• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Do the Rich Pay Their Fair Share of Taxes in the United States?

Do the Rich Pay Their Fair Share?

  • Yes

    Votes: 58 48.3%
  • No

    Votes: 62 51.7%

  • Total voters
    120
Its amazing-economists' predictions rate right next to weather forecasters in terms of accuracy.

why do you think wealth is concentrated at the top? I bet you think it is due to government not taking enough away-in other words you don't blame the indolent middle class and the poor but only the government and the rich.

Its like saying that Nadal, ND and Federer cheat the rest of the tennis players out of grand trophies rather than criticizing the other players for not training as hard as the champions or not having as strong a mental game


One of the reasons our forefathers wisely instituted the progressive tax rate was to prevent accumulation of wealth at the top, which tends to cause growth stagnation and poverty.

There is no indolent middle class, that is only a figment of a very biased mind. There is only the middle class that has been suffering from the effects of supply side economics and financial deregulation.
 
One of the reasons our forefathers wisely instituted the progressive tax rate was to prevent accumulation of wealth at the top, which tends to cause growth stagnation and poverty.

There is no indolent middle class, that is only a figment of a very biased mind. There is only the middle class that has been suffering from the effects of supply side economics and financial deregulation.

you need to prove that oozing nonsense. The progressive tax rate was imposed so politicians could buy what they want and only piss off a few percentage of the voters.

its a classic case of buying the support of many peters by robbing a few paula

Its political cowardice because making everyone pay for what the politicians use to buy their votes would lose the politicians elections


your almost religious reverence for the progressive tax is hilarious.


You starting with the welfare socialists as "forefathers" is telling as to your understanding of history
 
you need to prove that oozing nonsense. The progressive tax rate was imposed so politicians could buy what they want and only piss off a few percentage of the voters.

its a classic case of buying the support of many peters by robbing a few paula

Its political cowardice because making everyone pay for what the politicians use to buy their votes would lose the politicians elections


your almost religious reverence for the progressive tax is hilarious.


You starting with the welfare socialists as "forefathers" is telling as to your understanding of history


The democrats are going to bribe us with jobs that pay a living wage with affordable health care??? Beats the hell out continuing to take it up the ass so the rich can get an even bigger tax cut while the economy goes down the toilet!
 
The democrats are going to bribe us with jobs that pay a living wage with affordable health care??? Beats the hell out continuing to take it up the ass so the rich can get an even bigger tax cut while the economy goes down the toilet!

government should have no role in what wages you are paid. If your definition of a living wage is say 40K a year, you need to have the skills to earn such a wage. Rather than pissing and moaning that you deserve it even if you are only worth 25K a year

Your constant whining about the rich I believe is an indicator that you understand you don't have the ability to gain the wages you think you are entitled to
 
Thanks for you opinion anonymous internet guy, but I understand as one of the most frequently cited economists in the world does, that a consumer economy cannot prosper when most of society's wealth is at the top, out of reach of the majority of consumers.

But Stiglitz said it himself “inequality in America has been widening for decades.” "Decades" meaning 20 or more years, correct? I have consistently heard (from those on the left) how the ‘Clinton years’ were what we need to go back to. Remind me again who many years ago that was. OR has this ‘out of reach of the majority of consumers’ a recent phenomenon?...which of course would negate Stiglitz statement.
 
Yeah right, we want to ride our fox hunting horses over you peasants. There is that fixation with neologisms. You found a wiki definition that sounded impressive and you have beaten the dead horse until its hamburger

What I found was you obeying the orders of your corporate masters and their sycophants Luntz & Faris and dutifully repeating the neologism you were ordered to use whenever you could.
 
But Stiglitz said it himself “inequality in America has been widening for decades.” "Decades" meaning 20 or more years, correct?

