Why the poor should be taxed more heavily.

[Againsheila]

One thing I'm pretty sure he would NOT do is say, "Have Government take money from other people and give it to the poor." I think he'd say "YOU help the poor."

I don't think they should necessarily tax the poor more. What they should do is reduce government to the point where we would not need to pillage a relatively small percentage of the population in order to sustain such massive expenditure. Someone said something about the majority supporting this. Well, OF COURSE. That's because the majority gets the "benefit" of massive expenditure while a minority of the population bears the overwhelming preponderance of the cost.

It's not just the income tax either. Go to http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/88xx/doc8885/Appendix_wtoc.pdf and look at Table 5. The share of total federal tax liability borne by the top 20% was about 69% as of 2005. The bottom 40%, meanwhile, bore less about 5% of the burden. You can see that the top 40% bore about 86% while the bottom 40% bore about 14%. It's pretty easy to support expensive government when you're not the one paying for it.

A "moral" tax would require that everybody who lives in the country pays an equal share of the cost of running the government. And, I assure you, if we had such a system people wouldn't be supporting anything remotely like the level of expenditure the United States government engages in today.

As far as charity goes: It should be voluntary. Charity should not be compelled by government as it is now.

Yeah, you're right, the top 20% paid 69% of the taxes, but the top 10% own more wealth than the bottom 90% combined, they should be paying MORE than 90% of the taxes, they aren't taxed enough, the bottom 90% is taxed too much, and that includes 50% of your 20%

.

Do you honestly still not know the difference between income and wealth?
The top tax payers also happen, not coincidentally, to be the top job creators. That's usually how they got there. Why would you want to punish the most productive people in your society to subsidize the least productive?

Think about it...without the laborers, the rich wouldn't have all their wealth....why should we subsidize them so they can screw their workers? There would be no productivity without the workers. In truth, the most productive ARE the workers, not the top 10% of our nation who uses tax shelters and invests much of their money overseas and places them in overseas accounts that the rest of us have no access to. When the dollar dies, it's the worker that loses everything, the wealthy will already have sold all their dollars and invested in other currency. Heck a majority of their wealth is on paper as it is....not exactly something they've WORKED for, or produced.

Again, no country can long survive when the majority of it's wealth lies in the hands of a few. I believe it was Plato or Aristotle that said that, I'll have to look it up. The point is, it was said by someone far smarter than you or I.

 

[The Rabbi]

Yeah, you're right, the top 20% paid 69% of the taxes, but the top 10% own more wealth than the bottom 90% combined, they should be paying MORE than 90% of the taxes, they aren't taxed enough, the bottom 90% is taxed too much, and that includes 50% of your 20%

.

Do you honestly still not know the difference between income and wealth?
The top tax payers also happen, not coincidentally, to be the top job creators. That's usually how they got there. Why would you want to punish the most productive people in your society to subsidize the least productive?

Think about it...without the laborers, the rich wouldn't have all their wealth....why should we subsidize them so they can screw their workers? There would be no productivity without the workers. In truth, the most productive ARE the workers, not the top 10% of our nation who uses tax shelters and invests much of their money overseas and places them in overseas accounts that the rest of us have no access to. When the dollar dies, it's the worker that loses everything, the wealthy will already have sold all their dollars and invested in other currency. Heck a majority of their wealth is on paper as it is....not exactly something they've WORKED for, or produced.

Again, no country can long survive when the majority of it's wealth lies in the hands of a few. I believe it was Plato or Aristotle that said that, I'll have to look it up. The point is, it was said by someone far smarter than you or I.

Do you actually believe that communist crap?
Workers wouldn't have jobs without capitalists starting corporations. The capitalist is the last to get paid. Ever started a company? You'll know what I mean
It wasn't Plato or Aristotle. It was probably Marx. And the wealthy are a lot less wealthy today than 2 years ago, the recession having hurt them more.

 

[Sidestreamer]

" I am for doing good to the poor, but I differ in opinion of the means. I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it."
-- Benjamin Franklin, November 1776

Just maybe, if the poor were taxed more heavily than the wealthy, it would encourage them to better their position in life so that they could avoid paying so much in taxes.
The government frequently taxes things to discourage it. Things like tobacco and alcohol come to mind. The cap and trade will be a tax to discourage certain types of energy usage the government doesn't want.

Great, punish the strapped by making them more so, at the benefit of those of means. I say we should tax those below the poverty line at 120 percent of their income, that way this will encourage them burger-flippers to mug people to make ends meet. The surplus can go to tax credits for those making over 10 million.

