Does this scare the hell out of anyone else?

[Armyranger4ever]

Originally posted by: Citrix
as somebody else said, why should somebody who has worked hard to make a lot of money and have the government come and take a nasty chunk of it away. THis is one reason i hate the Dems, if they had it their way we would the the USSA (United Socialist States of America)


The only fair tax system is a flat tax.

Citrix, spread the stupidity around...the Republicans would have us live in a state of poverty if we made under a million dollars! Tax credit for those making $200K when an unemployed slub is taxed???!?!? Ridiculous!Tax credits for income above 500K, etc, etc....why?!?!?! As someone said, there is no longer a middle class. The poverty level continues to rise in this country while the fat cats get fatter.

A flat tax would not work as it is not proportional to income. 30% @100K hurts a lot mre than at 1mil.

 

[DT4K]

Originally posted by: Armyranger4ever

Originally posted by: Citrix
as somebody else said, why should somebody who has worked hard to make a lot of money and have the government come and take a nasty chunk of it away. THis is one reason i hate the Dems, if they had it their way we would the the USSA (United Socialist States of America)


The only fair tax system is a flat tax.

Citrix, spread the stupidity around...the Republicans would have us live in a state of poverty if we made under a million dollars! Tax credit for those making $200K when an unemployed slub is taxed???!?!? Ridiculous!Tax credits for income above 500K, etc, etc....why?!?!?! As someone said, there is no longer a middle class. The poverty level continues to rise in this country while the fat cats get fatter.

A flat tax would not work as it is not proportional to income. 30% @100K hurts a lot mre than at 1mil.

Of course it is proportional. The amount you pay is directly proportional to the amount you make. That is the whole point of a flat tax.

So what if 30% hurts more at 100k than at 1 million.
That still means the guy making 100k is paying 30k to support the government while the guy making a million is paying 300K a year!!
HOW THE FVCK IS THAT NOT FAIR TO THE GUY ONLY PAYING 1/10TH AS MUCH FOR THE SAME LEVEL OF SERVICES?

Of course there is still a middle class. I'm in it and so is virtually everyone I know.
The majority of the country is part of the middle class. We make enough to support ourselves and our families but we don't have a lot of extra money. That is what the middle class is and that is what the vast majority of people in this country fall under.

I am so fvcking sick of you people who want everyone else to pay your way just because they can afford to.
Like I said, you should be thanking god that there are rich people in this country.
Because if you had to pay your actual fair share for the government services we all benefit from, you would be paying a hell of a lot more. But luckily, there are plenty of people out there who pay a million dollars a year so you don't have to. And the ironic thing is they don't even need the government services nearly as much as those who pay nothing for them.

So STFU with your whining.

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: Shanti

Originally posted by: Armyranger4ever

Originally posted by: Citrix
as somebody else said, why should somebody who has worked hard to make a lot of money and have the government come and take a nasty chunk of it away. THis is one reason i hate the Dems, if they had it their way we would the the USSA (United Socialist States of America)


The only fair tax system is a flat tax.

Citrix, spread the stupidity around...the Republicans would have us live in a state of poverty if we made under a million dollars! Tax credit for those making $200K when an unemployed slub is taxed???!?!? Ridiculous!Tax credits for income above 500K, etc, etc....why?!?!?! As someone said, there is no longer a middle class. The poverty level continues to rise in this country while the fat cats get fatter.

A flat tax would not work as it is not proportional to income. 30% @100K hurts a lot mre than at 1mil.

Of course it is proportional. The amount you pay is directly proportional to the amount you make. That is the whole point of a flat tax.

So what if 30% hurts more at 100k than at 1 million.
That still means the guy making 100k is paying 30k to support the government while the guy making a million is paying 300K a year!!
HOW THE FVCK IS THAT NOT FAIR TO THE GUY ONLY PAYING 1/10TH AS MUCH FOR THE SAME LEVEL OF SERVICES?

Of course there is still a middle class. I'm in it and so is virtually everyone I know.
The majority of the country is part of the middle class. We make enough to support ourselves and our families but we don't have a lot of extra money. That is what the middle class is and that is what the vast majority of people in this country fall under.

