72% favor taxing "the rich". Wow!

[ssdawood]

Apr 20, 2011 13:32:17 GMT -5 @wxyz said:

Seems to me that a lot of people in China, japan, India, etc are enjoying our idiotic tax policies. Guess what, those jobs in the South are paying much less than they did. I was interested to recently read how IKEA was paying $9 per hour in their plant in the south. And.......were in the process of reducing the wages to the $7 to $8 range per hour.

I think India , China , Japan already tax the rich more than US. I think its almost upto 50%

Taxes in those countries are higher than US.

[ssdawood]

My two cents.

If you retire and close your business someone else is going to fill in the void. Service sector , groceries stores etc are a good example of this.
Now if you make a product , you can move your operations elsewhere and then ship it to US. To prevent this US will have to change import laws and impose tariffs.
Countries like India, China already have tariffs in place. I am pretty sure about India, it has a import tax from cars to goods you name it.

I went from paying 0 dollars in taxes to 25 percent . I have no problem paying 50 percent , I am even looking forward to it. I can do so much with my money. I dont have to pay 50 percent , I can put kids through school, start a foundation , start my own charity etc.

I dont understand the problem, We can raise the taxes on rich that is not the problem. The problem is will raising the tax help us cover our deficit.

Americans are good consumers, they love to spend , businesses are not going anywhere, rich are not going anywhere. If anyone moves the operations out of the country he will have to pay import duty.
Make their products more expensive than locally manufactured products. Then watch every rich person will stay here because of the vast consumer market, Best in world, US.

[whoisjohngalt]

The problem is will raising the tax help us cover our deficit.

Of course it won't cover the deficit. The more money govt will get, the more it will spend. What is so complicated about that?

You want to pay 50%, who is stopping you? I am "pretty" sure (not 100%) that if you just send checks to your local or fed govt, they will take it.

Oh and if you are so into paying more and more taxes, feel free to pay mine, bc unlike you, I HATE seeing my money being wasted.

Lena

[ssdawood]

Apr 21, 2011 8:25:53 GMT -5 whoisjohngalt said:

The problem is will raising the tax help us cover our deficit.

Of course it won't cover the deficit. The more money govt will get, the more it will spend. What is so complicated about that?

You want to pay 50%, who is stopping you? I am "pretty" sure (not 100%) that if you just send checks to your local or fed govt, they will take it.

Oh and if you are so into paying more and more taxes, feel free to pay mine, bc unlike you, I HATE seeing my money being wasted.

Lena

Thats what I meant , when I said will it cover the deficit. I know it wont cover the deficit.

Also you are in the minority when 72 percent want to raise the taxes. How do you plan on stopping them ?

I simply stated that there is nothing you or me can do if the majority wants to raise the taxes on people making 250k or more.
Unlike you I am not going to whine about it and spend my energy in making more money.

Since you are rich you can move anywhere in the world and live a good lifestyle.

Here are my options
Complain and Whine about how much I pay in taxes.
Move to a rich friendly country
Suck up pay taxes, Increase my business, and instead start donating to charities, foundation etc.

I dont know what upset you so much about my post. Why should I pay your taxes.
If you cant see that you are in minority I dont know what to say.

[Phoenix84]

My proposal wasn't to soak the rich while giving to the poor. What I want to see is modest and controlled (non emotional) raises to the wealthy ALONG WITH spending cuts (which include social programs). By modest and controlled tax increases I mean putting the tax on the wealthy more in line with what was in place in the 80's and 90's. I also favor increasing the number of lower income Americans who pay taxes.

I realize American business hates taxes (we all do) but almost every other civilized country has a much less business friendly atmosphere. There's still lots of reasons to keep business here, even if the means of production go elsewhere.

People seem to see this issue in black and white. Either you lower taxes on the wealthy while raising taxes on everyone else and you reduce spending, or you raise taxes on the wealthy while continuing to spend like a drunken sailor on social programs.

I'm not even talking about "taking" from the rich and "giving" to those who don't work. I just want to see the deficit fixed and EVERYONE (from wealthy barons to government employees to the welfare momma) is going to have to give something up.

I'm so tired of people acting like the wealthy, the military, the seniors, the poor, should be exempt. No one should be exempt from helping out the country. We're all Americans and we all have to do our part.

