President May be in Trouble

[Nova_C]

Seems like you're jealous that the top earners in the US use the tax code to benefit themselves. Why should they pay more if they don't have to?

I think you should send me $50 because I need it more than you and you make more money than me. Not going to? You must hate poor people then for wanting to keep the money that you worked for.

Give me a break.

I pay my taxes without whining like a baby. It pays for socialized health care, socialized education, socialized streets and roads, socialized law enforcement, socialized health and safety (Fire and ambulance and the like). All of which I support without hesitation. My taxes work out to something like %33.

 

[vliberatore]

http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2006/09/jec_releases_to.html

I guess it depends on what you mean by 'fair'.

The bottom 50% make $30k a year or less and pay 3.3% of taxes. At $30k a year I would be living on the street in Yellowknife. In Calgary, I might, might be able to afford a really bad illegal suite in a slum (Or as close as Calgary has to slums). The fact that 50% of Americans make less than this and you expect them to pay more taxes boggles my mind. How are they supposed to feed their families if you demand they have less?

At 30% tax rate (About what I calculate it would take for every to pay the same rate), 50% of Americans would be living on $20,000 a year or less.

That's ridiculous.

Your data is from 2004. Find something relevant.

http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/story/2012-02-09/income-rising/53033322/1

From the end of 2011:

Inflation-adjusted median household income increased 4%, from $49,434 to $51,413

Means that 50% is under $51k, not $30k

Where did I say I expect them to pay more taxes? The tax code is the same for everyone. It's not my fault they fail to utilize it.

As for your "calculation" about what the tax rate need to be, what are your qualifications? You used to work for the IRS before moving north? Your lack of knowledge of how the US government, taxes, and economy work means that you have a lot more to learn before you can build any sort of logical argument.

Stop your bleeding heart and stick to facts.

 

[vliberatore]

I pay my taxes without whining like a baby. It pays for socialized health care, socialized education, socialized streets and roads, socialized law enforcement, socialized health and safety (Fire and ambulance and the like). All of which I support without hesitation. My taxes work out to something like %33.

Cool story bro.

My taxes pay for heath care for citizens (who pay taxes but cannot afford their own health care) and non-citizens (who don't pay taxes), education for both citizens (who pay taxes) and non-citizens (who don't pay taxes), street, roads, law enforcement, health, and safety too.

What's your point?

 

[beautifullywild77]

Tsst likes me and I am poor

 

[tsst]

http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2006/09/jec_releases_to.html

I guess it depends on what you mean by 'fair'.

The bottom 50% make $30k a year or less and pay 3.3% of taxes. At $30k a year I would be living on the street in Yellowknife. In Calgary, I might, might be able to afford a really bad illegal suite in a slum (Or as close as Calgary has to slums). The fact that 50% of Americans make less than this and you expect them to pay more taxes boggles my mind. How are they supposed to feed their families if you demand they have less?

At 30% tax rate (About what I calculate it would take for every to pay the same rate), 50% of Americans would be living on $20,000 a year or less.

That's ridiculous.

I told you exactly what fair is. It has not been 'fair' for a very long time. Call it what it is Mr Obama. Your position has nothing to do with "fair share" it is approx 50% paying for everything for the other 50%. "Fair share" is simply his word play to perpetuate the class/social/race warfare in bolstering his campaign.

I pay my taxes without whining like a baby. It pays for socialized health care, socialized education, socialized streets and roads, socialized law enforcement, socialized health and safety (Fire and ambulance and the like). All of which I support without hesitation. My taxes work out to something like %33.

Here in the US the top 50% pay for ALL of that and much more. Guess I am relegated to continuing to whine like a baby!

 

[tsst]

Tsst likes me and I am poor

I like BW77 very much and she is poor. I don't care much for Obama and he is a millionaire. Go figure guess I am a little confused at who I should like.
:shrugs:
Would everyone send me their yearly income so I can make out my friends list please.
:nope:

 

[beautifullywild77]

LOL Tsst, darling, my yearling income wouldnt be all that much!

