Last edited by Harmor (2009-07-26 09:33:08)
Last edited by Red Forman (2009-07-26 09:34:39)
Pretty much. In order to stimulate the economy while still having enough tax revenue to balance the budget, we should probably lower corporate taxes but implement a national sales tax and increase personal income taxes among the rich.mikkel wrote:
With all the profits that US companies move to subsidiaries with tax liability in countries like Ireland and Poland, what little is actually accounted for in the US needs to be taxed high enough to let the ball keep rolling.
The poorest don't exactly have much money to contribute.Kmarion wrote:
Because we are trying to force business out. 43% of Americas poorest also pay zero or negative income tax.
43%!!!Turquoise wrote:
The poorest don't exactly have much money to contribute.Kmarion wrote:
Because we are trying to force business out. 43% of Americas poorest also pay zero or negative income tax.
How much money do you think you contribute to the government in taxes? How much money do you think the top 1% contribute?Kmarion wrote:
43%!!! http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/numbers/ … ocTypeID=7Turquoise wrote:
The poorest don't exactly have much money to contribute.Kmarion wrote:
Because we are trying to force business out. 43% of Americas poorest also pay zero or negative income tax.
Last edited by Turquoise (2009-07-26 09:52:17)
I'm looking for Norway. I know it's not going to happen though.Kmarion wrote:
Just admit it. You aren't looking for fair.. more charity.
I pay my taxes. The last time I filed, I broke even. So, contrary to your stats, I don't get money back from the government.Kmarion wrote:
When almost half of the country isn't paying for anything you've got a problem. That would be about 150 million people.
That would be the quickest route to transforming America into Brazil.mikkel wrote:
Just implement that damn flat tax and be done with it.
OIC, Turquoise pays his taxes and "break evens", so the tax policy center (which gets it's data from the IRS) must be wrong.Turquoise wrote:
I pay my taxes. The last time I filed, I broke even. So, contrary to your stats, I don't get money back from the government.Kmarion wrote:
When almost half of the country isn't paying for anything you've got a problem. That would be about 150 million people.
No, what I'm saying is that you aren't looking at the big picture.Kmarion wrote:
OIC, Turquoise pays his taxes and "break evens", so the tax policy center(which gets it's data from the IRS) must be wrong.Turquoise wrote:
I pay my taxes. The last time I filed, I broke even. So, contrary to your stats, I don't get money back from the government.Kmarion wrote:
When almost half of the country isn't paying for anything you've got a problem. That would be about 150 million people.
Please.. I wish.. but "fair share" is terrifying to some people. We've got to punish our successful.mikkel wrote:
Just implement that damn flat tax and be done with it.
Wealth disparity is what terrifies people with foresight.Kmarion wrote:
Please.. I wish.. but "fair share" is terrifying to some people. We've got to punish our successful.mikkel wrote:
Just implement that damn flat tax and be done with it.
I am in fact looking at the big picture. Who is the one bringing their own personal experience into the discussion? There is no doubt in my mind that the tax code is broken. I want the same relative payments across all income levels. If it hurt the rich, it hurts the rich.. if "working class" people need o finally start anteing up.. then so be it.Turquoise wrote:
No, what I'm saying is that you aren't looking at the big picture.Kmarion wrote:
OIC, Turquoise pays his taxes and "break evens", so the tax policy center(which gets it's data from the IRS) must be wrong.Turquoise wrote:
I pay my taxes. The last time I filed, I broke even. So, contrary to your stats, I don't get money back from the government.
If you want to know where a lot of the negative taxation comes from, it's in deductions.
If you want to make sure that working class people break even, then end all deductions and all tax benefits from marriage and children.
It wouldn't be pleasant, but it would make sure that people pay their taxes.
Right, but Taxing corporations (aka employers) into submission is NOT the way to fix this. The likely result is more wealth disparity.Turquoise wrote:
Wealth disparity is what terrifies people with foresight.Kmarion wrote:
Please.. I wish.. but "fair share" is terrifying to some people. We've got to punish our successful.mikkel wrote:
Just implement that damn flat tax and be done with it.
Personal experience can be equally as relevant as statistics in a discussion such as this. You're intentionally trying to twist my words here.Kmarion wrote:
I am in fact looking at the big picture. Who is the one bringing their own personal experience into the discussion?
And you still fail to realize that 10% of what I make is more important to my wellbeing than 10% of what Bill Gates makes is to his. We have a graduated income tax scale just like a lot of the rest of the world for the same reason: because the rich can afford to pay more.Kmarion wrote:
There is no doubt in my mind that the tax code is broken. I want the same relative payments across all income levels. If it hurt the rich, it hurts the rich.. if "working class" people need o finally start anteing up.. then so be it.
Last edited by Turquoise (2009-07-26 10:14:11)
Which is exactly why I said we should lower corporate tax but raise personal taxes.Kmarion wrote:
Right, but Taxing corporations (aka employers) into submission is NOT the way to fix this. The likely result is more wealth disparity.Turquoise wrote:
Wealth disparity is what terrifies people with foresight.Kmarion wrote:
Please.. I wish.. but "fair share" is terrifying to some people. We've got to punish our successful.
That's an issue with democracy, not with tax code.Turquoise wrote:
You seem to care more about what each person pays and its fairness without looking at the unfairness of how the wealthy obviously have more political influence than you or me.