runewell
Established Member
Joined: Jan 3, 2011 15:37:33 GMT -5
Posts: 395
|
Post by runewell on Apr 14, 2011 13:47:35 GMT -5
Republican Paul Ryan's budget proposal included tax breaks for the wealthiest americans. What I can't understand is why we would want to do this.
Our country was doing OK until Bush's massive tax cuts and his ensuing war. Everybody liked having taxes lower and people agree they like they tax levels now, but nobody wants to raise taxes or decrease spending.
Ben Stein is rich and he even made a video saying that we should tax the rich more, including himself.
|
|
Mardi Gras Audrey
Senior Member
So well rounded, I'm pointless...
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:49:31 GMT -5
Posts: 2,082
|
Post by Mardi Gras Audrey on Apr 14, 2011 14:04:25 GMT -5
Here's something I have always wondered about the rich who claim they need to be taxed more (Buffett, Gates, Stein, etc). If they seriously believe that, do they ever just pay more taxes? Either just a cut a check straight to the Treasury Dept (I am pretty sure the govt will take your $$ if you send it to them) or complete their tax returns claiming only income but NO DEDUCTIONS (I am assuming that the IRS doesn't care if you don't take any deductions, only if you underclaim on income)? Wouldn't these be ways for them to easily put their $$$ where their mouths are?
What do you guys think? Are they claiming every deduction they can? Or are their 1040s just completed at the top and middle of the first page with no deductions, schedule A, etc?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 2, 2024 13:37:59 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 14, 2011 14:05:20 GMT -5
Two things come to mind.
First, the rich have options you and I don't have for lowering taxes and many of them are legitimate. I'm sure there are countries where you can buy a home, treat it as your primary residence, get dual citizenship and somehow evade US taxes. There may even be countries where the banks are still secretive, although Bermuda, Switzerland, Liechtenstein and Luxembourg have become more co-operative with authorities lately. If you tax them enough, they will find a way to avoid taxation.
Second- I heard the interesting factoid that if you taxed the income of the top 1% at a 100% rate that would be enough to run the government for 10 days. (It was a BBC podcast- sorry, I don't have a link.) OK, now what are we gonna do for the other 355 days? The rich are not a bottomless pit either.
|
|
runewell
Established Member
Joined: Jan 3, 2011 15:37:33 GMT -5
Posts: 395
|
Post by runewell on Apr 14, 2011 14:16:14 GMT -5
What do you guys think?
I think that idea is absurd.
|
|
souldoubt
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 4, 2011 11:57:14 GMT -5
Posts: 2,745
|
Post by souldoubt on Apr 14, 2011 14:21:15 GMT -5
The country wasn't doing OK before the previous presidents tax cuts. Long term SS and Medicare have been in trouble for a while but no one has really wanted to address either issue. I think the federal government adding a trillion+ to the national debt in a year is absurd. It's amazing that a victory for either side is to reducre the expected debt over the next decade. Wouldn't be an issue if they weren't spending way more than they bring in while not addressing things that will be problems long term. I'm not in favor of taxing people any more than they already are being taxed nor am I a fan of the government spending more than it brings in regularly.
|
|
8 Bit WWBG
Administrator
Your Money admin
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 8:57:29 GMT -5
Posts: 9,322
Today's Mood: Mega
|
Post by 8 Bit WWBG on Apr 14, 2011 14:23:25 GMT -5
It has been proven time and time again that if you overtax the rich, they will leave. Then, not only do you not get the increase, but you lose what you would have gotten by leaving things the same.
|
|
wodehouse
Familiar Member
Joined: Jan 10, 2011 16:35:08 GMT -5
Posts: 786
|
Post by wodehouse on Apr 14, 2011 14:23:41 GMT -5
The "rich" pay the bulk of tax revenue anyway. If was them I would want them to pay 100% of the taxes so I didn't have to listen to wailing and moaning from the great unwashed. And there would be a great PR program to emphasize how great we were for supporting the whole shebang, and make it seem really enviable to be a member of that great club.
On the other hand, my personal belief is that "everyone has to pay something". Whether it's health care or other benefits, the ones getting the benefit should have to pay some token amount in order to minimize thoughts of entitlement and minimize waste.
Every time I see/hear this talk about "tax the rich" I have a mental picture of these formerly-rich people working in a quarry in their old suits, all dusty and dirty now, working away while the hoi polloi sit in the shade and watch them, while eating grapes. Yes, I have quite an imagination.
|
|
souldoubt
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 4, 2011 11:57:14 GMT -5
Posts: 2,745
|
Post by souldoubt on Apr 14, 2011 14:26:10 GMT -5
It has been proven time and time again that if you overtax the rich, they will leave. Then, not only do you not get the increase, but you lose what you would have gotten by leaving things the same. Not only that but as has been pointed out numerous times the tax the rich schemes usually backfire. The government doesn't bring in what they thought they would and the burden falls on the middle class. I still can't fathom how talks like these always turn to increasing revenue when spending is the bigger problem.
|
|
Mardi Gras Audrey
Senior Member
So well rounded, I'm pointless...
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:49:31 GMT -5
Posts: 2,082
|
Post by Mardi Gras Audrey on Apr 14, 2011 14:27:25 GMT -5
Rune, what is absurd about the idea of paying more taxes if you believe that it is the right thing to do? I am not a CPA so I don't know what the IRS would do if you DON'T claim legitimate deductions but I thought you couldn't get in trouble for that (Any tax pros want to confirm this?).
If you (not you personally, Rune, but the rich person) truly believe doing something is right (i.e. paying more taxes), why wouldn't you do it when you could? Why wait for the govt to mandate doing it? I liken it to knowing that picking up a piece of trash on the ground is right. I don't need the govt to mandate I pick up trash I run into, I just pick it up and throw it away. If you (again, not you personally Rune) are not willing to do this, maybe you aren't such a supporter of it after all and should just keep your moth shut...
|
|
Angel!
Senior Associate
Politics Admin
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 11:44:08 GMT -5
Posts: 10,722
|
Post by Angel! on Apr 14, 2011 14:32:32 GMT -5
|
|
Mardi Gras Audrey
Senior Member
So well rounded, I'm pointless...
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:49:31 GMT -5
Posts: 2,082
|
Post by Mardi Gras Audrey on Apr 14, 2011 14:34:25 GMT -5
I like that site, Angel. Are those gifts tax deductable? I notice it says that there are no goods/services exchanged. Is the Treasury Dept considered a non-profit org?
|
|
brdsl
Familiar Member
Joined: Dec 28, 2010 11:56:10 GMT -5
Posts: 863
|
Post by brdsl on Apr 14, 2011 14:43:09 GMT -5
Simplify the code, no breaks, deductions, etc. Everyone pays X % on brackets.
0-10,000 - x% 10-25k - x % 25k-75k - x%
Fair no. But simple, and each person pays taxes. No getting out of it.
|
|
Mardi Gras Audrey
Senior Member
So well rounded, I'm pointless...
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:49:31 GMT -5
Posts: 2,082
|
Post by Mardi Gras Audrey on Apr 14, 2011 14:47:03 GMT -5
Brdsl, The only thing that I would keep is the 401k and traditional IRA deduction (The income will be taxed later in retirement so it will be taxed at some point). This seems to be a good incentive for people to save for the future.
|
|
Angel!
Senior Associate
Politics Admin
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 11:44:08 GMT -5
Posts: 10,722
|
Post by Angel! on Apr 14, 2011 14:51:21 GMT -5
It has been proven time and time again that if you overtax the rich, they will leave. Then, not only do you not get the increase, but you lose what you would have gotten by leaving things the same. Yes, if you OVERTAX them. The question is at what point are you overtaxing them. It is basically the supply/demand curve. At what tax rate does the govt bring in the most revenue? Republicans seem to think if they keep lowering taxes forever, revenue will keep going up & that simply isn't true. On the flip side you can't raise taxes forever & expect revenue to keep going up either. I don't see that letting the bush tax cuts expire will suddenly overburden the rich, but it will bring up the revenue. When the first bush tax cuts were instituted, total tax revenue went down for the next 3 years, tax revenue as a % of GDP dropped over the next 3, & most importantly unemployment went up over the next 3 years & the GDP growth slowed. So there is clearly not an absolute cause & effect between lowering tax rates & more tax revenue or an increase in the economy or jobs.
|
|
Angel!