 

[Nova_C]

Your data is from 2004. Find something relevant.

http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/story/2012-02-09/income-rising/53033322/1

From the end of 2011:


Means that 50% is under $51k, not $30k

Where did I say I expect them to pay more taxes? The tax code is the same for everyone. It's not my fault they fail to utilize it.

As for your "calculation" about what the tax rate need to be, what are your qualifications? You used to work for the IRS before moving north? Your lack of knowledge of how the US government, taxes, and economy work means that you have a lot more to learn before you can build any sort of logical argument.

Stop your bleeding heart and stick to facts.

Average income for all Americans != what the bottom 50% make.

http://aworldofprogress.com/blog/2011/average-american-makes-near-poverty-wages/

My calculation was not based on qualifications, but just me running some numbers to get an idea. Of course I'm not an expert on American tax law, and I don't claim to be. Are you an expert on American tax law? If so, great, then tell me what should be done. If you're not an expert, then we can continue to debate as equals.

Anyway, my numbers came from the total revenue the US gov't got from taxes divided by the number of tax returns filed. For everyone to pay the same tax rate and for the government to not lose revenue, Most people would see a significant tax increase, especially the most vulnerable.

I think we have a massive disconnect in what we define as 'fair'. I don't consider poor people paying exactly the same money into the system as wealthy as 'fair'. I consider 'fair' to be ensuring a certain minimum quality of life being guaranteed for citizens to the best of our ability.

I am not jealous of wealthy people because I make enough to be in the higher percentile as well. I just think that the taxes I pay are the minimum expected of me to contribute back for all the help I've received over the years in terms of education, infrastructure and the privilege of having educated parents who weren't living in poverty.

 

[vliberatore]

Average income for all Americans != what the bottom 50% make.

http://aworldofprogress.com/blog/2011/average-american-makes-near-poverty-wages/

First, average is generally considered to be the mean. Mean=/=median. Median is generally accepted to be the way to measure income.

Your source is a blog, which lists no sources. Mine is USA Today. While biased, USA Today is considered a reliable source. Blogs are NOT.

My calculation was not based on qualifications, but just me running some numbers to get an idea. Of course I'm not an expert on American tax law, and I don't claim to be. Are you an expert on American tax law? If so, great, then tell me what should be done. If you're not an expert, then we can continue to debate as equals.

Anyway, my numbers came from the total revenue the US gov't got from taxes divided by the number of tax returns filed. For everyone to pay the same tax rate and for the government to not lose revenue, Most people would see a significant tax increase, especially the most vulnerable.

I have studied and have a degree in economics. This relates to the taxes in macroeconomics.

The problem isn't only low taxes, but high government spending. Both need to be fixed for there to be change in the US.

I think we have a massive disconnect in what we define as 'fair'. I don't consider poor people paying exactly the same money into the system as wealthy as 'fair'. I consider 'fair' to be ensuring a certain minimum quality of life being guaranteed for citizens to the best of our ability.

The poor don't pay the same amount as the wealthy. They may pay the same percentage, but 15% of $10,000,000 is a lot more than 15% of $45,000. Both are living on 85% of their gross income. What's the problem with that?

I am not jealous of wealthy people because I make enough to be in the higher percentile as well. I just think that the taxes I pay are the minimum expected of me to contribute back for all the help I've received over the years in terms of education, infrastructure and the privilege of having educated parents who weren't living in poverty.

If you found a way to pay less taxes and therefore have more discretionary money, are you saying you wouldn't? You like giving your hard earned money away? :nope: If you do, I pose my question again: Please send me $50 because I make less than you and I need it more than you.

 

[vliberatore]

I take that back, I looked at the article's soruce. Still not as recent as my USA Today article.

 

[Rich Z]

http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2006/09/jec_releases_to.html

I guess it depends on what you mean by 'fair'.

