• 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
What a backwards way to think of property. You don't allow people to keep what they own since you don't have ownership of it.

I agree with Reagan that a bus driver shouldn't have to pay a higher tax rate than a millionaire.
 
Any whose income is primarily from investment will pay less than someone making a comparable amount in income, not just the rich.

Only the rich get most of their income from investments.

While I can see the rationale behind your statement (the rich will inevitably make more from investment), I'm not quite sure I agree with the notion of charging high rates on long term investment.

How did it hurt the rich under Reagan when he increased the capital gains tax rate to that of earned income?
 
wrong, very few working class people have federal income taxes of an effective rate of 14%

Reading is fundamental. What I said was, "The rich who's income is primarily from investment earnings pay a lower percentage of their total income, then do the working class that have to pay taxes on their total income."
 
I agree with Reagan that a bus driver shouldn't have to pay a higher tax rate than a millionaire.

Why do you insist on bringing up Reagan with me?
 
Why do you insist on bringing up Reagan with me?

Because Reagan was ultra conservative and even he saw that bus driver shouldn't have to pay a higher tax rate than a millionaire. It is a way of drawing a comparison of the the ultra conservative of the 80's and your extreme far right political position.
 
Most food isn't taxed.
Funny, that's not what MY grocery reciept shows! Sales taxes are not the same in all parts of the country. Here, sales taxes are sales taxes, nothing is "special".

You must live in Texas - that's where the last guy that tried that ploy was from.

Gasoline makes up a good part, but certainly not a crippling part, and gas is always something you can manage yourself.
You've obviously never been poor. It takes what it takes to get you back and forth to work. This is not something you can "manage", it's part of the cost of working and reduces the amount of money you have to spend on other things -- like food.
 
Last edited:
I will need a real world example.
Sorry, you didn't provide one showing your theoretical refund. If you'd like to provide your evidence I can fill in the other parts of the equation for you.

We were talking about SS. If you can't defend SS changing the topic is what I expected from you. Can you not defend it?
I just did. If Uncle Sam buys the T-bills with my SS contribution instead of me buying them through the local bank why is it any different???
 
Can a group of individuals take from another to manufacture the life they desire?
The rich do it to the middle and working classes everyday.
 
I'm all for FICA reform. Especially since it's no longer doing what it was meant to do.
Of course it is. You've been blinded by right-wing propaganda who's only goal is to make sure that $2.6 trillion SSA Trust Fund finds it's way into the hands of Wall St bankers.

Any whose income is primarily from investment will pay less than someone making a comparable amount in income, not just the rich. While I can see the rationale behind your statement (the rich will inevitably make more from investment), I'm not quite sure I agree with the notion of charging high rates on long term investment.

Just for clarity, historical capital gains rates can be found here.
Exactly! It typically runs at 20-30% but has been at 15% for the last decade. Now we have an economy where investment income is worthless because demand is in the toilet. So explain to me again why the LTCG tax is at 15% instead of 25-30% - or even higher? Where's the pressing need for investment money that makes it worthwhile to keep the rate artificially low at this time?
 
To Republic Now!
You must live in Texas - that's where the last guy that tried that ploy was from.
I apologize - exceptions for food are more common than I thought.
 
To Republic Now!
I apologize - exceptions for food are more common than I thought.

We have to pay state sales tax for food from a grocery in Virginia, and if you go to a restaurant, they also have a big local meals tax you have to pay too.
 
Catawba said:
Only the rich get most of their income from investments.

Not entirely accurate, but I did state they are the ones who most commonly do.

How did it hurt the rich under Reagan when he increased the capital gains tax rate to that of earned income?

Who's talking about hurting the rich?

Funny, that's not what MY grocery reciept shows! Sales taxes are not the same in all parts of the country. Here, sales taxes are sales taxes, nothing is "special".

I've never been somewhere in America where food wasn't taxed. If your state is taxing food, that might be the FIRST thing I'd petition.

You must live in Texas - that's where the last guy that tried that ploy was from.

Colorado actually.


You've obviously never been poor.
That's not very accurate. Though, I don't see how it's relevant either way.