Senior Associate
Politics Admin
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 11:44:08 GMT -5
Posts: 10,722
|
Post by Angel! on Apr 14, 2011 14:52:18 GMT -5
I like that site, Angel. Are those gifts tax deductable? I notice it says that there are no goods/services exchanged. Is the Treasury Dept considered a non-profit org? I have no idea. Treasury Direct is a govt. agency, but I have no idea if you can deduct any gifts.
|
|
Mardi Gras Audrey
Senior Member
So well rounded, I'm pointless...
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:49:31 GMT -5
Posts: 2,082
|
Post by Mardi Gras Audrey on Apr 14, 2011 14:55:27 GMT -5
I wonder if you have to fill out gift forms if you send them over $13k. It would be kind of funny (But ver much like our govt), if they tried to tax you on the money with the estate tax after you sent them a bunch....
|
|
azphx1972
Familiar Member
Joined: Mar 2, 2011 22:08:36 GMT -5
Posts: 809
|
Post by azphx1972 on Apr 14, 2011 14:58:04 GMT -5
|
|
Mardi Gras Audrey
Senior Member
So well rounded, I'm pointless...
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:49:31 GMT -5
Posts: 2,082
|
Post by Mardi Gras Audrey on Apr 14, 2011 14:58:42 GMT -5
I also wonder what would happen if you gave a bunch of $$ to the Treasury as a gift and then fell ill. If it came up under the Medicaid look back period, would the states try to get the $$ back from the feds?
|
|
brdsl
Familiar Member
Joined: Dec 28, 2010 11:56:10 GMT -5
Posts: 863
|
Post by brdsl on Apr 14, 2011 15:21:10 GMT -5
azphx,
I read the article. I didn't think it was very good. I think it was one sided, and not even close to a good representation of the real world.
I like how the business owner was portrayed as an overworked, underpaid, and of course, the lazy factory worker.
I would bet if Dave actually knew Henry, Henry would be just fine doing what he does, and probably just fine with how John lives.
I hate when people who give financial advice, go into a area in which they know little about, and think they are equally qualified.
|
|
azphx1972
Familiar Member
Joined: Mar 2, 2011 22:08:36 GMT -5
Posts: 809
|
Post by azphx1972 on Apr 14, 2011 15:30:42 GMT -5
brdsl, the point is I don't like the attitude of entitlement that many people have. I believe in helping people, but I also believe in helping people help themselves rather than just giving them what they need. Why is it that most millionaires tend to be first generation immigrants? It's because they don't feel like everything should just be handed to them, but that they need to work for it.
|
|
|
Post by robbase on Apr 14, 2011 15:39:07 GMT -5
The US gov does not have a revenue problem, it has a spending problem
first let washington demonstrate for 2 years they can CUT spending. Once they accomplish this I will be all for a small tax increase.
Until the government actually demonstrates they can cut spending I will be against any tax increase, as even if a tax increase does result in more gov revenue you cannot currently convince me that the government will actually "save" this increase (or put it towards the deficit) -- I am convinced they will continue to spend
|
|
whoisjohngalt
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 14:12:07 GMT -5
Posts: 9,140
|
Post by whoisjohngalt on Apr 14, 2011 15:45:13 GMT -5
I can't even take those questions seriously anymore. If people who question how much "rich" should be taxed spend just as much time questioning why we have people who pay zero tax, may be we wouldn't be in this mess.
Just an idea
Lena
|
|
azphx1972
Familiar Member
Joined: Mar 2, 2011 22:08:36 GMT -5
Posts: 809
|
Post by azphx1972 on Apr 14, 2011 15:51:38 GMT -5
The US gov does not have a revenue problem, it has a spending problem THIS. Until we get some fiscally responsible politicians, there will never be enough to go around even if you impose a 100% tax on the rich.
|
|
brdsl
Familiar Member
Joined: Dec 28, 2010 11:56:10 GMT -5
Posts: 863
|
Post by brdsl on Apr 14, 2011 15:56:29 GMT -5
axph,
I agree. The article basically bashed the "factory worker," as it was something bad. I didn't agree with that.