The bottom 50% make $30k a year or less and pay 3.3% of taxes. At $30k a year I would be living on the street in Yellowknife. In Calgary, I might, might be able to afford a really bad illegal suite in a slum (Or as close as Calgary has to slums). The fact that 50% of Americans make less than this and you expect them to pay more taxes boggles my mind. How are they supposed to feed their families if you demand they have less?

At 30% tax rate (About what I calculate it would take for every to pay the same rate), 50% of Americans would be living on $20,000 a year or less.

That's ridiculous.

So let me see if I understand this correctly.

Someone making $30,000 per year at a 30% tax rate would be paying $9,000 in taxes.

Someone making $300,000 per year at a 30% tax rate would be paying $90,000 in taxes.

And that is considered as the "same rate"?

Or a progressive rate whereby the person making $300,000 per year and taxed at a 45% tax rate would have to then pay $135,000 is even MORE fair?

Just because someone may be more capable and deserving of a higher earning ability in the marketplace for saleable skills they must pay 10 times the dollar amount of taxes than someone else who has not worked hard enough and taken advantage of available opportunities to be able to provide that earning power?

That is fair? Seriously, what exactly IS the incentive for someone to try to strive to be capable of earning more if they don't GET more out of it? If the goal is to try to make everyone make the same amount after taxes, then WHY would anyone work harder or try to be BETTER at what they do in order to EARN more?

I think the government tooting this "tax the rich" horn is taking advantage of peoples' seemingly spiteful and malicious jealousy of people who are able to earn more than they can. Yeah, tax the people who have more than I do, that's the ticket. It's not fair that I don't live in a big house like they do so tax the crap out of them to bring them down to MY level. Then I might feel better about my own self worth.

Treat government services like a business in relation to customers. Project what your earnings are expected to be (taxes, fees, etc.), estimate what your customer base should be (most recent census numbers), and then calculate what you need to charge each of your customers (tax payers) in order to meet your budget. Here is your bill for the year.....

Quite simply, the government just HAS to stop spending more than it is "making" before the whole house of cards comes tumbling down. Anyone with more than a half dozen working brain cells can see that this just cannot continue like it has been. Saying that it is the fault of the highest level of earners in this country not paying their "fair share" is absolutely ludicrous. How close do you think that "fair share" figure will be, even if they taxed the "rich" at 90 percent of their income, to the deficit spending our government engages in EVERY YEAR?

Seriously, let's just drive all businesses and people with the highest capability to EARN big bucks (meaning the best and brightest people this country has) right out of the country and right out of the tax base completely. Yeah, that's going to be REAL helpful.......... Businesses are already outsourcing much of their manufacturing needs because of regulations and taxing, so let's just choke them all to death outright and be done with it. And people with offshore accounts will finally figure out that they might as well move offshore right along with their money so they can keep more of it from the grubby little paws of our government and not have to deal with the confiscatory nature of the government here. Heck, do you THINK another country just might like to have the best and brightest of USA move into their own country and set up shop and become part of THEIR tax base? I'm surprised they aren't actively soliciting this as policy. China would be immensely smart to do something like this.

Seriously, our government couldn't sink our country any better nor faster than if they just outright TOLD us that this was their goal and simply tried to confiscate all wealth and productivity.

Of course, they will have to bolt the doors first to keep everyone from escaping........ So watch for that to happen on some sort of "national security" pretext........

 

[tsst]

LOL Tsst, darling, my yearling income wouldnt be all that much!

Well then sweety, according to Nova, I can no longer like you.

I think we have a massive disconnect in what we define as 'fair'. I don't consider poor people paying exactly the same money into the system as wealthy as 'fair'. I consider 'fair' to be ensuring a certain minimum quality of life being guaranteed for citizens to the best of our ability.

Disconnect?!? When I hear fair I assume the actual definition not a politically distorted campaign slogan designed to inflame. If you think some should be forced to pay for the rest then stop using the term 'fair share'. It really is that simple. Of course if Mr. Obama actually said 'I want to give for free to 50% of the citizenry while forcibly taking it from the other 50% of the citizenry' he would have a much tougher time selling his socialism. Throw in the 'fair' spin and all of the sudden hey that sounds right.

Here we are guaranteed 'the right to pursue' happiness.

I am not jealous of wealthy people because I make enough to be in the higher percentile as well. I just think that the taxes I pay are the minimum expected of me to contribute back for all the help I've received over the years in terms of education, infrastructure and the privilege of having educated parents who weren't living in poverty.

Hmmm "expected to contribute" that's an interesting term to use. If I am "expected to contribute" for what I have received (incidentally no more than any other American citizen, much less than many) why are others NOT "expected to contribute"?

 

[Nova_C]

And once again comes the 'deserve' mantra.

I don't believe for one second that people making $300k a year work 10x as hard as someone making $30k. I don't believe they 'deserve' it any more, though I do not begrudge it. As it stands now, in the first world, the wealthy all have higher taxes than the poor. Many nations arr much more socialist than the US, and yet they still have people striving for better, working to make more, taking risks and putting in the time. For what? To pay more taxes?

No, because that is irrelevant. We've been simplifying how taxes work for this debate, but the fact of the matter is, you make more money, you have more money.

I ask you, Rich, if Obama's socialist agenda goes through, where will people go? Every first world country is at least as socialist as Obama. You want to escape that? The 3rd world is your only choice.

So I ask the question: Why do you think the rest of the first world has gone that way? Why are there still millionaires and billionaires in those country? Why is entrepreneurial spirit alive and well in those countries with higher taxes, especially for the wealthy, and a much larger social safety net?

Why do people like Warren Buffet argue that taxes on the wealthy should increase, not decrease?

 

[tsst]

And once again comes the 'deserve' mantra.

I don't believe for one second that people making $300k a year work 10x as hard as someone making $30k. I don't believe they 'deserve' it any more, though I do not begrudge it. As it stands now, in the first world, the wealthy all have higher taxes than the poor. Many nations arr much more socialist than the US, and yet they still have people striving for better, working to make more, taking risks and putting in the time. For what? To pay more taxes?

No, because that is irrelevant. We've been simplifying how taxes work for this debate, but the fact of the matter is, you make more money, you have more money.

I ask you, Rich, if Obama's socialist agenda goes through, where will people go? Every first world country is at least as socialist as Obama. You want to escape that? The 3rd world is your only choice.

So I ask the question: Why do you think the rest of the first world has gone that way? Why are there still millionaires and billionaires in those country? Why is entrepreneurial spirit alive and well in those countries with higher taxes, especially for the wealthy, and a much larger social safety net?

If someone has put forth the effort and work to attain that income level they absolutely 'deserve' it. I realize that is not the socialist mentality you were probably raised on.

I for one will use every possible option to reduce my "fair share". I will roll as much income as possible into tax deductable areas. Avoiding Obama's "fair share" socialism at all costs. (make no assumptions as they would probably be incorrect).

Why do people like Warren Buffet argue that taxes on the wealthy should increase, not decrease?

Yet Mr. Buffet never practices what he preaches. He is totally free to give the IRS as much of his fortune as he desires yet he uses every tax loophole at his fingers. What Mr. Buffet is actually saying is he wants Mr. and Mrs. small business to bear more of the burden as he will be able to continue to hide his income and assets from the IRS.

 

[beautifullywild77]

Well Tsst, I still like ya even if we cant be friends according to someone else!

 

[tsst]

Well Tsst, I still like ya even if we cant be friends according to someone else!

Don't worry BW77, I don't prescribe to the strawmanish notion. Just because I don't agree with a politicians class warfare tactics has no relevancy as to whom I may like in life. Obama may bank on it but I didn't need to go to Harvard or Columbia to see through that thin scheme.

 

[Rich Z]

And once again comes the 'deserve' mantra.

I don't believe for one second that people making $300k a year work 10x as hard as someone making $30k. I don't believe they 'deserve' it any more, though I do not begrudge it.