It takes what it takes to get you back and forth to work. This is not something you can "manage", it's part of the cost of working and reduces the amount of money you have to spend on other things -- like food.

I meant manage in that it's generally affordable. If driving to and from work is becoming too much of a burden, there are alternatives to look at.

Of course it is. You've been blinded by right-wing propaganda who's only goal is to make sure that $2.6 trillion SSA Trust Fund finds it's way into the hands of Wall St bankers.

I would respond to this, but my rich racist banker masters have not taught me the proper response.

Exactly! It typically runs at 20-30% but has been at 15% for the last decade. Now we have an economy where investment income is worthless because demand is in the toilet. So explain to me again why the LTCG tax is at 15% instead of 25-30% - or even higher? Where's the pressing need for investment money that makes it worthwhile to keep the rate artificially low at this time?

It's low because all taxes are low.

I apologize - exceptions for food are more common than I thought.

Technically I was wrong because it was not a country wide policy like I had assumed.

Really though, if your state is charging tax on food, that's the first reform I would look at.
 
Who's talking about hurting the rich?

What other reason would the rich have for cutting benefits to our most vulnerable to give themselves even bigger tax cuts at the expense of the economy? Is it just flat out greed?


I've never been somewhere in America where food wasn't taxed. If your state is taxing food, that might be the FIRST thing I'd petition.

Your statements contradict one another.
 
Can a group of individuals take from another to manufacture the life they desire?

You see, I don't think your point has much worth here.

My family is the epitome of taking from others for the life that they desire.

Since that is reality then your point that I have no point is pointless.

If you want to ignore that then that is fine but to dismiss it as irrelevant is really just darn silly.
 
What other reason would the rich have for cutting benefits to our most vulnerable to give themselves even bigger tax cuts at the expense of the economy? Is it just flat out greed?

What the hell are you even talking about now?


Your statements contradict one another.

In what way?
 
If the rich paid their fair share, a progressive tax system would be in place. Taxes shouldn't be based on a base amount all should pay, which it now even isn't, but the super rich are disproportionally taxed in terms of their income.

The super rich even have access to lawyers for loopholes that are embedded in the system for their benefit (which could possibly be due to their influence and that they shape policy, maybe, who really knows, it's not like data support this), so they pay even less than the aforementioned low amount proportional to their income.
 
What the hell are you even talking about now?

Why cut benefits for seniors and the poor so you can give the rich bigger tax cuts if rich don't need the tax cuts?




In what way?

They indicate the opposite of each other. That's pretty much the definition of contradiction so I thought it would be self-explanatory.
 
I meant manage in that it's generally affordable. If driving to and from work is becoming too much of a burden, there are alternatives to look at.
There aren't many alternatives in this economic climate. If you have to drive 30 miles to get to work then that's what you do. For the average car that's ~3 gallons of gas a day, which is much more than the cost of food.
 
I agree with Reagan that a bus driver shouldn't have to pay a higher tax rate than a millionaire.

maybe a millionaire shouldn't pay any more tax dollars than a bus driver

and guess what-Reagan was FOS on this-the millionaire pays at least the same or higher rate on like income than the bus driver
 
Only the rich get most of their income from investments.



How did it hurt the rich under Reagan when he increased the capital gains tax rate to that of earned income?

that's a lie, there are retirees who get all of their income from investments and they are not rich

Why would it HURT YOU if I paid the same percentage on my earned income as you do?
 
Reading is fundamental. What I said was, "The rich who's income is primarily from investment earnings pay a lower percentage of their total income, then do the working class that have to pay taxes on their total income."

being truthful is even more fundamental. you are lying since the rich pay income taxes on all their income while the working class do not. In fact half of the united states pays almost no or no federal income taxes
 
If the rich paid their fair share, a progressive tax system would be in place. Taxes shouldn't be based on a base amount all should pay, which it now even isn't, but the super rich are disproportionally taxed in terms of their income.

The super rich even have access to lawyers for loopholes that are embedded in the system for their benefit (which could possibly be due to their influence and that they shape policy, maybe, who really knows, it's not like data support this), so they pay even less than the aforementioned low amount proportional to their income.

this is silly-what is the "super rich" anyway?
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom