View Poll Results: Doesn't a middle class tax cut also benefit the rich?

Voters
22. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    20 90.91%
  • No

    2 9.09%
  • I don't know.

    0 0%
Page 6 of 9 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 81

Thread: Doesn't a middle class tax cut also benefit the the Rich?

  1. #51
    Enemy Combatant
    Kandahar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Last Seen
    10-15-13 @ 08:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    20,688

    Re: Doesn't a middle class tax cut also benefit the the Rich?

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    people get tired of being milked and get nothing back in return. those targeted for tax hikes by obama will get no additional benefits for that soaking. you miss the point that the politically expedient act of soaking the rich only causes more and more spending as those who want the spending have no reason to reign it in since they aren't paying for it
    Let's see what benefits the wealthy receive, will receive, or have received:
    1) Keeping their banks, insurance companies, and auto plants afloat during a recession (and not just the ones that were actually bailed out).
    2) An educated workforce that produces talented employees.
    3) A health care system that produces healthy employees with low absenteeism rates.
    4) A justice system that protects their property rights.
    5) A military and law enforcement system that protects their property and personal rights.
    6) An infrastructure system that can deliver goods from their suppliers to their business, without prohibitively expensive shipping costs. That can power their factories via an electric grid and provide them with data via the internet, without prohibitively expensive utility costs.
    7) A consumer class with disposable income, which can purchase the goods and services that their businesses provide.

    Those are a few that I can think of off-hand. Furthermore, a lot of recent spending on the lower- and middle-class is to combat the recession, for which the wealthy are disproportionately responsible. So even in those cases, it's not so much an increase in benefits to "the parasite classes" at the expense of the wealthy...it's making the kid who broke the window pay to have it fixed.

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude
    if people are expected to carry most of the load in paying for government services they damn well ought to get additional goverment benefits which certainly is not the case now
    No. Although the wealthy do benefit from government as stated above, the whole point of taxes is to provide things that the market cannot or will not. It doesn't make sense to establish a one-to-one ratio of more taxes from me personally = more benefits to me personally. Taxes provide for the public. Services in which the "I pay more, I get more" model works should be (and typically are) privatized. Government specifically handles areas where that model DOESN'T work.
    Last edited by Kandahar; 09-29-10 at 12:34 AM.
    Are you coming to bed?
    I can't. This is important.
    What?
    Someone is WRONG on the internet! -XKCD

  2. #52
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,685

    Re: Doesn't a middle class tax cut also benefit the the Rich?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    Let's see what benefits the wealthy receive or have received:
    1) Keeping their banks, insurance companies, and auto plants afloat during a recession (and not just the ones that were actually bailed out).
    2) An educated workforce that produces talented employees.
    3) A health care system that produces healthy employees with low absenteeism rates.
    4) A justice system that protects their property rights.
    5) A military and law enforcement system that protects their property and personal rights.
    6) An infrastructure system that can deliver goods from their suppliers to their business, without prohibitively expensive shipping costs. That can power their factories via an electric grid and provide them with data via the internet, without prohibitively expensive utility costs.

    Those are a few that I can think of off-hand.
    not a direct benefit-speculative at best

    the rich don't use the police near as much as the poor

    the poor are far more likley to be the victims of criminal attack than the rich

    we had all those benefits before there was an income tax

    try again

    and others noted what the rich get they pay for

    the rich get no additional direct benefits by virtue of paying way way too much of the tax bill

    a flat tax would still mean the rich pay more than they use

    but it would prevent the dems from buying votes by telling the many that only the minority will face higher taxes to pay for the government programs that appeal to the many

    later dude, early morning tomorrow take care



  3. #53
    Sage
    Barbbtx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    W'Ford TX
    Last Seen
    11-10-12 @ 08:04 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    8,467

    Re: Doesn't a middle class tax cut also benefit the the Rich?

    Quote Originally Posted by ender1 View Post
    Taxes 101

    Our tax system uses a progressive tax model. Income is evaluated in brackets. As your income increases you enter higher tax brackets and higher % of your income in that bracket. To be clear, everyone pays the same % on the first $8,375. Its 10% so everyone pays up to the max of $837.50 if you make over $8375.00. Rich and poor. If your income is greater than $8,375 you move into the next bracket and pay 15% on everything you earn within that tax bracket.