[ssdawood]

I agree with phenoix84, nobody is saying robin hood style increases in taxes for rich.
If you make couple million a year and dont have any deductions and end up paying 50 percent in taxes, I dont see that as a problem. But most people do have deductions and exemptions and thats why we have marginal and effective tax rates.

[lonewolf2019]

What bothers me is I don't like participating in fixing something that I didn't want broken to begin with.

[zibazinski]

I agree and when politicans start living and spending the way they expect others to do and that means no lifetime benefits of any kind and when social programs make it harder for those who wish to use it to use it and welfare ends PERIOD within a set time regardless of the fact that you spew out more children or don't wish to go to school, then raising taxes ONLY to cover deficit is fine and only for a set time and EVERYONE pays. You don't pay taxes? You don't get ANY kind of refund. Food baskets not food stamps. Drug testing and mandatory showing up for job training or school to keep that check coming. 30% cut in all federal spending and elimination of a lot of useless programs as well. 30% cut in ALL politician salaries starting with his majesty, the biggest freeloader of them all.

[whoisjohngalt]

Thats what I meant , when I said will it cover the deficit. I know it wont cover the deficit.

Also you are in the minority when 72 percent want to raise the taxes. How do you plan on stopping them ?

I simply stated that there is nothing you or me can do if the majority wants to raise the taxes on people making 250k or more.
Unlike you I am not going to whine about it and spend my energy in making more money.

Since you are rich you can move anywhere in the world and live a good lifestyle.

Here are my options
Complain and Whine about how much I pay in taxes.
Move to a rich friendly country
Suck up pay taxes, Increase my business, and instead start donating to charities, foundation etc.

I dont know what upset you so much about my post. Why should I pay your taxes.
If you cant see that you are in minority I dont know what to say.

I have no idea what you are saying anymore. In your first post you said that you don't mind paying even more taxes. OK, go for it. Me? I don't want to. If you consider that whining, so be it.

And not to sound rude, but it's actually people like you that I have a problem with. Instead of saying "enough is enough", you just want to do nothing. Guess what?? It won't work and I hope you have enough health, energy and motivation to keep making money, bc it will NEVER be enough and your 50% that you don't seem to mind paying will turn into 55% and 60% and 70%.

I take a different approach. I want the govt and that 72% of people to realize that keep taxing me won't solve their problems. But as long as we have people like you who thinks it's perfectly fine,nothing will change. Bc it's much easier to sell the idea of "taxing the rich" than making everyone else to rely more on themselves and stop taking.

Lena

[lonewolf2019]

"I take a different approach. I want the govt and that 72% of people to realize that keep taxing me won't solve their problems. But as long as we have people like you who thinks it's perfectly fine,nothing will change. Bc it's much easier to sell the idea of "taxing the rich" than making everyone else to rely more on themselves and stop taking.

Lena "

Lena, I love you!!!!!

[Formerly SK]

"No one should be exempt from helping out the country. We're all Americans and we all have to do our part."

THIS. Neither marriage nor friendships nor businesses nor neighborhoods would succeed if everyone only contributed the minimum. Govt is the same way. I agree with Biden - paying taxes is patriotic. So is military service. So is volunteering in your community. There are so many ways to make our country great. What saddens me about this thread (and the national debate in general) is everyone sounds like a married couple on the verge of divorce, arguing over the wrongs the other side committed. No one is turning the mirror on themselves to see what *they* can do to make things better. Everyone is either lazy or selfish and only cares about their own self interests. This country (or life for that matter) is only what we make it. If we want things to improve, we need to care and be willing to contribute. Otherwise our little experiment in democracy will end very soon.

[ssdawood]

Now I see your point of view and I totally agree with it. My 50 , 60 or 70 percent will never be enough to cover the deficit. I agree with this too. But if it ever reaches the point where I dont want to pay anymore or I feel I am getting ripped of, I do have the possibility of moving to another country. Now for instance if every country is taxing the rich outrageously then I have nowhere to go.


Making the government and the rest of the country realize that raising the taxes wont solve their problem is kind of a uphill battle. No you are not rude by saying you have a problem with me. I never said it was perfectly fine to tax the rich. I said i have no problem paying more if they raise the tax rate.

I was not here to discuss whether taxing the rich is right or not, I was here to discuss that the rich will not leave if we raise the taxes. I think you misunderstood me.

