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

It's unreasonable. I support a flat tax. It eliminates the need for the IRS since taxes can be collected and processed by smaller agencies on a state level, and it simplifies the tax code.

I think our government is vastly bloated. I'd like to see lower taxes if we can see lower government. That being said I don't think the economy will collapse because of the relatively small tax increases provided for by this deal. I'm not crying about the tax aspect or upset about it, in fact I'm glad the tax cuts are permanent on the bottom 99%. If it means the top 1% pays slightly more to avoid another tax increase cliff then c'est la vie. What I am upset about is that you see NO substantial spending cuts. Obama claims he is "open" and a compromiser. For all the ridiculousness of some of the Tea Partiers who refuse to play the game one iota Obama is a jackass. He made himself look reasonable all while refusing to cut spending. Now he's saying he is just going to raise the debt limit by fiat to avoid cutting spending. I was never a hardline Obama hater, I just kind of accepted he's a typical politician hack, but he has reached a new low with this deal.

Evenstar said:

It's unreasonable. I support a flat tax. It eliminates the need for the IRS since taxes can be collected and processed by smaller agencies on a state level, and it simplifies the tax code.

Click to expand...

**** it. just get rid of the IRS (think of the money that would save) and institute a national sales tax. have an exemption for food, so the poor don't starve (but you don't pay sales tax anyway when you use food stamps do you?)

the more you spend, the more tax you pay. and since the evil rich bastards spend more money than the poor they pay more taxes....everybody wins

Noooooooooooooo don't get rid of the IRS. You'll flood my field with a bunch of unemployed boobs.

I do support the wealthy paying more. 25% of $1 million IS more than 25% of $50,000.

the_recruit said:

I do support the wealthy paying more. 25% of $1 million IS more than 25% of $50,000.

Click to expand...

funny how that works out isn't it? 10% OF $1 million IS more than 25% of $50,000. but you'd see some retard squealing that the rich only pay half as much because 10% is less than 25%.

like the guy who tried to tell me that there were more people in the bottom 20% of the population than there were in the top 20%


these guys cry about wanting the rich to pay the same % and too stupid to realize that actual dollars pay the bills...and not precentages.

The falt tax isn't likely to happen. I think this explains why:

That change, many contend, would allow taxpayers to file their returns on postcards. And surveys suggest positive voter responses to several of the most recent proposals.

Yet none will be adopted, for at least two reasons. One is that a flat tax would do nothing to make filing tax returns any simpler. But, more important, it would greatly exacerbate longstanding growth in income inequality.

(snip)

The much more serious concern is that a flat tax would reinforce the trends toward greater income inequality that have been seen over the last several decades. As documented by a recent Congressional Budget Office study, the top 1 percent of income recipients in the United States earned 275 percent more in 2007 than they did in 1979, adjusted for inflation, a period when the earnings of middle-income households grew by less than 40 percent. A flat tax would increase inequality by substantially reducing rates on the most prosperous households, while increasing them on low- and middle-income households.

According to an analysis by the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center, Mr. Cain’s proposal would increase the annual tax bill of a typical family of four earning $50,000 a year by more than $4,000, but would reduce the taxes owed by a similar family earning between $500,000 and $1 million by almost $60,000. The center also estimated that families in the top one-tenth of 1 percent of households would enjoy an average annual tax reduction of nearly $1.4 million under the Cain plan. Similar distributional effects are common under all flat-tax plans, not just Mr. Cain’s.

Rising inequality exacts a toll not just on those with lower incomes, but also on those much higher up the income scale. In their 2009 book, “The Spirit Level: Why Greater Equality Makes Societies Stronger,” the British public health researchers Richard Wilkinson and Kate Pickett document a range of social ills that are reliably associated with increased income inequality, both over time within nations and at any particular moment across a broad range of countries. Countries and times with lower inequality fare better on virtually every published index of health, well-being and quality of life.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/06/business/flat-tax-doesnt-solve-inequality-problem.html?_r=0

anything that castrates congress's power is unlikely to pass

and congress loves pandering to the many. that is what the progressive tax does

OscarB63 said:

**** it. just get rid of the IRS (think of the money that would save) and institute a national sales tax. have an exemption for food, so the poor don't starve (but you don't pay sales tax anyway when you use food stamps do you?)

the more you spend, the more tax you pay. and since the evil rich bastards spend more money than the poor they pay more taxes....everybody wins

Click to expand...

I think you're speaking of the fair tax:

We stand behind our earlier analysis of the FairTax. The proposal to which Gov. Huckabee referred is not a 23 percent tax, but rather a 30 percent tax. And it is revenue-neutral only through an accounting trick. It will collect more money from those earning between $15,000 and $200,000 per year and less from those earning more than $200,000 per year. It is possible that the FairTax would make most people better off, but much of that gain would be a direct result of making the tax code less fair.

FactCheck.org: Unspinning the FairTax

TurtleDude said:

anything that castrates congress's power is unlikely to pass

and congress loves pandering to the many. that is what the progressive tax does

Click to expand...

Kind of a poor effort to avoid what's being argued. :coffeepap

Boo Radley said:

Kind of a poor effort to avoid what's being argued. :coffeepap

Click to expand...

no but then again I couldn't care less. the fact is the progressive income tax remains because there are more voters who benefit from it than those who are screwed over by it

TurtleDude said:

no but then again I couldn't care less. the fact is the progressive income tax remains because there are more voters who benefit from it than those who are screwed over by it

Click to expand...

