• 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
the only consistency we get from the far left is wanting more taxes taken from those who are more industrious than they are. They ignore the sound reasons why LTCG or dividend income is taxed at a lower rate
There is nothing "industrious" about handing over millions of inherited money to a money manager.
There is nothing "industrious" about having a free ride for the first 26 years of your life.

Most of what rich people do has nothing to do with being hard working. The local mechanic or water plant operator works harder than most rich people ever dream of working - and get paid a hell of a lot less for a job that's just as essential to society.
 
You seem to be missing the point.

This was in response to an earlier poster



My response which was




The whole point of my comment was it sets my teeth on edge when I read the utterly screaming hypocrisy of trust fund babies whining and bitching about a lack of INDUSTRIOUSNESS in others simply because they have the luck of birth to cash those checks which they did absolutely nothing to earn.

Are we clear on the context of that now?

OK, your envy of "the rich" has been well established, we "get it", now explain why ANY differences in taxation should result from two citizens making the SAME pay. What IS a "fair" a taxation policy? You seem to "zoom in" on ONLY the "uber rich" and can not justify why two citzens, both making EXACTLY $50K, should NOT pay EXACTLY the same amount to IRS. Some tax "breaks" you deem "fair", while others you do not; what makes YOU the decider of what is "fair" or should be gov't "social policy" included in the tax code?
 
Last edited:
There is nothing "industrious" about handing over millions of inherited money to a money manager.
There is nothing "industrious" about having a free ride for the first 26 years of your life.

Most of what rich people do has nothing to do with being hard working. The local mechanic or water plant operator works harder than most rich people ever dream of working - and get paid a hell of a lot less for a job that's just as essential to society.

"Just as necessary"? What does that mean? Playing in the NBA is not necessary yet commands quite a paycheck. Are you one of those that sees ALL work as equal, except of course your work, which should pay more than an auto mechanic because?
 
Last edited:
"The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not." Thomas Jefferson
This is just more right-wing crap. I don't believe Jefferson ever said that.

If you can provide the document where he wrote that - even the name of the document, you know, like "letter to Madison 1798" or something - then I'll happily retract but I'm pretty sure all you're going to find is fictional BS from another right-wingnut.
 
Please do feel free to back up your claims with my words by providing quotes.

Your so called "recall" is not going to suffice.

Do think a child should have to report as income, college funding paid on their behalf by their family or a car given to them to go to work or school? It seems only when that SAME activity, done on a larger scale (by the rich), is what you object to, as if the passing of family farmland, or "normal" assistance of children by "regualr" parents is OK, but only up to some "magic" amount that you have in mind, once it crosses that "line", ONLY then it is somehow "wrong". ;-)
 
"Just as necessary"? What does that mean? Playing in the NBA is not necessary yet commands quite a paycheck. Are you one of those that sees ALL work as equal, except of course your work, which should pay more than a an auto mechanic because?
My work isn't any more special than anyone else's under the philosophy you're trying to invoke.

Of course sports are necessary, including the "stars". Whatever gave you the idea they weren't?
 
My work isn't any more special than anyone else's under the philosophy you're trying to invoke.

Of course sports are necessary, including the "stars". Whatever gave you the idea they weren't?

I am just trying to see see any point in your "necessary" comment. What has the "necessary" argument have to do with taxation?
 
I am just trying to see see any point in your "necessary" comment. What has the "necessary" argument have to do with taxation?
Do you see "taxation" in the post you quoted???
 
now explain why ANY differences in taxation should result from two citizens making the SAME pay. What IS a "fair" a taxation policy? You seem to "zoom in" on ONLY the "uber rich" and can not justify why two citzens, both making EXACTLY $50K, should NOT pay EXACTLY the same amount to IRS. Some tax "breaks" you deem "fair", while others you do not; what makes YOU the decider of what is "fair" or should be gov't "social policy" included in the tax code?

Funny thing - I do not remember saying anything about such matters.

Perhaps you can quote me on these things you allege I have taken a stand on?
 
Do think a child should have to report as income, college funding paid on their behalf by their family or a car given to them to go to work or school? It seems only when that SAME activity, done on a larger scale (by the rich), is what you object to, as if the passing of family farmland, or "normal" assistance of children by "regualr" parents is OK, but only up to some "magic" amount that you have in mind, once it crosses that "line", ONLY then it is somehow "wrong". ;-)

You seem to be laboring under the false belief that I myself have authored and written the tax policy of the United States and thus must defend every line of the thousands upon thousands of pages of the tax code.
 
Funny thing - I do not remember saying anything about such matters.

Perhaps you can quote me on these things you allege I have taken a stand on?

OK, let me try to slow it down some for you. You want LTCG and dividend income taxed differently, yet put the blinders on to the rest of the MASSIVE tax code. You get all worked up over a TINY number of "uber rich" that get the majority of their income in this fashion. The SAME kind of tax break saves the middle class from paying LTCG taxes on their "retirement" accounts and their home sales, which you simply choose to ignore. You "like" posts that wish to tax inheritance "OF THE RICH", yet refuse to explain how much of any family farmland the gov't should take when passed on from parent to child.

By NOT "taking a stand", as you say, you are, in fact, "taking a stand", by simply OMITTING the same type (and in some cases the same exact tax benefit) as applied to middle class tax payers. The FACT that middle class taxpayers pay no more than 15% of their income in taxes (THE AVERAGE US INCOME TAXATION RATE IS 11%), bothers you not a bit, that you see as quite "fair" (or at least do not say is UNFAIR), yet that "the rich" having tax laws to NOT TAX THEM MORE THAN the middle class, is seen by YOU as unfair.