Ah, but I thought everyone knew that the way to bigger and better salaries is not so much what you DO, but what you KNOW. Seriously, is there anyone out there who COULD earn $300K per year who would NOT if they could? So why aren't they, then? Could it be, perhaps, that there isn't anyone willing to pay them that much money for what they know and/or can do? So why are some people able to command that kind of salary, then? Could it possibly be because they are WORTH it to someone? And therefore, certainly they do DESERVE what they earn.

Otherwise, what are you claiming? That their employers just give them those hefty salaries just from the goodness of their hearts or they don't know what else to do with that money?

As it stands now, in the first world, the wealthy all have higher taxes than the poor. Many nations arr much more socialist than the US, and yet they still have people striving for better, working to make more, taking risks and putting in the time. For what? To pay more taxes?

So, you are claiming that only one government could be wrong, but many of them cannot be? Well, how many countries are now in financial straits? Do you think perhaps that is telling us something?

No, because that is irrelevant. We've been simplifying how taxes work for this debate, but the fact of the matter is, you make more money, you have more money.

Yes, and my believe is if you EARN more money, you DESERVE to keep as much of it as you can, because obviously you are worth it to someone, and it should be YOURS, not the government's play money.

I ask you, Rich, if Obama's socialist agenda goes through, where will people go? Every first world country is at least as socialist as Obama. You want to escape that? The 3rd world is your only choice.

Pressure normally seeks an escape route. The opportunity exists for some country to cause a world wide brain drain if they make themselves attractive to those brains. And I also would go so far as to say that us peons probably won't learn too much about it, neither. Heck, wasn't China a third world country not that long ago? Things can change as pressure creates an opportunity. Right now there is tremendous pressure on those people WITH money to try to KEEP as much of it as they can.

So I ask the question: Why do you think the rest of the first world has gone that way? Why are there still millionaires and billionaires in those country? Why is entrepreneurial spirit alive and well in those countries with higher taxes, especially for the wealthy, and a much larger social safety net?

Beats me. You'll never hear me say that the more people that get together into a room, the higher the average IQ will rise.

Why do people like Warren Buffet argue that taxes on the wealthy should increase, not decrease?

Hmm, perhaps because some people will lie?

 

[Nova_C]

I think it's telling that the one country who came out of the recession with the healthiest economy was one of your socialist dystopias.

But that's probably just some people lying.

 

[vliberatore]

I think it's telling that the one country who came out of the recession with the healthiest economy was one of your socialist dystopias.

But that's probably just some people lying.

Which country?

 

[vliberatore]

And once again comes the 'deserve' mantra.

I don't believe for one second that people making $300k a year work 10x as hard as someone making $30k. I don't believe they 'deserve' it any more, though I do not begrudge it. As it stands now, in the first world, the wealthy all have higher taxes than the poor. Many nations arr much more socialist than the US, and yet they still have people striving for better, working to make more, taking risks and putting in the time. For what? To pay more taxes?

No, because that is irrelevant. We've been simplifying how taxes work for this debate, but the fact of the matter is, you make more money, you have more money.

I ask you, Rich, if Obama's socialist agenda goes through, where will people go? Every first world country is at least as socialist as Obama. You want to escape that? The 3rd world is your only choice.

So I ask the question: Why do you think the rest of the first world has gone that way? Why are there still millionaires and billionaires in those country? Why is entrepreneurial spirit alive and well in those countries with higher taxes, especially for the wealthy, and a much larger social safety net?

Why do people like Warren Buffet argue that taxes on the wealthy should increase, not decrease?

So you're saying that the US should be like everyone else. Last I checked, we're not like everyone else, so why should we be like them?

You say that someone who earns $300k doesnt work 10x as hard as someone who earns $30k, but salary isn't about hard work. Effort is part of it, but so is responsibility and tenure. If someone wants to make more than $30k a year, I suggest they go to college, get good grades in a major that is significant, and work their way up.

Buffet may say that taxes on the wealthy should increase, but last I checked, he is paying the minimum he has to by law. Remember that phrase about actions speaking louder than words?


I don't go up to Canada and mock the RCMP or poutine, please stay out of American politics.