That'd be a riot.

 

[Sidestreamer]

" I am for doing good to the poor, but I differ in opinion of the means. I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it."
-- Benjamin Franklin, November 1776

Just maybe, if the poor were taxed more heavily than the wealthy, it would encourage them to better their position in life so that they could avoid paying so much in taxes.
The government frequently taxes things to discourage it. Things like tobacco and alcohol come to mind. The cap and trade will be a tax to discourage certain types of energy usage the government doesn't want.

Good post. It's Much akin to "Give a man a fish and he eats for a day. Teach a man to fish, and he eats for a lifetime..."

You don't teach people how to earn more money by fucking taking it away! This is what training and education is for!!!

The OP is a horrible post. It sucks. It is fucking lunacy!

 

[Sidestreamer]

I think everybody should be taxed the same way - rich or poor. A poor man is just as much of an American as a rich man. Only difference is one has some money and the other has little. So why should the rich man pull the wagon alone? Pony up folks. We should have a flat tax in the US where everybody pays the same taxes. If we did this, at least half of the IRS deadbeats could be fired and save the government loads of cash. Then everybody would be being treated equally.

Unfortunately fairness isn't relevant when the tax burden on the bottom keeps them from affording basic necessities like housing, food and as-needed health care. Add the crime that will happen when they get desperate and you're just choosing whether your tax dollars are wasted on studying panda bears or on investigating robberies and homicides that wouldn't have happened if things were more stable.

 

[The Rabbi]

I think everybody should be taxed the same way - rich or poor. A poor man is just as much of an American as a rich man. Only difference is one has some money and the other has little. So why should the rich man pull the wagon alone? Pony up folks. We should have a flat tax in the US where everybody pays the same taxes. If we did this, at least half of the IRS deadbeats could be fired and save the government loads of cash. Then everybody would be being treated equally.

Unfortunately fairness isn't relevant when the tax burden on the bottom keeps them from affording basic necessities like housing, food and as-needed health care. Add the crime that will happen when they get desperate and you're just choosing whether your tax dollars are wasted on studying panda bears or on investigating robberies and homicides that wouldn't have happened if things were more stable.

Show me the working person who cannot afford basic necessities. Most people at that end pay no income taxes at all. Typically they get more in gov't benefits than any tax they pay.
Your point is based on feelings more than facts.

 

[JW Frogen]

The poor are not being taxed enough. They are getting uppidity and rude.

Trust me I know, I am upper middle poor (I work but drive a Hyundai and now think a night at Sizzler is the Four Seasons) so I insult the owner of my local liqour store all the time.

 

[Contessa_Sharra]

Sure proves the hypocrisy on the right, doesn't it... Only thing crazy here is the alley babbler, LOL.... can't keep her story straight....

Oh, I suppose that when the left hollers to tax the rich more, but can't stand when the tables are turned and somebody says to tax the poor more, that isn't hypocrisy to argue against it.

Please explain, in detail, your method for getting blood from turnips!

 

[Contessa_Sharra]

And the wealthy are a lot less wealthy today than 2 years ago, the recession having hurt them more.

So FREAKIN' WHAT!!!!! I care because?

 

[Care4all]

the top 1%, effective income tax rate paid was 19%, with an average income of $1.5 million a year according to the graph...is 19% really too much to be taxed?

the average HOUSEHOLD in the bottom 20% earned $15,900 GROSS in a year....there is no money that they have earned that can be taxed....

they are already taxed payroll taxes, gas taxes/excise taxes, taxes on whatever they buy with the corporate taxes of businesses being passed on to the price of the product, liquor taxes, cigarette taxes etc....and if they own a home they pay for 90% of the cost of their local schools and if they pay rent, this goes towards the property taxes for schools, sales taxes by the state on products they also pay which covers local gvt costs...

NO ONE, absolutely NO ONE gets away tax free in this country....no one!

as said, you can not get blood out of a turnip...

 

[REVxERIK]

unless you've been poor or are poor you have no idea what you're talking about

 

[The Rabbi]

unless you've been poor or are poor you have no idea what you're talking about

WTF?? Another example of the politics of personal meaning.
You can't talk about the presidency unless you've been the president.
You can't talk about the media unless you've worked in the media.
You can't critique a meal without having trained as a chef.

It's nonsense.

 

[Contumacious]

unless you've been poor or are poor you have no idea what you're talking about

Unless you work 6 days a week - unless you have to work until July to pay for the welfare/warfare state , you have no idea what you 're talking about.


.

