Forum Post: Not a little tax- A LOT OF TAX
Posted 13 years ago on Oct. 9, 2011, 1:38 p.m. EST by Toddtjs
(187)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
When you raise someones taxes it encourages them to get more involved in the direction of our common interests in this country. When you pay condominium fees it makes that person get more involved in it's association. Bringing back the percentage of taxes from the 1950's on the wealthiest of Americans will give them a chance of voting on where their money goes. These top tier Americans will vote what is right since many of them contribute and donate their money to charities every year anyway. Some organizations like the Patriotic Millionaires are already volunteering to raise their taxes today. These people understand the inequities in our society and realize what needs to be done. Maybe bringing back tax rates from that era might be a little extreme but it was done before and only made our country stronger- not weaker.
I believe that if we are able to convince the people who are rallying today for a more just society, we can get an agreement to place a national ballot to bring back these high taxes. With money of this magnitude coming back into our treasury we will immediately bring down our debt and allow for investments to be made to get us on the right track towards our future.
True, there are many "patriotic millionaires", and although I'm all in favor of taking down today's ineffective and inefficient Top 10% Management Group of Business & Government with the exception of these "patriotic millionaires", there's only one way to do it – by fighting bankers as bankers ourselves. Consequently, I have posted the Strategic Legal Policies, Organizational Operating Structures, and Tactical Investment Procedures necessary to do this at:
http://getsatisfaction.com/americanselect/topics/on_strategic_legal_policy_organizational_operational_structures_tactical_investment_procedures
Join
http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/StrategicInternationalSystems/
if you want to support a Presidential Candidate Committee at AmericansElect.org in support of the above bank-focused platform.
If we bring back 1950s tax rates are we also going to bring back 1950s deductions?
Probably not.
Fair Tax (fairtax.org) is the best option, a national sales tax with a prebate . . . It is NOT REGRESSIVE - it is a PROGRESSIVE tax because due to the prebate of taxes paid on necessary items, the effect is that nobody pays taxes up to a base level of spending (not income - spending!) on new goods and services. For example, a family of four is reimbursed for taxes paid up to 22,300 of spending. Tax rate at that level of spending is 0%. If you spend 44,600, your effective tax rate is 11.5%, if you spend 66.900, your effective tax rate is 14.7%. The more you spend, the closer you get to 23% as your effective tax rate. And this is on spending on NEW goods and services, no exceptions - any savings or spending on used goods just lowers the effective tax rate that you pay. TRANSPARENCY - BROADEN THE BASE OF TAXPAYERS - ELIMINATE LOBBYIST INFLUENCE ON TAX SYSTEM - PROGRESSIVE - this needs to be part of the Occupy platform . . .
This would motivate people to spend less, which would slow the economy, which would exacerbate EVERYBODY'S problems.
Fair Tax (fairtax.org) is the best option, a national sales tax with a prebate . . . It is NOT REGRESSIVE - it is a PROGRESSIVE tax because due to the prebate of taxes paid on necessary items, the effect is that nobody pays taxes up to a base level of spending (not income - spending!) on new goods and services. For example, a family of four is reimbursed for taxes paid up to 22,300 of spending. Tax rate at that level of spending is 0%. If you spend 44,600, your effective tax rate is 11.5%, if you spend 66.900, your effective tax rate is 14.7%. The more you spend, the closer you get to 23% as your effective tax rate. And this is on spending on NEW goods and services, no exceptions - any savings or spending on used goods just lowers the effective tax rate that you pay. TRANSPARENCY - BROADEN THE BASE OF TAXPAYERS - ELIMINATE LOBBYIST INFLUENCE ON TAX SYSTEM - PROGRESSIVE - this needs to be part of the Occupy platform . . .
How to you oversee what people spend? Receipts? And do millionaires spend all their money in a given year?
Most people don't have a problem so much with paying taxes even to support some things that they don't particularly endorse. The issue for most is that we just continue to "feed the beast" that in large part exists and continues to grow only to support itself. In the same way that you wouldn't want to contribute to a charity that has an 80% administrative overhead.
I've worked for and with a wide range of various government agencies over many years and I've seen first-hand how much waste and inefficieny there is. Do you really think that having a huge bureaucracy consiting of ~80% career budget analysts, program managers, and internal lawyers really helps environmental causes in the most effective way? Same with education, housing, energy, etc., etc. For the most part they're all the same. There is no appreciation of or accountability for the money that is spent and no relationship between it and performance/effectiveness because it's just an endless pot of magic money that just appears and increases every year. And I'm not talking about the little excesses that are reported in the media, I'm talking about entire offices consisting of hundreds of people that basically do little to nothing productive and contribute virtually nothing to their respective missions. Many exist only for the sole purpose of funneling Federal money to other groups and do nothing beyond adding cost and overhead.
