Can someone making $1 million a year afford a 5.87% tax increase?

[OnePercenter]

Wrong question. The right question is do you have the right to take the money that somebody else has earned regardless of whether they can afford it or not.

I would say no.

The real question: Should people making $1M/year pay the same effective tax rate as people making less than $1M?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Wrong question. The right question is do you have the right to take the money that somebody else has earned regardless of whether they can afford it or not.

I would say no.

The real question: Should people making $1M/year pay the same effective tax rate as people making less than $1M?

Too bad those mean rich people pay a higher rate. Bastards!

 

[RKMBrown]

Wrong question. The right question is do you have the right to take the money that somebody else has earned regardless of whether they can afford it or not.

I would say no.

The real question: Should people making $1M/year pay the same effective tax rate as people making less than $1M?

Note: the question of fairness in effective overall tax rates primarily stems from the idiocy of the population that believes, quite literally, anything they are told.

The real question:

1) Should income be taxed at all.

I would say no.

For the slavers who say yes:

1.a) Should personal income be charged at the same rate as capital gains income?

I would say no.

1.b) Should personal income be taxed progressively?

I would say no.

1.c) Should capital gains income be taxed progressively?

I would say no.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Wrong question. The right question is do you have the right to take the money that somebody else has earned regardless of whether they can afford it or not.

I would say no.

The real question: Should people making $1M/year pay the same effective tax rate as people making less than $1M?

That is the right question. Folks are going to disagree on the right answer.

 

[RKMBrown]

Wrong question. The right question is do you have the right to take the money that somebody else has earned regardless of whether they can afford it or not.

I would say no.

The real question: Should people making $1M/year pay the same effective tax rate as people making less than $1M?

That is the right question. Folks are going to disagree on the right answer.

That's the question the scum bag democrats want answered.

 

[freedombecki]

Wrong question. The right question is do you have the right to take the money that somebody else has earned regardless of whether they can afford it or not.

I would say no.

The real question: Should people making $1M/year pay the same effective tax rate as people making less than $1M?

Too bad those mean rich people pay a higher rate. Bastards!

Success must be punished. It's the Democrat way.

 

[OnePercenter]

Wrong question. The right question is do you have the right to take the money that somebody else has earned regardless of whether they can afford it or not.

I would say no.

The real question: Should people making $1M/year pay the same effective tax rate as people making less than $1M?

Too bad those mean rich people pay a higher rate. Bastards!

People don't pay tax rates, they pay effective tax rates. For the rich, effective is less than yours.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The real question: Should people making $1M/year pay the same effective tax rate as people making less than $1M?

Too bad those mean rich people pay a higher rate. Bastards!

People don't pay tax rates, they pay effective tax rates. For the rich, effective is less than yours.

Rich people pay higher effective rates than I do.

 

[Ame®icano]

Wrong question. The right question is do you have the right to take the money that somebody else has earned regardless of whether they can afford it or not.

I would say no.

The real question: Should people making $1M/year pay the same effective tax rate as people making less than $1M?

That is the right question. Folks are going to disagree on the right answer.

What if difference between them is two dollars?

 

[Politico]

Too bad those mean rich people pay a higher rate. Bastards!

People don't pay tax rates, they pay effective tax rates. For the rich, effective is less than yours.

Rich people pay higher effective rates than I do.

BS lol.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Wrong question. The right question is do you have the right to take the money that somebody else has earned regardless of whether they can afford it or not.

I would say no.

The real question: Should people making $1M/year pay the same effective tax rate as people making less than $1M?

Note: the question of fairness in effective overall tax rates primarily stems from the idiocy of the population that believes, quite literally, anything they are told.

The real question:

1) Should income be taxed at all.

I would say no.

For the slavers who say yes:

1.a) Should personal income be charged at the same rate as capital gains income?

I would say no.

1.b) Should personal income be taxed progressively?

I would say no.

1.c) Should capital gains income be taxed progressively?

