sorry if i wasn't more plain. we all know your not going to change someone opinion here on the message boards.
I just want a civil discussion. One I CAN'T have with my sister in law who doesn't like to look at facts.
Just stating what I'm seeing and what people thought. If you can't contribute. don't. that's all.
I got my new wheels ;)
I think the tax system is all messed up and the SSi tax is horable I will admit I am on SSI due to health problems and other problems, and trust me its not fun being on SSI, I would rather have a job and PAY SSI taxes if I could and I have tried for many years and being on SSI sucks. I am working on getting off SSI, Wile things I can do is verry limited out there I have been going to school to get my GED for the last year now and hope to have it by next year, then I am going to go to colage to become a PC technition and eather 3D graphics or something else in the computer world. so i hope that with in the next 5 years I will have a job I can do and get off SSI.
Our tax system is far too complicated and contains way too many loopholes. I like the idea of a use tax, with no, or very limited exemptions. Get rid of personal income tax and tax people a fixed percentage on what the buy / use.
Off-shore tax shelters and exemptions for all kinds of corporations places the tax burden more and more on individual tax payers. If done right (and I know it's not likely) a use tax would avoid these issues.
There would be issues in figuring out what percentage to tax in order to cover the massive budget, but that's something for the accountants to figure out.
I would like to see projections under this type of tax plan, with no loopholes or exemptions.
Goozex Forum Moderator
silentshawn: Our tax system is far too complicated and contains way too many loopholes. I like the idea of a use tax, with no, or very limited exemptions. Get rid of personal income tax and tax people a fixed percentage on what the buy / use.
I think this works very well with the state our world is in at the moment.
If you use a shit ton of resources, you should be spending the most to clean up the footprint you're leaving.
It might also be kind of bad for the economy though... people won't be putting money into something that direly needs it.
Follow me on Twitter!
I honesty think that the income tax system needs to be completely abolished or severely reduced, and replaced with just a system of slightly higher sales taxes. People who make more are going to spend more, and will still pay most of the tax dollars.
*EDIT* I am also anxiously awaiting the day that somebody bans Shredder from the forums, because recently I have noticed that he does not contribute anything useful to the topics he posts in.
the rich buy stuff so why not just tax stuff that aren't necessary to life? Super luxury taxes and making stuff normal people don't need way more expensive with a higher tax.
rich people will still buy them.
If a game today is $60 but the tax is 50%. would you still buy the game for $90? Maybe that would help kill bad games yet keep still be in demand for the people who really want it. Shoot, goozex would flurish in this system.
I took a small business tax class. Wow, there are so many loop holes for deductibles. Funniest one is employing your child.
spooon: I took a small business tax class. Wow, there are so many loop holes for deductibles. Funniest one is employing your child.
mafafu goes to check on his family sweat shop.
god you still have more kids mafafu, i thought you sold them all on the black market, no wonder you got bad hips buddy.
I'd like to talk to the original post. I think it's a great question. Here's my best answer:
spooon: Bottom line in 2006top 25% money earner pay 86%whilebottom 50% money earners pay 3%!!!!!! If this isn't enough should we be more extreme???
Bottom line in 2006top 25% money earner pay 86%whilebottom 50% money earners pay 3%!!!!!!
If this isn't enough should we be more extreme???
Wealth in the US has dramatically shifted over the last several decades. Basically you have the top 5% and the other 95%. The top 5% earns VASTLY more than the other 95%. If you look at the website you linked to, on page 5 of that spreadsheet, the top 5% show 6 TIMES as much earnings as the next 5% down (top 6% to 10%).
It is also common that the top 5% pay a much smaller portion of their actual income in taxes. This is because there are many loopholes and tax breaks given to this group that are simply not possible for the rest of us. So when I see 6 TIMES, that is REPORTED income. Actual income is likely to be several times higher. In many cases, what we are really talking about up at the top, are people making multiple millions per year and often paying 10-15% tax.
What Obama's tax policy is working on is reducing taxes on the 95%, which is me, and unless you happen to have several million in annual income, probably most posters on this board. To pay for this, he will remove some of the tax breaks and loopholes given to the top 5%. To me this seems conservative, and fair. There are certainly people even at the top of the lower 95% that are struggling. For some families in some parts of the country, even a $200K income can be hard to manage on (if you don't believe me, ask, and I'll outline why). But it's hard for me to believe there is anyone with a several million annual income that is struggling right now. In fact, they have been given many great benefits recently in the hope their winfalls would "trickle down" to the rest of is. It didn't work; in fact, the opposite occurred. As that top 5% received more and more benefits, they found better ways to hold on to them. One reason is that they have full time staff whose job it is to ensure they hold on to their wealth.
If you want our country to succeed, you need to ensure the 95% have money in their pockets to start and run businesses, keep their families secure, and keep the economy running.
If you are in the 5%, congratulations! I'm sure you realize that unless we get out of this, even your millions will not protect you from an economy that is failing. Due to his book sales, by the way, Obama's family is in that 5%.
silentshawn: Off-shore tax shelters and exemptions for all kinds of corporations places the tax burden more and more on individual tax payers. If done right (and I know it's not likely) a use tax would avoid these issues.
