Not Logged In Log In   Sign Up   Points Leaders
Follow Us    10:58 PM

Message Forum - Read Message

Category: US politics > Topics Add to favorite topics   Post new topicPost New Topic
Author Topic: Does anyone know if the Democrats have ever heard of a tax they didnt like? Back to Topics
flyboyUT

Champion Author
Utah

Posts:28,187
Points:1,524,920
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Nov 29, 2012 4:11:53 PM

They make lots of promises then just cant seem to keep their fingers out of someone elses cookie jar.
.
>>>How do you feel about the government touching your private retirement account known as your 401k in order to "pay down the deficit?" Not so good? Already feel like the government has stolen your retirement through Social Security? Well get ready because taxing the 401k is floating around as an idea while the fiscal cliff talks on Capitol Hill continue.


One of the earliest fears about tax-favored savings accounts like IRAs and 401(k) plans was that when this pool of savings grew large enough Congress would not be able to resist tapping it to help solve the nation’s debt problems. We’re about to find out if those fears—persistent for decades—have been justified.

Everything including the sacred mortgage deduction is on the table as lawmakers wrestle with the fiscal cliff, a year-end avalanche of scheduled spending cuts and tax increases. With a combined $10 trillion sitting in IRAs and 401(k) plans, retirement accounts make a juicy target. Some of this money has never been taxed, and under current law never will be.

The government argues that your 401k or privately saving for the future costs them money, when it isn't their money in the first place. They also argue that the 401k option doesn't increase savings and use this as an excuse to punish those who actually do save.<<<

Since when is my saving my money that I earned a "cost" to the government?
REPLIES (newest first) Post a Reply
Profile Pic
streetrider
Champion Author Gary

Posts:10,368
Points:150,495
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Dec 4, 2012 10:34:56 PM

should have been dont matter that much
Profile Pic
streetrider
Champion Author Gary

Posts:10,368
Points:150,495
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Dec 4, 2012 10:34:16 PM

In the immutable words of Dick Cheny deficits to matter that much.
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:28,187
Points:1,524,920
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Dec 4, 2012 8:39:41 PM

EZ but (caution sarcasm switch on) you dont understand. Those taxes are either sin taxes or the little people will not see them. The dems can put as many of them on as they want and just whine about how terrrrrribule the cons are for not paying their 'fair share'. ( sar swithc off)

ydraig - I think we saw the same cartoon.
Profile Pic
YDraigGoch
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:7,346
Points:86,435
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Dec 4, 2012 7:44:33 PM

Topic: Does anyone know if the Democrats have ever heard of a tax they didnt like?

Yes. The ones they actually have to pay for.

The Democrats were once known as the "tax and spend liberals".

They were replaced by the "Borrow and spend conservatives"

And that is why we are in the mess we are in today. The American people naturally followed the ones who kept the spending going, but didn't make us pay for it. Something for nothing.

For some reason, a cartoon I saw in the paper back in the early sixties stayed in the back of my mind. It shows a wife coming in the door loaded down with packages. The husband is coming out of his chair with horror on his face, his hair straight up. The caption?

"Don't worry, dear. It didn't cost a thing. I put it all on the credit card"

It doesn't seem so funny any more.
Profile Pic
EZExit
Champion Author Phoenix

Posts:16,030
Points:2,314,485
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Dec 4, 2012 6:58:24 PM

Johnny states: <<<In fact any tax that will have to be paid in anyway by the people that aren’t rich is hated by the Democrats.>>>

I strongly disagree, the democrats also enjoy taxing the poor and middle class as well, look at the following for examples passed recently by democrats:

Cigarette tax
New tax on medical devices
Increase in medicare tax
Forced purchase of health insurance
Increased threshold of deductible health costs out of pocket
Indoor tanning salon provider tax
Taxing of employer insurance benefits as income

I am sure there are more, this is just what I recall right off hand.
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:28,187
Points:1,524,920
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Dec 4, 2012 5:26:53 PM

Nick the returns from a Roth IRA may come the closest to the no tax concept. But what is the Roth IRA invested in? What is the 401K invested in? If its stocks or almost any business based investment I can think of then its already been taxed in some fashion or another.

I was too lod when the Roth IRA's first became available. I did an analysis ( maybe flawed I admit) that said I wouldnt benefit enough from a Roth it take the tax hit now to change over from a regular IRA or a non IRA investment. If I was younger and had more time to make up for the tax hit with more and longer nontaxed returns - then maybe it would have paid off for me.

However I did get my son into a Roth IRA when he got his first job that generated a W2 form. His is doing well for him.

Profile Pic
NickHammer
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:19,606
Points:3,169,120
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Dec 4, 2012 1:35:37 PM

>>And what money might that be? And from what sources is this money that has not been taxed coming from?<<

Your employer.

>>Nick - please let me know of any sources of income I have, that I might save a portion of that have not already been taxed at at, least once.<<

Flyboy, I have no idea what sources of income you have, but anyone who has a 401(k) pays no tax on that money OR on any interest that accrues until you begin withdrawing the money decades later, most likely at a lower tax rate. If you have a Roth IRA, you've already paid taxes on that money, but NEVER have to pay a penny of tax on any interest that accrues.
Profile Pic
fracknsave
Champion Author Grand Rapids

Posts:1,666
Points:58,000
Joined:Mar 2012
Message Posted: Dec 4, 2012 12:34:05 PM

Grasshammer, quickly as you can, snatch this coin from my outstretched hand, then it will no longer be mine, but until then.... (possession is 9/10th of the law)
Profile Pic
I75at7AM
Champion Author Dayton

Posts:73,848
Points:3,038,945
Joined:Feb 2006
Message Posted: Dec 4, 2012 12:32:45 PM

JOhnnyG, I would agree with your statement, on the face of it, until we remember that democrats (and others including some republicans) want more revenue from automobile drivers. Some want to increase the gasoline tax, others want to add a miles driven tax. Any tax on automobiles would place some burden on the middle and lower classes, without a doubt.

To respond to AC, below, about his dislike of the FairTax, I just want to remind you that the FairTax proposal attempts to compensate for the taxation of lower income people, who spend a large share of their money on food, with the Prebate. A check would be sent out (electronic means is fine) to each family or citizen in the amount of taxation that they would be expected to spend on the necessities of life. You get the check even before you go to the store to get the food and pay the tax. As for the effect on real estate, having the FairTax apply to new building would have the effect of supporting the value and prices of existing houses! And used cars! Anything that can be bought and sold used would be exempt from the FairTax. Second hand stores, used cars, existing houses, furniture, bikes, toys, clothes, appliances all might have a longer life and stay out of the landfills longer!
Profile Pic
johnnyg1200
Champion Author St. Louis

Posts:8,411
Points:1,241,470
Joined:May 2011
Message Posted: Dec 4, 2012 12:00:37 PM

One tax Democrats don’t like is the flat tax, because the poor would have to pay their fair share. Another one is a national sales tax because the poor would have to pay their fair share.

In fact any tax that will have to be paid in anyway by the people that aren’t rich is hated by the Democrats.
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:28,187
Points:1,524,920
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Dec 4, 2012 11:04:48 AM

Nick - please let me know of any sources of income I have, that I might save a portion of that have not already been taxed at at, least once.
Profile Pic
MahopacJack
Champion Author New York

Posts:9,588
Points:1,858,060
Joined:Feb 2008
Message Posted: Dec 4, 2012 10:49:42 AM

NickHammer, >>it's not saving your money that's 'a "cost" to the government' - it's the fact that you either never paid any taxes on that money or never will. And the taxes you never paid is not ***your*** money, despite what the writer at townhall.com wants you to believe.<<
***
And what money might that be? And from what sources is this money that has not been taxed coming from?

Profile Pic
NickHammer
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:19,606
Points:3,169,120
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Dec 4, 2012 9:17:47 AM

>>Since when is my saving my money that I earned a "cost" to the government?<<

This is the kind of statement you see when right-wingers mindlessly parrot the idiotic rantings of other right-wingers.

It's not saving your money that's 'a "cost" to the government' - it's the fact that you either never paid any taxes on that money or never will. And the taxes you never paid is not ***your*** money, despite what the writer at townhall.com wants you to believe.
Profile Pic
AFSNCO
Champion Author Montgomery

Posts:19,838
Points:1,831,635
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Dec 3, 2012 11:55:06 AM

AC...not necessarily. We already have a sales tax on vehicles, it is just less than it is on other purchases. They can set across the board sales tax on different items.

