Why shouldn't the rich pay more in taxes?

[KissMyAsscroft]

I'm sick of these assholes whining about how much they pay in taxes, they should be paying more!

They get break after break after break. From Reagan, to Bush I their burden was LOWERED.

Why aren't Americans fed up with these whining, Rush Limbaugh assholes bitching about the taxes they pay?

[Bronco69]

1. Because most Americans are suckers

They think that someday they are going to be that rich and they don't want to pay any taxes either.

[punpirate]

2. Very simply, because...

... most everyone thinks their taxes are too high. The rank-and-file are happy for crumbs because of that. And they really believe that the averages the Bushies trot out are real numbers applying to them.

Also, there was a study done around the time of the first round of tax cuts that showed something like 19% of people polled thought they were in the top 1% of wage earners, and presumably thought that the big cuts were destined for them.

Wonder why H&R Block is still in business?

[DiverDave]

3. If you really

WORK for money, you need tax relief.

When you have money making money and you bitch and moan about taxes...well that's class warfare.
OOPPSS! I said the dirty words!

Goddamned democratic leadership outta scream this from the rooftops.

UNEARNED INCOME SHOULD BE TAXED AT 50%!!

And, YO!, FREEPER TROLLS..You aint NEVER GONNA BE RICH enough to worry about taxing unearned income.

[AP]

29. Unearned income should definitely be taxed at higher rates than

earned income. However, it should be taxed progressively (ie, not one band and rate, but multiple bands and multiple rates). I might even be comfortable of a 90% rate for unearned income in the 1 billion to 2 billion range. You really have to look at the data though before you start shouting out rates and brackets. If you don't need the money to run the government efficiently, and if everyone has an equal opportunity to make that kind of money if they work hard enough, 90% for the 1 billion+ range might not be needed.

[Beaker]

37. that's the BIGGIE.

but...but...it will stifle investment!

notice that consumers are expected to exercise their "patriotic duty" and continue shopping during times of woe-

and wage-earners are expected to accept wage concessions in the face of national adversity-

but investors are only and entirely beholden to getting the highest return on investment???

why is that?

[Muddleoftheroad]

42. Billioniaires

Well, I have an easy solution to your taxing/taking plan. If I were a billionaire, I'd simply leave and take my money with me.

[Name removed]

4. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

5. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

10. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[LincolnMcGrath]

8. The should but they dont

*41* Payed 17-18 % when he filled his election papers. NOT the 50 60 70 percent that bill oreally whines about.


Welcomre to DU: Enjoy your stay

[camero]

9. Then the rich should be FOR a tax increase.

Cause then they will have more power, no? Your first post didn't contain any logic either.

[Name removed]

13. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Beaker]

16. boo-hoo...

"Anything over 136K is taxed by the feds at 36%..."

and anything over 84K isn't subject to FICA taxes.

"Fed taxes also apply to gasoline, telephone, cable, internet, tires, batteries, etc..."

As a percentage of income, I'm willing to bet that those with lower incomes pay a higher amount of it in sales taxes on the types of items you mention.

If you're making over 136K, and you're paying 50% of your gross(not adjusted-gross) in taxes...you need a better accountant.

[camero]

24. That's funny

I go to dinner and your name changes...lol :)

[StClone]

12. I have no idea what you are saying

My two reasons to tax back at the 50 to 70 decades level (which was between 60 to 75 % range).

1) The rich benefit most from the infrastructure and should pay the most to keep it functioning: eduction for educated workers, good roads for transporting goods, health and care system to keep work force in good shape.

2) It is not inconceivable the wealth of one individual (like in Monopoly) could exceed the wealth (and Power) to the point that the government is subverted to the detriment of all players.

[Name removed]

15. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Misinformed01]

6. You're not going to BELIEVE how many "Liberal" DU'ers will pop up...

...and attack the idea of Progressive Income Taxation.