I agree that implementing some form of use tax over income tax would probably lead to a better tax system. But in the end, the individual tax payer will ALWAYS bear the tax burden.
Businesses don't eat taxes, they pass them on to the consumer by way of price increases. So if loopholes under our current system got eliminated, a business would raise it's price (or decrease costs resulting in a poorer product or service) in an effort to reach the same amount of profit it enjoyed with the tax exemption.
mk500: If you want our country to succeed, you need to ensure the 95% have money in their pockets to start and run businesses, keep their families secure, and keep the economy running. If you are in the 5%, congratulations! I'm sure you realize that unless we get out of this, even your millions will not protect you from an economy that is failing. Due to his book sales, by the way, Obama's family is in that 5%. I've heard this but I think I agree with Kevlar. If you reduce the income the top 5% money earners who own and operate the large business that employee the thousands, what do you think they will do? They will turn to their full time business staff to help get back that money. raise prices cut benefits cut jobs (reduce overhead) I don't think the rich stay rich by letting anyone (even the government from reducing their bottom line). Now lets say for a second that the top 5% money earners are in fact only paying 10-15% tax because of the many loop holes. What will the rich do when those loop holes are removed and the addition 3% is slapped on them? Going from (10-15%) to 38% income tax, what do you think they will do if they can't hide those millions? EX: 100 million a year taxed @ 15% = 15million. Take home is 85 million 100 million a year taxed @ 38% = 38 million. Take home is 62 million Do you really think this rich person won't trickle down something to people below? cutting jobs, less tax, moving jobs overseas, cutting benefits..... Seriously. If you were making 85 million a year and the next year it goes to 62 million you wouldn't do something drastic? What happens if this rich person leaves the country and operations to another country? Doesn't 1 rich person from their income and taxes supports thousands if not millions? If 10% of the poor were to leave the country, would it really hurt our total income collected in taxes to the government? If 10% of the rich were to leave. That would be disasterous. I'm not for the rich I am also NOT for people who feel the government OWES them something. I believe there are too many people who feel the government needs to keep them alive and truely feel entitled to happines through the government (which is paid by the rich). remember. bottom 50% income earners only pay 3% of the total taxes collected. Forcing someone to support the poor or get thrown in jail is just crazy in my book. But then again if people would tithe and give to the needy then maybe this wouldn't be necessary? There will always be tax but to throw tax on the rich right at the poor won't help them. I would think a good percentage of the poor are there due to POOR financial decisions. throwing money at them isn't a good idea in those situations. Educate, teach them to fish, send them to college = I like. Giving them rebates to gamble, buy more liquor, or buy a brand NEW car is not good. Maybe it's human nature. If people were born to give without want people would donate and tithe enough to to poor to help them. But I guess greed has destroyed that and hence made the government to step in to require the rich to pay the poor on top of donations/tithes. Another member brought up. it would be much better to donate your $100 straight to someone personally who needs it vs sending that $100 to a government program and to see that $100 dwindle to something like $70. sure it's a non profit organization but guess what? They still pay people cause people gotta eat. Thanks for for everyone for being civil. Love learning how people think. I got my new wheels ;)
I've heard this but I think I agree with Kevlar. If you reduce the income the top 5% money earners who own and operate the large business that employee the thousands, what do you think they will do? They will turn to their full time business staff to help get back that money.
I don't think the rich stay rich by letting anyone (even the government from reducing their bottom line).
Now lets say for a second that the top 5% money earners are in fact only paying 10-15% tax because of the many loop holes. What will the rich do when those loop holes are removed and the addition 3% is slapped on them?
Going from (10-15%) to 38% income tax, what do you think they will do if they can't hide those millions?
EX: 100 million a year taxed @ 15% = 15million. Take home is 85 million
100 million a year taxed @ 38% = 38 million. Take home is 62 million
Do you really think this rich person won't trickle down something to people below? cutting jobs, less tax, moving jobs overseas, cutting benefits.....
Seriously. If you were making 85 million a year and the next year it goes to 62 million you wouldn't do something drastic?
What happens if this rich person leaves the country and operations to another country? Doesn't 1 rich person from their income and taxes supports thousands if not millions?
If 10% of the poor were to leave the country, would it really hurt our total income collected in taxes to the government?
If 10% of the rich were to leave. That would be disasterous.
I'm not for the rich
I am also NOT for people who feel the government OWES them something. I believe there are too many people who feel the government needs to keep them alive and truely feel entitled to happines through the government (which is paid by the rich).
remember. bottom 50% income earners only pay 3% of the total taxes collected.
Forcing someone to support the poor or get thrown in jail is just crazy in my book. But then again if people would tithe and give to the needy then maybe this wouldn't be necessary? There will always be tax but to throw tax on the rich right at the poor won't help them. I would think a good percentage of the poor are there due to POOR financial decisions. throwing money at them isn't a good idea in those situations. Educate, teach them to fish, send them to college = I like. Giving them rebates to gamble, buy more liquor, or buy a brand NEW car is not good.
