44
   

Why should rich people pay a greater share of their wealth to taxes?

 
 
BillRM
 
  0  
Reply Sat 13 Aug, 2011 05:42 am
@parados,
Quote:
Why even have democracy then when we can have divine rights of Kings.


With no inherence tax soon, as in a few generations at most, we will have “royal” families to the same degree as any country in the middle ages.

All by the divine right of blood lines.
Foofie
 
  0  
Reply Sat 13 Aug, 2011 08:36 am
@parados,
parados wrote:

So if it's nature then the rich are rich because they are granted that by God. Why even have democracy then when we can have divine rights of Kings.


Your statement above does not compute in my atheistic brain.
0 Replies
 
Foofie
 
  0  
Reply Sat 13 Aug, 2011 08:37 am
@BillRM,
BillRM wrote:

Quote:
Why even have democracy then when we can have divine rights of Kings.


With no inherence tax soon, as in a few generations at most, we will have “royal” families to the same degree as any country in the middle ages.

All by the divine right of blood lines.



Are we forgetting that the poor have more children that eventually vote?
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Sat 13 Aug, 2011 08:45 am
@Foofie,
First the vote is less and less meaningful and it is the people with the funds to lobby congress and pay for election funding that have the power.

As had been shown with the GOP the poor and the middle class can be talk into voting against their own best interest.

Second the poor have more children is not true under all conditions and for proof of that see the birth rate during the 1930s.
izzythepush
 
  1  
Reply Sat 13 Aug, 2011 08:51 am
@BillRM,
BillRM wrote:

As had been shown with the GOP the poor and the middle class can be talk into voting against their own best interest.


You're spot on Bill. If money didn't have such an effect, the rich would not spend so much on lobbying. It's because it's a fraction of what they would have to pay under a more egalitarian tax system.
0 Replies
 
Foofie
 
  0  
Reply Sun 14 Aug, 2011 09:27 am
@BillRM,
BillRM wrote:

...As had been shown with the GOP the poor and the middle class can be talk into voting against their own best interest.

Second the poor have more children is not true under all conditions and for proof of that see the birth rate during the 1930s.


The poor and middle class in the "red" states (aka, the South) vote for the GOP, as I understand it, are voting to maintain the "status quo" in their neck of the woods. In effect, vote Republican, so the families that own most of Main Street continue to keep their town afloat, and they can continue to live a life where everyone knows their place. That is actually, under the surface, voting for their own best interests. Not everyone has a desire to economically better themselves, if they already own the house they live in, and are just cash poor. Maintaining one's life style, so one doesn't have to move to the big city and rub elbows with a degree of diversity that might be anathema can also be a goal. Many assume the whole country has the same criteria and want individual economic progress; not if it comes with losing one's lifestyle. Saying one is fourth or fifth generation in a town has its own rewards.

Also, the birthrate today is greater for many of the poor, and especially immigrants, from my own observations.

BillRM
 
  0  
Reply Sun 14 Aug, 2011 09:49 am
@Foofie,
Quote:
The poor and middle class in the "red" states (aka, the South) vote for the GOP, as I understand it, are voting to maintain the "status quo" in their neck of the woods.


The GOP talks the far right bible pounding ant--science and anti-Mexicans, and hidden black racism nonsense to them in order to get their votes.

Take note how few in the GOP leadership dare to be upfront in dealing with the Obama birther fruitcakes for example.

In any case they are voting against their own interests with special reference to Medicare and SS just to start with.


0 Replies
 
rosborne979
 
  1  
Reply Mon 15 Aug, 2011 12:03 pm
I still believe that everyone should pay the same share of their wealth to taxes. But even more importantly we should fix the existing tax code so that it's not full of loopholes which allow the ultra-wealthy to pay less than their fair share.
Warren Buffet wrote:
"My friends and I have been coddled long enough by a billionaire-friendly Congress. It's time for our government to get serious about shared sacrifice," The 80-year-old "Oracle of Omaha" wrote in an opinion article in The New York Times.

Buffett, one of the world's richest men and chairman of conglomerate Berkshire Hathaway Inc , said his federal tax bill last year was $6,938,744.

"That sounds like a lot of money. But what I paid was only 17.4 percent of my taxable income - and that's actually a lower percentage than was paid by any of the other 20 people in our office. Their tax burdens ranged from 33 percent to 41 percent and averaged 36 percent," he said.

Source

The best way to close loopholes is so simplify. Once the tax burden is equally shared, then use special programs to bolster those that need assistance.
H2O MAN
 
  0  
Reply Mon 15 Aug, 2011 12:12 pm
@rosborne979,
rosborne979 wrote:



The best way to close loopholes is so simplify. Once the tax burden is equally shared, then use special programs to bolster those that need assistance.



That's The FairTax Plan
rosborne979
 
  1  
Reply Mon 15 Aug, 2011 12:42 pm
@H2O MAN,
H2O MAN wrote:
That's The FairTax Plan

That's unfortunate, because nobody every listens to me, so it's probably doomed to failure Wink
0 Replies
 
joefromchicago
 
  2  
Reply Mon 15 Aug, 2011 12:59 pm
@Foofie,
Foofie wrote:
The poor and middle class in the "red" states (aka, the South) vote for the GOP, as I understand it, are voting to maintain the "status quo" in their neck of the woods. In effect, vote Republican, so the families that own most of Main Street continue to keep their town afloat, and they can continue to live a life where everyone knows their place. That is actually, under the surface, voting for their own best interests.

Or, in other words, they don't want to live near blacks.

Foofie wrote:
Maintaining one's life style, so one doesn't have to move to the big city and rub elbows with a degree of diversity that might be anathema can also be a goal.

Well, that's one way to put it.
0 Replies
 
Fido
 
  0  
Reply Mon 15 Aug, 2011 01:08 pm
@Foofie,
Foofie wrote:

BillRM wrote:

Quote:
Why even have democracy then when we can have divine rights of Kings.


With no inherence tax soon, as in a few generations at most, we will have “royal” families to the same degree as any country in the middle ages.

All by the divine right of blood lines.



Are we forgetting that the poor have more children that eventually vote?
They have enough sense to realize they have no choice and cannot vote themselves out of hopelessness... The republican want to keep them hopeless and make no bones about it... The democrats claim to attack hopelessness, but they lie... Hopelessness is their common stock and trade.... I keeping the hopeless hopeless the republicans acare the dwindling middle classes with it... The Democrats exploit it for what it is, but it is all about making their friends rich on the backs of the poor... It is a racket... It isn't government... The parties own the place and the people have no choice... It is a racket... You have to go along to get along...
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Tue 16 Aug, 2011 06:46 pm
@rosborne979,
Quote:
But what I paid was only 17.4 percent of my taxable income


Maybe not all of his income was taxable...

http://taxes.about.com/od/income/Types_of_Income.htm
Quote:
All income is presumed to be taxable, but America's tax laws provide that income is taxed in a variety of ways. Wages for example are subject to several different types of tax rates. Dividends and capital gains may be taxed at a lower rate, and some income might be partially taxable or even non-taxable


http://www.irs.gov/newsroom/article/0,,id=179077,00.html

So there are certain kinds of income that is not taxable, or that is taxed at a different rate.

maporsche
 
  1  
Reply Tue 16 Aug, 2011 07:13 pm
@mysteryman,
mysteryman wrote:
So there are certain kinds of income that is not taxable, or that is taxed at a different rate.


Which is EXACTLY what Buffett is looking to have changed. Did you read his article?
failures art
 
  1  
Reply Tue 16 Aug, 2011 07:25 pm
@maporsche,
Holy crap. Map sighting!

A
R
T
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  2  
Reply Wed 17 Aug, 2011 03:45 am
I've been saying since the beginning of the thread that wealthy people get most of their income for capital gains, which are only taxed at 15% max. However, it apparently wasn't a sufficiently "ethical" argument, so it has been largely ignored. I was greatly amused to see Mr. Buffet's remarks.
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Wed 17 Aug, 2011 04:19 am
@Setanta,
Also, initial incomes from "R&D programs) can also be forgiven , so I can, if I develop , say a new biodiesel process, live off of profits for many a year as long as I call the process R&D and not production.

Theres a lot of that going on. The entire gas drilling "exploration" is sorta handled that way and Net Income TAxes wont ever be paid to the states. SO, in PA gas drilling and production is forgiven for any extraction fees and the fuckin bastards wont ever pay Net Income Taxes. And the governor is standing there like a Cheshire Cat .
0 Replies
 
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Wed 17 Aug, 2011 04:25 am
@mysteryman,
I ran into that kind of situation many years also where two brothers who was join owners of a paving company and earning many times my income were paying less taxes then I was at the time.
Fido
 
  2  
Reply Wed 17 Aug, 2011 05:40 am
@BillRM,
BillRM wrote:

I ran into that kind of situation many years also where two brothers who was join owners of a paving company and earning many times my income were paying less taxes then I was at the time.

The thing to understand, Bill, is that while wishing to reward talent, invention, or innovation, all wealth is part of the commonwealth and should be returned to it eventually... When property tax was the primary tax in this country property was cheap because it needed labor to make it profitable, and needed profit to support itself in private hands... Labor was dear because it was needed to make property profitable... Taxing income which means taxing wages, though it was no so intended by those who made the income tax constitutional drives down the price of labor... It does so in this fashion: A person working hard and long to make his wages and a profit must work even harder and longer to make a profit and pay taxes, and this extra work means he produces more, which lowers both the price of his product and his wages...

The rich complain about nearly 50% paying no income taxes which does not mean they pay no taxes... It is a situation they have created themselves by forcing more people into the work force and driving down wages to the subsistence level... A greater supply of labor lowers the prices, and a lower price forces people to hold two jobs, or for mothers to join the work force which again, drives down price of labor by increasing the supply... And all the time, lower actual income -due to increases in profit and taxes drive down demand which lowers the price of goods and ruins the domestic market... Instead of returning wealth to the commonwealth, taxes on wages has been the means by which wealth has been removed from the commonwealth and concentrated in the hands of the rich...
0 Replies
 
maporsche
 
  1  
Reply Mon 22 Aug, 2011 06:25 pm
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-august-18-2011/world-of-class-warfare---the-poor-s-free-ride-is-over?xrs=share_copy
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 12/07/2021 at 09:50:34