Cars, homes, etc...keep it at the low rate. Cigarrettes, alcohol, fast food make it 20%. Food and clothing (like in Pennsylvania) no sales tax. They can do whatever they want. You can even set it that it is progressive to hit luxury items.
Profile Pic
AC-302
Champion Author Los Angeles

Posts:31,146
Points:3,447,945
Joined:Aug 2004
Message Posted: Dec 3, 2012 11:47:46 AM

TeacherTim said: "Sales tax is one of the most regressive taxes. Rich people hardly notice it, but poorer people sure do."

--And this is my biggest objection to the proposed national sales tax. It is going to be terribly regressive on the poor. It will also boost the cost of cars, gasoline and homes (home construction, anyway), by 17 - 30% (depending on the numbers being bandied about). That is also not good, particularly on poor and middle class folks. And my sales tax out here is about to go to 9.25% - one of the highest in the nation. So now you're talking tax rates at the till of 28.25 up to 39.25%. Does that strike anyone else as excessive? And remember, the NST will also hit FOOD - spiking food prices by 17 - 30%.

I really didn't want to debate the UN-Fair National Sales Tax. That's already been soundly trounced in many, many other threads. Me? I think a flat or very flattened income tax with few or no deductions (closing loopholes) is a better way to go. I think a rate of 15% (assuming no deductions) starting at, say 1.5x Poverty level would be a good starting point. The rate (and the income level) can be adjusted up or down depending on revenue. As well, I think we do need to start cutting spending across the board at a rate of, say 1 - 3% per year, until revenue/spending are balanced that we have a slight surplus, with which we'll pay off the national debt. That would solve our fiscal crisis. But then again, by not spending money on expanded social programs, our bleeding heart liberal friends will be hearing NONE OF THAT!
Profile Pic
teacher_tim
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:19,359
Points:827,710
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Dec 3, 2012 10:35:39 AM

Same thing for cigarette, junk food, movie, amusement tickets, etc.


[Edited by: teacher_tim at 12/3/2012 10:37:34 AM EST]
Profile Pic
teacher_tim
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:19,359
Points:827,710
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Dec 3, 2012 10:35:38 AM

Sales tax is one of the most regressive taxes. Rich people hardly notice it, but poorer people sure do.
Profile Pic
btc1
Champion Author Lexington

Posts:22,852
Points:890,075
Joined:Aug 2006
Message Posted: Dec 3, 2012 10:19:37 AM

Yes, fly, they do not want a tax increase on the middle class. They LIKED that tax cut so much they want to make it PERMANENT.
Profile Pic
sgm4law
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:23,087
Points:2,983,370
Joined:Mar 2006
Message Posted: Dec 3, 2012 10:17:00 AM

I don't like the lottery, which is a tax on the poor and stupid.
Profile Pic
NickHammer
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:19,606
Points:3,169,120
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Dec 3, 2012 10:03:02 AM

>>Paxy - you are in error --

Steve said "That's our biggest spending." Then right after NSB said "There are few people, that know what their total tax bill is, all they worry about, is their federal tax bill. They don't think about all of the state, and local taxes they pay, all of the hidden taxes, and the ever popular tax on tax."

I responded to both of them. Steve didnt specify only federal tax nor did he specify any single federal tax.<<

No, "Paxy" is not in error, and neither is Steve. Trying to claim that NSB's comments about ***individuals*** applies to what Steve wrote is ludicrous, because he obviously wasn't talking about that. And claiming that Steve's wrong simply because YOU chose to apply his statement to include state and local spending is not only ludicrous, it's dishonest (as is lumping a bunch of stuff together to claim that it's more).

[Edited by: NickHammer at 12/3/2012 10:06:20 AM EST]
Profile Pic
teacher_tim
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:19,359
Points:827,710
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Dec 3, 2012 8:52:35 AM

Taxes on entitlements?
Profile Pic
oilpan4
Champion Author Virginia

Posts:13,640
Points:331,910
Joined:Jul 2006
Message Posted: Dec 2, 2012 5:41:15 PM

The only taxes democrats dont like are the ones that apply to them.
The caption for the link sums it up pretty well, "they cant keep their fingers out of someone elses cookie jar", they want to spend other peoples money.
Profile Pic
MahopacJack
Champion Author New York

Posts:9,588
Points:1,858,060
Joined:Feb 2008
Message Posted: Dec 2, 2012 3:08:34 PM

>>Does anyone know if the Democrats have ever heard of a tax they didnt like?<<
***
Yes, the 'Fair Tax.' They cannot comprehend, nor will they allow a system that works without the government forcing individuals to do things they do not want to do. Were such a system to pass, the Progressive institution, IRS, would lose its powers to punish and harass LAW ABIDING individuals. There would also be a dramatic drop in the gravy train known as the K Street lobbyists.

