50 armchair economists!

Which jobs doesn't society reward enough? Shouldn't the people doing those jobs demand more money? Either the job is worth more and they'd get the money, or someone would come along and offer to do the job for the same or less money.

understandable when the 5 and the 9 are all right next to each other and stuff.

I wish I had that problem :(

45,000 tax returns filed by people earning more than $100,000 and paying less than 7 percent of their income to the federal government--compared to millions of workers who earn much less and proportionally pay much more. (One recent IRS report counted 2,680 filers with incomes of $200,000 or more claiming they owed no taxes at all, up from just 85 in 1977.)


My tax plan would be for the first 20,000 a year there is no income tax and after its 15% for every one , no deductions , no playing around the tax laws. The millionaire and the middle manager pay 15%.

Thats so not true, there are people out there that arent blessed with the gifts we have. Working mopping floors or in a warehouse or serving food in a fast food place this the best they can do. They work very hard for very little, they are called the working poor.

And, there are people who are public school teachers, policemen, firemen. :(

Your right and they make shit also.

Sleazy, this is a lie or it happends in canada only.

I promise you, I pay more in taxes (in real dollars) than any teacher in america and I have great accountants.

the myth about the rich not paying taxes is shown to by false by the top 5% paying 50% of the total.

another lie.
here in NJ, the average teacher salary is 50k a year. oh yeah, their year is 180 days.

the democrats call a husband and wife who both teach "rich" now so they can be taxed more.

so which is it, are they poor or rich?
depends on wether you're tying to buy their vote I guess.

Forgot to add the private school teachers that wealthy people send their children to be educated.

Considering some have three times the education of you and me, help shape the future minds of America and make $50 grand that is shit.

considering its more than most people make, most of them are NOT as smart as me, and work half a year, you're wrong.

The me's of the world drive it, not the people who get a typical education and land in a typical government job.
for their effort and risk, they're paid just fine.

A jobs profitability and a jobs worth to society are very often unrelated.


Lots of jobs ultimately contribute nothing to the world;
but pay excessively well.
eg. . Playing in the NBA. Or running a successful TGP. :winkwink:


Other important jobs are rewarded by the market.
eg. Doctors. Researchers. Architects.


Still more don't pay what they are worth.
such as the Teacher example.
If you don't reward these positions well enough,
you get a lower quality of people filling them.

In todays high schools,
the best teachers think they're babysitters,
and the rest think they're prison gaurds.
It's no surprise the kids come out acting like prison inmates.

However if you made those jobs some of the best paying in our
society, and made the qualifications so high, and the compeition
so fierce, that only our smartest citizens were teaching our future
citzens, it would turn out a better class of people and even pay
off economically in the longterm.

But now I'm offtopic.


IMO if you cannot force the market to reward lower-income jobs;
you can at least give people in those positions a break on taxes.

Civilization simply wouldn't work if everyone was a basketball player,
or an adult webmaster, or a camgirl, so we should all be greatful
other people are busy doing real work. We do owe them.

I saw Warren Buffet (multi billionaire) speak on TV about President Bush's tax cuts and he was against them. He stated that the tax cuts were totally unfair as he would receive a benefit of several hundred million dollars over a period of time from the tax cuts and his personal secretary would receive a token amount even though she paid a higher percentage in taxes on the income that he paid her every year than he...being a multi billionaire pays percentage wise in taxes every year. He said that he pays about three percent in taxes compared to her thirty percent or so. In addition he said that the several hundred million that he would receive from the tax cuts would basically not create a single job...as it would simply go into investment accounts.

Anyone can trot out a half whit has been who has the wrong opinion on something. Look at Soros, a billionaire who now fears capitalism.

If the handful of multi billionaires want to put their money where their mouth is, I won't stop them. Typically however, they're all mouth (gets them and their fund noticed)

Millionaires in America are workers. Workers who excel over and above what is average. Penalizing them hurts society.
It's so simple yet the dumb can't wrap their feeble minds around it.

When our kids are in school, do we penalize our "A" students because others can only do "C" work or do we reward our "A" students for their hard work?
Our society succeeds because of its brightest and most productive. Taking away their incentive will destroy the America we know.

It's funny how patriotic right wingers are, right up until it's time to pay taxes. Then they suddenly hate America. Traitors. :1orglaugh

If you want to make bombs, it costs money. If you don't want to pay your share, then leave America. I hear Iraq is nice this time of year.

If you don't want to pay more taxes, then stop Bush from spending so much money bombing people and giving tax breaks to try to buy votes and donations.

Someone has to pay for the mess Bush has made, just like Clinton had to clean up after Reagan and the other Bush.

Bullshit.

Beautiful people make more money

People that look rich make more money

I myself make a lot more money than most of my friends, although many of them work harder. Why? Because I got lucky with some business decisions.

Have you ever noticed that the managers who run companies into the ground are often paid millions a year? These are people that pretty much suck at what they do, who often got their jobs through good business connections. Quite a few are even corrupt and damage society more than they benefit it (does Enron ring a bell?).

An orthodontist makes 3 times as much as a normal dentist. The extra education he needs takes 1 to 2 years, and the required skill level is pretty much the same. Are you trying to tell me he works 3 times as hard?

The idea that society succeeds because of millionaires is ludicrous.
Without policemen, society would fall into anarchy.
Without teachers, kids would lack a basic education.
Without scientists, there would be no technology worth speaking of, and the whole modern society would be completely impossible.
Without stock traders, there wouldn't be any stock traders.

So are you saying that stock traders are more important to society than policemen?
Are you saying that plastic surgeons do society more good than schoolteachers?
Are you even seriously considering the thought that basketball players do society more good than scientists?


Sure, capitalism has it's benefits. But thinking money is an objective standard of hard work, talent and beneficiality to society is just plain stupid.


<i>The use of quantity of money as a target has not been a success. I'm not sure that I would as of today push it as hard as I once did.</i>
-Milton Friedman

Yes, you're right. only stupid people make millions.

I love this place.
idiots.:1orglaugh

what an odd reality you live in.

why not go back to your other thread where you are defending child pornograqphy?

You have no arguments, so you come up with a lame remark and change the subject. Weak.

you worked awful hard at the post, but i don't think you really see the big picture.

yes, there are 'bad' ceos and all that crap, but that's the way it's always going to be. you can't destroy the hard workers that really strive to get to where they are just because of some bad seeds.

what you're pointing out here is seemlingly a point of "everyone should be happy with mediocrity". even that, a $250,000 house in a lot of parts around this country, won't buy much.

but say even that everyone was happy to have the same thing. what about the entrepreneurs and such that make the world go round? do you have any idea of how much capital that requires?

sure, you can tax the fuck out of the rich so it makes it harder to make big business work (which many of the "poor" are clearly dependant upon for their livelihood). but where do they get the extra capital to make things work?

even if you put an extremely light tax on the poor, they aren't going to have the capital to make business work, plain and simple. if a person making 20k a year only pays 1k in taxes, that other 19k a year isn't going to do shit in business.

if you tax a person who made 1 million dollars, $500k (just for example), that kind of capital could be re-invested in biz. it could open a new store of a franchise (albeit a small store) that adds jobs to a local market. it could be used for all kinds of things.

maybe you see where i'm getting at, maybe you don't. it's early.

but not only that... if everyone would be happy with a $250k house and $20k cars, it just takes the motivation out of everything. rather orwelian if you ask me. the only thing that drives people to work harder and acheive more is through getting a better position in life. make it too difficult, and people will stop.

if there's no money for private business, there's no motivation. there's no innovation. we get fewer and fewer enhancements on living. and there's certainly no motivation to make the nice cars on the road and such (and i'd argue that an "average" car these days only costs $20,000. go look at accords, camrys, impalas and the like. even a basic 2wd pickup new costs more than that).

money isn't everything, and it's not everyone's "key to success". but it makes society and the world go round...

I'm in a hurry, so I'll have to complete this post later, but you missed one thing:
Like the money that goes into business, the money that goes into taxes also benefits society. It pays for policemen, highways, hospitals, schools, teachers, universities, science, the military, etc. All those things are needed to make society run.

Like you said, the 20k of the common worker won't do jack shit in business. Neither will it in taxes. However, if you tax the common worker with his 20k a year 25%, that means he won't be able to afford a car, or won't be able to make rent or whatever.
If you tax the guy making 1 million a year 25%, he'll still be able to live extremely well, with a huge house, some nice cars, etc.

Communism is an extremely dumb idea that doesn't work. We know that.
But this isn't about making everyone equal. It's about being able to pay for the necessities of society and letting the strongest shoulders bear the heaviest burden. With progressive taxes people can still get extremely rich. It'll just benefit society as a whole more and have less negative impact on the lives of people.

:1orglaugh

In both threads you are America bashing. In one thread you speak against the constitution, in the other you don't want to pay your taxes.

If you hate America so much, why not leave? :)

I can't believe that we still don't have a flat tax.

Based on 2001 returns at flat tax rate (based on earned income without any loopholes or deductions) of 15% across the board would actually increase the amount of imcome tax collected.

I still can't comprehend how Russia beat us to a flat tax system.

yes, i agree that i didn't address the societal issues.

some of those problems have been created and deeply entrenched in society, and you're not going to be able to change that. the whole "government should pay for me mentality".

it's a delicate balancing act, a very fine line that must be met properly.

but, a lot of people seem to think if you take all the rich's money so they're more like everyone else, things will be a happy harmony. you can't simply tax the hell out of the rich while alleviating the poor's burden.

i do agree the tax situation needs to be reformed, but where is the happy medium? i'm not entirely sure.

i always thought a flat tax was an interesting idea, but i'd have to do more research into its implications to pass judgement on it.

What's funny is that liberal and defender of the Constitution believes that a the current income tax system is both 'American' and Constitutional.

:1orglaugh

It's never been American and surely wasn't Constitutional before 1913.

Whether the tax system is constitutional now is also open for debate. There is alot of evidence that the sixteenth amendment was never ratified according to procedures for admending the constitution spelled out in the document itself.

Using Russia for a model of capitalist success is not exactly the most persuasive argument.

- Titus

That wasn't the argument.

The argument was that a flat income tax rate of 15% would generate more in actual tax dollars collected than the current system.

That as that Russia has beaten the majority of the civilized world to the punch with its flat tax reform.



Bashing Russia is not exactly the most pervasive argument against a flat tax either.

Here are a few facts about the Russian tax system:

Since changing to the flat tax system on January 1, 2001, Russians have paid a 13% flat tax as opposed to paying the old rates of 12%, 20%, and 30%.

As of early 2002, the Russian government had seen a 28% in real ruble revenue.

In the three year period preceding November 2001 tax revenue had increase from 9-10% of the national GDP to 16%.



You can argue about higher revenues from and the societal benefits of a progressive tax system until you are blue in the face, but at the end of the day you'll still be wrong... but hey at least you'll have that blue face.

Government revenues increase upon the adoption of flat tax systems (that close tax loopholes) at lower marginal rates.

Read up on the Laffer Curve.

The Laffer Curve, ah yes. That brilliant piece of right wing economic theory that claims that as taxes increase people work less. You're absolutely right, during the Clinton era, when taxes were increased on the rich, they were a LOT less productive. A lot more jobs were lost in this country due to all of this wealth leakage.

All of the things you have mentioned do not dispute the fact that Russia is practically a third world country. Infant mortality is 2x the United States' numbers from 5 years ago (and they've halved it in the last 10 years). The per capita income in the country fluctuates from $200 to $2000 a month. Organized crime is rampant, the government heavily regulates the media and arrests and murders dissent among its populace.

But it's good to see that some progressive countries are following your wise lead.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp...nguage=printer

Iraq beat us to the punch, we'll never live it down.

- Titus

i also believe any income tax is unconstitutional.

I like how some people aways bring up the constitution but when it comes down to it, they are pretty much against everything the way the forefathers wanted things.

I'm all for tax reform, but wild statements like this just drive me bonkers. Where in the constitution does it say 'you are under no obligation to your country as an American citizen' ?

