Should The Rich Be Required To Pay Higher Taxes In the US?

[Dad2three]

Weird, I thought the GOP had most of Congress the past 20 years? Why didn't they cut the "waste" lol

I know, lets sign an agreement NOT to have a tax increase like 98% in Congress from GOP did right? After all, after Dubya/GOP gutted revenues to less than 15% of GDP (1950'S LEVEL) , WHILE they blew up spending with TWO UNFUNDED wars AND UNFUNDED MEDICARE EXPANSION THAT COST THIS DECADE, AS MUCH AS OBAMACARES THIS DECADE, WHICH IS 100% FUNDED!

Lying asshole......

LOVE how you refuted it with all the links to credible sources, lol

What do you consider credible sources? CBS Dan Rather or NBC Brian Williams? That kind of credible???

Lets see what YOU can come up with Bubba, I've done a pretty good job linking why I think the way I do, with REASONED, well thought out positions, you as typical of the rightie (see 2aguy above) just can't do more than "feelings"...

You link a lot and call other people out on what is credible.... Yet, according to what standards other than what lies between your ears.

So NO, you have NOTHING but opinions based on right wing BS, not even able to back that up. Thanks

 

[Dad2three]

I think the rich should ABSOLUTELY pay more because the majority of them are selfish and don't care about anybody but themselves! Trust me, if you are a millionaire, it is NOT going to hurt you if you just pay a little more in taxes. I believe that if you are a good and righteous person, you would want to help the poor or people that are less fortunate. It's as simple as that! People need to stop being so selfish.

80% of all federal gov't revenue is derived from personal income taxes. The top 10% of American earners carry 70% of the tax load. The top 25% of all earners carry 86% of the load. What would satisfy you? 96%? 106%?

Oh ... and the bottom 49% of all earners pay NO FEDERAL INCOME TAX.
You get a free ride on the backs of everyone else.
Quit your whining and start earning.

MORE right wing garbage based on garbage. Shocking, the bottom 50% of US make about 11% of ALL US income, about the same as the top 1/10th of 1% make


Historical Amount of Revenue by Source

Historical Amount of Revenue by Source

I PROVED YOU ARE A LIAR, RUN AWAY BUBBA

 

[Dad2three]

Maybe you ought to look up how our graduated income tax works, and not worry so much about the very wealthy. Keep in mind they pay lawyers and elected officials to take care of themselves, they don't need you.

They must not be paying them enough because the wealthy still support this country with their taxation. They are still paying the lions share for the rest of us.

NONSENSE, they USED to pay MUCH more on MUCH less incomes however!!!

We have no evidence that your graph is based on actual credible statistics. Until you can demonstrate such, it's just so much horseshit.

Sorry, I forgot, I've provided credible links to EVERYTHING I post on this forum, whereas you rely on BS and right wing spin. Sorry


The richest 0.1 percent of the American population has rebuilt its share of wealth back to where it was in the Roaring Twenties. And the richest 0.01 percent’s share has grown even more rapidly, quadrupling since the eve of the Reagan Revolution.

Top Tenth of 1 Percenters Reaps All the Riches - Businessweek

The fact is that the government relies far more on the bottom 99 percent than the top 1 percent for federal income taxes

Beyond the 1 percent


Forget the top 1% — Look at the top 0.1%

Top 1% = $368,238 (20.9% of income)
Top 0.5% = $558,726 (16.8% of income)
Top 0.1% = $1,695,136 (10.3% of income)
Top 0.01% = $9,141,190 (5% of income)

What is the source of the data for your graph on the effective tax rates people were paying in 1960? Don't tell us it's the New York Times.

Got it, you can't back up your BS so you TRY to attack mine. Got it!

Saez and CBO Bubba

 

[LeftofLeft]

Lying asshole......

LOVE how you refuted it with all the links to credible sources, lol

What do you consider credible sources? CBS Dan Rather or NBC Brian Williams? That kind of credible???

