Page 18 of 36 FirstFirst ... 8161718192028 ... LastLast
Results 171 to 180 of 358

Thread: Senate fails to advance Buffett rule

  1. #171
    Sage

    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Florida
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:53 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    23,375

    Re: Senate fails to advance Buffett rule

    Quote Originally Posted by muciti View Post
    I disagree. Everything should be equal. If you want to charge the rich X % you should be prepared to do that same.
    You may disagree but do you want to crash our economy or raise revenue? The progressive tax is designed to tax income not spent at a higher rate to encourage spending and growth. It is more than fairness, it is basic economics. Those that sock away most of their earnings are the slackers when it comes to helping our economy grow. The slghtly higher rates are more than justified to compensate for the money they take out of spending and growth. One CEO who makes as much as 100 of his workers is lucky to spend as much as 10 of them do in a year.
    Last edited by iguanaman; 04-17-12 at 05:01 PM.

  2. #172
    Sage
    AdamT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 04:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    17,773

    Re: Senate fails to advance Buffett rule

    Quote Originally Posted by muciti View Post
    Just because no modern states do it doesnt mean it wouldnt work. It would generate massive amounts of income for our country, and would be fair to everyone in the country. I don't see the down side to it.
    Every version a flat tax that I've seen includes a personal exemption, which would keep many of those who currently don't pay FIT from paying under a flat tax, and of course it would result in different rates.

    If you don't have an exemption then a flat tax is simply unfair. It fails to capture the distinction between income necessary for basic survival and disposable income. In effect it results in middle class disposable income being taxed at a rate in the high 80s or 90s, versus the low 20s for wealthier individuals.

    In other words, it's sort of like taxing a corporation on gross revenue rather than net profits.
    "The necessaries of life occasion the great expense of the poor. They find it difficult to get food, and the greater part of their little revenue is spent in getting it. The luxuries and vanities of life occasion the principal expense of the rich, and a magnificent house embellishes and sets off to the best advantage all the other luxuries and vanities which they possess. ... It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion."

    -- Adam Smith

  3. #173
    Sage
    Kreton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Colorado Springs
    Last Seen
    11-13-17 @ 08:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    6,118

    Re: Senate fails to advance Buffett rule

    Quote Originally Posted by Gimmesometruth View Post
    There is lots of research on the ills of wealth inequality, just because you are not aware of it does not mean it does not exist.

    When wealth inequality gets bad enough, things go very bad, ie the French Revolution, Russian Revolution....
    Creating a flat tax does not cause any wealth inequality. If anything it does the exact opposite.
    “Most people do not listen with the intent to understand; they listen with the intent to reply.”
    Stephen R. Covey


  4. #174
    Sage
    AdamT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 04:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    17,773

    Re: Senate fails to advance Buffett rule

    Quote Originally Posted by muciti View Post
    Creating a flat tax does not cause any wealth inequality. If anything it does the exact opposite.
    Total nonsense. A flat tax is clearly regressive.
    "The necessaries of life occasion the great expense of the poor. They find it difficult to get food, and the greater part of their little revenue is spent in getting it. The luxuries and vanities of life occasion the principal expense of the rich, and a magnificent house embellishes and sets off to the best advantage all the other luxuries and vanities which they possess. ... It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion."

    -- Adam Smith

  5. #175
    Sage
    Kreton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Colorado Springs
    Last Seen
    11-13-17 @ 08:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    6,118

    Re: Senate fails to advance Buffett rule

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamT View Post
    Every version a flat tax that I've seen includes a personal exemption, which would keep many of those who currently don't pay FIT from paying under a flat tax, and of course it would result in different rates.

    If you don't have an exemption then a flat tax is simply unfair. It fails to capture the distinction between income necessary for basic survival and disposable income. In effect it results in middle class disposable income being taxed at a rate in the high 80s or 90s, versus the low 20s for wealthier individuals.

    In other words, it's sort of like taxing a corporation on gross revenue rather than net profits.
    How does a flat tax result in the middle classes being taxed in the high 80's or 90's and low 20's for wealthier?
    “Most people do not listen with the intent to understand; they listen with the intent to reply.”
    Stephen R. Covey


  6. #176
    Sage
    Kreton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Colorado Springs
    Last Seen
    11-13-17 @ 08:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    6,118

    Re: Senate fails to advance Buffett rule

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamT View Post
    Total nonsense. A flat tax is clearly regressive.
    Explain how it would be total nonsense.
    “Most people do not listen with the intent to understand; they listen with the intent to reply.”
    Stephen R. Covey


  7. #177
    Sage
    Gimmesometruth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    US Southwest
    Last Seen
    09-13-17 @ 10:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    22,405

    Re: Senate fails to advance Buffett rule

    Quote Originally Posted by muciti View Post
    Creating a flat tax does not cause any wealth inequality. If anything it does the exact opposite.
    Totally false, a lowering of taxes on the top with an increase on low wage earners will increase the wealth gap.

    You have nothing to base your claim on.
    Quote Originally Posted by trouble13 View Post
    If you wanna know why Trumpsters are ignoring you its for the same reason you ignored the KKKs complaints about Obama.
    Quote Originally Posted by Moderate Right View Post
    When it comes down to it, all facts are cherry picked.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bodhisattva View Post
    He didn't say it didn't make sense. He said it is complete nonsense.

  8. #178
    Professor
    Billy the Kid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Last Seen
    05-28-13 @ 02:29 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    2,449

    Re: Senate fails to advance Buffett rule

    Quote Originally Posted by Gimmesometruth View Post
    So does that change in any way your previous belief about the tax ideas of today's Dem and Kennedy Dems?


    Don't think I posted anything other than - "The Libby/Demos of today are not Kennedy Democrats". So I don't know where you have me talking about "tax ideas of today's Dem and Kennedy Dems".


    You must have been reading someone else's posts.

  9. #179
    Sage
    Gimmesometruth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    US Southwest
    Last Seen
    09-13-17 @ 10:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    22,405

    Re: Senate fails to advance Buffett rule

    Quote Originally Posted by muciti View Post
    Explain how it would be total nonsense.
    It is your claim that it would not, you back yours.

    Ever since the decline in top marginal rates in the US after WWII, we have seen a steady rise in wealth inequality.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/17/bu...t-a-start.html
    Quote Originally Posted by trouble13 View Post
    If you wanna know why Trumpsters are ignoring you its for the same reason you ignored the KKKs complaints about Obama.
    Quote Originally Posted by Moderate Right View Post
    When it comes down to it, all facts are cherry picked.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bodhisattva View Post
    He didn't say it didn't make sense. He said it is complete nonsense.

  10. #180
    Professor
    Billy the Kid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Last Seen
    05-28-13 @ 02:29 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    2,449

    Re: Senate fails to advance Buffett rule

    Quote Originally Posted by Gimmesometruth View Post
    Obviously, he would not join the GOP now. They were good with 70% top marginal rate then. Now you guys are talking about 15%.

    Again, I haven't posted anything about "15% taxes" or "70% top marginal rate".


    Although I did post JFK would probably be a Repub today.


    Seems there are a great deal of folks posting about % and rates.

Page 18 of 36 FirstFirst ... 8161718192028 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •