Tax the Rich?

gunthernehmen said:

Glad to hear you're doing so well.

Click to expand...

First off taxes are needed to run the government, but the tax laws are written by politicians who for the most part are very rich and many have made money while in politics not as members of business and working class. If you have read the tax laws you know that you don't have to take any deductions and if you desire to give more than the government is asking of you you are free to do so. That being said, then why don't those of the left who demand higher taxes so rail roads and bridges to no where can be built and don't go after their own people who owe taxes (are the so called black civil rights leaders in Chicago listening?) and give out fake huge "grants" to their political backers instead of using the money as it is suppose to be used sign over their money to the government? No one is stopping them.

The members of Congress are not going to tax Soros, the Clinton's, Bloomberg or any of themselves. That is what the working class is for and the small business owners. The leftist on here who don't want to work for a living are too foolish or dumb or liars in that they don't look at what happens to Communist and Socialist countries with huge taxes. The country explodes like Venezuela, a place Obama and Clinton and Sanders held up to the people in this country as what they desired for us. Remember there are no unions in a communists county demanding higher wages and there are no "representatives" jumping up and down in their Legislatures (for fear of being shot) yelling at the leaders to help the people. I am sure that like Cuba all the leftist in this country are willing to live on $50 and ration food cards a month.

A one party system like in China and Russia and elsewhere just creates corruption from the top down. The leaders of China, Russia, Cuba, North Korea are among the riches people on earth while their people starve.

It is funny, the leftist in our colleges are just taking up space and should be sent to labor farms like in China and Russia or put into the military. They don't go to school to get a better education and get better jobs so they have a better living. So why are they there? If you want the government to care for you like you were a baby then let them. You are better off being in the Army or in Labor Camps doing your best for the leaders of the State. Like slaves on the old plantations they will give you a shack to live in, all the hard work you can do, and will give you whatever food they don't want. And still demand 60 to 90 percent of any money you do make. You are the rich.

Be honest, can you see the Democrats demanding that Soros pay more taxes? Trump is trying to make the taxes fair for all and still be able to run a government. What we need are accountants not lawyers running our treasury. Business people not a bunch of lying thieves. Ask yourself why politicians keep asking for more taxes. If they knew what they were doing they would be able to run things on the money we give them, but it is never enough. If you ran your home or business like they run the government you would be living under a freeway overpass in no time.

So when you say "tax the rich" you are really saying is "tax me more". You should be saying "run the government like a business and do the job we sent you to office to do or we will run you out of office".

RubenR said:

Wealth inequality in the United States

Click to expand...

Hey! That's not FAIR!

I want some of that money for me! GIMME NOW!!

Ruben (you're one of the foreign agitators that don't even live in the US, right?), Did you realize that most of that wealth is not worth and not income?

Let's say I have $200,000,000 in gold underneath my mattress but my income is only $100,000 because I work as a truck driver.

I will pay income tax on the $100k, not on my net worth. I already paid taxes on that.

urguyscott said:

Venezuela, a place Obama

Click to expand...

Called "unusual and extraordinary threat" to U.S. national security. You might wanna get your facts there straight buddy.

Also, Sanders does hold up "socialist" countries, like Denmark. Which, by the way, the Danes say they are not.

I found an artist's rendering of your argument.

RubenR said:

Yes.

No, not for me.

Yes, yes.

Yes.

No; I don't think they paid taxes on that.

Click to expand...

Yes it is fair or yes you know it's not fair? By the way, life is not fair. Life is what YOU make of it.

Does the name Harrison Bergeron mean anything to you?

"I don't think they paid taxes on that"

Except all the data in all the links posted in this thread shows they did. Oh, I'm sure they take every deduction and some probably cheat on top of that, but there isn't anything at all wrong with following the rules and as for the cheats there are criminals in ALL walks of life.

Whoever told you life should be fair did you a terrible disservice.

‘Pay your taxes’: Seth Meyers smacks Trump for bragging about donating his salary back to the government

On Friday, in his “Favorite Jokes of the Week” segment, comedian Seth Meyers mocked President Donald Trump for boasting about donating his salary.

Trump tweeted that he was donating $100,000 to the Department of Homeland Security.

“While the press doesn’t like writing about it, nor do I need them to, I donate my yearly Presidential salary of $400,000.00 to different agencies throughout the year, this to Homeland Security. If I didn’t do it there would be hell to pay from the FAKE NEWS MEDIA!” he tweeted.

