rich."

" ...$10,000 a month to cover everything..."!!! For God's sake, calculate what a person making minimum wage and a kid or two makes. You are the most out-of-touch person...wait, then there is Gipper.

 

[ProudLefty]

...
That couple is going to pay 48% (being generous again) in taxes, leaving them with roughly $125,000 before any bills are accounted for.

Excluding all property taxes etc, that leaves a couple (in reality a family of four probably) with basically $10,000 a month to cover everything...the mortgage, car note, food, clothes, kid schools, etc.

Let us face it, $125,000 does not go very far, and certainly does not make a person "rich."

• You mentioned 8% for FICA. Not true. That is capped at $106k
• The Income taxes have generous deductions, meaning their taxable income will be well below $250,000. Probably in the $200k to $225k range.
• The Income Tax is a progressive tax. With today's rates the tax is $52k. With proposed rates it would jump up to $56k. Or less, if you pay any attention at all to your tax liabilities

Here is a calculator so you can try it out for yourself.

http://www.moneychimp.com/features/tax_brackets.htm

If we are going to have a discussion, lets at least have it based upon some where near relevant examples.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

It is not the young ones who are the barbarians. It is the old rich ones who must be "forced" to abandon their deceitful ways.

The young ones are merely useful idiots.

Yeah.....that's pretty-accurate, alright!!

 

[Dr.Who]

So wrong again!

What school did you go to?

Obviously it was on the East Coast, and giving very succint Economics 101!

But I'm tired of arguing with you.

In fact, it is true that "allowing SOME people to keep more of their money" is a simple way to stimulate the economy.

But only SOME people. Those who can't wait to go and spend that money. Those who live from one pay check to the next, or who are waiting for that "down fall" to purchase that new small car, or that new fridge!

Given "extra money" to people who are worth millions or billions in wealth is like adding a drop of water to their bath tub. . .they don't care, they'll just book another world wide cruise, where they'll be able to spend that "extra money" in Fiji, or New Zealand, or on a $30,000 safary in Africa, killing elephants, and giraffes (only to control the population, of course!).

It is the money that is left to the poor, and the middle class that brings DEMAND WITHIN the US economy! Not the millions left to the top 1%!

But, why am I even pointing that out! I know I'm wasting my time!

That is just more discriminatory class warfare. It is also anti-liberty.

All money held by anyone helps the economy. All money held by anyone cannot help but be a part o the economy unless it is actually stored under a mattress. Rich or poor their money is a part of the economy. Most importantly it is wrong when the gov decides that some people are more deserving of having money than others.

 

[Dr.Who]

" ...$10,000 a month to cover everything..."!!! For God's sake, calculate what a person making minimum wage and a kid or two makes. You are the most out-of-touch person...wait, then there is Gipper.

A person making minimum wage will have even less. I did not see where Big Rob denied or contradicted that such a person would have less.

I a free society we do not let jealousies over who earns more decide policy. The person with 10,000 left would like to keep more of it just like the person with 1200 left would like to keep more. In a society as free as possible each is allowed to keep as much of their own money as possible and in a fair society each person pays taxes based on the same rules rather than one set of rules for one person and another set of rules for another.

 

[Dr.Who]

• You mentioned 8% for FICA. Not true. That is capped at $106k
• The Income taxes have generous deductions, meaning their taxable income will be well below $250,000. Probably in the $200k to $225k range.
• The Income Tax is a progressive tax. With today's rates the tax is $52k. With proposed rates it would jump up to $56k. Or less, if you pay any attention at all to your tax liabilities

Here is a calculator so you can try it out for yourself.

http://www.moneychimp.com/features/tax_brackets.htm

If we are going to have a discussion, lets at least have it based upon some where near relevant examples.

I think everything you say is true. So sure, lets take the hypothetical example and make it more real. Are you suggesting that the person making 250,000 has so much left over after taxes that that it becomes fair to take much more from him/her? Because it never becomes fair to take a larger percentage from one person than is taken from another. It is still class warfare probably based on jealousy.

 

[steveox]

Close tax loopholes for the wealthy and add a new tax for the weathy. 15% tax extra for Entertainers. That means,, Pro Ballplayers,Movie Stars,Comedians,Magicans,Circus performers,Pro Wrestlers and TV Network news achorman,,TV Talk show host all must pay 15% more for the I.R.S. Like whats the rich bracket something like 32% add 15% extra thats 47% outta their income. And States should raise property taxes 20% more on home owners that cost over $500,000 So there! The Middle class doesnt get hurt.

 

[ProudLefty]

Close tax loopholes for the wealthy and add a new tax for the weathy. 15% tax extra for Entertainers. That means,, Pro Ballplayers,Movie Stars,Comedians,Magicans,Circus performers,Pro Wrestlers and TV Network news achorman,,TV Talk show host all must pay 15% more for the I.R.S. Like whats the rich bracket something like 32% add 15% extra thats 47% outta their income. And States should raise property taxes 20% more on home owners that cost over $500,000 So there! The Middle class doesnt get hurt.

Why go so far? That is not needed, and is just an in your face move. Why not just go with any number of moderate plans that call for shared sacrifice from everyone, including the military contractors, the rich, and the middle class?

There is no reason to just take from the rich, plus that wouldn't be anywhere near enough, anyway. Tax revenues have to rise, spending has to fall. Providing jobs does both of course, but there is more needed.

So why not just go with a middle of the road solution instead of going for one extreme or the opposite extreme?

What is gained by choosing any extreme solution which is guaranteed to fail?

 

[steveox]

Youre forgeting something,,The Middle class and the poor make up most of Americas population. You raise taxes on them kiss ur job as senator or congressman goodbye cause were vote ur ass right out of office..

 

[GenSeneca]

After reading some of the replies, I wanted to quote myself from earlier in the thread...

The "rich" people you think are being nailed by the progressive tax, make most, if not all, of their income through capital gains. That's how Buffet was able to say he paid less in taxes than his secretary. Your Progressive tax is punishing her, not him. His capital gains rate is 15%, her Progressive rate was in the 20's.

BTW, why don't supporters of the Progressive Tax ever push to make the Capital Gains Tax Progressive? Have you ever wondered why none of the "TAX THE RICH!" Leftist politicians have even suggested making the Capital Gains Tax Progressive?

"I shall never be ashamed of citing a bad author if the line is good." - Seneca

 

[ProudLefty]

Youre forgeting something,,The Middle class and the poor make up most of Americas population. You raise taxes on them kiss ur job as senator or congressman goodbye cause were vote ur ass right out of office..

That is really untrue.

If your position is "Give the rich more tax breaks, but lets sock it to the old, the poor, and the middle class" then yes, you can bet your belly button that Republicans will get voted out of office.

But if you say "we all have to share the pain" then you'll get a deal and your Republicans stand a chance of getting reelected.