http://www.cbpp.org/10-16-03tax.htm

want to try again?

$12, not 12%.

whats the point? the only response people are left with is "see, they're just greedy" and the only plan of action can be to tell everyone you are going to somehow create legislation to fuck with a free market, rather than let it correct and thrive.

"you're a victim" is the only product we sell in this country these days.

if i hear about one more kids sports game where no one keeps scores so feelings don't get hurt... i'm joining the fucking taliban... at least they know what they want and what tey stand for.

This is why I don't have a fix on economics yet. There is too much conflicting information I have yet to weed through. Some will say there was tremendous growth under Reagan because he cut taxes. Another person will say he increased taxes basically every year he was in office. If he increased taxes and their was tremendous growth, what does that say about the affect of taxes on economic growth.

Anybody care to address Tony's post?

I think my buddy mojo said it best on a similar thread over on JBM today, so I'll let his words educate a few here on just what that negative "economic fallout" I mentioned earlier might entail... People, get a clue. Gouging the rich in order to "fix" everything and make all your woes magically go away is not the answer.


And Peaches, good post, good points.

And you clearly don't have a clue.

WOW I didn't know that income tax was the ONLY tax paid by people.

Why are some of you fuckers feeling so sorry for the rich? They sure as fuck don't give a shit about you?

http://www.cbpp.org/10-16-03tax.htm

one more time,you guys just hate facts. Reagan taxed the shit out of this country and that's ignored. The pundits have taught people well.

That's from the national review not some liberal publication

If your buddy is going to be paying 64 percent he should fire his accountant.

Maybe because some posting here are rich. Ever think of that?

And dude, what's with your avatars lately, are you a child?

Either that or one of you is in for a rude awakening in '09, possibly '10.

When everyone has more money... theres more to spend. But the only way for everyone to have more money is to have it distributed decently.

If there arent programs in place to help the poor, which have a much tougher time advancing in this world, then they will resort to stealing from you, the guy with a 2.8 Mil /yr income (im sure a ton of you on this board fall into this category).

This country is based on being UNITED and sometimes that means helping the disenfranchised.

And for the non-recession people.... The government gave out almost $600/person last month. Of course spending was up! People in this country spend like the republicans, if you got $1, its going to be spent on something, worthwhile or not.

BTW How are everyones SALES this month. Im sure they are BOOMING in this AMAZING economy.

It took until almost 2006 for him to just reach the levels of tax revenue that we had when he took office. There was a tax cut in 2001 that you failed to mark on your chart as well. You also don't mention the Homeland Reinvestment Act which signifigantly played a role in the revenue growth in 2005. FICA has also gone up.

Now go through Reagan and Kennedy and show me the tax revenue increases. Most economists believe that not cutting the taxes would have meant much more tax revenues. The same goes for Bush. The Laffer Curve has almost completely been debunked, even by the people who promoted it. They just felt it was a way to sell the lowering of taxes on the rich.

Another thing you fail to mention is that we are spending a ton of government money within the economy. When the government spends billions on U.S. companies, it'll certainly increase growth and tax revenues, but it's coming from within. It would be akin to setting up two companies and selling each other a billion dollar in products. Both companies would have a billion dollars in revenue, but neither would have a profit. It's just cooking the books and doesn't account for any true progress. Look at the shape our economy is in right now, unemployment is skyrocketing, GDP has slowed, gas is insane, real incomes are down, and the market has anally raped me for the last month.

And this isn't to say I'm against tax cuts. I think they were needed. I think the tax system is still oppressive to those who are succesful. I think the rich pay way too much. But cutting taxes while increasing spending is retarded. We've put a burden on our country that will last for decades (think of the recent Medicare bills that will hurt us for a long time). Cut the spending first, then cut the taxes.

Buffet was parsing his words like a politician.

Wealthy people do not earn their money through income like the rest of us, they make it through capital gains. Low capital gains taxes encourage wealthy people to invest in companies like google, or into medical companies, etc...

We all benefit from this investment - wealthy people take risks with their money and are rewarded, and the rest of us get to surf for free porn, and pop viagra!

What a country!!!

