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

[JakeStarkey]

If we are ever going to pay down the $16 trillion debt, everyone is going to have to pay more. As we used to say when I was on active duty when things got really bad, "It's a big shit sandwich, and everybody has to take a bite."



It should be indexed to 9 percent of the population. That's what percentage were above the age of 65 when Medicare was enacted. When Social Security was enacted, only 5.4 percent were over 65.

Today, 13 pecent are over 65. This is clearly unsustainable.

Raise the eligibility age to 70, then index to 9 percent going forward.

But heaven forbid that anyone dare suggest indexing the max rate to earnings!

You are basically demanding they pay more money for a benefit which will not be increased for them. Just so you can retire at the same age your great-grandfather did.

You are a thief.

That is a legal term and our taxation is not thievery, but if you cheat on your taxes, then you are stealing from other Americans, yes.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Taxation is theft regardless of any 'legal term'. It's morally and ethically wrong and has been known as such for thousands of years. Just because a few Statists put pen to parchment doesn't change that fact, Fake.

 

[martybegan]

Who the fuck are you to say who is or is not paying enough?

You are a typical progressive statist, you want to play with other people's money, and you want the government to get it for you.

You dont have the honor or the decency to go out and rob it yourself.

and howabout we shut off the deductions YOU get, put your money where your mouth is you socialist fuckwad.

don't let jake get to you, he/she/it is not a real person. he/she/it is a dem/lib talking point repeater.

Marty, Redfish, and I all have the right, as do all citizens, to chime in.

Their far right reactionary response to my GOP mainstream comments is "Nazi" "socialist" "liberal" and so forth.

We the People, son, have every right through our legislatures to create tax brackets.

So, yes, we can do that.

And I am quite sure I have paid more in taxes in my life than the two of you have earned in income.

Closing off the tax loop holes would "hurt" me as much as any other capitalist.

Those folks that have done well in the environment of this wonderful country do have a social obligation to help bring others up.

I don't care whether you agree, you two, because I have the votes and you don't.

Its easy to get votes from people by promising them other people's money. The problem is sooner or later its not other peoples money that the government has to take, its mine, its redfish's its yours.

It never ends, "just a bit more" becomes "just a bit more more" and so on and so forth. DeBlasio in NY says he can fund all he wants just by taxing people over $500k more, which is bullshit, he's going to have to come after me and my barely over $100k salary to do it.

The government is doing things at higher levels it was never meant to do. I don't like having my income stolen for forced charity, and to pay some useless burecratic assholes to regulate me to death and provide zero return for thier services.

 

[g5000]

Its easy to get votes from people by promising them other people's money. The problem is sooner or later its not other peoples money that the government has to take, its mine, its redfish's its yours.

The "loopholes" to which Starkey was referring are already causing you and redfish and me and Starkey to all pay higher tax rates.

Eliminating all tax expenditures (loopholes, deductions, credits, boondoggles, whatever you want to call them) would allow for the tax rates to be lowered for everyone.

Do you take advantage of the mortage interest deduction? If so, you are one of the causes of higher tax rates.

Get off the government tit, hippy!

 

[Wry Catcher]

1. I'd be happy to receive one million dollars in compensation and pay 10% off the top.

2. Means testing. Why should anyone receive SS if they are in the top 10% of retirement income?

3. The no tax, no way, never crowd will oppose any tax, any time for any purpose.

4. I support electing a no tax, no way candidate to fix our economy. Sure, the economy will tank, local governments will fail, tens of millions will be unemployed and business and industry will suffer for lack of customers. But sometimes it requires a person or an economy to hit bottom before they can make necessary changes.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Its easy to get votes from people by promising them other people's money. The problem is sooner or later its not other peoples money that the government has to take, its mine, its redfish's its yours.

The loopholes to which Starkey was referring are already causing you and redfish and me and Starkey to all pay higher tax rates.

Eliminating all tax expenditures (loopholes, deductions, credits, boondoggles, etc.) would allow for the tax rates to be lowered for everyone.

Do you take advantage of the mortage interest deduction? Then you are one of the causes of higher tax rates.

Get off the government tit, hippy!

massive flaw in logic.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Its easy to get votes from people by promising them other people's money. The problem is sooner or later its not other peoples money that the government has to take, its mine, its redfish's its yours.

The loopholes to which Starkey was referring are already causing you and redfish and me and Starkey to all pay higher tax rates.

Eliminating all tax expenditures (loopholes, deductions, credits, boondoggles, etc.) would allow for the tax rates to be lowered for everyone.

Do you take advantage of the mortage interest deduction? Then you are one of the causes of higher tax rates.

Get off the government tit, hippy!

massive flaw in logic.

Libertarian and far right reaction to getting tax breaks so the working poor and middle class pay the same as the richies.

Baby Otters Jumping And Cheering Is The Happiest Thing You'll See Today (VIDEO)

 

[g5000]

Its easy to get votes from people by promising them other people's money. The problem is sooner or later its not other peoples money that the government has to take, its mine, its redfish's its yours.

The loopholes to which Starkey was referring are already causing you and redfish and me and Starkey to all pay higher tax rates.

Eliminating all tax expenditures (loopholes, deductions, credits, boondoggles, etc.) would allow for the tax rates to be lowered for everyone.

Do you take advantage of the mortage interest deduction? Then you are one of the causes of higher tax rates.

Get off the government tit, hippy!

massive flaw in logic.

Tell that to Libertarians. It's a Libertarian principle.

We have a system in which two people earning identical incomes are paying different amounts of income taxes, precisely because of tax expenditures.

If the stretch of road between their two houses represents their share of federal expenses and that totals $1200, then they should each be paying $600.

But one guy has a mortgage and gets a gift from the government for going along with their intervention in the markets. He also bought the right kind of refrigerator which the manufacturer bribed a bunch of Congressmen to put a gift in the tax code for buying it.

The other guy is being punished with higher taxes for not buying a house and for not buying the right kind of refrigerator. He is paying a tax penalty.

So one guy only has to pay $400, which means the other guy is going to have to pay $800 to balance the budget. His tax rate would have come out to a $600 bill, but it had to be raised for everyone in that bracket to balance the budget after giving out all these gifts.

The guy who gets the gifts thinks he is getting to keep more of his income (and he is), and so what is wrong with that? Well, what is wrong with it is that it comes at someone else's expense. He is a welfare queen. Someone else has to give up MORE of their income to pay for all those presents.

Now, the other guy doesn't want to pay $800. He's pissed about that. So his Congressman arranges for him to pay $700 and then our government borrows the rest from China.

Americans take $1.2 trillion worth of these gifts from the government every year.

Eliminate tax expenditures and we can lower the tax rates, stop borrowing from China, and everyone who earns the same income pays the same amount of taxes.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

The loopholes to which Starkey was referring are already causing you and redfish and me and Starkey to all pay higher tax rates.

Eliminating all tax expenditures (loopholes, deductions, credits, boondoggles, etc.) would allow for the tax rates to be lowered for everyone.

Do you take advantage of the mortage interest deduction? Then you are one of the causes of higher tax rates.

Get off the government tit, hippy!

massive flaw in logic.

Libertarian and far right reaction to getting tax breaks.

Baby Otters Jumping And Cheering Is The Happiest Thing You'll See Today (VIDEO)

"Tax break". Thank you sire, for allowing me to keep some of my own property. That is very generous of you.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

1. I'd be happy to receive one million dollars in compensation and pay 10% off the top.

2. Means testing. Why should anyone receive SS if they are in the top 10% of retirement income?

3. The no tax, no way, never crowd will oppose any tax, any time for any purpose.

4. I support electing a no tax, no way candidate to fix our economy. Sure, the economy will tank, local governments will fail, tens of millions will be unemployed and business and industry will suffer for lack of customers. But sometimes it requires a person or an economy to hit bottom before they can make necessary changes.

You wouldn't happily peel off 100k if you actually earned that money.

 

[g5000]

massive flaw in logic.

Libertarian and far right reaction to getting tax breaks.

Baby Otters Jumping And Cheering Is The Happiest Thing You'll See Today (VIDEO)

"Tax break". Thank you sire, for allowing me to keep some of my own property. That is very generous of you.

See my previous post. I anticipated this line of flawed thinking.

Your "tax break" comes at someone else's expense. Someone else has to give up MORE of their income to pay for your gift from the government. And the government has to borrow more money from China to pay for it.

You are part of the $1.2 trillion of annual tax expenditures dragging us all under.

 

[g5000]

I am simply amazed someone claiming to be Libertarian goes along with the tax expenditure scheme which is an astronomical government intervention in free markets.

 

[g5000]

Tax expenditures are another avenue by which the federal government expands its power and scope.

Americans have accepted a tax penalty for not buying a house. They have accepted tax penalties for not buying the right kind of appliances. They have accepted tax penalties for not buying the right energy sources.

But tax penalties for not buying the right kind of health insurance? OH HELL NO! FREEEEEEEEEEEDOOOOOOOOOMMMMMMMM!




We didn't get to this point suddenly. You allowed it. A long time ago.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

I am simply amazed someone claiming to be Libertarian goes along with the tax expenditure scheme which is an astronomical government intervention in free markets.

That would be an extremely distorted definition of free markets, I'm afraid.

 

[g5000]

I am simply amazed someone claiming to be Libertarian goes along with the tax expenditure scheme which is an astronomical government intervention in free markets.

That would be an extremely distorted definition of free markets, I'm afraid.

The mortgage interest deduction is government intervention in the housing market in every sense of the meaning, and it drives the cost of houses up. It also forces others to pay higher income taxes to pay for it.

The employer sponsored health insurance tax free benefit is government intervention in the healthcare market in every sense of the meaning, and it drives the cost of healthcare up. It also forces others to pay higher income taxes to pay for it.

These should be driving any right-minded Libertarian as insane as they get over the Federal Reserve.

 

[chikenwing]

If we are ever going to pay down the $16 trillion debt, everyone is going to have to pay more. As we used to say when I was on active duty when things got really bad, "It's a big shit sandwich, and everybody has to take a bite."



It should be indexed to 9 percent of the population. That's what percentage were above the age of 65 when Medicare was enacted. When Social Security was enacted, only 5.4 percent were over 65.

Today, 13 pecent are over 65. This is clearly unsustainable.

Raise the eligibility age to 70, then index to 9 percent going forward.

Tell that to a masons helper,or a pipe fitter or any of the other of trades that work with their backs. Adding on almost 5 years isn't going to work for many.

Then make the disability requirements lighter for the "back break" workers than the office and white collar folks.

The point is this: with good will from all sides, we can SS easily work in the future.

Who will decide whats the correct formulas? People don't want to be indentured until they can get disability?

 

[Redfish]

Who the fuck are you to say who is or is not paying enough?

You are a typical progressive statist, you want to play with other people's money, and you want the government to get it for you.

You dont have the honor or the decency to go out and rob it yourself.

and howabout we shut off the deductions YOU get, put your money where your mouth is you socialist fuckwad.

don't let jake get to you, he/she/it is not a real person. he/she/it is a dem/lib talking point repeater.

Marty, Redfish, and I all have the right, as do all citizens, to chime in.

Their far right reactionary response to my GOP mainstream comments is "Nazi" "socialist" "liberal" and so forth.

We the People, son, have every right through our legislatures to create tax brackets.

So, yes, we can do that.

And I am quite sure I have paid more in taxes in my life than the two of you have earned in income.

Closing off the tax loop holes would "hurt" me as much as any other capitalist.

Those folks that have done well in the environment of this wonderful country do have a social obligation to help bring others up.

I don't care whether you agree, you two, because I have the votes and you don't.

I asked you which specific loopholes you would close. Did you respond? maybe I missed it.

As to who has the votes, we will see next november whether the majority will vote for more socialism and big govt or for freedom. BTW, real freedom includes both the freedom to succeed and the freedom to fail---govt should not cause either to happen.

 

[g5000]

g5000, the rich do need to pay more than what they are, and you can count on that happening within the next decade: no way around that.

If we are ever going to pay down the $16 trillion debt, everyone is going to have to pay more. As we used to say when I was on active duty when things got really bad, "It's a big shit sandwich, and everybody has to take a bite."

You are also right that SS should be adjusted to live expectancy and working longevity.

The retirement age can be extend logically and fairly.

It should be indexed to 9 percent of the population. That's what percentage were above the age of 65 when Medicare was enacted. When Social Security was enacted, only 5.4 percent were over 65.

Today, 13 pecent are over 65. This is clearly unsustainable.

Raise the eligibility age to 70, then index to 9 percent going forward.

Tell that to a masons helper,or a pipe fitter or any of the other of trades that work with their backs. Adding on almost 5 years isn't going to work for many.

I don't buy your argument at all. The 60 year old of today is in far better shape than the 60 year old of 1934. In fact, life expectancy was 60 when Social Security was enacted. It was designed for those who lived beyond the mean.

Social Security already has provisions for early retirement. Some people currently collect at 62, and they get a smaller pension as a result.

 

[Redfish]

I am simply amazed someone claiming to be Libertarian goes along with the tax expenditure scheme which is an astronomical government intervention in free markets.

That would be an extremely distorted definition of free markets, I'm afraid.

The mortgage interest deduction is government intervention in the housing market in every sense of the meaning, and it drives the cost of houses up. It also forces others to pay higher income taxes to pay for it.

The employer sponsored health insurance tax free benefit is government intervention in the healthcare market in every sense of the meaning, and it drives the cost of healthcare up. It also forces others to pay higher income taxes to pay for it.

These should be driving any right-minded Libertarian as insane as they get over the Federal Reserve.

the mortgage interest deduction is in the tax code to incentivize home ownership, why do you think home ownership is a bad thing? Would you prefer a system where everyone rents from the government?

 

[g5000]

don't let jake get to you, he/she/it is not a real person. he/she/it is a dem/lib talking point repeater.

Marty, Redfish, and I all have the right, as do all citizens, to chime in.

Their far right reactionary response to my GOP mainstream comments is "Nazi" "socialist" "liberal" and so forth.

We the People, son, have every right through our legislatures to create tax brackets.

So, yes, we can do that.

And I am quite sure I have paid more in taxes in my life than the two of you have earned in income.

Closing off the tax loop holes would "hurt" me as much as any other capitalist.

Those folks that have done well in the environment of this wonderful country do have a social obligation to help bring others up.

I don't care whether you agree, you two, because I have the votes and you don't.

I asked you which specific loopholes you would close. Did you respond? maybe I missed it.

I would close all of them. Every last one of the annual $1.2 trillion worth.

The reward would be lower tax brackets for everyone. And no more borrowing from China.


Government spending is ridiculous, but just by raising Social Security and Medicare eligibility to 70, and banning tax expenditures, our government would be rolling in cash without cutting a cent of other spending.