Majority of Americans favor wealth tax on very rich: Reuters/Ipsos poll

[Ray From Cleveland]

They manipulate the system so that it does allow it. That’s why the tax code is complex. They don’t want a simple tax code since that can’t be manipulated.

You don’t know anything about me. I do very well for myself.

IF you're doing very well, then you're part of the households that pay Federal Income Taxes. Come April 15th of this year, when you mail in your tax return, will you calculate them so you the most possible or the least you can legally pay?

I pay what I should. I don’t use loopholes and take advantage of the law.

Typical, dodging the question.

Come April 15th of this year, when you mail in your tax return, will you calculate them so you pay the most possible or the least you can legally pay?

I have been a Realtor for over 45 years. As such, I worked as an independent contractor, in business for myself. As such, when I would buy a new computer, take a class in New Orleans, or buy an SUV instead of a luxury car, I could deduct all those things from my gross income. Should I have NOT taken those deductions because you could not? Was that a loophole? Certainly not.

It’s a dishonest question. There’s a lot of difference between “pay the most” or “pay the least”.

You aren’t using any loopholes because average people don’t have the means or capability to do so. Loopholes are for the elite.

Is your definition of loopholes people using tax deductions? If so, ordinary average everyday people use them all the time.

 

[colfax_m]

They manipulate the system so that it does allow it. That’s why the tax code is complex. They don’t want a simple tax code since that can’t be manipulated.

You don’t know anything about me. I do very well for myself.

IF you're doing very well, then you're part of the households that pay Federal Income Taxes. Come April 15th of this year, when you mail in your tax return, will you calculate them so you the most possible or the least you can legally pay?

I pay what I should. I don’t use loopholes and take advantage of the law.

Typical, dodging the question.

Come April 15th of this year, when you mail in your tax return, will you calculate them so you pay the most possible or the least you can legally pay?

I have been a Realtor for over 45 years. As such, I worked as an independent contractor, in business for myself. As such, when I would buy a new computer, take a class in New Orleans, or buy an SUV instead of a luxury car, I could deduct all those things from my gross income. Should I have NOT taken those deductions because you could not? Was that a loophole? Certainly not.

It’s a dishonest question. There’s a lot of difference between “pay the most” or “pay the least”.

You aren’t using any loopholes because average people don’t have the means or capability to do so. Loopholes are for the elite.

Is your definition of loopholes people using tax deductions? If so, ordinary average everyday people use them all the time.

It’s not.

 

[Markle]

It’s a dishonest question. There’s a lot of difference between “pay the most” or “pay the least”.

You aren’t using any loopholes because average people don’t have the means or capability to do so. Loopholes are for the elite.

How is it a dishonest question? Why are you dodging the question? Do you avoid taking deductions you are entitled to take so you can pay more in income tax or do you take those deductions so you pay the least you can legally pay?

What is your definition of "loophole"? What "loopholes" are available to the elite and not available to average people?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

IF you're doing very well, then you're part of the households that pay Federal Income Taxes. Come April 15th of this year, when you mail in your tax return, will you calculate them so you the most possible or the least you can legally pay?

I pay what I should. I don’t use loopholes and take advantage of the law.

Typical, dodging the question.

Come April 15th of this year, when you mail in your tax return, will you calculate them so you pay the most possible or the least you can legally pay?

I have been a Realtor for over 45 years. As such, I worked as an independent contractor, in business for myself. As such, when I would buy a new computer, take a class in New Orleans, or buy an SUV instead of a luxury car, I could deduct all those things from my gross income. Should I have NOT taken those deductions because you could not? Was that a loophole? Certainly not.

It’s a dishonest question. There’s a lot of difference between “pay the most” or “pay the least”.

You aren’t using any loopholes because average people don’t have the means or capability to do so. Loopholes are for the elite.

Is your definition of loopholes people using tax deductions? If so, ordinary average everyday people use them all the time.

It’s not.

Then what is your definition of loopholes if not tax write-offs?

 

[rightwinger]

It is almost impossible to identify and tax all of someone’s wealth.

Tell that to Warren. She thinks you can.

I agree with you, the wealthy are too good at hiding wealth
They can’t hide a stock transaction

 

[rightwinger]

It is almost impossible to identify and tax all of someone’s wealth.