Maybe it's human nature. If people were born to give without want people would donate and tithe enough to to poor to help them. But I guess greed has destroyed that and hence made the government to step in to require the rich to pay the poor on top of donations/tithes.
Another member brought up. it would be much better to donate your $100 straight to someone personally who needs it vs sending that $100 to a government program and to see that $100 dwindle to something like $70. sure it's a non profit organization but guess what? They still pay people cause people gotta eat.
Thanks for for everyone for being civil. Love learning how people think.
cody9119: I am also anxiously awaiting the day that somebody bans Shredder from the forums, because recently I have noticed that he does not contribute anything useful to the topics he posts in.
Don't mention me. it only awards my presence.
Everyone knows I don't do anything worth banning me over. All I do is post dumb crap that doesn't contribute. I don't hurt anyone or thing. Nor have I flung (many) insults.
spooon: I've heard this but I think I agree with Kevlar. If you reduce the income the top 5% money earners who own and operate the large business that employee the thousands, what do you think they will do? They will turn to their full time business staff to help get back that money. raise prices cut benefits cut jobs (reduce overhead) I don't think the rich stay rich by letting anyone (even the government from reducing their bottom line). Now lets say for a second that the top 5% money earners are in fact only paying 10-15% tax because of the many loop holes. What will the rich do when those loop holes are removed and the addition 3% is slapped on them?
You are talking about two different things here though...personal income tax and corporate tax. For Obama, at least, I think the official rate for most at the top will go up from like 38% to 39%. Basically he is removing one of the tax breaks they received under Bush, so taking the rate back to what it was 8 years ago. I don't think a lot of them will freak out about 1%.
On the corporate side of things, I agree that we do need to be careful how we tax large corporations, because a lot of that gets "passed down". However, there are some tax incentives and other breaks that we would probably all agree aren't so great. Like the billions in tax breaks given to the telcos to build out fiber infrastructure to all our houses, that they didn't actually use to build fiber. They didn't do it because there was no enforcement. Those kinds of things could probably save us a lot of money.
spooon: I am also NOT for people who feel the government OWES them something. I believe there are too many people who feel the government needs to keep them alive and truely feel entitled to happines through the government (which is paid by the rich).
I agree. Nobody owes anything to a person other than maybe justice. The government is basically our employee. They should take the money we agree to give them and do with it what we ask. I wouldn't agree that the government is paid for by the rich though; I think the government is primarily paid for by the middle class (as a percentage of income at least).
spooon: remember. bottom 50% income earners only pay 3% of the total taxes collected.
That 50% pays 3% thing sounds scary, but what percentage of the total income of the country is made by the bottom 50%? Based on that website you linked to, it appears to be 13%. Anyway, 3% of all taxes paid is probably a pretty big chunk if they only have 13% of the income or so. I think most of that bottom 50% are probably hurting right now, so I'm not sure it would do our economy much good to tax them higher. It certainly wouldn't end up bringing in much money, as they make a pretty small amount as it is (even a 10% increase on that 13% wouldn't amount to much).
spooon: Forcing someone to support the poor or get thrown in jail is just crazy in my book. But then again if people would tithe and give to the needy then maybe this wouldn't be necessary? There will always be tax but to throw tax on the rich right at the poor won't help them. I would think a good percentage of the poor are there due to POOR financial decisions. throwing money at them isn't a good idea in those situations. Educate, teach them to fish, send them to college = I like. Giving them rebates to gamble, buy more liquor, or buy a brand NEW car is not good.
Yeah, as far as supporting the poor, this is best done by individuals and the community. Unless you are talking about giving the poor health care. Since they go to the emergency room and get free care anyway, which comes out of our local taxes, I'm not sure a government health care policy is such a bad idea. Again, it would be great if this could be handled more locally though. In my city we instituted a health care program for children. The idea is that by covering the children that have no health care insurance, we will save so much money in emergency room visits, that the program will pay for itself. We'll see how it works out, but that kind of thing is just logical. Emergency room facilities are far more expensive than regular checkups.
spooon: Another member brought up. it would be much better to donate your $100 straight to someone personally who needs it vs sending that $100 to a government program and to see that $100 dwindle to something like $70. sure it's a non profit organization but guess what? They still pay people cause people gotta eat.
That is SO true. It's best to avoid government involvement as much as possible.
I guess the point I'm trying to make is more specifically about Obama vs. just a general discussion about taking from the wealthy and giving to the poor (since the election is right around the corner). I think it would be nice to see some tax breaks for the middle class, who are really suffering right now. I think his idea of funding these tax breaks by repealing some tax breaks given to the very wealthy seems reasonable. When we gave these breaks to the wealthy, it didn't end up helping things much. It seems like these breaks were a mistake. It's a pretty small change for the wealthy that will make a pretty dramatic difference for the rest of us.
If you live in America and are blessed with massive success, I think it's reasonable to ask that you pay a percentage that is similar to those less blessed. It just seems wrong to burden those barely making ends meet with taxes that are such a huge chunk of their income, while at the same time taxing those with extraordinary wealth at a far lower rate. It seems like a lot of really wealthy people agree with me, as you see a lot of them backing the Obama plan. It's not like it's a really big change for them; just a few percent at most.