    So if your taxable income is $100,000 you would pay the following
    ( $ 8,375 minus 0 ) x .10 : $837.50
    ( 34,000 minus 8,375 ) x .15 : $3,843
    ( 82,400 minus 34,000 ) x .25 : $12,100
    ( 100,000 minus 82,400 ) x .28 : $4,928
    Total: $ 21708.5


    Based upon your question then yes. If the bottom brackets stay the same or go down then both rich and poor benefit. BUT, to the poor and middle class the actual % increase in disposible income is a significantly higher than what the rich would get. In fact that few thousand dollars is nothing to someone who makes $250k or more.

    I am not saying I like the tax system we have or what it is spent on. This is just the facts.
    Let's just all pay 20% forget all this crap.
    Taxes collected should be enough to take care of those truly unable to work or find a job in a bad economy.
    Catawa is my favorite bleeding heart liberal.
    1/27/12

  4. #54
    Educator ender1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    08-01-11 @ 11:13 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    646

    Re: Doesn't a middle class tax cut also benefit the the Rich?

    Quote Originally Posted by Barbbtx View Post
    Let's just all pay 20% forget all this crap.
    Taxes collected should be enough to take care of those truly unable to work or find a job in a bad economy.
    Because that is even worse. Its a regressive tax. Not quite as bad as a consumption tax but still bad.

    I do like that your trying to come up with solutions instead of just complaining about the one we have. I do think there is a solution but its not to give all the money to the rich. Its also not steal from the rich and give it to those who dont want to work. Money is still the best motivation for success we have come up with.

  5. #55
    Don't Mess With Texas
    mertex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Last Seen
    10-14-14 @ 03:37 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    2,382

    Re: Doesn't a middle class tax cut also benefit the the Rich?

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    In some ways it hurts the rich. The middle class supply most of the votes in this country and use most of the government resources.
    That's a load of crap. Actually the very wealthy use up more of the government services.


    Shouldn't everyone pay the same amount?
    In a word-- no. It's not more fair; it's appallingly unfair. Why? The rich should pay more taxes, because the rich get more from the government.

    Consider defense, for example, which makes up 20% of the budget. Defending the country benefits everyone; but it benefits the rich more, because they have more to defend. It's the same principle as insurance: if you have a bigger house or a fancier car, you pay more to insure it.

    Social security payments, which make up another 20% of the budget, are dependent on income-- if you've put more into the system, you get higher payments when you retire.

    Investments in the nation's infrastructure-- transportation, education, research & development, energy, police subsidies, the courts, etc.-- again are more useful the more you have. The interstates and airports benefit interstate commerce and people who can travel, not ghetto dwellers. Energy is used disproportionately by the rich and by industry.

    As for public education, the better public schools are the ones attended by the moderately well off. The very well off ship their offspring off to private schools; but it is their companies that benefit from a well-educated public. (If you don't think that's a benefit, go start up an engineering firm, or even a factory, in El Salvador. Or Watts.)

    The FDIC and the S&L bailout obviously most benefit investors and large depositors. A neat example: a smooth operator bought a failing S&L for $350 million, then received $2 billion from the government to help resurrect it.

    Beyond all this, the federal budget is top-heavy with corporate welfare. Counting tax breaks and expenditures, corporations and the rich snuffle up over $400 billion a year-- compare that to the $1400 budget, or the $116 billion spent on programs for the poor.

    Where's all that money go? There's direct subsidies to agribusiness ($18 billion a year), to export companies, to maritime shippers, and to various industries-- airlines, nuclear power companies, timber companies, mining companies, automakers, drug companies. There's billions of dollars in military waste and fraud. And there's untold billions in tax credits, deductions, and loopholes. Accelerated depreciation alone, for instance, is estimated to cost the Treasury $37 billion a year-- billions more than the mortgage interest deduction. (Which itself benefits the people with the biggest mortgages. But we should encourage home ownership, shouldn't we? Well, Canada has no interest deduction, but has about the same rate of home ownership.)

    Why the rich should pay more taxes



    Giving them a tax break leads to the middle class believing they can continue to support reckless spending politicians because their taxes won't be raised.
    You got a tax break. Is that why you supported Bush's reckless spending?



    "I have been thinking that I would make a proposition to my Republican friends... that if they will stop telling lies about the Democrats, we will stop telling the truth about them."
    --Adlai Stevenson, Politician





  6. #56
    Educator Gabriel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Last Seen
    10-07-10 @ 08:38 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    1,019

    Re: Doesn't a middle class tax cut also benefit the the Rich?