Can you point to a recent vote on it?

Boo Radley said:

Can you point to a recent vote on it?

Click to expand...

why the diversion? the progressive tax is not something the GOP will get rid of because they would lose the next election big time-too many parasites in government and the voters addicted to it

TurtleDude said:

why the diversion? the progressive tax is not something the GOP will get rid of because they would lose the next election big time-too many parasites in government and the voters addicted to it

Click to expand...

And you know this how? You do know most people work for a living, right?

Boo Radley said:

And you know this how? You do know most people work for a living, right?

Click to expand...

because I am very smart and I understand such things


actually lots of people don't work these days

TurtleDude said:

because I am very smart and I understand such things


actually lots of people don't work these days

Click to expand...

I'm not convince by your lack of evidence, while some people think ten is a lot, the remains more wrk than don't.

Boo Radley said:

I'm not convince by your lack of evidence, while some people think ten is a lot, the remains more wrk than don't.

Click to expand...

that doesn't make much sense.

TurtleDude said:

that doesn't make much sense.

Click to expand...

What are you not getting, the fact that a lot doesn't give me any idea what you consider a lot, or that most, a majority actually work?

Its a moot point now, a done deal! Both sides finally came together to do what they were hired to do, represent the majority of American voters on tax rates.

RabidAlpaca said:

His percentage was so low because it was mostly capital gains. Capital gains is 15% for everybody, to include you. When you tax capital gains you're taxing money TWICE. So if you go out, work hard, and make money, you have to pay a tax on it. If you then take that after tax money and invest it, the government will come in and tax you again on the same capital.

Click to expand...

Nothing could be further from the truth. It is a capital GAINS tax, not a capital tax (which DOES exist in some countries - heck even some states). You only pay capital gains tax on money that was given to you because your asset was sold for more than you paid. Problem is, when that happens, someone else had a corresponding loss (either in cash or value) and zero wealth is created - it is merely being redistributed.

Double taxation happens on DIVIDEND income - in which case the company pays its tax on earnings and then you pay again on your share of the tax paid profits of the company shared with you by paying a dividend.

An intelligent tax system would tax the living crap out of capital gains - because when a capital gain occurs, there is zero wealth created. 99% of what Wall Street does is just that - capital gains in the world of Casino Capitalism - where everything is run for a capital gain and nobody is INVESTING any money into productive ventures. Of course, the balance is that dividend income should NEVER be taxed - driving money into productive assets.

Now you know how I voted and why. Tax capital gains to death and kill of Wall Street's Casino Capitalism the creates zilch and bring CAPITALISM back into the world by leaving the field open for actual investment in businesses that make things and actually DO something. Most of the really wealthy people make very little of their money from wealth that is created - they instead live on capital gains from wealth that is re-distributed. No harm in taxing that back to discourage such horrid use of capital.

Meanwhile, do I think it will make any difference to the debt crisis? Hell no! The US makes Greece look like a truly conservative country. It is spending far, far beyond its diminished means and is doing nothing to make the money it will need in the future to fund even a modest portion of that largess.

Boo Radley said:

What are you not getting, the fact that a lot doesn't give me any idea what you consider a lot, or that most, a majority actually work?

Click to expand...

yep. let the fleas vote to tax the dog to death. then the fleas starve and everybody is dead

cannuck said:

Nothing could be further from the truth. It is a capital GAINS tax, not a capital tax (which DOES exist in some countries - heck even some states). You only pay capital gains tax on money that was given to you because your asset was sold for more than you paid. Problem is, when that happens, someone else had a corresponding loss (either in cash or value) and zero wealth is created - it is merely being redistributed.

Double taxation happens on DIVIDEND income - in which case the company pays its tax on earnings and then you pay again on your share of the tax paid profits of the company shared with you by paying a dividend.

An intelligent tax system would tax the living crap out of capital gains - because when a capital gain occurs, there is zero wealth created. 99% of what Wall Street does is just that - capital gains in the world of Casino Capitalism - where everything is run for a capital gain and nobody is INVESTING any money into productive ventures.

Now you know how I voted and why. Tax capital gains to death and kill of Wall Street's Casino Capitalism the creates zilch and bring CAPITALISM back into the world by leaving the field open for actual investment in businesses that make things and actually DO something. Most of the really wealthy people make very little of their money from wealth that is created - they instead live on capital gains from wealth that is re-distributed. No harm in taxing that back to discourage such horrid use of capital.

Meanwhile, do I think it will make any difference to the debt crisis? Hell no! The US makes Greece look like a truly conservative country. It is spending far, far beyond its diminished means and is doing nothing to make the money it will need in the future to fund even a modest portion of that largess.

Click to expand...

this is one of the most moronic suggestions that I have seen on this board in over 7 years

OscarB63 said:

yep. let the fleas vote to tax the dog to death. then the fleas starve and everybody is dead

Click to expand...

Working folks are fleas?

TurtleDude said:

this is one of the most moronic suggestions that I have seen on this board in over 7 years

Click to expand...

Says the guy who thinks the country has been socialist since FDR.

Catawba said:

Says the guy who thinks the country has been socialist since FDR.

Click to expand...

FDR infected this country with some socialist germs.