But as they move that wealth around, the transaction can be taxed

Why should anyone's wealth be confiscated just because it is there?

Because that is where the money is
You can’t get blood out of a turnip. The poor and working class do not have it

 

[Markle]

Could you please explain that one? How does sales tax make one run the risk of breaking the law?

If you don't document the sale and pay the tax correctly.

That's on the vendor, not the vendee.

So what?

So what? Because this is what you posted which is totally not true. dblack: "This means you risk running afoul of the law multiple times a day."

How? As the vendee, please be specific how I run the risk of running afoul of the law multiple times a day.

Good god. It's like talking to the "jury" in Idiocracy.

Try to follow along. I stated that I opposed income tax because it required government getting in our business. Some nitwit proposed sales tax as an alternative, but that has government in our business just as much as income tax. Arguably more. That's all I was saying.

But if you can't respond intelligently, feel free to focus in irrelevant minutiae if it makes you feel like you're contributing.

You made the false statement but I'M the idiot. You're the one that refuses to answer the question because you have no answer other than to attack me.

Once again, or admit you're wrong.

This is what you posted which is totally not true. dblack: "This means you risk running afoul of the law multiple times a day."

How? As the vendee, please be specific how I run the risk of running afoul of the law multiple times a day.

 

[dblack]

If you don't document the sale and pay the tax correctly.

That's on the vendor, not the vendee.

So what?

So what? Because this is what you posted which is totally not true. dblack: "This means you risk running afoul of the law multiple times a day."

How? As the vendee, please be specific how I run the risk of running afoul of the law multiple times a day.

Good god. It's like talking to the "jury" in Idiocracy.

Try to follow along. I stated that I opposed income tax because it required government getting in our business. Some nitwit proposed sales tax as an alternative, but that has government in our business just as much as income tax. Arguably more. That's all I was saying.

But if you can't respond intelligently, feel free to focus in irrelevant minutiae if it makes you feel like you're contributing.

You made the false statement but I'M the idiot. You're the one that refuses to answer the question because you have no answer other than to attack me.

Once again, or admit you're wrong.

This is what you posted which is totally not true. dblack: "This means you risk running afoul of the law multiple times a day."

How? As the vendee, please be specific how I run the risk of running afoul of the law multiple times a day.

 

[Markle]

It is almost impossible to identify and tax all of someone’s wealth.

But as they move that wealth around, the transaction can be taxed

Why should anyone's wealth be confiscated just because it is there?

Because that is where the money is
You can’t get blood out of a turnip. The poor and working class do not have it

Pretty graph but, typically, you dodged the question.

Why should anyone's wealth be confiscated just because it is there?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

It is almost impossible to identify and tax all of someone’s wealth.

But as they move that wealth around, the transaction can be taxed

Why should anyone's wealth be confiscated just because it is there?

Because that is where the money is
You can’t get blood out of a turnip. The poor and working class do not have it

That is your claim, but I have no idea how you would know. I'd be willing to bet these poor and working class have smart phones. They have the most expensive brand of walking shoes. They have cable or satellite television. They have big screen TV's and video gams. They purchase alcohol and recreational narcotics.

As I stated in an earlier post, the US has over 250 million adults in our population. Even if they contributed a hundred bucks a year towards income taxes, it would benefit our country greatly.

 

[colfax_m]

It’s a dishonest question. There’s a lot of difference between “pay the most” or “pay the least”.

You aren’t using any loopholes because average people don’t have the means or capability to do so. Loopholes are for the elite.

How is it a dishonest question? Why are you dodging the question? Do you avoid taking deductions you are entitled to take so you can pay more in income tax or do you take those deductions so you pay the least you can legally pay?

What is your definition of "loophole"? What "loopholes" are available to the elite and not available to average people?

It’s a false dilemma.

A loophole is taking advantage of the tax code to lower liability in a way that was clearly not intended.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

It is almost impossible to identify and tax all of someone’s wealth.

Tell that to Warren. She thinks you can.

I agree with you, the wealthy are too good at hiding wealth
They can’t hide a stock transaction

Her idea would be to tax them out of wealth. Then who would want to become wealthy in this country? Who would want to start or expand a business? Who would donate to charities?

Right now, 20% of our top earners in this country pay 87% of all collected taxes. What happens when they don't have the money anymore to pay those taxes? Who is the government going to turn to?

