Top tax rates were at 70% when Microsoft and Apple were founded

[Skull Pilot]

What's fair about a guy taking 100 times the average salary? You think his work week is 100 times longer? You think that him taking home 40 times the average salary is not a fair compensation for his troubles?

So what if a guy makes 100 times what you do? If he makes less you will not necessarily make more will you?

And what's your point anyway that everything over the average income should be confiscated by the fucking government?

Some people have a distorted perception of reality. We can't fix that.

I can't imagine what it's like to live with such envy of others.

 

[whitehall]

I guess they forgot to tell Steve Jobs and Bill Gates that high tax rates kill incentives to innovate.

Jobs and Gates were two kids working out of a garage when Microsoft was "founded" in 1975. They incorporated (is that a bad thing?) in 1981 when tax rates started coming down. They went "public" on the stock market when tax rates dropped to 50%

 

[ilia25]

I'm still waiting for a definition of the term "fair share"

70% highest bracket starting at $500,000. Plus 50% bracket from $200,000 to $500,000.

So paying 0% is what in your opinion?

Sorry, I should not have assumed that this would be obvious for you -- the lower brackets stay unchanged. Like $0 to $8,700 bracket stays at 10% and so on.

 

[Skull Pilot]

70% highest bracket starting at $500,000. Plus 50% bracket from $200,000 to $500,000.

So paying 0% is what in your opinion?

Sorry, I should not have assumed that this would be obvious for you -- the lower brackets stay unchanged. Like $0 to $8,700 bracket stays at 10% and so on.

The brackets can remain unchanged but because of all the bullshit deductions tax credits and giveaways 47% of earners still pay no income tax and some of those people actually get more back than was taken from their checks.

Their effective rate is 0 so what do you call that....fair?

And if 10% is enough to ask from some why is it not enough to ask from everyone?

 

[ilia25]

Ilia, you're missing the point. We have to cut spending.

There's no way around it. Even if we taxed everyone earning over $250k 100% of their incomes, we'd barely fund the government for even a few months.

In what language do we need to spell it out so one of you liberals will acknowledge that spending cuts need to be made?

Repeating it does not make it true. Many developed countries are perfectly capable financing the government spending at 50% GDP. The US is only at 38% or something.

Refusing to acknowledge the truth doesn't make it any less real.

What truth? That the US cannot sustain the level of govt. spending that, say, Germany can? Simply because you say so?

Republican brain, enough said.

 

[ilia25]

So paying 0% is what in your opinion?

Sorry, I should not have assumed that this would be obvious for you -- the lower brackets stay unchanged. Like $0 to $8,700 bracket stays at 10% and so on.

The brackets can remain unchanged but because of all the bullshit deductions tax credits and giveaways 47% of earners still pay no income tax and some of those people actually get more back than was taken from their checks.

Their effective rate is 0 so what do you call that....fair?

Yes. The market happens to redistribute wealth from the bottom to the top. So the progressive tax system simply restores the fairness somewhat.

 

[tooAlive]

Sorry, I should not have assumed that this would be obvious for you -- the lower brackets stay unchanged. Like $0 to $8,700 bracket stays at 10% and so on.

The brackets can remain unchanged but because of all the bullshit deductions tax credits and giveaways 47% of earners still pay no income tax and some of those people actually get more back than was taken from their checks.

Their effective rate is 0 so what do you call that....fair?

Yes. The market happens to redistribute wealth from the bottom to the top. So the progressive tax system simply restores the fairness somewhat.

You keep referring to lower taxes as if they were gifts.

They're not gifts. Lower taxes just mean people get to keep more of what they have already rightfully earned.

 

[bripat9643]

I'm still waiting for a definition of the term "fair share"

70% highest bracket starting at $500,000. Plus 50% bracket from $200,000 to

$500,000.

Why is that "fair?"

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

I guess they forgot to tell Steve Jobs and Bill Gates that high tax rates kill incentives to innovate.

Feel free to cut an extra check on 4/15/2013 so that your effective tax rate will be 70%.

 

[bripat9643]

Yes. The market happens to redistribute wealth from the bottom to the top. So the progressive tax system simply restores the fairness somewhat.

The market doesn't redistribute jack. Only government redistributes. to redistribute means to take money from the person who earned it to give to someone who hasn't earned it.

 

[bripat9643]

What truth? That the US cannot sustain the level of govt. spending that, say, Germany can? Simply because you say so?

Republican brain, enough said.

Why would anyone want to "withstand" that level of government spending?

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

I'm still waiting for a definition of the term "fair share"

70% highest bracket starting at $500,000. Plus 50% bracket from $200,000 to

$500,000.

Why is that "fair?"

In the land of the Statist... they are entitled to 100% of your earnings as the fruits of your labours belong to the "people".

 

[ilia25]

The brackets can remain unchanged but because of all the bullshit deductions tax credits and giveaways 47% of earners still pay no income tax and some of those people actually get more back than was taken from their checks.

Their effective rate is 0 so what do you call that....fair?