Meyers joked that if Trump really wanted to give to the government that he could pay his taxes.

“Of course if you want to give part of your salary to the government you could just pay your taxes,” Meyers said.

Click to expand...

With Trumps Billions he could easily pay a lot more than his salary and his Golf expenses. Maybe even pay for a Wall!

If I somehow become rich, I seriously doubt anyone here will benefit. Screw this tax stuff.

Be honest about tax returns. Like white man POTUS Trump.

JackLuis said:

‘Pay your taxes’: Seth Meyers smacks Trump for bragging about donating his salary back to the government



With Trumps Billions he could easily pay a lot more than his salary and his Golf expenses. Maybe even pay for a Wall!

Click to expand...

I'm betting none of you have any proof he hasn't paid his taxes.

BotanyBoy said:

I'm betting none of you have any proof he hasn't paid his taxes.

Click to expand...

and nobody has proof he has paid his taxes....

could try explaining the irony but you would launch into another of your word salad diatribes

badbabysitter said:

and nobody has proof he has paid his taxes...

Click to expand...

And this means what? Do you believe that he owes you proof of some sort that he paid his taxes? Your proof is in the fact that he is in the White House, not in the "Big" House.

badbabysitter said:

and nobody has proof he has paid his taxes....

could try explaining the irony but you would launch into another of your word salad diatribes

Click to expand...

You mean the word salad where I point out that he doesn't owe anyone but the IRS proof he has paid his taxes??

And then you worm around, deflect and bullshit eventually resulting in you getting bent and calling me names like a womanchild??

Yea we can skip that because we both know it ends poorly for you.

To recap:

DawnODay said:

lilsarah91 said:

Hey Dawnoday,

You do know that post World War II, the tax rate on the rich was 90%, And that lasted all the way up until Nixon, who lowered it down to 70%. Then Ronald Reagan lowered it to 20%. During those decades, the United States had the greatest economic growth it is ever had in the history of this country. But go ahead and tell me how raising tax rates on the rich so they start paying their fair share, is bad. You do know that Bank of America paid absolutely zero in taxes last year. Right??? I paid more I'm taxes than the largest bank in the United States. Do you actually, honestly think that's fair?

Click to expand...

There is so much wrong with this analysis that it's hard to know where to start. In summary, it is such a gross oversimplification, and thereby misrepresentation, of the facts that any informed and serious student of economic history would laugh at it. I did....

You express concerns about fairness. Is it fair that 1 percent of the population pays over 37 percent of taxes while 44 percent pay nothing at all? Q. Fottrell, More than 44% of Americans pay no federal income tax, MarketWatch (Feb. 26, 2019) ("Approximately 76.4 million or 44.4% of Americans won’t pay any federal income tax in 2018, up from 72.6 million people or 43.2% in 2016 before President Trump’s Tax Cuts and Jobs Act"). As for your personal situation vis-a-vis Bank of America, I have no opinion without examining in detail both your and its financials. Did you pay more than you needed to? Did Bank of America engage in tax evasion? Without knowing such things, how can anyone judge if either of you paid what is "fair"?

Lastly, your assertion about economic growth in the post-war era is tremendously simplistic. It ignores a number of other historical and economic factors besides tax rates. Further, while what you say about economic growth is true as a general trend, there were significant periods of economic stagnation during those times, including three -- the Eisenhower Recession, the Ford/Carter "Stagflation," and the Obama Malaise -- which were in large part cured by tax cuts implemented under, respectively Kennedy, Reagan, and Trump.

Click to expand...

(Emphasis added.)

Now, another example of tax cuts leading to increased revenues:


E. Litke, John Nygren says Wisconsin Republicans have cut taxes by $8B, still grown revenue, Politifact (Mar. 21, 2019).

Dawn you have to read the whole article:

State tax cuts adopted since 2011 have disproportionately gone to Wisconsin residents with the highest incomes, according to an analysis by the nonprofit Wisconsin Budget Project.

The manufacturing and agricultural tax credit gave an estimated $22 million in credits to 11 individuals who had an adjusted gross income of $30 million or more in 2017, according to the state fiscal bureau.

dan_c00000 said:

Dawn you have to read the whole article:

State tax cuts adopted since 2011 have disproportionately gone to Wisconsin residents with the highest incomes, according to an analysis by the nonprofit Wisconsin Budget Project.

Click to expand...

That's because the residents with the highest incomes pay a disproportionately large %'age of the taxes.

