Who pays more taxes?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Salty, Mar 23, 2008.

  1. Salty

    Salty
    Expand Collapse
    20,000 Posts Club
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2003
    Messages:
    22,126
    Likes Received:
    221
    A thread partially entitled "promissory note" was somewhat hijacked. I am starting this thread to continue the new discussion.

    So, who actually pays more taxes. It depends on how you look at at.
    Many say that the rich pay no taxes. That is a bunch of hogwash. For starters, lets say Bill Gates goes out and buys a$60,000 car. (Assuming his state has one) sales tax will cost him $4,800!
    The tax liability for my wife and I this year was about $1500.
    A family of two adults and two children must make $24,000 before there is any tax liability.

    Many will complain that the rich get all kinds of loopholes. But those loopholes are there for a reason. For example, if a man gives $1,000 to the Salvation Army, he will save - say $200 on his taxes, but that is money is the govt will NOT have to spend to give assistance to a needy* person.
    Also, a "rich person" may get a tax write-off for his business. But lets look at it economically. A man has a small business, takes out a loan for - say $10,000 to build a new branch store. Sure he can deduct that 10 grand from his taxes, but that new store will hire 4 new employees. Thats 4 additional people who now have a job.

    Mind you, I an not saying that all the "rich" never cheat, but keep in mind that if you keep messing with the rich - then the poor will have no one to feed them.
    I recently found an excellent email, that proves that point. As soon as I find it, I will post it here.

    Salty

    * Needy - not greedy
     
  2. billwald

    billwald
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2000
    Messages:
    11,414
    Likes Received:
    0
    Before WW1 half of all Americans lived in poverty and most of the rest were dirt poor farmers who also lived in poverty. A large middle class is a post WW2 phenomenon. We are reverting to the historical norm with maybe 5% stinking rich, 15% middle class, and the rest, working poor, like India.
     
  3. billreber

    billreber
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2005
    Messages:
    461
    Likes Received:
    0
    Please remember that Jesus said we would ALWAYS have the poor among us.

    It is just a matter of common sense to understand that. If you raise the amount of money paid to everyone, the "old poor" will still be poor, but at a higher rate of income. Nobody will ever be able to correct that, short of the Return of Christ.

    As far as who pays more taxes, the "rich" always will pay more "dollars" than the poor, and that is also as it should be. Everything is proportionate, isn't it?

    Bill :godisgood:
     
  4. LeBuick

    LeBuick
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2006
    Messages:
    11,537
    Likes Received:
    0
    I say the middle class since the rich pays someone to find loopholes to get them out of paying taxes.
     
  5. StefanM

    StefanM
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    Messages:
    6,428
    Likes Received:
    72
    Proportionally speaking, you may be correct. It's not really a matter of loopholes, though.

    Since FICA/SECA has a cap, one can earn money in the highest tax bracket, but one can subtract just over 7% from that rate to make an effective comparison to income earned before the cap.

    Additionally, capital gains taxes are currently much lower than the highest income tax rates. Also, no FICA/SECA tax is deducted. That's major tax savings. Who benefits from these the most? The wealthy, who invest greater amounts.

    I firmly believe that the social security system is achieving the opposite of its desired effect. It doesn't provide a reliable security blanket. For those who are young (like myself), the prospect of reduced benefits or a raised retirement age further diminishes the potential return of social security. So what benefit do the lower-income citizens receive? They have to pay just over 7% of their already-low income into a failing system.

    As a minister, I could certainly make good use of that 15%+ percent of my income in SECA tax I'm paying. Some dishonest or misinformed ministers opt out of social security because they recognize that it's a bad investment. That's not legal. You must opt out for religious reasons alone.

    The worker who is making 7 dollars/hour at 40 hours a week could definitely benefit from an additional 80 dollars a month.
     
  6. LeBuick

    LeBuick
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2006
    Messages:
    11,537
    Likes Received:
    0
    Two things you said, yes the $7/hr worker can use the $80 but if it wasn't for SSI they would have put that and more in an IRA. That or work until they die. So the lower income can receive some money when they are old and can't work even if it is "fixed income".

    Secondly, SSI would take care of you in the sad event you are disabled. I don't wish this on anyone but you never know what's in our future. It's not much but it's better than sleeping under a street bridge.
     
  7. billwald

    billwald
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2000
    Messages:
    11,414
    Likes Received:
    0
    Jesus didn't say that the poor would be the majority. Money is only a measure of power, one's standing in the game of life. The people with power will always find a way to dump on the middle class and the middle class will always dump on the poor.

    Imagine a cashless society in which robots are doing the nasty work and consumer goods come free out of a Star Trek like machine on the wall. Will there be equality? fat chance! There will still be a fixed number of residences on Lake Washington and the people with power will be living in them.
     
  8. billwald

    billwald
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2000
    Messages:
    11,414
    Likes Received:
    0
    If not for SS, half of all retired people would be below the poverty line.
     
  9. StefanM

    StefanM
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    Messages:
    6,428
    Likes Received:
    72
    I think that there are great benefits from the social security system, but the system is fundamentally flawed. It takes a large portion of your paycheck, and for young fellows like myself, it seems pointless. I honestly do not expect to ever receive any significant social security benefits. The retirement of the baby boomers will make sure that never happens.
     

Share This Page

Loading...