[Edited by: MahopacJack at 12/2/2012 3:10:27 PM EST]
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:28,187
Points:1,524,920
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Dec 2, 2012 12:58:33 PM

Paxy - you are in error --

Steve said "That's our biggest spending." Then right after NSB said "There are few people, that know what their total tax bill is, all they worry about, is their federal tax bill. They don't think about all of the state, and local taxes they pay, all of the hidden taxes, and the ever popular tax on tax."

I responded to both of them. Steve didnt specify only federal tax nor did he specify any single federal tax.

Trying to look at only one single tax out of a myriad of taxes and the effects in toto is fruitless.
Profile Pic
PappaVanTwee
Champion Author Indianapolis

Posts:14,635
Points:714,710
Joined:Feb 2003
Message Posted: Dec 1, 2012 10:45:05 PM

>>>
For FY 12 - federal, state, local spending
<<<

When you cheat and take state, and local spending; and lump "entitlement" spending together, of course defense looks small. But aren't we talking about federal spending, and federal taxes? That's what the OP article is about.
Profile Pic
AC-302
Champion Author Los Angeles

Posts:31,146
Points:3,447,945
Joined:Aug 2004
Message Posted: Dec 1, 2012 10:25:30 PM

OH, and SemiSteve said: "That's our biggest spending. So why can't we talk about reducing it? It's total overkill. We spend more than the next 25 nations combined. That's ridiculous. Runaway military spending is what killed the USSR."

-- While we do spend more on the military, military research and weapons systems development than the next 25 nations combined, do you realize that we sell war material to MOST of those 25 nations? There are four areas of commerce that I know of, where we are exporting far more than we import, and therefore are turning the tide in the balance of trade. Those areas where we now export more than we import are: 1) Agricultural products (that may go away with the latest drought and corn crop failure) 2) Chemicals, fine and basic 3) (closely related to 2) Petroleum fuels and distillates and last but certainly not least 4) Weapons and military systems (including defense systems).

Also remember, there are a whole lot of military spin-offs that have everyday, non-military practical applications. GPS is a prime example that has taken off in the economy. The military-based space programs in general is another (Tang is my favorite space spin-off!) PCs and very large scale integrated circuit devices (AKA computer chips) is another. Cell phones are another (Microwave analog and digital communications) And for those who want to cut off all military contractor spending, understand what that means. The military contractors hire folks who have experience and are educated, both to do design and manufacture. These jobs, even the "blue collar" jobs of bolting fuselages or wings together are truly middle class jobs. Obviously the designers and engineers and scientists are also all middle class folks. When you cut these folks off, what are you going to do with them? Are you going to lay them all off, turn them out, and let them fend for themselves? Congratulations - you've now turned literally MILLIONS of middle class, tax paying families into poor ones that will depend on the government for minimal checks. Gone will be their savings and their ability to educate their kids to become middle-class, tax-paying Americans that are an asset, rather than now a BURDEN to our society. And again, while you may not agree with any aggression, think of the value to our society of the spin-offs. And think of the economic devastation you are wont to cause. Think about this very carefully.
Profile Pic
AC-302
Champion Author Los Angeles

Posts:31,146
Points:3,447,945
Joined:Aug 2004
Message Posted: Dec 1, 2012 8:48:06 PM

Topic: Does anyone know if the Democrats have ever heard of a tax they didnt like?

--Can't say as I have. The Dems are now also proposing National sales taxes, additional income taxes, consumption taxes, mileage taxes on cars (in addition to road taxes) AND even an EU VAT has been proposed.
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:28,187
Points:1,524,920
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Nov 30, 2012 5:31:57 PM

Steve this source says your not correct.
.
For FY 12 - federal, state, local spending

Welfare --------- 12%
Education ------- 14%
Healthcare ------ 17%
SS and pensions - 16%
Total entitlements ----- 59%

Then if you add in interest on the debt of 5% your up to 64%.

Yet defense spending is only 14% of the total.

Steve I believe your in error quite badly.

However lets make it easy lets just cut actual spending by all departments in all levels of government by 1% per year in real actual dollars until spending and income matches. Then do it for ten more years and use the generated surplus to pay off the debt. No actual increase in dollars spent will be allowed until the debt is paid off and we are profitable again.

I keep hearing libs squealing to go back to Clinton taxes. Ok fine if we also go back to Clinton spending too.
Profile Pic
AFSNCO
Champion Author Montgomery

Posts:19,838
Points:1,831,635
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Nov 30, 2012 5:11:29 PM

"That's our biggest spending."

No it is not...entitlement spending is.
Profile Pic
noseatbelt
Champion Author Indiana

Posts:8,133
Points:212,590
Joined:Feb 2004
Message Posted: Nov 30, 2012 4:46:03 PM

There are few people, that know what their total tax bill is, all they worry about, is their federal tax bill. They don't think about all of the state, and local taxes they pay, all of the hidden taxes, and the ever popular tax on tax.
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:19,305
Points:439,285
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Nov 30, 2012 4:30:21 PM

Does anyone know if the Military Industrial Complex ever heard of military spending they didn't like?

That's our biggest spending. So why can't we talk about reducing it? It's total overkill. We spend more than the next 25 nations combined. That's ridiculous. Runaway military spending is what killed the USSR. And with them gone you would think we could cut back. But no. Instead we are spending even more! For what? Where's our big enemy? It's crazy over the top spending that we can ill afford in this day and age of economic woes.

We must begin to taper down.

Problem is that military contractors have lots of lobbying money and campaign money. And they are in nearly every voting district. Representatives vote for the other guys project in return for reciprocal votes. It's out of control. They even vote to spend more than the Pentagon asks for.

This has to be on the table.
Profile Pic
YDraigGoch
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:7,346
Points:86,435
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Nov 30, 2012 1:40:05 PM

Does anyone know if the Democrats have ever heard of a tax they didnt like?

Or a Republican a spending bill that they would actually to pay for? It's a two way street, you know.

No Democrat EVER said "Deficits don't matter. Reagan proved that".

Time to back up from that extremely narrow mirror and get the whole picture.
Profile Pic
I75at7AM
Champion Author Dayton

Posts:73,848
Points:3,038,945
Joined:Feb 2006
Message Posted: Nov 30, 2012 8:29:52 AM

The only problem with a flat tax, fly, is what rate it would have to be put at to cover the amount of revenue the government "needs" by today's spending levels. If everyone paid the same percentage, the rich could afford it. Heck, some would be getting a tax cut. All the people who make up the 47% (Romney's 47%) or the 99% (occu-tard's 99%) would be facing a stiff income tax hike. Unless they have no income at all. The only solution to that would be to declare all government payments of any kind "income" and subject to the flat tax. I'm guessing about 20%. I can hear the howls of protest already.
Profile Pic
e_jeepin
Champion Author Michigan

Posts:4,774
Points:140,170
Joined:May 2007
Message Posted: Nov 30, 2012 1:27:54 AM

During the campaign, Obama bastardized the ending of the "mortgage deduction" as Paul Ryan raising taxes in the middle class by thousands of Dollars. This was blatantly dishonest to not tell people the rest of the story.

Nobody has ever propose to just end it with no other tax balancing. We all start tax season at 32% income tax and then use deductions to whittle down to around 20-25%.

So cant we just fill out a form, here is everything I earned last year, from all sources, including investments -- mail in 20% (or whatever the magic number is).

sign me up! Doing taxes now days is unjustly complicated beyond reason.

One of the major problems with the mortgage crisis is that banks allowed you to borrow willy nilly from equity on paper. Buy that Escalade, big boat, etc. The bigger loan the better! Tax deduct me a Maui vacation too.

They all got swept under.

The mortgage interest deduction is a joke. People think it "gives them back" that full amount. Just like the donating a car for a "100% tax deduction". People think that $2000 receipt for the junker lowered their taxes by $2000! I wrote it off, woo hoo! No they probably received a refund of $60 more.

get rid of it, it discourages saving and conserving
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:19,305
Points:439,285
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Nov 29, 2012 6:15:02 PM

That won't work fly. If you on ly tax income then they will get their companies/corporations to buy things for them and give them things besides income, such as stock, so it makes their actual income and hence the tax liability, smaller.

I agree with I75 and MJack.