The level at which this exists is simply ridiculous and represents an extraorindarily ineffective and inefficient way of allocating money and resources. The more we waste like this, the less there is that actually makes it to serve the intended purpose whatever that might be.
Do you think we can still keep our agencies and have them work efficiently?
Sure. And there are (or at least at one time were) good reasons why most exist and should be there in some form. But we've reached the point where we need big reforms and an entire re-think of how government works. I'm not particularly optimistic that will happen from within given all of the various vested interest involved. Probably the only way to cause that to happen is by restricting the flow of money in some ways that forces hard decisions and greater efficiency. Whether you raise taxes on the rich, or everyone, or go with alternative ways of taxing, that doesn't address the root problem of every increasing cost with no relationship to benefit. In a similar fashion all of the debate around health care. In the end, despite all of the angst on all sides, we still didn't really address the heart of the issue which is out of control cost, we just mostly dealt with how to continue to pay more for it.
How about a step by step approach... 1) remove money from campaigns- government limited funding and campaign advertising rules. 2) a non government watchdog agency to investigate and remove wasteful agency spending.
1 might help some. But while favored programs and handouts are part of the problem, more what I was addressing is just the basic nature of a large organization, whether public or private, which operate with no accountability and no sense of the value of the money that it spends.
I'm not sure how #2 would work. There have been many such groups internal and external and, largely, it's had little effect.
I'd add term limits, true zero-based budgeting, and some major effort to significantly reduce costs across all programs (like 30% in real terms, not some piddly 5% of this FY's budget increase and playing games with how much we would have spent and the typical crap that's now done and passed off as "cuts"). Again, probably the most effective way to do that initially is to force cuts and let them sort it out and then go from there.
Public organizations and agencies are a basic need in a democratic society and our government cannot function without them. If we agree we have problems within them then we must simply try to fix rather then eliminate. There is so much energy today with this movement that I believe anything can be possible and I would be happy if this issue was addressed and corrected.
I think we (the government) should tax citizens for the cost of wars in real time (not borrowing to go to war). We'd have a lot fewer wars and/or they'd end sooner, because as you point out "when you raise someone's taxes it encourages them to get more involved..."
Agreed.
Everyone should pay the same percentage tax. That is the only way to be fair.
If I make more, I pay more. If I make less, I pay less.
Why should I pay a higher tax rate for being more successful than you?
In the Constitution it's a called a " Bill of Attainder" & it is prohibited. However our govt has been doing it to us since the creation of "Income Tax".
It's just that nothing has been done about it.
If we all paid the same rate 8-10% without any offset, and we controlled spending, that would be a good thing.
The analogy here condo associations is Bull Shit! I've run several of them and just like our elections, only about 25% participate.
25 is better than nothing. Also a flat tax won't cut it since a defense missile costs a million dollars and not a thousand dollars.
Bull Shit. Do the math.
Typical liberal BS.
A defense missile? Which one?
1.) "That is the only way to be fair." In another post you said you didn't believe in "fairness" didn't you? Or is fairness only for the rich?
2.) No that's not what a bill of attainder is, Henry. We have a progressive income tax system, at one time the rate for the top tier was 91% it was changed for a number of reasons, but "bill of attainder" wasn't one of them.
A bill of attainder (also known as an act of attainder or writ of attainder) is an act of a legislature declaring a person or group of persons guilty of some crime and punishing them without benefit of a judicial trial.
Same thing, punishment through taxation. The crime being success!
I never said I didn't believe in fairness. I said it's used as liberal buzz word.
Progressive Income tax? More Bull Shit!
Earn 30K pay 3k Earn 200k pay 20k
That's fair!
Not really. Having 27,000 a year left over is much different than having 180,000 a year left over. Flat taxes just bankrupt poor people and let rich people off the hook, it's the absolutely least fair tax ever.
Who the fuck are you or anybody else to tell me how much money I can make? If I do a better job than you or someone else I have earned. It's not your to redistribute to others.
More liberal radical bull shit
Redistribute is really the key here. One reason our country has been the most powerful on the planet is because of redistribution. Society is not a series of little islands, but one piece of land. You have the opportunity of making more money here and expressing your freedom then anywhere else on the planet. ONE RULE- you pay the taxes that are NEEDED to keep the cycle going. Your redistribution turns into consumption turns into redistribution - the cycle. With a little off the top for the 1 percent- that we need to change.