I have consistently heard (from those on the left) how the ‘Clinton years’ were what we need to go back to. Remind me again who many years ago that was. OR has this ‘out of reach of the majority of consumers’ a recent phenomenon?...which of course would negate Stiglitz statement.[/QUOTE]

Yes, it began growing when the supply side economics/financial deregulation policies began in 1980. The 90's with higher tax rates for the wealthy just restored some of the progressiveness to our tax rates. The Bush tax cuts took us farther down the hole.
 
government should have no role in what wages you are paid. If your definition of a living wage is say 40K a year, you need to have the skills to earn such a wage. Rather than pissing and moaning that you deserve it even if you are only worth 25K a year

Your constant whining about the rich I believe is an indicator that you understand you don't have the ability to gain the wages you think you are entitled to


And while you are at it why don't we get ride of child labor laws? After all they are just parasites right?
 
Last edited:
you need to prove that oozing nonsense. The progressive tax rate was imposed so politicians could buy what they want and only piss off a few percentage of the voters.

"Adam Smith, the father of modern economics and frequent referent of conservatives, favored progressive taxes. In "The Wealth of Nations," Smith said, "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."
Those who are lucky at birth to be born into wealthy families have structural advantages throughout life that provide them a downhill playing field.
They get the best educations while networking with the most powerful people.

If they want to start a business, they have capital to get started.

If they fail at any point in life, they have a safety net to fall back on. With more capital, they get better returns on investment from economies of scale and access to investment opportunities unavailable to those with less money.

And they can influence government policy in a way that the working class cannot, which reinforces their ability to garner and maintain wealth.
A progressive tax system acknowledges that these advantages are largely the product of the lottery of birth and uses taxes and government services to level the playing field.
By increasing the top marginal tax rate – or, if you prefer, by creating a new top tax bracket, say for income in excess of $1 million a year – we can help those among us who have the least.

That is, by any religious tradition or standard of morality, the right thing to do.
And, by reducing the gap between the rich and the poor, it ends up helping us all."

Progressive tax structure helps reduce harmful income inequality - Opinion - The Daily Athenaeum - West Virginia University
 
No, it doesn't cause death and suffering. If greed caused all these problems now, the same would have been true prior to the 2008 financial crisis.
When times get hard the disparities become more apparent. That doesn't mean they weren't there before.

If someone is wealthy, it does not take away from someone who has less, no matter what economic class that individual is in.
We both know differently. Like anything else in the world there is a limited supply of money. If someone has more then someone else has less. There's no getting around that simple truth. If people with wealth don't give a crap that someone else has less then let them own that position and quit trying to make the public believe otherwise.
 
Last edited:
So you didn't answer the high school opportunity question? Why not?
Because it's misleading and irrelevant.

Having more HS grads overall would just put more HS grads in the unemployment lines.
 
What type of PhD's?

There are also thousands of agricultural jobs paying well above minimum wage that these poor souls are unwilling to fill. It doesn't take a high school diploma to see we should not be paying people unemployment for not taking available jobs.
I wouldn't want a Ph.D of any kind except mechanical engineering to rebuild a truck engine. Same goes for agricultural jobs. If the job is "paying well above minimum wage" then it needs some specialized skill or talent.
 
What I found was you obeying the orders of your corporate masters and their sycophants Luntz & Faris and dutifully repeating the neologism you were ordered to use whenever you could.

Fantasy land mutterings again. I don't even know who Faris is. Must be someone on the DNC hit list
 
I wouldn't want a Ph.D of any kind except mechanical engineering to rebuild a truck engine. Same goes for agricultural jobs. If the job is "paying well above minimum wage" then it needs some specialized skill or talent.

Specialized like picking apples?
 
Not a criminal. Not greedy either. Not rich, not poor. Never missed a meal- because I know how to earn money. I have been unemployed. I never missed a mortgage payment. Cut grass, did odd jobs- then temp to perm when the opportunity arose. Didn't pay me much so started my own business. Now I own two. No one ever gave me a dime, and I never took anything from anyone.

There is opportunity. Again, I didn't read it on a website. If you are unemployed and you are sitting around all day waiting on the job market to improve, you are missing opportunties.
And if ten million unemployed were as industriousness and lucky as you then we would have twenty million more businesses in America just like yours, right??? :lol:
 
Last edited:
Specialized like picking apples?
Is picking apples "paying well above minimum wage" now??? Hell, I might do that just for fun, then! :) Where do I apply? Please provide a link - I can't seem to find it with Google.



