View Poll Results: Is it unreasonable to pay a little more?

Voters
97. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes. I'm a greedy bastard!! I need MORE!!!

    28 28.87%
  • No. There's comes a point in wealthiness where it just doesn't even matter anymore.

    61 62.89%
  • I'm not sure.

    8 8.25%
Page 70 of 81 FirstFirst ... 2060686970717280 ... LastLast
Results 691 to 700 of 809

Thread: Is it unreasonable for the wealthiest to pay a little more?

  1. #691
    Sage

    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Florida
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:42 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    23,401

    Re: Is it unreasonable for the wealthiest to pay a little more?

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    that is irrelevant. what is relevant is I pay far more dollars for each dollar of value received than you do. sitting back and getting a free ride is less painful than working hard and smart to be wealthy enought to have to fund the slackers
    Every dollar you receive is made possible by this Govt. that you despise so much. Without it you would get nothing, and have nothing. Someday you will realize this and hate yourself for being such a skinflint.

  2. #692
    User Laura80L's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Rhode Island
    Last Seen
    01-13-13 @ 02:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    28

    Re: Is it unreasonable for the wealthiest to pay a little more?

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    History is longer than your life:

    This analysis revealed a lot of surprising conclusions, including the following:

    Today's government spending levels are indeed too high, at least relative to the average level of tax revenue the government has generated over the past 60 years. Unless Americans are willing to radically increase the amount of taxes they pay relative to GDP, government spending must be cut.

    Today's income tax rates are strikingly low relative to the rates of the past century, especially for rich people. For most of the century, including some boom times, top-bracket income tax rates were much higher than they are today.

    Contrary to what Republicans would have you believe, super-high tax rates on rich people do not appear to hurt the economy or make people lazy: During the 1950s and early 1960s, the top bracket income tax rate was over 90%--and the economy, middle-class, and stock market boomed.

    Super-low tax rates on rich people also appear to be correlated with unsustainable sugar highs in the economy--brief, enjoyable booms followed by protracted busts. They also appear to be correlated with very high inequality. (For example, see the 1920s and now).

    Periods of very low tax rates have been followed by periods with very high tax rates, and vice versa. So history suggests that tax rates will soon start going up.


    Read more: THE HISTORY OF TAXES: Here's How High Today's Rates Really Are - Business Insider
    I realize history goes back further than my date of birth. My point was that the rich already do in fact pay a higher tax rate (in dollars AND percentages). I just wasn't sure why the proof needed to go back more than 30 years. It was assumed that my tax rate should be lower today than it was when I was making 30K simply because Warren Buffett makes a claim.

    Almost Classical: The 90% Tax Rate Myth
    "When there was a 94% top rate in 1944-45, there were so many deductions and exclusions that the taxable income was not comparable to someone's entire income. First, the top rate started at $200,000, which today is equal to $2,413,059.90 — so the maximum EMTR would apply only to incomes of $2.5 million. But, that's still taxable income, not earned income.

    It's pretty hard to find the "effective" tax rates prior to 1979. I wonder why that is? And I wonder how we get a truer picture of taxation and it's benefits and hinders when we cannot get accurate data.


    Why they should continue paying more while the other half see's only a return is another argument altogether.
    Laura

  3. #693
    Farts in Elevators
    OscarB63's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Alabama
    Last Seen
    09-06-14 @ 07:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    26,526

    Re: Is it unreasonable for the wealthiest to pay a little more?

    and i am still confused by the people who pay the least crying that those who pay much much more than them are not paying their fair share.
    The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter.

    An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last.

  4. #694
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: Is it unreasonable for the wealthiest to pay a little more?

    Quote Originally Posted by Laura80L View Post
    I realize history goes back further than my date of birth. My point was that the rich already do in fact pay a higher tax rate (in dollars AND percentages). I just wasn't sure why the proof needed to go back more than 30 years. It was assumed that my tax rate should be lower today than it was when I was making 30K simply because Warren Buffett makes a claim.

    Almost Classical: The 90% Tax Rate Myth
    "When there was a 94% top rate in 1944-45, there were so many deductions and exclusions that the taxable income was not comparable to someone's entire income. First, the top rate started at $200,000, which today is equal to $2,413,059.90 — so the maximum EMTR would apply only to incomes of $2.5 million. But, that's still taxable income, not earned income.

    It's pretty hard to find the "effective" tax rates prior to 1979. I wonder why that is? And I wonder how we get a truer picture of taxation and it's benefits and hinders when we cannot get accurate data.