Sooner or later taxes on the rich will go up. The country is run by majority and majority of people are poor

[ssdawood]

Also Let me explain when I said I have no problem paying more in taxes.
Now I pay 25 percent, my income double so I pay 30, It triples I pay 35 percent and so on. I am close to 250k and even then I dont think I will see 50 percent taxes. After mortgage, childcare expenses, student loans, IRAs, Donations, Gifts and charity I doubt I will pay 35 percent.

[whoisjohngalt]

Yep, I agree with you (post 144). And it makes me really sad, bc the idea that everyone should do and contribute something is fading fast, if it's not gone already.

There was a poster on old YM (who I liked very very much). Her and her husband had a pretty successful business. I remember her saying a few years ago that if the taxes will keep going up, she won't expand her business. It just wasn't worth the effort anymore, bc if she put X amt of effort and only got to keep X-Y%, it didn't make sense to be putting all that effort. Your basic cost-benefit analysis. I don't think she was thinking of leaving the country, but here is just one example of someone who did not want to expand her business.

Lena

[ssdawood]

As for expanding the business, I had nothing when I started ten years ago. A rich person took me under his wing and set me up. I will always keep on expanding, The way I expand is pick my best employee and then make him partners in a new location. I ll keep on doing this till the 72 percent of people who want to tax the rich make 250k or so. Its not hard to do.

There is always incentive to expand, even after government takes 50 percent I am left with 50 percent plus I have a good feeling that I did gave another person a chance for success.

[whoisjohngalt]

Your post made me smile. I wish you nothing but good health and good luck and I truly command you for what you are doing, bc that's America is suppose to be all about.

If you don't mind sharing, what kind of business are you in?

Lena

[Formerly SK]

But Lena, is that a bad thing? Perhaps the poster you referred to ended up spending more time with her children/grandchildren, or volunteering for a cause she believed in. And perhaps the demand for her business ended up being met by another business who wanted/needed the income more.

We all make cost/benefit decisions throughout out life. I'm a SAHM, and one reason I am is because my DH's income is right at a tax level that any income I bring in will be taxed in the next bracket. For now it isn't worth it to us as we desire flexibility more than money. At some point that will change. But even if I grumble about the fact my income will be taxed that much heavier, I'm still grateful that my life is what it is. I may not *happily* pay the taxes (especially when I see how the govt spends it) but in the grand scheme of things it isn't that big of a deal.

[pig]

"Bottom 50% = 13.5% of total US AGI Top 1% = 20% of total US AGI ... Theres some numerical information for you... "

[whoisjohngalt]

SK,

Oh no, I don't think it's a bad thing at all, and I will be the first one to tell you that I won't be doing what Ssdawood is doing. It's great that he has all that zest for it, and I don't know how long he has been doing it, but for ME, I very much take into consideration our future tax liability before considering what I want to do, whether it's my own business, RE investments or even my DH's job.

Lena

[ssdawood]

Retail anything retail, Gas station, Grocery store, Liquor store, Departmental store deli etc.
I already have plans when I dont have good health and become old , I am going to shift from retail to real estate, Apartment complexes, Malls Hotels and motels

[ssdawood]

Lena its a good thing that you look at your future tax liabilities

Answer me this if you had opportunity to make 100 K per year but it will increase your tax liability by 50 K per year would you do such an investment. ? This is extreme case considering that government will take half of what you make.

[lisaa]

Apr 20, 2011 8:44:09 GMT -5 Phoenix84 said:

as long as the government curbs spending.

[whoisjohngalt]

It depends on how much time and risk would I have to incur.

Lena

[fairlycrazy23]

Apr 21, 2011 11:13:45 GMT -5 @ssdawood said:

Lena its a good thing that you look at your future tax liabilities

Answer me this if you had opportunity to make 100 K per year but it will increase your tax liability by 50 K per year would you do such an investment. ? This is extreme case considering that government will take half of what you make.

Apr 21, 2011 11:31:31 GMT -5 whoisjohngalt said:

It depends on how much time and risk would I have to incur.

Lena

[phil5185]

If there were a balanced budget, you can bet govt spending would be a whole lot less.