I am all about people working and making their own way, but I don't judge on how that way is made. Factory vs. Small business owner.
robbase,
It has both. It should cut, and raise to cover past due bills. It is the only way we will make it out of this mess. I actually care about the future generations, so I am willing to make the sacrifices now.
Lena,
I feel all should be burdened by taxes, no class should be spared....we all use government services daily, and should pay for them....no free rides.
|
|
|
Post by Savoir Faire-Demogague in NJ on Apr 14, 2011 16:05:11 GMT -5
I a curious as to how much additional revenue would be brought in by raising taxes on the high income earners? Note, I say income earners and not high net worth people.
Based on the annual Forbes list, the top 400 Americans have a combined net worth of around $2 trillion. Their annual income is a fraction of that.
Our current budget gap is around $1.7 trillion and we have 100s of trillions in unfunded liabilities. The rich and wealthy do not have sufficient income and net worth to even make a dent in what lays before us.
|
|
april47
Familiar Member
Joined: Jan 8, 2011 18:44:29 GMT -5
Posts: 512
|
Post by april47 on Apr 14, 2011 16:09:20 GMT -5
I don't think the rich need to be taxed "more" and I'm very far from rich. However, I think they should all be made to not be hiding money, deducting odd things, etc. I think "business expenses" and some other deductions need to be revamped. No hiding money in strange accounts and foreign lands. They need to clamp down on all cheaters and a lot of them do happen to be rich. The penalties need to stringent for cheaters even the rich. Just being rich and famous does not buy you a pat on the hand. No sneaky lawyers.
|
|
|
Post by robbase on Apr 14, 2011 16:22:43 GMT -5
robbase, It has both. It should cut, and raise to cover past due bills. It is the only way we will make it out of this mess. I actually care about the future generations, so I am willing to make the sacrifices now.so you want to potentially give Washington more money (assuming Tax increases increase revenue), even though they have yet to prove in all years past they will not just spend more money (i.e. why would they not just spend the extra money a tax increase may generate, they have done it time and time again) .... Einstein said insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. In all past years any time gov had "extra" / more revenue they found a way to spend it pretty easy...why would now be different? Let them PROVE they can save / cut spending for 2 years and than I will consider a tax increase
|
|
brdsl
Familiar Member
Joined: Dec 28, 2010 11:56:10 GMT -5
Posts: 863
|
Post by brdsl on Apr 14, 2011 16:30:55 GMT -5
rob,
You assume I meant both at the same time. I didn't. They need to cut, but raise revenue to get us out of the situation.
I don't believe cutting everything will fix the problem.
BTW. In the past, we have had surplus. So, I am not sure where you are getting the following.
"In all past years any time gov had "extra" / more revenue they found a way to spend it pretty easy"
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 2, 2024 13:37:59 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 14, 2011 16:49:00 GMT -5
It has been proven time and time again that if you overtax the rich, they will leave. Then, not only do you not get the increase, but you lose what you would have gotten by leaving things the same. Overtaxing is 70% to braket... not what we have now...
|
|
8 Bit WWBG
Administrator
Your Money admin
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 8:57:29 GMT -5
Posts: 9,322
Today's Mood: Mega
|
Post by 8 Bit WWBG on Apr 14, 2011 16:51:01 GMT -5
...:::"I also wonder what would happen if you gave a bunch of $$ to the Treasury as a gift and then fell ill. If it came up under the Medicaid look back period, would the states try to get the $$ back from the feds? ":::...
What if you give the gift by maxing out a bunch of credit cards, and then declare Bk?
...:::"Overtaxing is 70% to braket... not what we have now... ":::...
and cue Ameiko coming in with that tired "90% taxation of some athlete [who owed a ton in back taxes]" sob story he has in his one-trick arsenal.
|
|