Tax everyone equally and that will stop.

dan_c00000 said:

The manufacturing and agricultural tax credit gave an estimated $22 million in credits to 11 individuals who had an adjusted gross income of $30 million or more in 2017, according to the state fiscal bureau.

Click to expand...

Good....it's their money they should get to spend it how they see fit.

Sorry you missed your chance to live in 1920's Ukraine.

BotanyBoy said:

dan_c00000 said:

Dawn you have to read the whole article:

State tax cuts adopted since 2011 have disproportionately gone to Wisconsin residents with the highest incomes, according to an analysis by the nonprofit Wisconsin Budget Project.

Click to expand...

That's because the residents with the highest incomes pay a disproportionately large %'age of the taxes.

Tax everyone equally and that will stop.

dan_c00000 said:

The manufacturing and agricultural tax credit gave an estimated $22 million in credits to 11 individuals who had an adjusted gross income of $30 million or more in 2017, according to the state fiscal bureau.

Click to expand...

Good....it's their money they should get to spend it how they see fit.

Sorry you missed your chance to live in 1920's Ukraine.

Click to expand...

I could not have said it better, BotanyBoy!

Also, dan_c00000 is worried about $22 million out of the $8 billion Scott Walker and the Republicans saved the taxpayers of the entire state. Lets look at those numbers. It is impossible to truly conceive of a million, much less a billion, so people forget that they are separated by three orders of magnitude. A billion is a thousand millions. So 22 million is just 0.00275 percent of 8 billion! Put another way, subtracting $22 million from $8 billion still leaves $7.978 billion for everyone else.

Lastly, and most importantly, as you pointed out BotanyBoy, the fact that these tax reforms saved 11 individuals $22 million just shows how disproportionately overtaxed those 11 people were to begin with.

BotanyBoy said:

Tax everyone equally and that will stop.

Click to expand...

Wow, a flat tax proposal! Except that hurts the poorest people. That was the easiest own ever.

DawnODay said:

I could not have said it better, BotanyBoy!

Click to expand...

Scratch that. Easiest double own ever.

Herman Cain, aka the pizza man, was pushing his 9-9-9 plan really hard. I'm sure you guys remember him. You were all very excited about him.

Now if you look at what a real economist says (and not one of dawn's racist cronies) you'll find that flat taxes: "But all of them end up benefitting the rich more than the poor for one simple reason: Today’s tax code is still at least moderately progressive. The rich usually pay a higher percent of their incomes in income taxes than do the poor. A flat tax would eliminate that slight progressivity."

You guys really owned yourself on that one.

I realized too that you're going to say something like "lower taxes means more economic growth!" because you're both predictable racists. The truth is they don't. Trump's didn't. It didn't in Kansas. It didn't work in Wisconsin (Minnesota raised taxes on the rich and outperformed Wisconsin).

Racist dawn/bot also pointed out that the rich by too much in taxes. Hmm well considering that rich people pay an effective tax rate is actually between 20% and 24% while earning about 300 times more than the average worker I would argue (and be correct) that they're under taxed. Warren Buffett would agree with me. Business owners get preferential treatment in the tax laws (even something as strange as meal purchases), other developed countries collect taxes at about 33% of GDP while the U.S. is 26%, and the U.S. has generally low taxes for both single people and families. I've also yet to see bot or his racist alt dawn respond to the fact that a country like Denmark with high taxes can be rated as more free by right-wing CATO than the U.S.

This is was a shockingly easy own. It's almost as if you two share a brain. Albeit one that doesn't function and is mostly concerned with making sure black/brown people remain a permanent underclass but a brain none-the-less.

dan_c00000 said:

Wow, a flat tax proposal! Except that hurts the poorest people. That was the easiest own ever.



Scratch that. Easiest double own ever.

Herman Cain, aka the pizza man, was pushing his 9-9-9 plan really hard. I'm sure you guys remember him. You were all very excited about him.

Now if you look at what a real economist says (and not one of dawn's racist cronies) you'll find that flat taxes: "But all of them end up benefitting the rich more than the poor for one simple reason: Today’s tax code is still at least moderately progressive. The rich usually pay a higher percent of their incomes in income taxes than do the poor. A flat tax would eliminate that slight progressivity."

You guys really owned yourself on that one.

I realized too that you're going to say something like "lower taxes means more economic growth!" because you're both predictable racists. The truth is they don't. Trump's didn't. It didn't in Kansas. It didn't work in Wisconsin (Minnesota raised taxes on the rich and outperformed Wisconsin).