Lets see what YOU can come up with Bubba, I've done a pretty good job linking why I think the way I do, with REASONED, well thought out positions, you as typical of the rightie (see 2aguy above) just can't do more than "feelings"...

You link a lot and call other people out on what is credible.... Yet, according to what standards other than what lies between your ears.

So NO, you have NOTHING but opinions based on right wing BS, not even able to back that up. Thanks

Again, you tout your own links as gold, but they lack validation other than what lies between your ears.

 

[rightwinger]

He? Oh right NOT decades of every US admin spending and policyOR the failure of communism as a system, it was SuperRonnie *shaking head*

the Carter policy, until the USSR invaded Afghanistan, was to cut the military and surrender to Communist infiltration and overthrow.

Carter became President right after Vietnam ended. He had an obligation to cut the size or our wartime forces.

Carter decimated the military and handed our allies over to the communists.

Far from it
In fact, by the 70s and 80s our military built to Cold War doctrine was obsolete
Investing in more Cold War equipment would have been wasted

Reagan was elected in 1980, moron.

No shit Sherlock

Our military had to be rebuilt right after Reagan left office
Lighter and faster forces

 

[rightwinger]

The "rich" already pay the vast bulk of taxes.

That is what happens when you control
90% of the wealth
Where else should the taxes come from?

 

[hadit]

The only significant response to such an OP title is, how much? If they won't/can't define something so simple and basic, it's not worth the argument.

 

[hadit]

There is no real purpose in taxing the rich more of their income because there simply isn't enough income among the rich to even close the Obama deficit, much less pay for anything new.

 

[boedicca]

I think the rich should ABSOLUTELY pay more because the majority of them are selfish and don't care about anybody but themselves! Trust me, if you are a millionaire, it is NOT going to hurt you if you just pay a little more in taxes. I believe that if you are a good and righteous person, you would want to help the poor or people that are less fortunate. It's as simple as that! People need to stop being so selfish.

80% of all federal gov't revenue is derived from personal income taxes. The top 10% of American earners carry 70% of the tax load. The top 25% of all earners carry 86% of the load. What would satisfy you? 96%? 106%?

Oh ... and the bottom 49% of all earners pay NO FEDERAL INCOME TAX.
You get a free ride on the backs of everyone else.
Quit your whining and start earning.

MORE right wing garbage based on garbage. Shocking, the bottom 50% of US make about 11% of ALL US income, about the same as the top 1/10th of 1% make


Historical Amount of Revenue by Source

Historical Amount of Revenue by Source

I PROVED YOU ARE A LIAR, RUN AWAY BUBBA

Uh, the PAYROLL TAX is a TAX ON PERSONAL INCOME, bub.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

From: 10 Tax Questions the Candidates Don t Want You to Ask - 2 What the Flat Tax Taxes

Question. Incidentally, many, and perhaps most, Americans believe that a single, flat tax rate would be fairer than our system of progressive rates. So, you might ask, who would pay more income taxes, and who would pay less, if the only change to our income tax system were the adoption of a single, flat tax rate today that would generate as much revenue as is generated by our progressive rates? The single tax rate would have to be about 19% in a typical year.

Answer: Middle-income taxpayers would, on average, pay considerably more, and high-income taxpayers would pay considerably less. For people with taxable income in the $50,000 -$75,000, the tax rate on that income is, on average, about 13%. For people with between $2 million and $10 million of taxable income, the tax rate on that income is, on average, about 26%, nothwithstanding favorable tax rates on dividends and capital gains.

So if you’re in the solid middle class, your tax rate would be about 6 percentage points higher with a flat tax rate, while very high income households would enjoy a tax rate about 6 to 7 percentage points lower. Now what do you think?

Bullshit...10% of a million is more tha 10% of 100,000 so the millionaire automatically pays more to the government than the guy making 100,000 ....so sorry, your bullshit doesn't fly....a flat tax is the only fair way to tax people if you aren't filled with hate and envy of someone who makes more money than you...and that is at the core of the left...hate, jealousy, greed and envy...

Weird how SOOOOO many people here talk about "hate" and then show how it's REALLY done

80% of the population owns 5% of the wealth.