Seriously, it's like Free Republicrat here when the issue arises.

Have fun and Ra Bless You!

[Generic Other]

7. A real patriot would pay more than his or her share of taxes to prove it

And most of us do just that. We don't hire people to pore over our financial records looking for ways to limit our tax liability or to maximize our deductions. We just pay up.

It takes a flag lapel wearing pruneface in an expensive suit with a bad combover to do that.

[baldguy]

11. It depends on how you define "rich".

There are people in this country who have the Big Job, with the Big House, and the Big Car. Yet they're up do debt to their eyeballs and are one paycheck away from financial disaster.

Just like the single mother with one job flipping burgers and another cleaning the office of the guy with the Big Job.

The GOP has convinced these MIDDLE CLASS people that because they drive a Lincoln Navigator and have a 401k, then that means they're rich. And that less deserving "poor" people are plotting to take things away.

The REAL wealthy class - those that make tens and hundreds of millions each year - have pitted the merely well-off against those who are less well-off. Divide and conquer.

[sasquatch]

14. Tell'em what

If having all that money is such a burden because of taxes they can give it to me. I'll gladly pay 50% in total taxes on 12 million a year salary. If they don't like it? I'd like to see them make that much cash in some third world country.

[Beaker]

17. "I'd like to see them make that much cash in some third world country."

actually, that's where a lot of them are making their money.

[arewethereyet]

27. its a damn site easier to do there

and the taxes there are miniscule ! and they're beloved of the local governments who woo them as well as they can because it creates jobs for their people. Some of them actually still care about their people. Not Robert Mugabe but others.

[Beaker]

18. I don't understand why all those posts were deleted...

they didn't seem that offensive- If differing POV's are totally banned, what's the point? how can it really be called a discussion?

It's really becoming very tiresome. I never thought about Democrats as being so gung-ho about stifling dissent.

[cryofan]

20. what did the deleted posts say?

[Beaker]

22. nothing that offensive...

the ones I responded to were about how much the poster paid in taxes- pretty benign stuff.

[cryofan]

19. The Rich should be paying a LOT MORE in taxes

Many of you may not remember this, but 20 years ago, rich people paid 70% tax rate on their income. yes, their were loopholes, but they usually involved local investment in small businesses.

Back in those days, you could go to college free or virtually free. Unemployment was easier to get. hell, in California, many people collected unemp. while attending school and paying no tuition.

We need to copy the european social democracies method of taxation.

[arewethereyet]

28. uh, those countries have problems these days

and the soon to be (perhaps) EU nations mock them for it.

Germany has deflation and BIG problems, France is in much the same boat and the Netherlands is looking for ways to cut social spending that they can no longer afford.

[AP]

30. They're having problems because their economies are too tied to US economy

and not because of their tax rates and social safety nets.

The whole point of the EU is to put their destinies in the control of institutions in which the Europeans have a democratic say (and they don't have a democratic say in the US).

If they had gotten up to speed a little sooner -- before Bush became president -- Germany wouldn't be having the problems it's having. All things considered, they're doing pretty well. Look at the UK. They're doing pretty well, relative to the US, and considering the sabotage the US is trying to perpetrate on Europe.

[Kathy in Cambridge]

31. And we don't have problems? Please.

At least there's a safety net in Europe. My grocery bill went up 20% this year, and I've cut out any 'goodies' that I used to buy. Our *real* unemployment figures (those that include people off the unemployment rolls that are still without work) are just around or a little lower than most of the large European nations. They pay higher taxes, but healthcare and university is free.

So, if you think we're so much more advanced than the EU, think again.

[AP]

32. Grocery bill up 20% --

notice that grocery stores are trying to lower wages and eliminate benefits for employees, and that family farms are going out of business because wholesale prices are so low.

Yet retail prices are increasing every year.

Where's all that money going? Oh yeah. To low-taxed profits for huge corporations. Yeah!

Individual wealth flows into the pockets of big corporations through a spigot which Bush Republicans have their hands on. If the little guy gets a little money in his or her pocket, Bush opens up the spigot and lets the money flow into the pockets of mortgage companies, private energy utilities, big grocery stores, tax breaks for the rich, no bid contracts for Halliburton.

The make sure that we're always treading water, and too scared to try for something better.

[Kathy in Cambridge]

33. It's Horrible-Worse than under Reagan

Inflation is just around the corner. I watched "Norma Rae" today and it made me long for the days when Unions were strong and people could expect a living wage.

[cryofan]

34. And of course the USA is doing JUST GREAT (read this!)

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/01/08/business/08FUND.html?hp

With its rising budget deficit and ballooning trade imbalance, the United States is running up a foreign debt of such record-breaking proportions that it threatens the financial stability of the global economy, according to a report released Wednesday by the International Monetary Fund.

Prepared by a team of I.M.F. economists, the report sounded a loud alarm about the shaky fiscal foundation of the United States, questioning the wisdom of the Bush administration's tax cuts and warning that large budget deficits pose "significant risks" not just for the United States but for the rest of the world.

The report warns that the United States' net financial obligations to the rest of the world could be equal to 40 percent of its total economy within a few years — "an unprecedented level of external debt for a large industrial country," according to the fund, that could play havoc with the value of the dollar and international exchange rates.
.................
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

See my sig for links to writings about social democracies and comparisons to the USA.

[unblock]

21. the day gloria estefan lost me as a fan

was when she went on dennis miller and griped about having to pay $2 million in taxes.

of course, she had earned over $14 million that year, so she got taxed at an average rate below 15% or so, and remained with $12 million after taxes. from that year alone.

it just astounded me how she can complain. as if keeping $13 million is justice done and $12 million is a crime.


the fact of the matter is, if you complain about your taxes and fail to acknowledge what government does provide for you -- even if only in an emergency -- then you're no patriot.

[baldguy]

23. She needs a more devious accountant.

The average corporation pays about 3.75% of their *declared* earnings in taxes.

[Beaker]

26. a local disc jockey lost my business- steve dahl...

steve dahl went off, complaining about taxes, and saying that people that make $150,000-$300,000 are "middle class"...I couldn't handle his bitching any more after that.

[Muddleoftheroad]

43. Gloria

I note you said she EARNED $14 million. When you are an entertainer, your agent takes 15% off the top. That means she didn't see anywhere near the $14 mil. That cut her total down to $11.9 million. From that, comes all of her salaries for her group, support people, security people, etc.

I'm not even vaguely saying she's hurting, just that your percentages are way off.

[Hong Kong Cavalier]

25. Because they all think that soon...

They will be one of those rich people. And thus, deserve to get their money without any taxes.

[ComerPerro]

35. There is absolutely no reason to justify them NOT paying more

I'm sorry, but if you are making millions just by sitting on your fat ass and having a brokerage firm manipulate bonds and stocks for you, then I think you can afford to pay taxes at a higher rate.

[Printer70]

36. Simple Rule- The Rich only Pay as Much Taxes...

...as prevents a revolt in the streets. They resist and attack anyone who tries to make them pay more.

[cryofan]

39. yes! That is why we need massive consumer and workplace strikes

Read my sig url for links to pages about social democracies and you will see how it works in Europe.

[Lestat de Lioncourt]

38. Amen...those who have the money should be paying...

more in taxes. I too am fed up with the whining the rich always do.

[PVnRT]

40. I'd be happy if corporations paid the taxes that they are supposed to pay

If we taxed corporations the way they were taxed in the 1960's and 1970's, before Reagan completely fucked the country over, we would be raking in something like another $110 billion a year. Think about that.

[October]

41. Unbelievable

Why isn't more attention paid to this?

People here on this thread are calling $150K rich? Not for a family living in the NE, within an hour of NYC.