Federal tax rates

They should be abolished. But then there would be no more cause for argument over it.

 

Yes, marginally.

But only to a point where it is not too taxing. :laugh:

 

One distinction that should be made here is between rich earners and rich retirees. Rich retirees are not taxed on their savings except for earned interest, so taxing the rich only involves taxing the income of those still earning. Those earning much more are already taxed at a proportionately higher rate. What happens when taxes are raised on rich earners is that the incentive to keep earning begins to erode. Who wants to keep sweating and laboring to earn money only to have to give it to the govt?

Raising taxes on the high earners has the effect of encouraging them to retire and get out of business, closing doors and laying off employees and harming the economy. Increasing taxes and regulations on business also has the effect of encouraging businessmen to close shop or to refrain from starting new businesses, thus harming the economy.

Economists who suggested lowering taxes would increase business, build the economy, put more people to work and increase overall govt. income were proven right by Reagan. Liberals refuse to agree, which is why we are in this current depression which is doomed to worsen because too many of our leaders don't understand that overspending leads to bankruptcy. There is some kind of stupid mental block there which keeps these people stuck on stupid for somer reason.

 

>What is your position with federal income taxes? Should the rich pay more of a rate then those who are not as rich? Why?

Real Christian Americans that anyone can grow up to be the president. Didn't Obama prove it? Can't anyone grow up to be rich? Didn't Obama prove it? If only the government and the unions would get out of our way we could all be rich, right? After all every red blooded white American is better than average.

Further, Jesus promised us that there would all ways be poor people to do the grunt work. Jesus must have believed in Social Darwinism. Those who do not work should be left to starve. That's what Jesus taught, Right? That's how God cleans the gene pool. When all the non-workers have starved then Jesus can return and the True Believers will all be rich.

 

> What happens when taxes are raised on rich earners is that the incentive to keep earning begins to erode. Who wants to keep sweating and laboring to earn money only to have to give it to the govt?

Rich people only sweat on the golf course.

Rich people don't labor. Or is it hard work to instruct your board of directors to maximize profits even if that requires sending jobs off shore?

Someone please explain why someone with a billion in invested assets would want to WORK to earn more money?

 

Under your system then a person could work hard all their life, pay taxes on their earnings, save instead of live a lavish lifestyle...

Then in their old age pay taxes all over again on that same hard work.

No thanks,

 

Agree with this. Why should the rich pay more? Because they are employing the majority of people. The majority of people use the majority of government services, like the educational system, and infrastructure. If Mr. Rich Man wants government schools to produce smart, educated employees they should pay a little bit more than the average person.

 

>OK Bill, you have vented, now are you going to answer the OP

OK. Higher taxes for rich people would not be necessary if there was very large inheritance on estates, say marginal 100% tax on estates over $100,000,000.

It boggles me why people can't see the difference in economic equity between working class families who spend 90% of their income every month to pay housing, food, transportation, and medical bills and those who are so rich that they don't know to spend even 10% of their monthly income.

The working father will be lucky to die with a paid off house, a paid off car, and enough cash for his kids to bury him. The rich kids like Romney are de facto born as multi-millionaires. Yes, Bill Gates says his kids will not inherit billions each. The old money billionaires must hate his gut.

Most of you have bought the Great American Scam that everyone of you is smarter and harder working than average. Every one of you would be rich if only the government and the unions would get out of your way. Some of you even think that $80,000/year income - median income in Seattle - is "rich."

By the way, the Seattle Police Department is hiring . . . starting pay $65K.

 

Pleased you support food stamps, free medical care, and low cost housing for poor people. You also support increased welfare for single mothers and dependent children?

 

You for got to call all of those people "trash" as is your habit to do.

 

Only Targus doesn't understand the difference between trash and honest, hard working people trying to do what is right caught in a depression not of their making.

 

If we have to support a government through taxation, I would prefer if we could find a way to do it not based on income. Why does the federal government have to know how much wealth any given individual has? All they should care about is if their expenses are paid.

 

The difference that I understand, that you do not, is that no one is "trash".

But then you are a liberal aren't you?

So what else is to be expected?

 

>The difference that I understand, that you do not, is that no one is "trash".

What words do you prefer to differentiate between decent people who can find a job and bums, punks, and winos who refuse to work and/or whom no business person would hire?

>But then you are a liberal aren't you?

No, a dues paying Libertarian.

 

I will pay all the taxes the law requires of me and not a cent more. Taxes are a blight on society.

That said, I favor a flat federal income tax minus charitable deductions (maybe education expenses) across the board. 12%-15% of all persons saved those who live under the poverty line, they don't pay any tax.