4 ways the rich will pay more this tax season

[dmcowen674]

2-21-2014

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/4-ways-rich-pay-more-122600766.html


4 ways the rich will pay more this tax season



Thanks to the fiscal cliff deal and the Affordable Care Act, the top 1% of taxpayers - and many in the top 3% as well - will have to pay a bigger tax bill come April 15.


Who'll be hit hardest? Those who make 7-figures with substantial wage and investment income.

Households with incomes over $1 million could pay about $170,000 more on average than they did in tax year 2012, according to estimates from the Tax Policy Center.


Those making between $500,000 and $1 million would likely pay an average of $15,000 more.

Plenty of taxpayers with incomes between $200,000 and $500,000 also could be affected by some of the changes

 

[dmcowen674]

Awesome.

Hope all the rich braggards in here got nailed

 

[MagickMan]

I'm not on board with the ACA and won't be, "the rich" have HSAs. What can they do about it? Not a damned thing. Also, I make comparatively very little in personal "income", including cap gains, so overall I'm going to pay another 1.5-2%. That's not too bad.

 

[dmcowen674]

so overall I'm going to pay another 1.5-2%.

Obama got cha :thumbsup::biggrin:

 

[Newell Steamer]

This just means they will find another money manager to look for more loop holes for them to continue dodging taxes.

 

[BUnit1701]

The real money problem isn't individuals acquiring too much, its corporations like Apple sitting on like half a trillion, GE and others keeping profits offshore.

 

[z1ggy]

The real money problem isn't individuals acquiring too much, its corporations like Apple sitting on like half a trillion, GE and others keeping profits offshore.

Ding ding ding

 

[BoberFett]

It's too bad the state of Georgia didn't lock this dipshit up for life.

 

[theeedude]

The real money problem isn't individuals acquiring too much, its corporations like Apple sitting on like half a trillion, GE and others keeping profits offshore.

Two sides of same coin. More wealth concentration at the top where it's most likely to be saved, as opposed to middle class and low income workers who are most likely to spend it, means less consumer demand and less interest by corporations in investing to meet that demand.

 

[BoberFett]

Two sides of same coin. More wealth concentration at the top where it's most likely to be saved, as opposed to middle class and low income workers who are most likely to spend it, means less consumer demand and less interest by corporations in investing to meet that demand.

Do you ever stop to think about what you're actually saying?

You're upset that money is concentrated at the top, because those people don't spend their money.

You claim that middle and lower class people would spend that money if they had it, and drive the economy. Except that if they spend it, they still don't have any wealth.

All you're advocating is for the middle class to buy more stuff. Not for them to actually have more wealth. You're not advocating any change, just more consumerism.

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

Do you ever stop to think about what you're actually saying?

You're upset that money is concentrated at the top, because those people don't spend their money.

You claim that middle and lower class people would spend that money if they had it, and drive the economy. Except that if they spend it, they still don't have any wealth.

All you're advocating is for the middle class to buy more stuff. Not for them to actually have more wealth. You're not advocating any change, just more consumerism.

...which is part of the reason we are in this predicament of people bitching that they have an iPhone 4 and can't afford the new iPhone 5.

NO MOM FUCK YOU I DESERVE THE LATEST IPHONE I CANT STAND THIS OLD SLOW PIECE OF SHIT IPHONE 4!

 

[Atomic Playboy]

Do you ever stop to think about what you're actually saying?

You're upset that money is concentrated at the top, because those people don't spend their money.

You claim that middle and lower class people would spend that money if they had it, and drive the economy. Except that if they spend it, they still don't have any wealth.

All you're advocating is for the middle class to buy more stuff. Not for them to actually have more wealth. You're not advocating any change, just more consumerism.

I think you've hit upon a brilliant solution. Everyone knows that a concentration of wealth is problematic, but we don't want to just transfer wealth from the rich to the poor; that's communism, by God, and we won't stand for that. Instead of wealth transfer, let's have item transfer. Once a year the wealthy go out and buy new flatscreen TVs and exotic cars and industrial vats of yacht polish (or whatever they buy) and they give all their old shit to poor people. They can keep the new stuff, they've earned it. But they just flat-out donate all their "slightly used rich guy stuff" to the local poors. Maybe they buy a few dozen flatscreens, since there's a whole hell of a lot more poor people than rich, and you wouldn't want to leave anybody out. It spurs economic growth, it ensures that poor people get shiny things to keep them happy and it avoids the nonsense of "wealth transfer."

"What did you get on National 'the billionaire down the block refurnishes your neighborhood' Day?"
"A sectional couch that's slightly larger than my living room, master bedroom and kitchen combined, and a charger for an electric vehicle I don't own."
"All I got was this painting of a soup can. This year's haul really sucked."

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

I think you've hit upon a brilliant solution. Everyone knows that a concentration of wealth is problematic, but we don't want to just transfer wealth from the rich to the poor; that's communism, by God, and we won't stand for that. Instead of wealth transfer, let's have item transfer. Once a year the wealthy go out and buy new flatscreen TVs and exotic cars and industrial vats of yacht polish (or whatever they buy) and they give all their old shit to poor people. They can keep the new stuff, they've earned it. But they just flat-out donate all their "slightly used rich guy stuff" to the local poors. Maybe they buy a few dozen flatscreens, since there's a whole hell of a lot more poor people than rich, and you wouldn't want to leave anybody out. It spurs economic growth, it ensures that poor people get shiny things to keep them happy and it avoids the nonsense of "wealth transfer."