End the income tax and all it's loopholes. Encourage people to pay off mortgages instead of borrowing against them and getting a big deduction. That interest mortgage deduction is like asking America to be in debt.

FairTax.

That's the way to go.
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:28,187
Points:1,524,920
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Nov 29, 2012 5:59:36 PM

I 75 - I'm not trying to start an argument with you for sure. But what is it that makes it 'fair' to tax Joe Blow more on the same dollar than Windy Harry. What makes it 'fair' to even consider taxing some of us at actual payment rates exceeding 30% and a lot of others pay nothing or LESS?

Dont we all use the same roads and waterpipes and cops and stuff? What does the government do for Mr. Richguy that is worth him paying multiple times as much on the same dollar as someone else?

I likek the concept of the flat tax or something similar to it. We could do it with an income tax if it was an actual tax on ALL income regardless of source (foodstamps and govt payments of any kind count). Then we all pay the exact same %. No deductions or shucking and jiving or games playing of any kind. Just a percentage of income from all sources withg no deductions fo any kind for anything.

If the govt wants more money - fine they raise the rate of taxation on everyone equally and we all still pay the exact same % on income.

The so called rich will still pay more. After all if your income is 10 million and the tax is 20% you will pay 2 million. If you make 20 thousand you pay 4 thousand on it. Can anyone tell me who pays more?
Profile Pic
AFSNCO
Champion Author Montgomery

Posts:19,838
Points:1,831,635
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Nov 29, 2012 5:28:56 PM

The Democrats are making is very obvious they only care about getting these tax hikes passed and nothing more.
Profile Pic
I75at7AM
Champion Author Dayton

Posts:73,848
Points:3,038,945
Joined:Feb 2006
Message Posted: Nov 29, 2012 5:14:36 PM

Well fly, I am against income taxes in general. I work for me, not for someone else. I realize that government has legitimate needs. All citizens should be expected to contribute to the foundation of the nation. I support the FairTax, which is a consumption-based tax. That way, you don't get taxed for earning, you get taxed for spending. Most states and many localities have sales taxes.

But since income taxes have been with us since the ratification of the Sixteeth, (promised at 1% or 2% and only on those wealthy people in New England...) I think 25% should be tops. The states get another bite of the apple, cities do, and then you pay county taxes on property (renters pay it through their landlord) and sales. All told many people's effective tax rates approach 50%.

Ask any person on the street if they think people should pay 50% of their money in tax and they will likely say "no". Then they will tell you that Obama is right to raise taxes on the rich and that the rich should pay their fair share. Obvious conflict due to ignorance.

I think there should be a maximum tax rate. People should be able to show, while filing, what other taxes they have paid, and all all those up so that their federal tax liability cannot exceed a set amount, say 33% or 38% or 40%. So in states and counties that have high rates, they would pay lower to the federal government. The feds would get the last bite of the shrinking apple, all in the name of "fairness"!

How's that, fly?
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:28,187
Points:1,524,920
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Nov 29, 2012 5:03:13 PM

I75 - maybe yo ucan do it. I keep asking what exactly is the "fair share" ---- none of the libs have ever been able to tell me just what it is and how to figure it.
Profile Pic
I75at7AM
Champion Author Dayton

Posts:73,848
Points:3,038,945
Joined:Feb 2006
Message Posted: Nov 29, 2012 4:45:02 PM

Oh, by the way, that 1% or 2%, only on the wealthy, is exactly what politicians promised the public when the income tax was first instituted.

History of the income tax
Profile Pic
I75at7AM
Champion Author Dayton

Posts:73,848
Points:3,038,945
Joined:Feb 2006
Message Posted: Nov 29, 2012 4:40:46 PM

What they want is a "wealth tax", a tax on money you didn't earn this year but simply have. Just a small amount, 1% or 2%, you wouldn't even notice it. Only the wealthy would pay it, most regular people wouldn't, and we're just asking the wealthy to pay "their fair share", after all they gain great benefit from living in this country, they should be expected to "give back" to the country that made it all possible for them. After all, they didn't build it themselves, they needed help along the way.

Think I an kidding?
Read about new taxes here.
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:19,305
Points:439,285
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Nov 29, 2012 4:22:09 PM

What they need to do is have a Wall Street transaction tax. That would be a very small amount on every trade. Europe just did this. Great way to raise revenue and limit speculation.
Post a reply Back to Topics