I am so fvcking sick of you people who want everyone else to pay your way just because they can afford to.
Like I said, you should be thanking god that there are rich people in this country.
Because if you had to pay your actual fair share for the government services we all benefit from, you would be paying a hell of a lot more. But luckily, there are plenty of people out there who pay a million dollars a year so you don't have to. And the ironic thing is they don't even need the government services nearly as much as those who pay nothing for them.

So STFU with your whining.

The problem with a Flat Tax, if it is applied from $0-$n, is that the lower the Income, the more repressive is the Tax. So, while it seems "fair" on paper, it certainly wouldn't be good for those whose Tax Burden affects their ability to eat, support a family, or ever own anything more than the shirt on their back. If you have a decent Social Safety Net these can be counteracted, or you could decrease the Tax Burden for people below a certain Income negating some of the burden. It's a trade off.

 

[DT4K]

Originally posted by: sandorski

Originally posted by: Shanti

Originally posted by: Armyranger4ever

Originally posted by: Citrix
as somebody else said, why should somebody who has worked hard to make a lot of money and have the government come and take a nasty chunk of it away. THis is one reason i hate the Dems, if they had it their way we would the the USSA (United Socialist States of America)


The only fair tax system is a flat tax.

Citrix, spread the stupidity around...the Republicans would have us live in a state of poverty if we made under a million dollars! Tax credit for those making $200K when an unemployed slub is taxed???!?!? Ridiculous!Tax credits for income above 500K, etc, etc....why?!?!?! As someone said, there is no longer a middle class. The poverty level continues to rise in this country while the fat cats get fatter.

A flat tax would not work as it is not proportional to income. 30% @100K hurts a lot mre than at 1mil.

Of course it is proportional. The amount you pay is directly proportional to the amount you make. That is the whole point of a flat tax.

So what if 30% hurts more at 100k than at 1 million.
That still means the guy making 100k is paying 30k to support the government while the guy making a million is paying 300K a year!!
HOW THE FVCK IS THAT NOT FAIR TO THE GUY ONLY PAYING 1/10TH AS MUCH FOR THE SAME LEVEL OF SERVICES?

Of course there is still a middle class. I'm in it and so is virtually everyone I know.
The majority of the country is part of the middle class. We make enough to support ourselves and our families but we don't have a lot of extra money. That is what the middle class is and that is what the vast majority of people in this country fall under.

I am so fvcking sick of you people who want everyone else to pay your way just because they can afford to.
Like I said, you should be thanking god that there are rich people in this country.
Because if you had to pay your actual fair share for the government services we all benefit from, you would be paying a hell of a lot more. But luckily, there are plenty of people out there who pay a million dollars a year so you don't have to. And the ironic thing is they don't even need the government services nearly as much as those who pay nothing for them.

So STFU with your whining.

The problem with a Flat Tax, if it is applied from $0-$n, is that the lower the Income, the more repressive is the Tax. So, while it seems "fair" on paper, it certainly wouldn't be good for those whose Tax Burden affects their ability to eat, support a family, or ever own anything more than the shirt on their back. If you have a decent Social Safety Net these can be counteracted, or you could decrease the Tax Burden for people below a certain Income negating some of the burden. It's a trade off.

I believe that as a civilized society, we have an obligation to not let our fellow citizens die from lack of food, shelter, or medicine. But I don't believe that obligation extends to making sure they have anything more than enough to survive and be healthy. I don't believe it is anyone else's responsibility to make sure someone owns "more than the shirt on their back".

I understand that it would be harder on lower income people. But I also believe that it would still be fair because these people would still not be required to contribute their share.

I'm not sure if it would be best to have a certain amount that is tax free or not. I wouldn't necessarily be opposed to some kind of system where maybe the first 15k is tax free. As long as someone who made 100k didn't have to pay taxes on that first 15k, I would be OK with that. What I am opposed to is the current system where the percentage paid goes up as the amount earned goes up.
I'm fine with a system where someone who makes twice as much money pays twice as much in taxes.
I just don't like a system where someone who makes twice as much pays four times as much in taxes.

 

[dfi]

What really scares me is how little tax dollars this would generate. I'm assuming a large majority of parents make less than 100k, and a high percentage make less than 50k. We'll have to start taking the rich 1000000000%, or even 1000000000000000%!

dfi

 

[DerwenArtos12]

OMG... A Largely Socialist President Nominee!!!

Thank God.

 

[lifeguard1999]

Getting back to the original point of this thread..... what do people think about Wes Clark's tax plan?

Whether Clark gets elected, or Bush gets elected, or whoever gets elected, no one is ever going to do anything substantial about the tax code. The government wields too much power in a tax code that spans hundreds of thousands of pages. Does anyone really think that the government is going to give up that power? Clark, if elected, would be blocked from implementing his tax code. Heck, I doubt he would even propose it to Congress knowing that it is DOA.

The same problem exists with the Social Security mess. The government wields too much power through it and it will never be fixed.

That being said, I am not rich but I am working my way towards it. Becoming rich is simple. A black 88 year old clothes washer left $150,000 to the University of Southern Mississippi in 1996. Do you ever think she made $30,000 a year? Getting rich is both easy and hard. It is as easy as spending less than you make, and as hard as not buying that new HDTV when you don't have the money, but do have the credit card. As for me, I live below my means, and I know the loopholes to reduce my taxes now (401K, etc.) and in the future (Roth IRA, etc.).

 

[Compudork]

..

 

[Genesys]

Originally posted by: Rob9874

Originally posted by: ThaPerculator

Because the dude that physically busts his arse all day will never see $100k....

Sounds like good incentive to get an education. I'm sick of the victim mentality that says, I'm going to choose to make poor decisions in life so I have to work hard for no pay, and I want society to feel sorry for me.

yeah, im tired of the victim mentality myself, that and political correctness.

 

[DOSfan]

Shanti:

What I got from your comments was not just that you were pissed, but that you thought it was unfair that you have to pay the amount of taxes you do. That is what I took issue with. If what you actually meant was that you were pissed but still thought it was fair, then I don't really understand why you would be pissed and talking about an angry mob.

When it comes to taxes, or anything political/government controlled, what I think is fair, or unfair is a moot point.

You may ask why?

1)Because I do not have the money, nor do I belong to the wealth class that has the money, to put the pressure on the houses in order to get what I want.
2)Fairness is purely subjective. If I am not getting the best side of the tax deal, then natural I will feel that is unfair. It is human nature, and an American's prerogative.

But if that is not enough, then how about this?

We can not look at taxes as fair or unfair. Why?

We have to pay them. No question, no choice, no option. Unless you are getting paid under the table, you are paying taxes. That inherently makes the tax system unfair.

We need to think of taxes as reasonable, or unreasonable.

There are 3 basic tax plans:

1)Flat amount (everyone pays $x)
2)Flat rate (everyone pays x%)
3)Progressive (as you make more money, you pay more of a percentage)

Now these are just simplified descriptions for the benefit of anyone who is reading this and is unaware of the terms. And there are nearly infinite amounts of variations on these plans, but that is a little too complicated to get into here.

Now, I am no economist, but let me try and look at each of these plans in an effort to analyze if they are fair, or not.

The Flat Amount:

At a cursory glance, this seems the most fair. The government needs x dollars. The country has y people. Therefor everyone must pay x/y dollars. But that does not work.

First, there are those that do not have a taxable income. That throws a monkeywrench into that plan right there. But lets go on under the assumption that this problem will be handled appropriately.

Next, let us assume that everyone needs to pay $12,000. I have seen that thrown around as a good amount to use. (At least as an example.) Now according to the statistics I am using, 20% of Americans make less than $10,000 taxable income. Now that is a vague category. Because there are those that do not work, and those that live off of non taxable incomes.... But some percentage of Americans, between 0% and 25%, do not make enough money to even pay their taxes.

What do we do then? Make those exempt? But that would not be fair.

No, the only answer would be to adjust the minimum pay scale to ensure that anyone who works gets at least enough money to pay their taxes plus about $5,000. You can live on 5K a year (after taxes), it isn't pretty, but it can be done.

But that is not fair. You have increased the poor's pay by y%, so you should increase everyones pay by y%. Right? No that will not work. And even if it does, then you have the problem with the middle, upper-middle class business owners that everyone claims to be concerned about. Because you have just forced them to pay their workforce up to 3x the amount they were doing so previously.

No, no..... This plan is in no way fair, reasonable, or even feasible. At least not in the short run. If you can get the government, or wealthy individuals ? or both, to subsidize the suffering middle to lower class people, it just might work in the long run. But in realistic terms this will just not work.

Now lets look at the progressive plan:

You have stated how this plan would be received.

(taken out of context) but if you believe you should have to pay less tax while the rich pay even more,

That is basically how it would be felt. ?Why should I have to pay more money than he does??

No, that is not fair.

Slightly less violently opposed by the rich, and ultra rich, is the flat rate. But that still has the problem with billionaire x is paying more money per year than poor man y.

No, that can not be fair.

So, the real problem is that taxes can not be looked at as fair or not.

So we must look at them in terms of reasonability.

Is it reasonable to have the rich pay more money per year than the poor? Yes. It is. Is it fair? Hardly. (Especially if you are the rich.)

But let us look more closely at progressive, and flat rate.

Let us see which might be more reasonable. (Disclaimer: I am looking at these numbers as I write them. I have not figured out the outcome before hand.)

According to the chart at the bottom of this page, 20% of the country make less than 10K, 20% make 10K to 20K, 20% make from 20K to 35K, 20% make from 35K to 55K, and finally15% make 55K to 95K, 4% make from 95K to 205K, and 1% make more than 205K.

I have simplified a lot, so bear with me.

So if we make a chart like this:

1| 1000000
2| 205000
3| 150000
4| 80000
5| 55000
6| 40000
7| 35000
8| 25000
9| 10000
10| 0

To represent a small cross section of the populous, let us see what each plan might provide.

Flat rate of, say, 10%.

100000 + 20500 + 15000 + 8000 + 5500 + 4000 + 3500 + 2500 + 1000 + 0 = 160000

And lets look at a progressive plan stating a 5% and working up to 50%.

500000 + 92250 + 60000 + 28000 + 16500 + 10000 + 7000 + 3750 + 1000 + 0 = 703650

The progressive plan would yield more revenue. Is it fair? Hardly. It it reasonable? Perhaps.

Naturally, I have just thrown together a very simplistic model. And if there are different percentage used, that would yield different results...

But it does shed some light into what is fair, and reasonable, and what is not.

So, in conclusion I still do not know how to fix it.

But I have given it much thought, as you can hopefully see.

 

[bsmithy]

Originally posted by: slag
it sucks for those wealthy people who have worked hard for their money, but it helps redistribute wealth and will aid in recreating the middle income class. As it is, we are spiraling towards a lower income class and an upper income class, with middle income generally dropping to lower income.

tax breaks for those who are having a hard time making ends meet seems to make sense to me.

Tell me this. Why is unemployment taxed? Obviously you need all the money you can get since you are unemployed so why can the govt tax this money? Hey, you are out of a job, lets tax you!!!

if they earn 12 times more than me does that mean they work 12 times harder?

 

[SagaLore]

Originally posted by: bsmithy

Originally posted by: slag
it sucks for those wealthy people who have worked hard for their money, but it helps redistribute wealth and will aid in recreating the middle income class. As it is, we are spiraling towards a lower income class and an upper income class, with middle income generally dropping to lower income.

tax breaks for those who are having a hard time making ends meet seems to make sense to me.

Tell me this. Why is unemployment taxed? Obviously you need all the money you can get since you are unemployed so why can the govt tax this money? Hey, you are out of a job, lets tax you!!!

if they earn 12 times more than me does that mean they work 12 times harder?

no just 12 times smarter

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: Genesys

Originally posted by: Rob9874

Originally posted by: ThaPerculator

Because the dude that physically busts his arse all day will never see $100k....

Sounds like good incentive to get an education. I'm sick of the victim mentality that says, I'm going to choose to make poor decisions in life so I have to work hard for no pay, and I want society to feel sorry for me.

yeah, im tired of the victim mentality myself, that and political correctness.

Yes, "victim mentality" sucks, especially when it's someone sipping Pina Colladas(sp) by the backyard swimming pool while money is being transferred to their bottom line. That's an exageration for sure, but it's hard to take someone seriously when they claim "victim" while at the same time their life is improving.

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: SagaLore

Originally posted by: bsmithy

Originally posted by: slag
it sucks for those wealthy people who have worked hard for their money, but it helps redistribute wealth and will aid in recreating the middle income class. As it is, we are spiraling towards a lower income class and an upper income class, with middle income generally dropping to lower income.

tax breaks for those who are having a hard time making ends meet seems to make sense to me.

Tell me this. Why is unemployment taxed? Obviously you need all the money you can get since you are unemployed so why can the govt tax this money? Hey, you are out of a job, lets tax you!!!

if they earn 12 times more than me does that mean they work 12 times harder?

no just 12 times smarter

no, they just made 12x more. It doesn't imply anything more than that. Whether its "harder, "smarter", "luckier", "more timelier", or "better connections" who knows for sure?

 

[nitrousninja]

I am married and, unless something happens in the medical world, my wife won't be making $50k anytime soon. She could, easily, if she weren't ill.

I hope she gets better


Whatever happened to the flat tax?

 

[vi edit]

DOSfan

Christ man...if you put as much effort into bettering your professional life as you do bantering in this thread you'd be making double what you currently do.

Put your energy to good use and quit loathing about your measly pay and do something with yourself.

 

[DOSfan]

Originally posted by: vi_edit
DOSfan

Christ man...if you put as much effort into bettering your professional life as you do bantering in this thread you'd be making double what you currently do.

Put your energy to good use and quit loathing about your measly pay and do something with yourself.

Well, I did not put much energy into this thread.

Most of what I have said comes from feelings welling up over the past 15 years (give or take) that I have been working.

That which I actually think about I do at work. My job is not very mentally challenging.

And who said I loath my pay?

It is the best I have ever had.

It is near the best my imediate family have ever had.

I feel rich. I have money that is not already spent on something. It is a good place to be.

Too bad I feel sorry for myself, and I want society to pity me. And, of course, that I do not have anything remotely resembling an education.... Right?

 

[DT4K]

DOSfan,
I agree that it is silly to talk about whether a tax plan is fair.
But I do think we can strive for the "most fair" plan that is still feasible.
Obviously a flat tax amount would never work.
I've never heard anyone suggest that as a serious option.
I simply think that a flat rate is far "more fair" than the current increasing percentage rate system and I think a flat rate is feasible and practical.

If I misinterpreted your views, sorry.
I don't think I'm the only one that got those same impressions from the tone in your first few posts/rants.

 

[thomsbrain]

Originally posted by: Vic
Pardon me for the typo...

I think you should know by now that my math is better than that.

As for your whole rant... that's all it is. The rant of a little boy who's never worked an honest day in his life. "Gonna be a big man someday..." But, ooh... you see the unfairness out there, and you want to make it right. Good for you. Too bad nobody ever taught you that stealing is wrong.

yeah, you're right, i've never held a job. i'm also secretly the heir to a huge multi-million dollar company, that's why i've never worked an honest day in my life. and i also recently took a vacation to mars. and i never ran my own buisness or supported myself while in school. [/sarcasm]

actually, i did learn that stealing is wrong. that's my entire point: our wealth is stolen from other people (you say potato, i say potawto). but unlike you, i'm a big enough man to admit that. i'm not about to go tossing my cash in the street, either, but i don't live in some fantasy world with blinders on to help me believe that i haven't been taking unfair advantage of my situation in life. i never said i want to make it right, in fact i went out of my way to say that i have no intention of doing anything of the sort. but if you took advantage of someone to get your money, you don't have much moral ground to stand on when someone takes it from you. if you say the government is stealing your money, well that's the pot calling the kettle black.

 

[Ornery]

"Obviously a flat tax amount would never work.
I've never heard anyone suggest that as a serious option."

Forbes Flat Tax Plan


"...that's my entire point: our wealth is stolen from other people..."

Your point is a steaming pile of SH|T, unless you can PROVE IT!

 

[IronOxide]

Steal from the rich and give to the poor Robin Hood style

 

[lifeguard1999]

Well ViperGTS, I agree that you should diversify. However, some companies tie up your 401K in the company's stock. It is easy to see then how one can loose a retirement fortune. 3% of my retirement is forcibly put into company stock. Personally I do not even count that matching money as mine ... just in case the stock goes to $0.00.

I can also throw a rock and hit the EX-Worldcom headquarters from where I live. (I can look at the window and see the lights on right now.) My family lost money when it cooked the books, and fooled even the financial advisors who are suppossed to know better. Fortunately, my family diversified their savings. Still $10,000, $40,000, or whatever number you like is still a lot of money.

 

[FoBoT]

he's a freaking communist

that will kill business in the USA, what incentive will there be to run a business?