"What did you get on National 'the billionaire down the block refurnishes your neighborhood' Day?"
"A sectional couch that's slightly larger than my living room, master bedroom and kitchen combined, and a charger for an electric vehicle I don't own."
"All I got was this painting of a soup can. This year's haul really sucked."

People like you need help. By buying said items they ARE transferring their wealth. It's called demand. Jobs are what answers to demand. Jobs are how people get paid. Someone has to make the parts for that TV, someone has to make the schematics for that TV, someone has to make the TV from the parts, someone has to load the TV's onto a truck, someone has to transfer the TV's on the truck, someone has to unload those TV's from the truck, someone has to market for that TV (salesman), and finally, someone has to actually SELL that TV (clerk/check-out line).

Need some more help on basic economics? Or do you think the only way to "Transfer wealth" is by directly handing cash/items over to poor people? Certain people are destined to stay in one place. It's quite obvious people with your train of thought is among that group.

 

[Atomic Playboy]

People like you need help.

People like you need help too. Here's a link that might help.

 

[Matt1970]

Two sides of same coin. More wealth concentration at the top where it's most likely to be saved, as opposed to middle class and low income workers who are most likely to spend it, means less consumer demand and less interest by corporations in investing to meet that demand.

Yep, spend it on cheap imported crap and then China gets it.

 

[Zaap]

People like you need help. By buying said items they ARE transferring their wealth. It's called demand. Jobs are what answers to demand. Jobs are how people get paid. Someone has to make the parts for that TV, someone has to make the schematics for that TV, someone has to make the TV from the parts, someone has to load the TV's onto a truck, someone has to transfer the TV's on the truck, someone has to unload those TV's from the truck, someone has to market for that TV (salesman), and finally, someone has to actually SELL that TV (clerk/check-out line).

Need some more help on basic economics? Or do you think the only way to "Transfer wealth" is by directly handing cash/items over to poor people? Certain people are destined to stay in one place. It's quite obvious people with your train of thought is among that group.

Wow. Total sarcasm meter failure. Get that looked at ASAP.

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

People like you need help too. Here's a link that might help.

Sarcasm meter must indeed be broken, sounds awfully like you're trying to be sarcastic for the other side

 

[Generator]

People like Mitt Romney would cut the throats of his parents to avoid the extra 4% tax with Obamacare. Its about time the people are recapturing some of the ill-gotten gain by these filthy rich swine.

 

[Doppel]

OP takes joy in the pain of others, so...I got back over $5k this year. I overpay because I love that green in February. Also bought my fifth new car in four years last week. OP jelly?

 

[BoberFett]

People like Mitt Romney would cut the throats of his parents to avoid the extra 4% tax with Obamacare. Its about time the people are recapturing some of the ill-gotten gain by these filthy rich swine.

Why wait comrade! Start the revolution now! Take up arms against he capitalist pigs!

Seriously, I want to see you on the news. I'd enjoy watching the results.

 

[mect]

Do you ever stop to think about what you're actually saying?

You're upset that money is concentrated at the top, because those people don't spend their money.

You claim that middle and lower class people would spend that money if they had it, and drive the economy. Except that if they spend it, they still don't have any wealth.

All you're advocating is for the middle class to buy more stuff. Not for them to actually have more wealth. You're not advocating any change, just more consumerism.

I think it depends on how consumption changes. Do people just consume more, or do they consume similar amounts, but consume higher quality goods that require more man hours. If it is the former, then I agree, we accomplish little. If it is the latter, then we help create US jobs. This in turn further improves our economy, an people are further enabled to buy high quality goods. Overall, this could potentially even lead to a net decrease in consumption because the products people buy have longer lifespans.

People earn more money, so they eat out at a nicer restaurant instead of McDonalds. This drives up demand for nicer restaurants, and so we get more of those and less McDonalds. As a result, more people are working at these more expensive establishments which in turn pay employees more money. These employees now have more money, and also are able to now buy higher quality goods.

I think you are quite right, we do not need an increase in consumption in the US. However, I do think an increase in the consumption of quality products would be very good for both the economy and the environment.

 

[dmcowen674]

It's too bad the state of Georgia didn't lock this dipshit up for life.

Obama must have got you too :thumbsup: :biggrin:

 

[BoberFett]

Obama must have got you too :thumbsup: :biggrin:

Keep on derpin', moron.

 

[MagickMan]

Obama got cha :thumbsup::biggrin:

Troll-olol-lol-lol. There's your ignorance again, the temporary tax breaks lapsed, like they were supposed to. That's the only "extra" I'm paying. So, the only thing Obama did was leave the damned thing alone.

 

[MagickMan]

People like Mitt Romney would cut the throats of his parents to avoid the extra 4% tax with Obamacare. Its about time the people are recapturing some of the ill-gotten gain by these filthy rich swine.

You missed where I explained they won't be involved with Obummercare, it appears.