Yes. The market happens to redistribute wealth from the bottom to the top. So the progressive tax system simply restores the fairness somewhat.

You keep referring to lower taxes as if they were gifts.

I'm not, stop putting words in my mouth.

rightfully earned.

And who decides what is "rightfully earned"? You think that whatever money a guy makes are his by some God given rights. Well, you are wrong.

The society lives by the rules set by people -- not God, and not Nature. And it is the people who decide what share of your earned income is yours to keep, and what the government takes in taxes. And that decision is made not for your personal benefit, but to benefit the society as a whole.

 

[bripat9643]

I'm still waiting for a definition of the term "fair share"

Fair share isn't the government taking 70% of anything.

What's fair about a guy taking 100 times the average salary? You think his work week is 100 times longer? You think that him taking home 40 times the average salary is not a fair compensation for his troubles?

What's fair about it is the fact that all transaction in the market are totally voluntary. If you want to pay a janitor 10 times what he currently makes, no one is stopping you. The guy who makes 100 times what the janitor makes does so because that's what someone voluntarily agreed to pay him. Who are you to interfere?

 

[bripat9643]

Repeating it does not make it true. Many developed countries are perfectly capable financing the government spending at 50% GDP. The US is only at 38% or something.

The idea of government taking 50% of everything produced in this country is utterly obscene. What's the moral justification for such a thing?

 

[ilia25]

Yes. The market happens to redistribute wealth from the bottom to the top. So the progressive tax system simply restores the fairness somewhat.

The market doesn't redistribute jack.

Of course it does, you silly thing!

How else do you think Bill Gates had "earned" his billions -- by working 40,000 hours per week?

 

[tooAlive]

Yes. The market happens to redistribute wealth from the bottom to the top. So the progressive tax system simply restores the fairness somewhat.

You keep referring to lower taxes as if they were gifts.

I'm not, stop putting words in my mouth.

rightfully earned.

And who decides what is "rightfully earned"? You think that whatever money a guy makes are his by some God given rights. Well, you are wrong.

The society lives by the rules set by people -- not God, and not Nature. And it is the people who decide what share of your earned income is yours to keep, and what the government takes in taxes. And that decision is made not for your personal benefit, but to benefit the society as a whole.

If it was up to the people, they'd leave the rich man without a penny.

Everything a man earned is rightfully his. Unless he breaks into another mans home and steals it. And wanting to tax the rich man more simply because he's rich is stealing.

That thing about it being for the "collective good" is rubbish. It's stealing.

 

[Staidhup]

Sorry, I should not have assumed that this would be obvious for you -- the lower brackets stay unchanged. Like $0 to $8,700 bracket stays at 10% and so on.

The brackets can remain unchanged but because of all the bullshit deductions tax credits and giveaways 47% of earners still pay no income tax and some of those people actually get more back than was taken from their checks.

Their effective rate is 0 so what do you call that....fair?

Yes. The market happens to redistribute wealth from the bottom to the top. So the progressive tax system simply restores the fairness somewhat.

And we wonder why the government keeps spending and knuckle heads keep demanding someone else pay? I like the one about bullshit tax credits, so the home interest tax credit deduction that affords middle and lower class home ownership is bull shit? These people in many cases qualify for those loans because of the tax credit. Energy tax credits afforded those to reduce their carbon foot print, these are bull shit as well, right? Don't forget It's your Messiah who is a major supporter. Then we have the state deduction for taxes paid to the states deducted from your federal tax, so I assume we should pay taxes twice on the same dollar taxed on the state, local, then federal level? We can go on and on and on but the bottom line remains, the vast number of Americans don't pay any taxes other than sales tax, receive full benefits at the expense of those that do, and now have free health care to boot. The market nor current tax policy have nothing to do with the redistribution of wealth from the bottom up, for god's sake yuppie what the heck are you smoking? The simple fact is that those that work hard, apply themselves, and don't spend what they do not have realize a greater chance of accumulating wealth then those that live beyond their means. Oh by the way, the reduction in those bullshit write offs is just another way your guy and his buds have in broadening the tax base and still claim they are not increasing taxes on the middle class. Whats funny and yet sad is that they are so freaking stupid they believe him!The word for the day is political legerdemain. The bottom line fool is that unless private sector employment expodes, and that is soon, the worlds financial markets are going to punish the United States.

 

[ba1614]

I'm still waiting for a definition of the term "fair share"

70% highest bracket starting at $500,000. Plus 50% bracket from $200,000 to $500,000.

So paying 0% is what in your opinion?

How is asking some to pay more than others fair?

It seems as though paying 0% and demanding others pay more is patriotic to a lot of people anymore. That is an awfully sad indictment of where this great country is headed.

 

[bripat9643]

Yes. The market happens to redistribute wealth from the bottom to the top. So the progressive tax system simply restores the fairness somewhat.

The market doesn't redistribute jack.

Of course it does, you silly thing!

How else do you think Bill Gates had "earned" his billions -- by working 40,000 hours per week?

He earned it because every dime he received was paid to him by someone voluntarily, as opposed to your income which is extracted from taxpayers at gunpoint.