If it was a flat tax system there would be more to go around. That's what people don't get.
We both agree that something needs to be fixed so let's just agree on that and we'll be closer to our goal.
Yes we agree on that but I'm not sure we agree on the goal. That's what I'm trying to figure out here if there really is one.
There is too much crazy shit here like don't pay your bills & give everyone a free education, the teachings of Marx etc.
Just people expressing themselves. The ideas won't really catch on - no worries
Wow, that's a lot of anger for...well, nothing. You also didn't respond to what I said. You said that earning 30K and paying 3k vs earning 200k and paying 20k was fair. I replied with a logical argument. You chose to voice an emotional response.
I don't think I can redistribute your money to others...If I were you, I wouldn't worry about me trying, I don't even have much of my own.
If you can do a better job than me, that's great that you earn your money, but if you do a job that includes hiring and paying me a specific wage, you should be paying that wage. In most cases, the people who work those jobs do not pay their employees the needed wage for those employees to survive. In the past, this has been supplemented with one of two things. One choice is private benefits for workers, which would be the non-radical liberal bullshit solution, with which I would be fine. The other choice would be a tax increase for the rich, to allow benefits to be awarded to workers through local or regional governments.
A flat tax has got to come with private provisions that protects lower paid employees, or else, it's just going to destroy them. But private provisions could never be made mandatory, because of the attitude you're expressing here: that the government shouldn't interfere with people's lives or their coffers. So, that's a catch 22.
But, if companies can't either give workers private provisions to keep them afloat, or ensure that society helps them take care of their needs through a progressive tax structure, than what is the answer to making sure that the lower strata of society isn't purged from the earth through poverty and starvation?
What if Jim bought a bigger house and a boat, while Mark bought only a modest house? Obviously, Jim "needs" more to survive bankruptcy, so should Jim then get paid more because of this need? How would that make Mark feel? Would Mark go out and buy a bigger house and a boat so that now he can get a pay raise too? If no, who would regulate that from happening?
You understand nothing about owning & operating a business. A business owner can not pay some one based on how much they need to survive. You have to pay someone to be competitive and survive.
The first rule of business is to survive. The second rule is to gain market share The third rule is to turn a profit
If I'm paying a higher percentage than you are, then you are in fact redistributing wealth.
You don't need a progressive tax structure if you get rid of the deductions and the loopholes. That's how a flat tax can work.
Of course you also have to cut spending.
With properly managed workfare programs, a flat tax and no deductions or loopholes, we would have more than enough to take care of everyone.
The emotional response is I'm tired of the govt taking all my money and pissing it away!
If I ran my business the way Washington runs the country I'd be fired!
See, that's what I wanted to hear from you. I'd be fine with a flat tax that went along with properly managed welfare programs- they have tax systems like that in other countries that work wonders. And, it's true that if there was a simple flat tax, there wouldn't be loopholes.
I would support a flat tax, as long as I get to choose where my money goes and there's the right welfare programs to support those in need, I'm just surprised and impressed to hear you say it.
You shouldn't be but I understand! Most people on the left have the wrong perception of those on the right. Mostly due to the media and how both sides are portrayed.
There was no need for an initial stimulus. There was no need for TARP.
No body has the balls to do whats right.
Retrospectively, I agree that there wasn't a need for a stimulus or TARP, regarding where it went. I wanted to see the fall of GM and the rise of Tesla, because that would have actually been capitalism at work.
We should have let them all fail. In 2008 I sat in a bar having a cheeseburger and a beer with a buddy watching them jam it down our throats. Everybody around the bar yapping how great it was going be, I looked over at my good friend and said, "This is the beginning of the end". "The market will crash and everything is going to turn to shit"
I wish I would have been wrong.
The classic line, the one that replaced "read my lips" was, "You'll have to pass the bill so we can see what's in it".
If that wasn't a fucking clue, what is?
How come they didnt stop voting when Bush cut their taxes?
Read the comments below to understand the source of the problem.
That's because the initial stimulus was too small. If you were running a business and you needed 10k and all you got was 5k then all you could really do is keeps some lights on. We needed more stimulus but the republicans and some conservative democrats were unwilling to spend. So it was cut short of the magical number. There is a magical number you know.
Toddtjs, you misunderstood my comment...
Oh.
I was referring to the uneducated rhetoric of persons like BigDikdJew and teddyr. In other words the politics of mis-information...