Racist dawn/bot also pointed out that the rich by too much in taxes. Hmm well considering that rich people pay an effective tax rate is actually between 20% and 24% while earning about 300 times more than the average worker I would argue (and be correct) that they're under taxed. Warren Buffett would agree with me. Business owners get preferential treatment in the tax laws (even something as strange as meal purchases), other developed countries collect taxes at about 33% of GDP while the U.S. is 26%, and the U.S. has generally low taxes for both single people and families. I've also yet to see bot or his racist alt dawn respond to the fact that a country like Denmark with high taxes can be rated as more free by right-wing CATO than the U.S.

This is was a shockingly easy own. It's almost as if you two share a brain. Albeit one that doesn't function and is mostly concerned with making sure black/brown people remain a permanent underclass but a brain none-the-less.

Click to expand...

"Pizza" man? Did he have acne or something?

I know a bunch of pizza shops and similar small businesses were put out of business when they increased the minimum wage. (They being the Democrats). Maybe that's it.

Of course that also increased the numbers on unemployment or welfare, so it counted as a win. And.. and it decreased the money collected in taxes, I guess. But not by as much as if they paid the same percentage as the wealthy.

dan_c00000 said:

Wow, a flat tax proposal!

Click to expand...

Fair is fair.

dan_c00000 said:

Except that hurts the poorest people.

Click to expand...

Irrelevant point and deflection.

dan_c00000 said:

That was the easiest own ever.

Click to expand...

Except the only person you owned was yourself.

dan_c00000 said:

Now if you look at what a real economist says (and not one of dawn's racist cronies) you'll find that flat taxes: "But all of them end up benefitting the rich more than the poor for one simple reason: Today’s tax code is still at least moderately progressive. The rich usually pay a higher percent of their incomes in income taxes than do the poor. A flat tax would eliminate that slight progressivity."
.

Click to expand...

Right...that means any tax cuts will benefit the biggest tax payers the most.

The only way for that NOT to be the case is to have a flat tax, so that any tax cuts effect everyone equally.

You can have it one way or the other, can't have both. Fair=/= progressive.

How about some of the Democrats paying their taxes? Would you like a list including one of the fake Civil Rights Minsters from Chicago? (Remember when Obama fist took office the stories of over 40 people on his staff who owed taxes?) How about Hillary Clinton having a full audit on her "foundation". Money from Russia and other countries she used for political purposes or for her family (like her daughters apartment) and the money she and the little girl pervert of a husband use to live off. I would love to see an audit of Soros. But of course the left would never tax or ask for accounting from their rich corrupt fat cats.

The "crimes" of Trumps taxes, the two year long investigation by Herr Muller and company (how many families could that money have fed?), the "Green Plan" and the parties band wagon on racism (except for the three little pigs of Virginia and the hate crime racist actor in Chicago, etc. of course) and the crimes against females (except for Bill Clinton and numerous members of the Party and their Hollywood freaks). No the Dumbacrats would never put their money where their mouth is. (Well you won't want them to put their money where Nancy P. mouth is. She has had so many government paid face lifts that every time she opens her mouth a fart come out.)

But serious, if you are honest about being moral and lawful than lets investigate all who have really committed crimes. And mean while tell the Democrats to get to work. It's been two years now and they haven't done a thing in Washington but wet their pants and cry. How about acting like grown up instead of wearing KKK white dresses and jumping up and down like a bunch of little girls and do the job you have been sent to do. Protect the country from enemies foreign and domestic and put America first in all your bills and laws. Protect the Constitution because you can't be a socialist, nazi or commie and be an American as it goes against the Constitution and our way of life. A better way than Obama's heaven on earth like Venezuela that he held up as a model for us. Look what Sanders type of socialism did to that country.

urguyscott said:

How about Hillary Clinton having a full audit on her "foundation"

Click to expand...

Are you TRYING to commit suicide by shooting yourself twice in the back of the head?

gunthernehmen said:

"Pizza" man? Did he have acne or something?

Click to expand...

Yes, he had very bad acne. Raising the minimum wage made him no longer able to afford his Differn gel and he became a pimply mess.

BotanyBoy said:

I got owned because I didn't read it all the way through just like when I'm loggged in as my racist alt dawn.

Click to expand...

"But all of them end up benefitting the rich more than the poor for one simple reason: Today’s tax code is still at least moderately progressive. The rich usually pay a higher percent of their incomes in income taxes than do the poor. A flat tax would eliminate that slight progressivity."

Gotta read the post all the way through bot. Not just cherry pick like you and racist dawn do. Good job owning yourself.

Your argument that the richest 1% pay the largest percent of total taxes is true. But they're still under taxed. Why? Because the 1% own somewhere around 40% of the wealth in the U.S. yet pay an effective tax rate of 27%. The difference in wealth between the top 10% and the middle class is something like 1000% percent. Globally the richest 1% are predicted to own about 2/3rds of the world's wealth. So what you and your racist alt dawn are arguing for is to create more inequality, to give the rich more money, and further destroy the middle class.

dan_c00000 said:

Gotta read the post all the way through bot. Not just cherry pick like you and racist dawn do. Good job owning yourself.

Click to expand...

I did, that's why you had to manipulate what I post, you can't actually refute any of it.

dan_c00000 said:

Your argument that the richest 1% pay the largest percent of total taxes is true. But they're still under taxed. Why? Because the 1% own somewhere around 40% of the wealth in the U.S. yet

Click to expand...

The ONLY reason they are under taxes is because we got bills to pay.

Equity is not a valid reason for taxation.

dan_c00000 said:

So what you and your racist alt dawn are arguing for is to create more inequality, to give the rich more money, and further destroy the middle class.

Click to expand...

Allow...not create inequity.

We have some equality, if we had a flat tax we would have more equality.

Not taking peoples money isn't the same thing as giving them money, the implication is absurd.

dan_c00000 said:

The argument that the richest 1% pay the largest percent of total taxes is true. But they're still under taxed. Why? Because the 1% own somewhere around 40% of the wealth in the U.S.

Click to expand...

Assuming you are among those that actually pay income taxes, I'm curious. Did you pay taxes on the money that you earned in 2018 or on the money that you earned from 1984 all the way up to 2019?

Because if you're paying taxes (this year) on money that was already yours prior to January 1, 2018 then you're doing it wrong.

BotanyBoy said:

Equity is not a valid reason for taxation.

Click to expand...

Let's fine that under "Things Racists Say". Another wonderful self own.

gunthernehmen said:

earned from 1984

Click to expand...

1984? I was 1. I'll let you do the math on that.

dan_c00000 said:

1984? I was 1. I'll let you do the math on that.

Click to expand...

Ok, so chances are you earned nothing between 1983 and say, 2002 or so and were probably below the level of paying taxes at all (assuming you went to college?) until maybe 2005 or even 2006. Lets give you $50k a year for the first 5 years (brings us up to lets say 2010, $75k for the next 5 (2015) and $100k a year since then.

So you've earned $825k your entire life up to January 1, 2018 and then $100k IN 2018 and expect to make $100k in 2019 (or more if you get a raise). Obviously I have no idea what you make, so don't feel either flattered or offended.

2004 Dan earned $0k, paid $0 in taxes.
2005 Dan earned $50k, paid $12k in taxes.
2006 Dan earned $50k, paid $12k in taxes.
2007 Dan earned $50k, paid $12k in taxes.
2008 Dan earned $50k, paid $12k in taxes.
2009 Dan earned $50k, paid $12k in taxes.
2010 Dan earned $75k, paid $18k in taxes.
2011 Dan earned $75k, paid $18k in taxes.
2012 Dan earned $75k, paid $18k in taxes.
2013 Dan earned $75k, paid $18k in taxes.
2014 Dan earned $75k, paid $18k in taxes.
2015 Dan earned $100k, paid $24k in taxes.
2016 Dan earned $100k, paid $24k in taxes.
2017 Dan earned $100k, paid $24k in taxes.
2018 Dan earned $100k, paid $24k in taxes.

So as of April 15, 2018 you had paid in your entire life, around $222k on the $625k you'd earned up to that point.

Now this coming April 15th you will pay another $24k to cover your taxes for the money you earned in 2018.

But wait, you own a house worth $250k and have $80k in equity in that. You have another $20k in equity in your car, $215k in an IRA, $30k in savings and another $3k in checking. So do you owe $100k x 0.24 = $24k or do you owe $448k x 0.24 = $107k. Oh wait. Does that put you in a higher tax bracket? LOL

Let's go with the 27% that the wealthy pay:

You owe $448k x 0.27 = $121k, not $24k

My God, that's more than you EARNED! You'll need to take a second job just to pay the taxes!

Dan, TLDR version is: you pay taxes not on what you OWN at any particular time (well, excise tax but that's a different discussion) but on what you EARN.

So relax, you only have to pony up the $24k.