    This question is certainly long overdue. In so many ways the wealthiest in society completely benefit in multiple ways that can be made comparable to a parasitic effect. First and foremost the wealthy benefit from public spending more then anyone else. Health, education and welfare all indirectly subsidise the upper classes wallet size.

    Having a huge relatively healthy body of employable and well educated is their main asset. In most cases these people pay for these factors out of their own pockets via taxes and or bank loans.(done with interest) On this alone the wealthy get more then they put into society .. easily.

    The Bush taxes originally in place are about to come back. The question we should ask is why Bush set a time that they would return? Obviously they didn't believe them to be sustainable. But lets consider the group that benefited most in terms of money saved/earned.

    The whole idea is that a tax cut for the highest income bracket would increase the tax base substantially.. but it didn't. In fact it had little to no effect. The tax cuts for middle and lower income classes had a far greater positive effect then a few thousand dollars more in some ones pocket that really wasn't asking for the tax cut and didn't need it. But further lower income brackets directly reinvest that tax savings into the economy more often then not because they have to for multiple reasons. Debt repayment and consumption of services or goods. Which again directly goes into upper income classes pockets. While the wealthiest who needed the money saved even far less donít have to spend it at all.

    Additionally, the economy at best only had a one time small burst from the cut.. then as the excess money from the tax savings is realised the economy normalised. It just equated to less money being in circulation as a whole. The wealthy have absorbed the money the middle incomes saved from the tax cut.. via consumption of services or goods at added expense, debt repayment (at interest) all the while raising the public debt which has interest to be financed with public funds derived from taxation. Would a tax increase on the middle class hurt the economy.. well an even more progressive cap on taxing the middle class incomes over 200k would not hurt so much as lower incomes.. and another cap around 150k a smaller percentage. The vast majority of lower incomes benifit more from lower taxation. The taxes on the most wealthy have smaller and smaller effect overall

    It's no wonder why we can see such a disparity in the growth of wealth in the middle class and lower incomes compared to the wealthiest. I say it is about time that the upper crust of society, that has an ultra privileged existence, has to pay back. You could call it a form of social morality if you like. Simple logic is one good turn deserves another. Why doesn't society expect these people to pay back? Clearly they see them deserving of such privilege. I don't personally revere the wealthy as though they all merit insanely privileged lives over and above the rest of us maggots that are obviously deserving of our state of being. Ironically they live their lives directly benefiting from the existence of lower income classes that are fraught with struggle and living from pay check to pay check.

  7. #57
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,685

    Re: Doesn't a middle class tax cut also benefit the the Rich?

    Quote Originally Posted by ender1 View Post
    Because that is even worse. Its a regressive tax. Not quite as bad as a consumption tax but still bad.

    I do like that your trying to come up with solutions instead of just complaining about the one we have. I do think there is a solution but its not to give all the money to the rich. Its also not steal from the rich and give it to those who dont want to work. Money is still the best motivation for success we have come up with.
    how do you give money to people by taking less of what they already had?



  8. #58
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,685

    Re: Doesn't a middle class tax cut also benefit the the Rich?

    Quote Originally Posted by mertex View Post
    That's a load of crap. Actually the very wealthy use up more of the government services.


    Shouldn't everyone pay the same amount?
    In a word-- no. It's not more fair; it's appallingly unfair. Why? The rich should pay more taxes, because the rich get more from the government.

    Consider defense, for example, which makes up 20% of the budget. Defending the country benefits everyone; but it benefits the rich more, because they have more to defend. It's the same principle as insurance: if you have a bigger house or a fancier car, you pay more to insure it.

    Social security payments, which make up another 20% of the budget, are dependent on income-- if you've put more into the system, you get higher payments when you retire.

    Investments in the nation's infrastructure-- transportation, education, research & development, energy, police subsidies, the courts, etc.-- again are more useful the more you have. The interstates and airports benefit interstate commerce and people who can travel, not ghetto dwellers. Energy is used disproportionately by the rich and by industry.

    As for public education, the better public schools are the ones attended by the moderately well off. The very well off ship their offspring off to private schools; but it is their companies that benefit from a well-educated public. (If you don't think that's a benefit, go start up an engineering firm, or even a factory, in El Salvador. Or Watts.)

    The FDIC and the S&L bailout obviously most benefit investors and large depositors. A neat example: a smooth operator bought a failing S&L for $350 million, then received $2 billion from the government to help resurrect it.