It is the fact that you REFUSE to discuss or "take a stand" on the tax law for the 99% that bothers me. It is quite easy to "zoom in" on the individual taxpayers, and say "see look how unfair that 80,000+ page tax code is", but to ignore the BIG PICTURE, of why we NEED all that tax code. Instead of harping on what is "unfair", please state what YOU you feel IS "fair" for ALL taxpayers.
 
No, but "fair" taxation is the subject of this thread. Perhaps I foolishly expected YOUR post to be topic related. ;-)
Then bitch to TD, to whom I was responding, about his unrelated and unnecessary comments.
 
The SAME kind of tax break saves the middle class from paying LTCG taxes on their "retirement" accounts and their home sales, which you simply choose to ignore.
LOL! Like the middle class's retirement income is going to be so large that it gets taxed at higher than 15%? You've been badly mislead by right-wing propaganda.
 
LOL! Like the middle class's retirement income is going to be so large that it gets taxed at higher than 15%? You've been badly mislead by right-wing propaganda.

In your "fair" plan will only "the rich" pay a higher rate on capital gains/dividend income? If the "common man" sells their home it may well generate a CG of six figures, especially considering a lifetime of accumulated prior CG "rollovers" are likely to be involved.
 
In your "fair" plan will only "the rich" pay a higher rate on capital gains/dividend income? If the "common man" sells their home it may well generate a CG of six figures, especially considering a lifetime of accumulated prior CG "rollovers" are likely to be involved.
As far as I know there is still a $250k ($500k joint) exclusion for the primary residence and everyone gets this including the rich. How many middle class couples do you know who will see $500k out of the sale of their home??? LOL!
 
OK, let me try to slow it down some for you. You want LTCG and dividend income taxed differently, yet put the blinders on to the rest of the MASSIVE tax code. You get all worked up over a TINY number of "uber rich" that get the majority of their income in this fashion. The SAME kind of tax break saves the middle class from paying LTCG taxes on their "retirement" accounts and their home sales, which you simply choose to ignore. You "like" posts that wish to tax inheritance "OF THE RICH", yet refuse to explain how much of any family farmland the gov't should take when passed on from parent to child.

Again, I must insist that when you assign my views to me and tell the world what it is that I believe, please do me the small courtesy of providing those views for us in the form of my quotes and the posts you are linking to. I hope that courtesy is not too much to ask of you.
 
Allow me to elaborate and connect the dots for you since the obvious implication seems to have escaped you. The person who labors for their check, has earned that check with their own industry. Many people who get checks for long term capital gains are merely cashing the check and they did absolutely nothing to earn it in any way shape or form. They got it through a pure accident of birth. They earned nothing.

Err, the logic of long term capital gains getting a lower rate has nothing to do with the effort put into obtaining the income and everything to do with incentivizing investment.

What exactly is unfair about the methods in which long term capital gains are taxed?
 
Last edited:
Again, I must insist that when you assign my views to me and tell the world what it is that I believe, please do me the small courtesy of providing those views for us in the form of my quotes and the posts you are linking to. I hope that courtesy is not too much to ask of you.

Quote taken from YOUR post #658 on this thread:

"But I am saying that in addition to that reality, I would support all Americans who earn dollar one to pay 5% federal income tax on that. And I would raise ALL tax brackets by 5 points each. In addition I would treat all income the same and get rid of the favorable discriminatory rates for things like capital gains and inheritance. Just tax it as income according to the applicable schedule"

Do I need to refresh you memory further, or can you figure it out on your own?
 
As far as I know there is still a $250k ($500k joint) exclusion for the primary residence and everyone gets this including the rich. How many middle class couples do you know who will see $500k out of the sale of their home??? LOL!

Thank you, I stand corrected, as I had not sold a home since before the 1997 tax law changes, prior to that it was a ONE TIME exclusion of up to $125K, ONLY allowed for those age 55 or older, allowing for the untaxed proceeds of that asset to help in retirement.
 
In your "fair" plan will only "the rich" pay a higher rate on capital gains/dividend income? If the "common man" sells their home it may well generate a CG of six figures, especially considering a lifetime of accumulated prior CG "rollovers" are likely to be involved.


the only consistency you will get from several of the tax hike fans on this forum is that they support any and all schemes, ploys or machinations that will cause the rich to be taxed even more
 
Err, the logic of long term capital gains getting a lower rate has nothing to do with the effort put into obtaining the income and everything to do with incentivizing investment.

What exactly is unfair about the methods in which long term capital gains are taxed?

I do not feel I should subsidize the gambling of anyone else. Why would you?
 
Quote taken from YOUR post #658 on this thread:

"But I am saying that in addition to that reality, I would support all Americans who earn dollar one to pay 5% federal income tax on that. And I would raise ALL tax brackets by 5 points each. In addition I would treat all income the same and get rid of the favorable discriminatory rates for things like capital gains and inheritance. Just tax it as income according to the applicable schedule"

Okay. That is my position. And what does that have to do with what you claimed I believed?

now explain why ANY differences in taxation should result from two citizens making the SAME pay. What IS a "fair" a taxation policy? You seem to "zoom in" on ONLY the "uber rich" and can not justify why two citzens, both making EXACTLY $50K, should NOT pay EXACTLY the same amount to IRS. Some tax "breaks" you deem "fair", while others you do not; what makes YOU the decider of what is "fair" or should be gov't "social policy" included in the tax code?

What you quoted me saying and what you claimed I believed are not the same.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom