quote:

Wow!

I'm not even sure where to begin in responding to this. 

Are we debating tax policy here or your bitterness at some bad college experiences?  It wasn't me, really.  I didn't have any "artsy friends".

quote:

ORIGINAL: Elisabella

The richest among us pay 35% of their income in taxes.y

The poorest among us pay 10% (though it seems like they get it all refunded? At least I always did. I'm not sure how that works.)

So yes I would think it's better that the person paying a disproportionately HIGH percentage should get a break instead of the person paying a disproportionately LOW percentage.

And what is all this nonsense about "the little guy could use a break"?? Do you know how awful and divisive that sounds? It's classic socialist rhetoric - the people who earn a lot of money are bad, and greedy, and "fat cats" while the people who earn very little money are "the little guy, the good guy, the average guy" - the poor helpless waif who needs the Socialist Robin Hood to save him from the awfulness of his predicament.

We're all Americans. Why do we think it's okay to raise taxes on one group of citizens yet lower them on another group of citizens? How is that equal? It's not like the people who pay higher taxes get more of a say in how the taxes are spent.

If people want to be charitable, they can give money to charity. In fact, in the past few decades many people are more hesitant to give to charity because they felt they already 'gave at the office' - and they're right.

I can see where you're coming from. I'm a "little guy" too - I'd be lying if I said it wouldn't be really fucking awesome to have my health care, my university bills, my daycare expenses if I have kids, etc. paid for by the government. That would be seriously nice. If I had less of a conscience I'd vote for Obama and not only ask what my country can do for me, but then demand more on top of it. And why shouldn't "those rich guys" pay for it? They aren't worried about their bills. They aren't poor. They've already laid a secure foundation for their future - surely taking a bit off the top won't hurt that foundation?

In fact, come to think of it, I don't have a car. Those rich people down the block have four cars and only 3 of them are able to drive. Taking one of their cars won't hurt them a bit. I deserve it, after all, I don't HAVE a car. And they have more cars than they NEED. What's next? Taking their summer home because they OWN it and I pay RENT on my apartment?

I don't think I have the right to do that. I think that's stealing, and I think it's wrong. Even though I'm just the little guy, the poor suffering working class peon who has to take the train to get somewhere and has to postpone dental surgery until I have the money. Woe is me, but it's neither that rich family down the street's fault nor is it their responsibility. That's what my conscience tells me.

The only difference between Obama socialism and a bank robber is that the bank robber admits he's taking what isn't his to take.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Elisabella

quote:

ORIGINAL: candystripper

Sanity, Joe does not seem to grasp the fact that the US has a progressive tax system...not a flat tax....and has had since the passage of the constitutional amendment which permitted the income tax.  Why should a wealty person pay a higher percent of income in tax than a poor one?  Because it has always been felt that it was unfair for the poor to bear an undue share of the burden.

See I don't get this. How is a flat tax making the poor bear an undue share of the burden?

If every income were taxed at 10% (easy number to do the math with) then people making $50k would pay $5k and people making $2B would be paying, yeah you guessed it, $200M in taxes a year.

Seems to me that the person paying $200M bears a bit more of a burden than the person paying $5k. That's just the way percentages work. IMO it's discriminatory to expect higher incomes to pay a higher percentage. If you really want to be fair, they should pay a lower percentage, because 5% of 100K is the same as 10% of 50K, but FWIW I think the tax percentage should be the same for all individual taxpayers.

Businesses on the other hand are a different story.

candystripper 

quote:

ORIGINAL: Elisabella

quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

quote:

ORIGINAL: MadRabbit

I simply don't want a President who agrees with the idea of "sharing the wealth", because it comes right around to this bullshit socialist agenda of "economic fairness". Everything has to be "fair". 

No, we sure wouldn't want an outrageous idea like fairness spreading around.

I'm all for fairness.

Fairness would be taxing every American the same percentage of his income. The rich would pay more, the poor would pay less - they would all pay the same proportion though. That's fair.

What's unfair is raising the percentage of tax paid based on income. Especially considering that those high income people would pay more in taxes anyway. How is it fair, by any definition of the word, to tell those people "yeah you know, there are a lot of people who want what you have, so I think we're going to take it from you and give it to them.

We're talking about income here, not inherited wealth. Income is money earned. Considering that most people who earn a lot of money got there through hard work (high grades in HS, taking SAT prep instead of partying, maintaining scholarship-level grades in university (whether or not they were on scholarship), internships, entry level positions, and proving their worth enough to be promoted over maybe 20, 30 years) I think it's the epitome of UNfair to expect those people to subsidize people who didn't take that track.

It's all well and good to get a liberal arts degree in philosophy instead of an MBA, but when you're making $40k and That Designer Blonde Bitch your artsy friends made fun of, who is now a CFO of a major corporation, is pulling in nearly $300k, you have NO right to whine and expect socialist policies to make things "fair" by some twisted definition of the word.

FAIR is accepting consequences for your life decisions. That is the epitome of JUSTICE.

MERCY on the other hand, is quite unfair. Lenience and sympathy? Also unfair. Compassionate clemency? Ditto.

You can call socialism merciful, lenient, sympathetic, compassionate, etc. but in no way is it either just or fair.

candystripper 

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity

Here's one link I found, and it looks pretty legit. The top 10% of taxpayers pay almost 71% of the taxes, while the bottom 50% only pays about 3%.

http://www.ntu.org/main/page.php?PageID=6

So, tell me again mike - what is Obama going to do exactly to make that more fair?

candystripper 

quote:

ORIGINAL: Elisabella

quote:

ORIGINAL: slvemike4u

And yet of the 41 states that have an income tax 35 use a graduated (re:progressive)tax plan.The federal income tax has been a graduated(re:progressive)since 1913....and still the rich manage to get rich and do well..is there a possibility this happens to work....or has it been unfair to all those entrepanuers and millionaires all these years.BTW you do realise the rich hire very competant tax lawyers to reduce their burden has much as possible...and they are quite good at it.....Somehow Elisabella we have muddled along with a Graduated tax plan for almost one hundred years....it seems to be working.

Personally I don't see our (or rather, the US's, as I guess in a few months I'll be officially considered an expat) current economy as 'working.'

I think our economy needs a lot of changes, and a flat tax would only be one of them. I think it would be better for our economy to tax high levels of savings rather than high levels of income - that would ensure that the money continues to fluctuate in the economy. A person making $2B a year isn't a problem in itself - it's when he saves $1.5B and removes it from the economy that things get muddy.

I do have a question for you - if you think our current system is working so well, why are you voting for someone who bases his platform on 'change'?

candystripper 

quote:

ORIGINAL: ThatDaveGuy69

In reply to Naga:
"Over regulation"? Really? Then I guess every news source and politician in congress, even the president, got it all wrong over the past few weeks. They've all been telling me that it was a lack of regulation/oversight that caused the financial meltdown we're all enjoying. And to think I beleived them... Silly me.

quote:

ORIGINAL: candystripper
few probably take issue with the deduction for dependents

(snip)

Fewer still probably take issue with the deduction for child care

quote:

ORIGINAL: slvemike4u

This post in its entirety has to be a joke.The theory the market can regulate itself ha been proven false,and anyone paying any attention at all knows this....As far as obscene risks,what risks...they just got bailed out to the tune of 750 billion dollars of taxpayer money.....please tell me you are being sarcastic here..please.

quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

Really? Over-regulation?
Is that why we have Bernanke, Bush, Paulson, and McCain, all historic deregulators now calling for more government regulation?

quote:


Exactly what massive Democratic spending plans did he rubberstamp? You mean things like the Medicare drug benefit, which was proposed by Bush and passed by a Republican Congress. The Republicans, in case you haven't been paying attention, have controlled the White House for almost 8 years and Congress for almost 12 of the last 14 years. The massive spending falls on their shoulders.

quote:

Bush came into office with a budget surplus. The worst economic problem we had at the time was deciding what to do with the extra money. He has run a deficit in every single year he has been in office. In doing so he has managed to double the national debt in less than 8 years. Think about that for a minute. The total debt this country has accumulated since its founding has been doubled under Bush's two terms.

quote:

Which, believe it or not, happened with Reagan too. That's the wonderful thing about these supply-side economic theories. You can do great by increasing your debt and everything just seems fine. Until the bills come due. Guess what's happening to our economy right now?

quote:

ORIGINAL: slvemike4u

Wow Candstripper,in 2 post's you have done more with the flat tax nonsense than I have been able to do in 1 hour's worth of posting,I am either very tired or very stupid....thanks...I'm glad I checked in one last time before going to sleep...good night.....God I love smart strippers   only joking ,please take no offence....mike.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Elisabella

It's not like the people who pay higher taxes get more of a say in how the taxes are spent.