Anyone who denies that American citizens have far better opportunities than the majority of the world for success, wealth, or simply safe living, is full of it. We have to pay for the security and fortune we have. It's nice to live in a imaginary bubble, but look around the rest of the world. Iraqis never paid income tax, would you like to live as they did?

- Titus

The Laffer curve is so ridiculously simplistic that it is rather hard to take it seriously, let alone believe in it. Leaving out the influence of culture and especially the effects of diversity in taxes for different income classes is an unforgivable mistake.

While the Russian tax system indeed seems to give a strong argument for a flat tax rate, one should not forget that the situations are entirely different from eachother.
Russia is basically a third world country, with an inefficient and disorganized government - something that makes tax evasion a whole lot easier.
By taking away incentive for tax evasion and at the same time using an easy to enforce, simple system, it becomes easier for a disorganized government to actually collect taxes.

However, for a country with a strong government, the effects don't have to be the same at all... since tax evasion may well be a lot lower in the US than it was in Russia, a flat tax rate like the one used in Russia could very well lower tax revenue.

LOL, I like that:)

Hopefully Congress and the Senate will try to keep Bush's 2nd term less extravagant...

Flat tax will never happen here the rich will never allow it , its a tax increase for them . Also anyone here who is a millionaire and getting slammed with taxes. Get a real accountant!

The whole trick is instead of just talking here is to get out of the house and vote w out of office.

:) In my neck of the woods I could probably do more for another candidate online:)

I really wish people on the internet would learn to read
a thread in chronological order, without skipping stuff.
This wasn't the point at all. For the second time, the 'math' post
was just a bored response to some guy saying a 1+mil/year isn't much.
I suggest he go convince a fireman risking his life for $30K/year.

I am no tax attorney, but I am under the impression that if you are actually using the money to invest in business, you probably won't have to pay much in the way of tax on it. I'm sure it's more complicated than that, and there will be loopholes and exceptions, but in general that's the idea.(?)

Some jobs shouldn't belong to the lowest bidders.

There are important jobs that do not directly turn a profit,
so it's up to the rest of society to recognize the need for good
people in these positions regardless of the income they generate.

But since people typically only care about themselves,
it doesn't happen, and you end up with deficient rejects
taking care of your kids, and sadists enforcing the law.

ditto.

the smartest one of the bunch.

the gov't IS largly responsible for your ABILITY to make wealth, and it provides that ability to poor people as well. it's why we don't have revolt - the poor know that the ABILITY to create wealth exists.



that's a fact that many whinning sniveling rich boys seem to forget when it comes time to pay their bills.

i can't comment on your personal situation, but I know of others in your income bracket that pay less than $10K a year in tax in the USA

For once, I completely agree with you :thumbsup

ahhh, yeah thats it.

you ramble on with lies and when I laugh at them I have no argument.
sure kid.

Here's the point.
Just because I got where I'm at thru brains and hard work doesn't mean I'd vote to over tax you because you were lucky.

No you don't.

Lies? Please, do point them out.

And as for taxes... I didn't say anything in that post about taxes. All I said was that the idea of a person's income being a fair and objective measure of amount of work and talent is seriously flawed.

Nice fantasy.

The politicians will never allow a flat tax because the poor would throw them all out of office once they realized how much thier spending costs them.

I love people spouting about things they're clueless about.

If the top 5% pay 50% of the taxes, imagine how heavy the tax burden will be on the poor when the top 5% pay 5% of the taxes.

We'll never see it but the rich would line up behind it in a second.

I don't think you grasp the concept of a flat tax rate. It's generally considered to be a flat percentage, not a flat amount.
That means the top 5% wouldn't pay 5% of the taxes, but whichever percentage of the total income they are making.

12clicks is obviously incapable of grasping most simple concepts.

When his brain hurts too much he uses the smilie emoticon.

Forrest Gump makes more sense.

hmmm, yeah I don't get it. If my tax rate goes from 39% to 15% I'm going to vote against it.
how old are you son?:1orglaugh

Have you been drinking?
You seem to have some serious trouble following the subject and staying coherent, and usually you do a much better job in defending your viewpoints.