    Beyond all this, the federal budget is top-heavy with corporate welfare. Counting tax breaks and expenditures, corporations and the rich snuffle up over $400 billion a year-- compare that to the $1400 budget, or the $116 billion spent on programs for the poor.

    Where's all that money go? There's direct subsidies to agribusiness ($18 billion a year), to export companies, to maritime shippers, and to various industries-- airlines, nuclear power companies, timber companies, mining companies, automakers, drug companies. There's billions of dollars in military waste and fraud. And there's untold billions in tax credits, deductions, and loopholes. Accelerated depreciation alone, for instance, is estimated to cost the Treasury $37 billion a year-- billions more than the mortgage interest deduction. (Which itself benefits the people with the biggest mortgages. But we should encourage home ownership, shouldn't we? Well, Canada has no interest deduction, but has about the same rate of home ownership.)

    Why the rich should pay more taxes




    You got a tax break. Is that why you supported Bush's reckless spending?
    speaking of a steaming load of bs

    I was against Bush's spending

    I want to get rid of about half of the federal government

    the wealthiest people are far more mobile than the middle class so your crap that the Rich benefit the most is complete nonsense.

    The people who benefit from corporate welfare are the uber-rich not those who make up the majority of those targeted for Dem tax hikes.



  9. #59
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,685

    Re: Doesn't a middle class tax cut also benefit the the Rich?

    Quote Originally Posted by Gabriel View Post
    This question is certainly long overdue. In so many ways the wealthiest in society completely benefit in multiple ways that can be made comparable to a parasitic effect. First and foremost the wealthy benefit from public spending more then anyone else. Health, education and welfare all indirectly subsidise the upper classes wallet size.

    Having a huge relatively healthy body of employable and well educated is their main asset. In most cases these people pay for these factors out of their own pockets via taxes and or bank loans.(done with interest) On this alone the wealthy get more then they put into society .. easily.

    The Bush taxes originally in place are about to come back. The question we should ask is why Bush set a time that they would return? Obviously they didn't believe them to be sustainable. But lets consider the group that benefited most in terms of money saved/earned.

    The whole idea is that a tax cut for the highest income bracket would increase the tax base substantially.. but it didn't. In fact it had little to no effect. The tax cuts for middle and lower income classes had a far greater positive effect then a few thousand dollars more in some ones pocket that really wasn't asking for the tax cut and didn't need it. But further lower income brackets directly reinvest that tax savings into the economy more often then not because they have to for multiple reasons. Debt repayment and consumption of services or goods. Which again directly goes into upper income classes pockets. While the wealthiest who needed the money saved even far less don’t have to spend it at all.

    Additionally, the economy at best only had a one time small burst from the cut.. then as the excess money from the tax savings is realised the economy normalised. It just equated to less money being in circulation as a whole. The wealthy have absorbed the money the middle incomes saved from the tax cut.. via consumption of services or goods at added expense, debt repayment (at interest) all the while raising the public debt which has interest to be financed with public funds derived from taxation. Would a tax increase on the middle class hurt the economy.. well an even more progressive cap on taxing the middle class incomes over 200k would not hurt so much as lower incomes.. and another cap around 150k a smaller percentage. The vast majority of lower incomes benifit more from lower taxation. The taxes on the most wealthy have smaller and smaller effect overall

    It's no wonder why we can see such a disparity in the growth of wealth in the middle class and lower incomes compared to the wealthiest. I say it is about time that the upper crust of society, that has an ultra privileged existence, has to pay back. You could call it a form of social morality if you like. Simple logic is one good turn deserves another. Why doesn't society expect these people to pay back? Clearly they see them deserving of such privilege. I don't personally revere the wealthy as though they all merit insanely privileged lives over and above the rest of us maggots that are obviously deserving of our state of being. Ironically they live their lives directly benefiting from the existence of lower income classes that are fraught with struggle and living from pay check to pay check.
    the dishonesty of posts such as your whine about the uber wealthy is that the schemes you back hit everyone in the top 2% and most of those aren't the ones "guilty" of the stuff that causes major bedwetting among the socialists and egalitarians. and btw-the top 1% pays 40% of the income tax so your drivel that they don't give back is just a bright and shining LIE
    Last edited by TurtleDude; 09-29-10 at 08:53 PM.



  10. #60
    Educator ender1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    08-01-11 @ 11:13 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    646

    Re: Doesn't a middle class tax cut also benefit the the Rich?

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    how do you give money to people by taking less of what they already had?
    Sorry, I dont understand. Please be more spacific.

Page 6 of 9 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... 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
  •