I would say no.

Taxation = slavery!

 

[bripat9643]

The real question: Should people making $1M/year pay the same effective tax rate as people making less than $1M?

Note: the question of fairness in effective overall tax rates primarily stems from the idiocy of the population that believes, quite literally, anything they are told.

The real question:

1) Should income be taxed at all.

I would say no.

For the slavers who say yes:

1.a) Should personal income be charged at the same rate as capital gains income?

I would say no.

1.b) Should personal income be taxed progressively?

I would say no.

1.c) Should capital gains income be taxed progressively?

I would say no.

Taxation = slavery!

Of course it does, moron. Do you imagine that taxation is voluntary?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Social Security proposals are wrongheaded - The Washington Post

For someone earning $1 million, the tax increase would be $58,700.

The options are keeping Social Security solvent or allowing those making $1 million a year to keep 5.87% of their pre-tax earnings.

Seems like a small enough increase for the long term benefit of the nation to a fiscal conservative like myself. And yes, I will personally pay more in taxes if this passes. But having a stable future for this nation means more to me than this paltry amount. If anything it is cheap at the price.

What is even more attractive is that it is a flat tax, something that fiscal conservatives have been advocating for ever since the Reagan era.

Besides the kneejerk opposition to any tax increase what are the legitimate objections to a reasonable and effective solution of this modest nature?

Hmm, can a government that spends $4 Trillion annually spend 5% less?

 

[bripat9643]

The real question: Should people making $1M/year pay the same effective tax rate as people making less than $1M?

Too bad those mean rich people pay a higher rate. Bastards!

People don't pay tax rates, they pay effective tax rates. For the rich, effective is less than yours.

The government can't write a law that mandates your "effective tax rate," nimrod.

 

[bripat9643]

Social Security proposals are wrongheaded - The Washington Post

For someone earning $1 million, the tax increase would be $58,700.

The options are keeping Social Security solvent or allowing those making $1 million a year to keep 5.87% of their pre-tax earnings.

Seems like a small enough increase for the long term benefit of the nation to a fiscal conservative like myself. And yes, I will personally pay more in taxes if this passes. But having a stable future for this nation means more to me than this paltry amount. If anything it is cheap at the price.

What is even more attractive is that it is a flat tax, something that fiscal conservatives have been advocating for ever since the Reagan era.

Besides the kneejerk opposition to any tax increase what are the legitimate objections to a reasonable and effective solution of this modest nature?

It's not a "knee-jerk" reaction. We don't need more taxes. We need less spending. The idea that Americans aren't taxed enough is utterly ludicrous.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Indentured servants weren't taxed as highly as the average American taxpayer

 

[Derideo_Te]

Note: the question of fairness in effective overall tax rates primarily stems from the idiocy of the population that believes, quite literally, anything they are told.

The real question:

1) Should income be taxed at all.

I would say no.

For the slavers who say yes:

1.a) Should personal income be charged at the same rate as capital gains income?

I would say no.

1.b) Should personal income be taxed progressively?

I would say no.

1.c) Should capital gains income be taxed progressively?

I would say no.

Taxation = slavery!

Of course it does, moron. Do you imagine that taxation is voluntary?

Please explain exactly how you are "bound in servitude as the property" of the US government.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Indentured servants weren't taxed as highly as the average American taxpayer

Indentured servants don't have the freedom to quit their jobs.

 

[Redfish]

Indentured servants weren't taxed as highly as the average American taxpayer

Indentured servants don't have the freedom to quit their jobs.

Right, americans can go on unemployment and food stamps if they get pissed at their boss. And you think this is a good thing?

 

[RKMBrown]

Indentured servants weren't taxed as highly as the average American taxpayer

Indentured servants don't have the freedom to quit their jobs.

How do you force indentured servants to work their jobs? Whips, chains, starvation, torture? Is that your plan to force us to pay for your welfare? Whips, chains, starvation, torture?