    Why they should continue paying more while the other half see's only a return is another argument altogether.
    The why is the argument. Like I said, we've favored the wealthy and business in a lot of ways in recent history, and the gap between the wealthy and poor has grown. This gap has seen more wealthy, but also more below the line on tax rates, with either shrinking wages or stagnation. If the bottom doesn't rise, the wealthy will continue to pay more and more. The why is really the only issue. But, right now, mostly all anyone is seeing is a return to the Clinton tax rate, which was hardly a burden. There should be no reason for any real outrage.

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

  5. #695
    Farts in Elevators
    OscarB63's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Alabama
    Last Seen
    09-06-14 @ 07:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    26,526

    Re: Is it unreasonable for the wealthiest to pay a little more?

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    The why is the argument. Like I said, we've favored the wealthy and business in a lot of ways in recent history, and the gap between the wealthy and poor has grown. This gap has seen more wealthy, but also more below the line on tax rates, with either shrinking wages or stagnation. If the bottom doesn't rise, the wealthy will continue to pay more and more. The why is really the only issue. But, right now, mostly all anyone is seeing is a return to the Clinton tax rate, which was hardly a burden. There should be no reason for any real outrage.
    i would argue that the gap has grown due to the dumbing down of the american populace. i quit teaching after 11 years in 2004 because every year the kids were getting dumber and their attitudes were getting worse. If you barely make it out of HS (or drop out) and you have no skills, no training, no nothing...it's not some rich guy's fault that you are not successful. and, honestly, the bulk of the poor people fall into this category rather than being highly motivated individuals who just can't catch a break or have had a run of bad luck.

    a friend of mine is a recruiter for the army and you would be surprised at the number of people he has to turn away because they don't have a HS diploma or GED or because they are so stupid they can't make the minimum score on the incredibly easy entrance exam. I have known many kids who made a lower score on the entrance exam than you would have if you marked every answer "b" or just made random guesses.

    I've been in public schools and i've seen it first hand. You can't place all the blame for a lack of quality education on the school systems. It doesn't matter how good or how bad the school is...if the student doesn't put forth any effort they are going to leave school just as ignorant and uneducated as when they went in.
    The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter.

    An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last.

  6. #696
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Last Seen
    12-26-14 @ 02:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    10,032

    Re: Is it unreasonable for the wealthiest to pay a little more?

    Quote Originally Posted by iguanaman View Post
    Every dollar you receive is made possible by this Govt. that you despise so much. Without it you would get nothing, and have nothing. Someday you will realize this and hate yourself for being such a skinflint.
    This is actually correct. The govt has allowed the Federal Reserve to print money just like that, loan it to the government in exchange for govt bonds and then it is placed in the market, for you to use. Thus, every dollar you have is a dollar of debt to the federal reserve.

    But you see, if the Federal Reserve would actually be nationalized, and be a national bank, you would get rid of about $8tril and not be subjected to the same debt non-sense. But then, you have other issues to deal with.

  7. #697
    Farts in Elevators
    OscarB63's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Alabama
    Last Seen
    09-06-14 @ 07:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    26,526

    Re: Is it unreasonable for the wealthiest to pay a little more?

    is it totally unreasonable to expect the rich to pay a little more? not really

    is it totally unreasonalbe to expect the poor to do a little more to help themselves? ditto
    The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter.

    An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last.

  8. #698
    User
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Last Seen
    07-26-13 @ 03:37 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    47

    Re: Is it unreasonable for the wealthiest to pay a little more?

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    Actually, they pay less over all. We're only talking about a return to pre-Bush tax cuts and a few minor adjustments. Not one single wealthy person will trade places with any poor person.
    Well thats not true, but the "no rich person would trade their place with a poor person" like you would trade your place if you were rich.

  9. #699
    User
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Last Seen
    07-26-13 @ 03:37 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    47

    Re: Is it unreasonable for the wealthiest to pay a little more?

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    Not over what thy paid in the past, no. And they make more in actual dollars. I'm sorry, but the whining by the wealthy is largely hollow.
    The whining by the rich, more like the whining by Obama he just wants more money to TRY to get the debt problem solved by taxing and not cuting spending and it wont work at all, how much would it help if we tax them more huh tell me?

  10. #700
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: Is it unreasonable for the wealthiest to pay a little more?

    Quote Originally Posted by cado20 View Post
    The whining by the rich, more like the whining by Obama he just wants more money to TRY to get the debt problem solved by taxing and not cuting spending and it wont work at all, how much would it help if we tax them more huh tell me?
    Tax cuts alone? Not much. Same can be said for the cuts most talk about. Only a balanced approach, one that includes both tax increases and spending cuts will have any chance of being successful.

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

Page 70 of 81 FirstFirst ... 2060686970717280 ... 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
  •