Yes, we had 12 years of the PAYGO System, pay-as-you-go. Congress had to have the money before a spending bill could be passed. Alan Greenspan proposed this, it was in effect from 1990 to 2002 when it expired. During a good portion of that 12-yrs we had an annual budget surplus.

[rumples]

Apr 20, 2011 13:46:37 GMT -5 shelby said:

Definitely raise taxes on wealthy and do not cut social spending. We do have the lowest tax rate pretty much ever for the rich and one of the lowest for industrialized nations. If corporations move fine then impose tariffs, stop making it easy for them to leave. The cuts have not improved our economy or the middle class in fact the opposite has happened, still no proof at all we have gained from them. As far as social spending we spend the least on those programs for industrialized nations as well. To cut programs we have had for decades even though we already had welfare reform while decreasing taxes for the rich is cruel and really does make us look bad to other nations. We happen to be at a critical point of need for these programs with record unemployment, record bankruptcies, stagnant to decreasing wages, high food inflation. People who vote for things might want to look at their faith a little closer if they have one because I do not believe any true Christian would condone such things.

I know better than to open these threads and when I opened this one, I wasn't going to respond to anything. Well, the best intentions...

My lack of desire to give the government more of my money so that they can spend it willy-nilly on whatever they deem necessary at the time and give it to whomever they feel needs it has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with my faith. My desire to help the person next to me one-on-one who is currently down on his luck has EVERYTHING to do with my faith. I am highly offended that it would even come into question.

Also... just to give a little background on some of the people you are asking to raise taxes on... We paid over $80K in taxes last year on a pre-tax take-home pay of $150K. Why? We own a small S-Corp. The remainder of our income ON PAPER was from a Schedule K. We never touched it. It stayed in the company's coffers to pay January's expenses, including the payroll for our employees. If we need to pay even more in taxes next year, that will mean that there will be less there for said employees, leaving one (or two or three) more people in the unemployment line. Bite the hand that feeds you lately?

[shelby]

"Also... just to give a little background on some of the people you are asking to raise taxes on..."

I do know about this my father owned his own business my whole life and my sister currently does. Still does not change my mind. I think we (most people on this board) have fundamentally different core values. No amount of arguing will change my mind or yours. This value system is what drives politics in most cases that is why it is emotional for most people. Unless you subscribe to objectivism then you have no emotional involvement in the world around you and that is sad.

[zibazinski]

I have a problem with ANYONE taking money I earned by working a job that wasn't always the best and giving it away to those who choose not to work. I don't support charities/groups I don't agree with voluntarily so because of that I am forced to INVOLUNTARILY "donate." It's easy to spit out platitudes when it isn't your nickel. Put yOUR money where YOUR mouth is but stop expecting others to donate to your "pet causes."

[sunuva]

Arthur Laffer (Laffer Curve) was able to demonstrate visually the concept of collecting taxes by the government and the revenues of those tax returns and that it isn't a linear correllation. Unfortunately, it isn't apparent what magic formula exists to identify the optimum tax rate and revenue realized.

Based solely on the concept that if the government has a tax rate of 0% it has a net revenue of $0 and if the government has a tax rate of 100% it also will have revenue of $0. Somewhere between 0% and 100% the government will have some revenue. So the curve has an apex somewhere in the middle (rising revenue then falling revenue as the tax rate increases). Grasping this concept then very obviously there exists a point at which the tax rate maximizes government revenue. If the government, currently, is not at that apex point and has to decrease the tax rate to acchieve it, then trickle-down economics (a political phrase not an economic one) comes into play.

But notice that what I have described is solely tax rate versus revenue. It does not factor in government spending and that government spending, obviously, does not adhere to the notion that "you can't get something from nothing." The Trillion Dollar debt is evidence enough that spending doesn't adhere to any rules.

I am on the side that the government has plenty of revenue and that spending is a problem. So, obviously I am of the persuasion that a reduction in government spending (austerity) will be far more beneficial to a solid bottom line for the future than will increasing tax rates.

[Angel!]

I have a problem with ANYONE taking money I earned by working a job that wasn't always the best and giving it away to those who choose not to work.

Exactly how much of the federal budget is money handed out to the non-working poor? I am guessing a pretty miniscule amount depending on your definition of what fits this criteria.

I keep hearing this rational & unless you are counting medicare & SS as welfare, then "giving money to the poor" is not really a significant problem in the budget.