Or is this one of those scams like those work-at-home things where you get $0.001/envelope you stuff and it takes 6 seconds to stuff the envelope?
 
Last edited:
Or you're just posting crap ...
 
But of course-those who need the government to take care of them or who resent those who are wealthy, always have a far greater understanding of economics than those who actually are successfully economically

Again, how does one getting handed millions from dead parents confer upon one the label of being ECONOMICALLY SUCCESSFUL? A far better term would be LUCKY.
 
Has anyone here considered the endpoint of a progressive tax system designed
to redistribute the wealth?
I think everyone will agree, our Government has the authority to set a minimum wage.
This fact also implies the Government has the authority to set a maximum wage.
Alright progressives, what is the maximum total compensation any person should be
allowed per year?
 
Fantasy land mutterings again. I don't even know who Faris is. Must be someone on the DNC hit list

You either outright lie or you have the worst memory on this board. :roll:

Faris is the Tweedle-dum to the Tweedle-dee of Luntz - you remember now don't you? After all, I have provided their names to you dozens and dozens of times in post after post after post when you bring up their favorite neologism for inheritance taxes. You slavishly follow their orders so perhaps you should try to remember the names of your masters.

Or at least be honest about it. ;)
 
Has anyone here considered the endpoint of a progressive tax system designed
to redistribute the wealth?
I think everyone will agree, our Government has the authority to set a minimum wage.
This fact also implies the Government has the authority to set a maximum wage.
Alright progressives, what is the maximum total compensation any person should be
allowed per year?

Good point. This is where the left will dare not go. I have asked many times to define what IS fair taxation. I have proposed taxing income from ALL sources (including LTCG and interst/dividends) at a SINGLE rate (of say 20%) and giving each FIT payer a "standard" deduction of say $20K. An income tax system with only two numbers is "fair", in that it is both flat and progressive. I have yet to see any proposals (except from Haymarket) that describe/propose an alternative "fair" FIT system.
 
And if ten million unemployed were as industriousness and lucky as you then we would have twenty million more businesses in America just like yours, right??? :lol:

I don't care what they do. That is up to them. Opportunity exists. If by "industrious" you mean figuring out how to eat and pay the mortgage...

My entire claim throughout this thread is that people like you would rather cast the blame of a bad situation on successful people, rather than taking responsibilty for their own lives and figuring out how to be successful themselves.

If you aren't "industrious" enough to figure out that there are ways to earn money while you are unemplopyed, and you are just sitting around blaming the rich for your predicament, then your situation is YOUR FAULT, because YOU are doing nothing to improve it. The governement isn't the answer to this country's ills. Personal responsibilty is.

If we cut off all the food stamps, welfare, and housing assistance, you would see just how "industrious" Americans would get. People all over this country are just wallowing in the "safety net." If it were removed, people would begin to see how life really is... that you better learn to be "industrious," because if you don't, you will starve to death. :lol::lol::lol:
 
Last edited:
Has anyone here considered the endpoint of a progressive tax system designed
to redistribute the wealth?
I think everyone will agree, our Government has the authority to set a minimum wage.
This fact also implies the Government has the authority to set a maximum wage.
Alright progressives, what is the maximum total compensation any person should be
allowed per year?

I do not think there should be a maximum.
 
Good point. This is where the left will dare not go. I have asked many times to define what IS fair taxation. I have proposed taxing income from ALL sources (including LTCG and interst/dividends) at a SINGLE rate (of say 20%) and giving each FIT payer a "standard" deduction of say $20K. An income tax system with only two numbers is "fair", in that it is both flat and progressive. I have yet to see any proposals (except from Haymarket) that describe/propose an alternative "fair" FIT system.

The term FAIR should be abolished in discussions about taxation. APPROPRIATE is a more apt term.

Yes, lets tax capital gains and inheritance at normal rates - but they need to follow the progressive schedule. Perhaps three or four basic rates starting at 5% for everyone who earns dollar one and topping at 40% for the top rate with a couple in between that. I would favor very few if any deductions - perhaps something for medical expenses if we do NOT have national health care but that would be about it.
 
Back
Top Bottom