Who Rules America Wealth Income and Power

The middle class has been eviscerated. What middle class?

the middle class gets screwed by the politicians spending 18 trillion dollars, which eats up the money that could be used to create jobs......the politicians you want to give even more money to are the ones fucking up the economy...so why do you want to give them more money.......?


you said they just give that money to the rich right, dumb fuck? so why on earth would you want to give them more tax money...our money, so they can just give it to the rich? Please...explain how that works.....

DUMBFUK, MOST OF THAT $18 TRILLION CAN BE TRACED BACK TO RONNIE/DUBYA TAX CUTS !!!

Tax cuts don't cost money. Tax cuts reduce the money coming in. If you reduce the money coming in as well as spending, it doesn't cost us a dime. If you reduce the money coming in and not reduce spending, it's the spending that costs the money--not the tax reduction.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

BS...........the effective rates under the current system are far lower than the percentages of tax rates...........The massive tax codes have ensured that.....................The massive code is for loop holes and twisting of tax law to keep people from paying the rates and nothing more.

Instead of repeating right wing talking points, how about a CREDIBLE link to ANY flat tax plan that would work, and run Gov't? lol

I have done so before and did an analysis for the year 2012..........and the rate was 15% that I calculated to get a return on the system at 200 billion more than under the current system of taxation.

It was based off the IRS data for that year and the wage brackets directly from the IRS..............

It fell on deaf and dumb ears...........aka YOU...............who refuse to even consider it...........because you like the current BS system which is corrupt with fraud.

But liking fraud and abuse is expected of you.

Liar, no fukkn way you used MATH. Maybe conservative/GOP "math" but that's NOT reality!

TODAY the US gets 17%+ of GDP AND are running deficits, you saying gutting it to 15% AND giving the bottom making $50,000 or less a zero tax works? lol

Yeah...cut spending. We don't need shrimp running on treadmills or paying for stupidness to figure out why girls who are fat can't get dates...you twit.

Weird, I thought the GOP had most of Congress the past 20 years? Why didn't they cut the "waste" lol

I know, lets sign an agreement NOT to have a tax increase like 98% in Congress from GOP did right? After all, after Dubya/GOP gutted revenues to less than 15% of GDP (1950'S LEVEL) , WHILE they blew up spending with TWO UNFUNDED wars AND UNFUNDED MEDICARE EXPANSION THAT COST THIS DECADE, AS MUCH AS OBAMACARES THIS DECADE, WHICH IS 100% FUNDED!

And that's why we got rid of them. In fact, our top running nominees are not professional politicians at all.

What are the constituents of your party doing to improve things?

 

[SAYIT]

I think the rich should ABSOLUTELY pay more because the majority of them are selfish and don't care about anybody but themselves! Trust me, if you are a millionaire, it is NOT going to hurt you if you just pay a little more in taxes. I believe that if you are a good and righteous person, you would want to help the poor or people that are less fortunate. It's as simple as that! People need to stop being so selfish.

The top 10% of wage earners in this country already pay over 70% of the collected income taxes in this country. If that's not enough, then how much more should they pay? 75%? 80%? 95%?

About 45% of our population pays no income tax at all. Maybe it's about time those on the bottom start paying their fare share for a change. And remember, the US is the most generous people in the entire world. We give more of our money to the so-called poor than anybody, and it's not those Wal-Mart people that are giving, it's those greedy millionaires you speak of.

Seriously, how much money do you think increasing taxes on the poor will get you? That'll balance our budget? Maybe we could buy A tank. The people running Walmart manage to get out of quite a bit of taxes while paying their workers a low enough wage that taxpayers foot the bill for their food stamps.

1 in 4 corporations get out of paying taxes, so yeah tax the rich

Earlier on this thread I stated that a Flat Tax could be tiered and most Flat tax proposals do exactly that. Where the poor pay 0% or 1% into the system. So they wouldn't be paying Federal Taxes on most proposals. So how is 0% or 1% increasing the tax on the poor............

Now if you want to address the Tax Credits under the current system............then yes the savings to the Gov't would be over 200 Billion a year to these same people. As in the end their Federal Tax burden is 0%, but they get a check back anyway.......to the tune of thousands of dollars every year.

I call that what it is.............A Welfare Check every year without calling it one. Paying 0% is enough of a break................and if we were to write Welfare checks then do it outside of tax law. We have safety nets already in place for those needing assistance..............and 0% tax rates are enough already under the system.

The term "tiered flat tax" is an oxymoron.

Yeah ... how about an SFT (Sorta Flat Tax)?
We can call it whatever makes you happy as long as it eliminates the need for accountants, tax attorneys, IRS bean-counters, multiple forms, and hours (or days, or weeks) of compiling and filing. I figure we all get the same $30,000 or $40,000 standard deduction (which means the bottom 49% would still pay no fed income tax) and then do at most 2 or 3 tiers ... #1 for all earned income above the SD up to $250,000, #2 on income from $250,000 to $500,000 and #3 on all income above that. Simple, fair, tons of aggregate savings in both cash and time and it's a win-win-win (unless you are an acct or tax lawyer).

 

[SAYIT]

The "rich" already pay the vast bulk of taxes.

That is what happens when you control
90% of the wealth
Where else should the taxes come from?

Income taxes are not based on wealth ... we have inheritance taxes for that.
Income taxes are based upon - drum roll, please - INCOME.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Guys like you worship government, you believe it does no wrong and that government has first claim on anything you earn...and after that you can keep what they don't need right now........and there is never enough money for the government to spend.....

And you anti Gov't types do EVERYTHING to undermine effective Gov't AND US as a society.

......this coming from the side that believes tripling the deficit and increasing debt ceiling is effective government. That mindset definition of efficiency makes about as much sense as a financial advisor telling consumers in debt to triple their credit card debt levels and ask for more credit when they have hit their limit.

Most sound financial minds are all about limiting that level of "effectiveness" ; conservative and otherwise.

Reagan tripled the debt.

Which is impossible since no President has our checkbook. Congress has our checkbook. Only they can triple the debt. If the President refuses to go along with Congress, that's what causes a government shutdown.

 

[NYcarbineer]

From: 10 Tax Questions the Candidates Don t Want You to Ask - 2 What the Flat Tax Taxes

Question. Incidentally, many, and perhaps most, Americans believe that a single, flat tax rate would be fairer than our system of progressive rates. So, you might ask, who would pay more income taxes, and who would pay less, if the only change to our income tax system were the adoption of a single, flat tax rate today that would generate as much revenue as is generated by our progressive rates? The single tax rate would have to be about 19% in a typical year.

Answer: Middle-income taxpayers would, on average, pay considerably more, and high-income taxpayers would pay considerably less. For people with taxable income in the $50,000 -$75,000, the tax rate on that income is, on average, about 13%. For people with between $2 million and $10 million of taxable income, the tax rate on that income is, on average, about 26%, nothwithstanding favorable tax rates on dividends and capital gains.

So if you’re in the solid middle class, your tax rate would be about 6 percentage points higher with a flat tax rate, while very high income households would enjoy a tax rate about 6 to 7 percentage points lower. Now what do you think?

Bullshit...10% of a million is more tha 10% of 100,000 so the millionaire automatically pays more to the government than the guy making 100,000 ....so sorry, your bullshit doesn't fly....a flat tax is the only fair way to tax people if you aren't filled with hate and envy of someone who makes more money than you...and that is at the core of the left...hate, jealousy, greed and envy...

Your taxes would go up, unless you can convince me you're really really rich or really really poor.

 

[SAYIT]

From: 10 Tax Questions the Candidates Don t Want You to Ask - 2 What the Flat Tax Taxes

Question. Incidentally, many, and perhaps most, Americans believe that a single, flat tax rate would be fairer than our system of progressive rates. So, you might ask, who would pay more income taxes, and who would pay less, if the only change to our income tax system were the adoption of a single, flat tax rate today that would generate as much revenue as is generated by our progressive rates? The single tax rate would have to be about 19% in a typical year.

Answer: Middle-income taxpayers would, on average, pay considerably more, and high-income taxpayers would pay considerably less. For people with taxable income in the $50,000 -$75,000, the tax rate on that income is, on average, about 13%. For people with between $2 million and $10 million of taxable income, the tax rate on that income is, on average, about 26%, nothwithstanding favorable tax rates on dividends and capital gains.

So if you’re in the solid middle class, your tax rate would be about 6 percentage points higher with a flat tax rate, while very high income households would enjoy a tax rate about 6 to 7 percentage points lower. Now what do you think?

Bullshit...10% of a million is more tha 10% of 100,000 so the millionaire automatically pays more to the government than the guy making 100,000 ....so sorry, your bullshit doesn't fly....a flat tax is the only fair way to tax people if you aren't filled with hate and envy of someone who makes more money than you...and that is at the core of the left...hate, jealousy, greed and envy...

Your taxes would go up, unless you can convince me you're really really rich or really really poor.

Yanno, every year of my nearly 40 years in business I came face-2-face with the reality that I was wasting days, sometimes weeks, compiling data for accountants and tax attorneys who then bent, twisted and mutilated that info into a tax return. The time I wasted and the professional fees had a value of $10,000 - $15,000 per tax season ... nearly 10% of my annual income.
Where the hell is the productivity in that?

 

[bripat9643]

I think the rich should ABSOLUTELY pay more because the majority of them are selfish and don't care about anybody but themselves! Trust me, if you are a millionaire, it is NOT going to hurt you if you just pay a little more in taxes. I believe that if you are a good and righteous person, you would want to help the poor or people that are less fortunate. It's as simple as that! People need to stop being so selfish.

The top 10% of wage earners in this country already pay over 70% of the collected income taxes in this country. If that's not enough, then how much more should they pay? 75%? 80%? 95%?

About 45% of our population pays no income tax at all. Maybe it's about time those on the bottom start paying their fare share for a change. And remember, the US is the most generous people in the entire world. We give more of our money to the so-called poor than anybody, and it's not those Wal-Mart people that are giving, it's those greedy millionaires you speak of.

Seriously, how much money do you think increasing taxes on the poor will get you? That'll balance our budget? Maybe we could buy A tank. The people running Walmart manage to get out of quite a bit of taxes while paying their workers a low enough wage that taxpayers foot the bill for their food stamps.

1 in 4 corporations get out of paying taxes, so yeah tax the rich

Earlier on this thread I stated that a Flat Tax could be tiered and most Flat tax proposals do exactly that. Where the poor pay 0% or 1% into the system. So they wouldn't be paying Federal Taxes on most proposals. So how is 0% or 1% increasing the tax on the poor............

Now if you want to address the Tax Credits under the current system............then yes the savings to the Gov't would be over 200 Billion a year to these same people. As in the end their Federal Tax burden is 0%, but they get a check back anyway.......to the tune of thousands of dollars every year.

I call that what it is.............A Welfare Check every year without calling it one. Paying 0% is enough of a break................and if we were to write Welfare checks then do it outside of tax law. We have safety nets already in place for those needing assistance..............and 0% tax rates are enough already under the system.

The term "tiered flat tax" is an oxymoron.

Yeah ... how about an SFT (Sorta Flat Tax)?
We can call it whatever makes you happy as long as it eliminates the need for accountants, tax attorneys, IRS bean-counters, multiple forms, and hours (or days, or weeks) of compiling and filing. I figure we all get the same $30,000 or $40,000 standard deduction (which means the bottom 49% would still pay no fed income tax) and then do at most 2 or 3 tiers ... #1 for all earned income above the SD up to $250,000, #2 on income from $250,000 to $500,000 and #3 on all income above that. Simple, fair, tons of aggregate savings in both cash and time and it's a win-win-win (unless you are an acct or tax lawyer).