Flat tax with no shelters is the only fair tax. Add a consumption tax with a flat tax if you must, but taxing somebody because they work harder destroys man kinds drive to go the extra mile to get ahead. Communism breaks mans spirit and people do not try to get ahead, it is mans ingenuity and drive that made this country successful, let's not forget that. Tax everybody equally with no loop holes, I don't think you will find a red blooded American will argue with that other then a Tax collector, there will be millions of tax collectors, tax accountants, and tax lawyers whom will be out of work. They make money on all of our misery, let's put the, out of business first.
Some shelters encourage investment and betterment in our society. The housing tax credit was designed for citizens to invents in a home and have a nest egg and foundation for which to grow their families. It helped the black community out of poverty.
no this was desinged to prop up a failing system. you can not legislate behavior with the tax code. it failed and got us into this god awful mess.
the market crashed in 1999
we are living in that reality in slow motion.
You're right; the government has done such a great job with responsibly spending the tax dollars they already have; it makes perfect sense to give them more... especially now that Obama is in office and he has reduced our debt and brought back a transparent and ethical government for the people.... douche.
So what do you wanna do?
The opposite of whatever you think we should do.
Why don't you keep your hand out of my pocket? Make you own tax donation.
Your a millionaire?
Does that matter? If you worked hard for 20 years, and saved, invested and now have a million dollars, how is anyone else entitled to it. Why is it the people that pay little to no taxes want the "rich" to pay more?
"Does that matter?" Translation: No, he's not a millionaire.
The proposed taxes are not on people who "worked for 20 years and SAVED a million dollars" the proposed taxes are on people whose INCOME every single year is 1 million dollars.
You know, like your income is probably 50K or so? They make a million every YEAR.
Because we need the money. When we go to war who will sacrifice their LIFE, not money for the betterment of our society? It's the young, poor and uneducated that's who. So we need a new type of Patriot this time around and a lousy 4% hike won't really cut it. We need to fix infrastructure and best to do it right away because we will need it anyway. We need to assist the 45% of this counties poor- at historic levels. Bottom line is we are in a hole and their is no way out without a replenishment.
Don't confuse "we" with meaning you and I. If you wanna fix infrastructure go grab a shovel. If you wanna help poor countries I will pay for your plane ticket there. But, please do not look at my pocket book as a way to fit your beliefs.
Heck, you are a better person than I am - I'd expect him to pay for his own plane ticket ;o)
Well, when he calls begging to be brought back that is when it will all dawn on him. Pretty cheap lesson if you think of it. Someone pay for the ticket to change one bleeding heart. Then they return as normal people aware of how the world works.
I'm not sure that premiss is correct ... but I am GLAD you'll pay for the ticket cuz I'm DONE being forced to voluntarily give up what is mine ;o) It is very nice to see that I'm not the only one here who knows Rights & what our Constitutional Republic really is. Much love to you!
Do you make over a million dollars a year? If you do, then congratulations. If you don't then, did I ask you to donate anything?
Not quite there yet in earnings. I am holding back my earnings actually until the political climate changes. Why should I put more effort into my business when my return dwindles to nothing? And, yes I donate to many things, mostly cancer related situations. Charities have been getting a bit distorted lately with their high overhead, so I have to make such the value is going to where I want it to go.
You know that when you hold on to your investment dollars your competitors will gain the upper hand. Business is not a guarantee - it is a risk. We need investment in our country right now. We need to bring back CONFIDENCE. We need the American public to start spending again. That's capitalism and that's the business your in.
Yup, but you forgot my silent business partner: the government. They take my hard earned dollars at the point of a gun. They tell me how to hire, run my business, and what other regulations I have to obey before I can move forward. So, I am practicing capitalism on the government. When you get out of my way I will do well, and in return my employees and business will generate more returns and more taxes. So, contact your representative and support a simplified tax structure (it is coming in a few years anyways). I can survive any downtown or collapse now. Just because there are hard times where you are does not mean on the other side of the world it is the same.
My business is interior landscaping. 5 employees and 350k in which to work with. I know the regulations I need to conform to. Their not that outrageous and they are decades old and not surprising. Knew them when I started by biz. They serve a purpose. If you have problems with some specifics then sure- contact your rep and try to change the law. My basic premiss today is to invite conversation about tax rates on people who can afford it. If you can't afford it then you shouldn't pay any more- reasonable enough. Their are millionaires and billionaires who can afford it. Don't get all moralistic on me and tell me when you will have your million dollar salary because that may never come to be if we continue down the road of 99 to 1.
The best statement of the day.
Thank buddy.