Ph334 the socialism 
Really, I have no problem with it, even if it's not my country. If the rich and corporate america (especially) were paying even close to an equivalent of what the average joe does, I'd be far happier with things.
-- Jack
Artists and engineers create wealth, lawyers and politicians redistribute it.
Really, I have no problem with it, even if it's not my country. If the rich and corporate america (especially) were paying even close to an equivalent of what the average joe does, I'd be far happier with things.
-- Jack
Artists and engineers create wealth, lawyers and politicians redistribute it.
Clark doesn't scare me because he doesn't stand a chance. Hillary, however, scares the sh!t out of me.
Ya, and thats just Federal Income, lets not forget state income and social security why are you at it.
HeroOfPellinor
Lifer
- Dec 27, 2001
- 11,272
- 1
- 0
Originally posted by: Wuffsunie
Ph334 the socialism
Really, I have no problem with it, even if it's not my country. If the rich and corporate america (especially) were paying even close to an equivalent of what the average joe does, I'd be far happier with things.
-- Jack
Artists and engineers create wealth, lawyers and politicians redistribute it.
I don't know what country you're from, but your math sucks.
SagaLore
Elite Member
- Dec 18, 2001
- 24,037
- 21
- 81
Wrong. Across the board tax cuts stimulate a middle income class. Employers have more money to pay the employees, and the employees get to keep more of their paycheck. By wiping out taxes up to a higher range within the lower income class, you're just widening the lower income class. Once people reach the line between non-tax and skyrocketed-taxes, they're either going to work that extra for nothing or intentionally fall back to stay under. Less people are going to strive for the high income class. The high income class might be hurt to the point that their business fails, or they will move the entire business to another country. Or their business will simply not grow.
It has been said over and over - we need a flat percentage tax. It is the most fair tax possible. If you're only making 20k a year, and you pay 10% tax, then you pay 2k in taxes. If you're making 500k a year, and you pay 10% tax, then you pay 50k in taxes. The person making 20k is paying less taxes than the person making 500k, but proportionally. When you take the increasing taxes out of the picture, it is a level playing field for all laborers. The more effort you put into working, the more you rise in the ranks, the more you get paid, no penalties.
Oh and about the unemployment - the person getting the unemployment compensation check isn't the one getting taxes. The people paying into the unemployment compensation fund are getting taxed. UC should be privatized into Unemployment Insurance that people can elect to put a small percentage of their check into. Then we can avoid the inefficient beurocracy of the government taxing their own social program.
Lets see...
1) I have an education.
2) I do not have the victim mentality.
3) I have not made "poor" decisions. (I have made some bad ones, but not as a habit.)
4) I do not care if society feels sorry for me or not.
And I make... About $25,000 a year.
And guess what? This is almost 100% more than I made last year. (Which is about 50% more than I have ever made in a year.)
So, I guess it is all my fault then?
So when I get my paycheck, and I have 20% taken out just in Federal Taxes alone I shouldn't get upset?
Let's face it. You will not agree with me, and I sure as hell won't agree with you. But the system as is, isn't worth a damn. Something needs to be done. If not something like Clark's proposal, then you suggest something better.
SagaLore
Elite Member
- Dec 18, 2001
- 24,037
- 21
- 81
Originally posted by: EagleKeeper
Originally posted by: Skoorb
If I want to make $50k/year and have 4 children it's my god given right for rich people to pay for it
Better get Mrs Skoorb's approval :evil:
who said MrsSkoorb had to be the mom? :Q
:evil:
Gee, my parents only pay about 50% of their income to the government. What's 5% more, they're LOADED!!
I still think flat tax is the way to go. That and eliminate waste in the government.
I still think flat tax is the way to go. That and eliminate waste in the government.
Vic
Elite Member
- Jun 12, 2001
- 50,415
- 14,305
- 136
Hey, well at least you're not the hyprocrite I thought you were.
Alternative solution? It's not the government's business to redistribute wealth. And every attempt that government has made to do so has only made things worse. In order to get ahead, the middle class needs tax cuts and more incentives and rewards for being successful. And Clark's system would provide less incentives and rewards..
When success is penalized (as Clark's proposal would do), then people have less reason to be successful. Even more than that, some people don't even want to. That means less tax revenue for the government, not more. Of course, when that happens the government will want to continue upon the same path and make the problem even worse.
As we are already well into this problem, that is where we are already at. It is the current progressive tax structure that is widening the gap between rich and poor more than anything else.
Idealistic college kids think that everyone wants to be successful merely for the sake of being successful. They don't realize that, once you're out in the real world, success takes hard work and long hours. Under a highly progressive tax system, why would anyone want to work harder to net less?
My biggest complain about socialism is that, when it fails as it always does, the proponents of socialism always try to use that failure as an excuse for even more socialism. The time has come to draw the line.
Anyway, I think Sagalore already said it best. The time has come for the flat tax and removal of all deductions. You wanna see the rich squirm? Propose that. Because that would really level the playing field for everyone, especially the struggling middle class.
Your mortgage payment is way, way off. My mortgage payment is less than your $1500/month and I bought a substantially more expensive home July '03.
~AJ
I used to think Al Sharpton was the Democrat party personified, but now I've changed my mind. Clark now wears that mantle.
OK, so my math was inaccurate. It's $900/mo, plus homeowners insurance, plus homeowners assoc. fees, `plus mortage insurance (assuming you don't have 20% down), plus property tax. It's well over $1000/mo. I wouldn't know, because at $50K/yr, I can't afford to buy a house. So I throw money away to rent every month. And people want to raise my taxes. Sheesh.
And if you're educated and making $25K, I also would have to question your field and where you're living. There's no reason a college grad should make less than $30K.
Originally posted by: amnesiac
Gee, my parents only pay about 50% of their income to the government. What's 5% more, they're LOADED!!
I still think flat tax is the way to go. That and eliminate waste in the government.
I agree. What was Steve Forbes' (I think it was him) flat tax plan? First $30, 000.00 is tax free, after that a flat tax of 17%? The rich would still pay more in taxes, since they have more money to pay the 17% on. I am not one of those that believes the wealthy ought to be penalized simply because they have more money.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 9K
-
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 7K
-
Facebook
Twitter