As long as we have an income tax, we will still have the IRS and all the accountants, tax attorneys and IRS bean counters will keep their jobs. The only way to get rid of them is to abolish the income tax and switch to a consumption tax.

 

[David_42]

The top 10% of wage earners in this country already pay over 70% of the collected income taxes in this country. If that's not enough, then how much more should they pay? 75%? 80%? 95%?

About 45% of our population pays no income tax at all. Maybe it's about time those on the bottom start paying their fare share for a change. And remember, the US is the most generous people in the entire world. We give more of our money to the so-called poor than anybody, and it's not those Wal-Mart people that are giving, it's those greedy millionaires you speak of.

Seriously, how much money do you think increasing taxes on the poor will get you? That'll balance our budget? Maybe we could buy A tank. The people running Walmart manage to get out of quite a bit of taxes while paying their workers a low enough wage that taxpayers foot the bill for their food stamps.

1 in 4 corporations get out of paying taxes, so yeah tax the rich

Earlier on this thread I stated that a Flat Tax could be tiered and most Flat tax proposals do exactly that. Where the poor pay 0% or 1% into the system. So they wouldn't be paying Federal Taxes on most proposals. So how is 0% or 1% increasing the tax on the poor............

Now if you want to address the Tax Credits under the current system............then yes the savings to the Gov't would be over 200 Billion a year to these same people. As in the end their Federal Tax burden is 0%, but they get a check back anyway.......to the tune of thousands of dollars every year.

I call that what it is.............A Welfare Check every year without calling it one. Paying 0% is enough of a break................and if we were to write Welfare checks then do it outside of tax law. We have safety nets already in place for those needing assistance..............and 0% tax rates are enough already under the system.

The term "tiered flat tax" is an oxymoron.

Yeah ... how about an SFT (Sorta Flat Tax)?
We can call it whatever makes you happy as long as it eliminates the need for accountants, tax attorneys, IRS bean-counters, multiple forms, and hours (or days, or weeks) of compiling and filing. I figure we all get the same $30,000 or $40,000 standard deduction (which means the bottom 49% would still pay no fed income tax) and then do at most 2 or 3 tiers ... #1 for all earned income above the SD up to $250,000, #2 on income from $250,000 to $500,000 and #3 on all income above that. Simple, fair, tons of aggregate savings in both cash and time and it's a win-win-win (unless you are an acct or tax lawyer).

As long as we have an income tax, we will still have the IRS and all the accountants, tax attorneys and IRS bean counters will keep their jobs. The only way to get rid of them is to abolish the income tax and switch to a consumption tax.

LOL. Yeah, great idea, punish the poor more then anyone else.

 

[Dad2three]

LOVE how you refuted it with all the links to credible sources, lol

What do you consider credible sources? CBS Dan Rather or NBC Brian Williams? That kind of credible???

Lets see what YOU can come up with Bubba, I've done a pretty good job linking why I think the way I do, with REASONED, well thought out positions, you as typical of the rightie (see 2aguy above) just can't do more than "feelings"...

You link a lot and call other people out on what is credible.... Yet, according to what standards other than what lies between your ears.

So NO, you have NOTHING but opinions based on right wing BS, not even able to back that up. Thanks

Again, you tout your own links as gold, but they lack validation other than what lies between your ears.

 

[Dad2three]

There is no real purpose in taxing the rich more of their income because there simply isn't enough income among the rich to even close the Obama deficit, much less pay for anything new.

Weird, the top 1% had $1,976,738 ($1.97 TRILLION) in income in 2012, thew latest year with only $451,328 ($451 BILLION) in income taxes (an EFFECTIVE rate of 22.8%) IF we just doubled the effective rat\r the US would have another $451 billion, does that help US in revenues?

Top 5% had $3,330,944 ($3.3 TRILLION) in income and only paid $698,543 ($698 Billion) in taxes, 21.0% EFFECTIVE tax rates. What if we had another $698 billion?

BTW, this years deficit is projected to be $486 billion

Summary of Latest Federal Income Tax Data Tax Foundation