 

[rightwinger]

It is almost impossible to identify and tax all of someone’s wealth.

But as they move that wealth around, the transaction can be taxed

Why should anyone's wealth be confiscated just because it is there?

Because that is where the money is
You can’t get blood out of a turnip. The poor and working class do not have it

Pretty graph but, typically, you dodged the question.

Why should anyone's wealth be confiscated just because it is there?

Because Congress has a Constitutional responsibility to raise revenue to run the people’s government

The best source of revenue is from those who have wealth, not those who do not

 

[rightwinger]

It is almost impossible to identify and tax all of someone’s wealth.

Tell that to Warren. She thinks you can.

I agree with you, the wealthy are too good at hiding wealth
They can’t hide a stock transaction

Her idea would be to tax them out of wealth. Then who would want to become wealthy in this country? Who would want to start or expand a business? Who would donate to charities?

Right now, 20% of our top earners in this country pay 87% of all collected taxes. What happens when they don't have the money anymore to pay those taxes? Who is the government going to turn to?

She has not said that
She has said that she has no intention of making rich people poor, she only wants them to contribute more to the society they benefit so much from

 

[rightwinger]

 

[Ken Mac]

It is almost impossible to identify and tax all of someone’s wealth.

But as they move that wealth around, the transaction can be taxed

Why should anyone's wealth be confiscated just because it is there?

Because that is where the money is
You can’t get blood out of a turnip. The poor and working class do not have it

Pretty graph but, typically, you dodged the question.

Why should anyone's wealth be confiscated just because it is there?

Because Congress has a Constitutional responsibility to raise revenue to run the people’s government

The best source of revenue is from those who have wealth, not those who do not

Maybe, just maybe the government should live within the means of the revenue now collected.

You're a communist. YOU want to confiscate personal property/wealth that has already been taxed. That makes you an

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

It is almost impossible to identify and tax all of someone’s wealth.

Tell that to Warren. She thinks you can.

I agree with you, the wealthy are too good at hiding wealth
They can’t hide a stock transaction

Her idea would be to tax them out of wealth. Then who would want to become wealthy in this country? Who would want to start or expand a business? Who would donate to charities?

Right now, 20% of our top earners in this country pay 87% of all collected taxes. What happens when they don't have the money anymore to pay those taxes? Who is the government going to turn to?

She has not said that
She has said that she has no intention of making rich people poor, she only wants them to contribute more to the society they benefit so much from

Her tax plan is to have an annual wealth tax--not income tax. That means every year, the government adds up all your assets, and you have to pay tax on everything you own. So you go into work one day, and a lock is on the door. The company closed up because they needed to sell the building, machinery, and automation within to pay taxes on other things they also own.

Next year, same thing. They add up all your assets, which are now much less than the year before, and force you to pay taxes on what you have left. They keep doing that until you have nothing left. That's why her plan is a failure.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

It is almost impossible to identify and tax all of someone’s wealth.

But as they move that wealth around, the transaction can be taxed

Why should anyone's wealth be confiscated just because it is there?

Because that is where the money is
You can’t get blood out of a turnip. The poor and working class do not have it

Pretty graph but, typically, you dodged the question.

Why should anyone's wealth be confiscated just because it is there?

Because Congress has a Constitutional responsibility to raise revenue to run the people’s government

The best source of revenue is from those who have wealth, not those who do not

But they are already paying most of the taxes. The top 20% are paying 87% of all collected income taxes. How much more should they be paying?

 

[sartre play]

What evades me is if the economy is doing great & employment is great how come the middle/working class are falling behind, and the list of people living in poverty and the number of homeless people keeps growing. some places where wealth rules no regular paycheck person can afford to live there any longer even if it is the place where they were born. some one explain this please.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

What evades me is if the economy is doing great & employment is great how come the middle/working class are falling behind, and the list of people living in poverty and the number of homeless people keeps growing. some places where wealth rules no regular paycheck person can afford to live there any longer even if it is the place where they were born. some one explain this please.

You can lead a horse to water. You can have as many jobs as you want, but if people are not going to take those jobs, there is not much you can do. Under President Trump, we hit a new high in median household income. But our country suffers from a major drug and illegal immigration problem.