 

[Care4all]

unless you've been poor or are poor you have no idea what you're talking about

Unless you work 6 days a week - unless you have to work until July to pay for the welfare/warfare state , you have no idea what you 're talking about.


.

If the very wealthiest making on average $1,500,000 a year end up paying 19% of their earning in income tax...then HOW COULD THEY BE WORKING UNTIL JULY to pay their income tax....they would not even be working through the month of February to pay their income tax?

These EXAGGERATIONS of the TRUTH don't help with any honest discussion that we could have on this...

The effective income tax rate of the very wealthiest is 19%....

the CBO link posted earlier in this thread SHOWS SUCH.

 

[JohnStOnge]

Yeah, you're right, the top 20% paid 69% of the taxes, but the top 10% own more wealth than the bottom 90% combined, they should be paying MORE than 90% of the taxes, they aren't taxed enough, the bottom 90% is taxed too much, and that includes 50% of your 20%

.

Why do you say that? Why should one person have to pay more for running this country than another because they own more wealth or make more money?

Did you ever have a room mate when you were in college or something? If so, did y'all sit down and see who had more wealth and/or income and pro-rate each of your shares of the rent? Or did you just split the rent?

When you go to buy a loaf of bread in the store, do they ask you how much wealth and/or income you have then charge you more or less for that loaf of bread than they would charge somebody else based on that?

The premise that someone who has more wealth should pay more of a share of what it costs to sustain what government spends in this country is totally unsubstantiated.

 

[alan1]

" I am for doing good to the poor, but I differ in opinion of the means. I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it."
-- Benjamin Franklin, November 1776

Just maybe, if the poor were taxed more heavily than the wealthy, it would encourage them to better their position in life so that they could avoid paying so much in taxes.
The government frequently taxes things to discourage it. Things like tobacco and alcohol come to mind. The cap and trade will be a tax to discourage certain types of energy usage the government doesn't want.

Good post. It's Much akin to "Give a man a fish and he eats for a day. Teach a man to fish, and he eats for a lifetime..."

You don't teach people how to earn more money by fucking taking it away! This is what training and education is for!!!

The OP is a horrible post. It sucks. It is fucking lunacy!

Interesting that you would call it "lunacy", after posting this,

Great, punish the strapped by making them more so, at the benefit of those of means. I say we should tax those below the poverty line at 120 percent of their income, that way this will encourage them burger-flippers to mug people to make ends meet. The surplus can go to tax credits for those making over 10 million.

That'd be a riot.

A 120% tax rate? Yeah, that's what I said, almost exactly.
Oh wait, it was nothing like what I said, you just took it to an extreme beyond any sense of reality. Must be your clarity of thought, or rather lack of.

 

[Sidestreamer]

120, 60, taxing a higher percentage than the top bracket for making below the poverty level... either way you're leaving them with far less to save for the things that would ultimately get them out of that situation such as education. And it's a position that can't be taken seriously.

 

[Sidestreamer]

I think everybody should be taxed the same way - rich or poor. A poor man is just as much of an American as a rich man. Only difference is one has some money and the other has little. So why should the rich man pull the wagon alone? Pony up folks. We should have a flat tax in the US where everybody pays the same taxes. If we did this, at least half of the IRS deadbeats could be fired and save the government loads of cash. Then everybody would be being treated equally.

Unfortunately fairness isn't relevant when the tax burden on the bottom keeps them from affording basic necessities like housing, food and as-needed health care. Add the crime that will happen when they get desperate and you're just choosing whether your tax dollars are wasted on studying panda bears or on investigating robberies and homicides that wouldn't have happened if things were more stable.

Show me the working person who cannot afford basic necessities. Most people at that end pay no income taxes at all. Typically they get more in gov't benefits than any tax they pay.
Your point is based on feelings more than facts.

I don't personally know any real-life examples so I can't. I can say however that more and more people are leaving their parents' house at a later age, even though they are working.

 

[The Rabbi]

OK
And that proves, what? People get roomates all the time when they have trouble paying the rent. No one said a job was a guarantee of one's own dwelling or anything else. But their basic needs are still met.

 

[Care4all]

OK
And that proves, what? People get roomates all the time when they have trouble paying the rent. No one said a job was a guarantee of one's own dwelling or anything else. But their basic needs are still met.

do you pay taxes on the first 15k that you make?

NO

so why should they?

why should YOU not pay taxes on your first 15k earned, while you charge these other people with paying taxes on their first 15k earned?

you call that just, or fair?

you put SHAME to your name RABBI.... why would you choose such a userid handle?

care