There is NOTHING like UNBIASED information:

According to New York Times reporter Matt Bai, CBPP is one of three left wing think tanks funded by the Democracy Alliance. The other two are the Center for American Progress and the Economic Policy Institute. According to Bai's account, representatives of CBPP and the other two Democracy Alliance-sponsored think tanks attended the May 2006 meeting of the Democracy Alliance at the Barton Creek Resort near Austin, Texas. Their role was to "talk about the agendas they were busy crafting that would catapult Democratic politics into the economic future."

It is BS, he is comparing apples to oranges. The vast majority of his income is dividend or long term capital gains. BOTH of which he has used his vast resources to reduce the taxes on. I love the guy but this argument of his is just to be self serving.

Also he is including payroll tax and I am not sure but I can be pretty sure he is excluding or ignoring the deductions that a person in her income bracket would normally have. Does she own a home etc? So it is a higher %. He does not qualify for these deductions at all.

You really don't think they are leaving because it's cheaper to hire labor overseas? I understand your tax argument and agree that some have left for that reason.

But lets not kid ourselves, this is becoming a global economy and the world has flattened. The IT guy is having trouble because there are a shitload of new programmers being trained daily in Pakistan, India, Philippines, and other countries. Guys who have the same IT knowledge as a guy in the U.S. will charge 1/5th the price. I have two developers full time from Pakistan. They both make $20,000 a year. They are phenomenal. I couldn't get one for what I'm paying for two of them.

And as for tax rates, we are high in some areas, but other countries like Canada are just as high (if not higher).

So the Treasury Department lied? Are you that closed minded?

what does any other tax have to do with the fact that he lowered income taxes for the top bracket from 70% to the 20-something %'s?

oh...

nothing.

;)

A) most are not as rich as they would like you to believe.

B) they can afford the taxes.

Oh yes I'm actually 8 years old.

But overall he raised taxes on everyone and I remember getting laid off in the late 80's because the economy sucked dick.
On the porn stuff, Im your defender and admirer even though I got beat up about it but on this I have to disagree.

Certainly there is not a problem with Buffet netting $37,858,000. The problem is that government seems to be oblivious to the FACT that ANYONE making less that $50,000 annually in this day and age is barely making ends meet and have very little discretionary income to help perpetuate the growth of the U.S. economy. Thus his secretary who is netting $42,000 a year gets shafted as do the majority of today's working class American citizens.

Is there a simple solution? YES. I can see two possibilities.

1. If the federal government is willing to eliminate the I.R.S. and implement a National Sales tax (with a rate based on establishing an accountable federal budget and setting a percentage based on what we as citizens spend) then it will become proportionately equal to ALL citizens.

OR

2. Eliminate all deductions for individuals and establish an individual Federal Income Tax schedule that does not begin taxation until a person makes a minimum of $50,000. At that point tax individuals at a rate of 5% on $50,001 to $70,000, 10% on $70,001 to $100,000 and a set maximum of 15% on any individual making over $100,000 a year.

Of course this is a simplification of two viable options that the American people could have if they wanted to completely change the current tax system bad enough.

The problem is that the structure of the current federal tax system is so convoluted and completely outdated that the I.R.S. doesn't even completely understand it, which in turn has caused it to be one of the most inefficiently run departments of the U.S. government. Add to that the fact that the U.S. government has NEVER been audited and that my friends is why this country is in such a financial mess.

I AGREE. The federal government needs to look at a state like Massachusetts that has eliminated Welfare and replaced it with Workfare.... "You want a check? Then here is a government job for you! Of course you may not like paving streets with asphalt all day but if you don't like it then get off your ass and find a job yourself."

While there is probably no one correct answer the time has come to take drastic measures. I think that starting with a clean slate and designing the most simple system possible that is not only as fair and equitable as possible but one that ALL U.S. citizens can understand.

Just my :2 cents: worth.
_

HAHAHAHAA OMG, Playboy got humor too. Great entertainment :1orglaugh:1orglaugh

1) But some are.

2) Irrelivant. I'll say again, placing the burden of "the fucked up ecomomy" and massive deficit etc on the shoulders of the successful simply because "they can afford it" is a ridiculous non-solution that is born of short term thinking. Everyone should pay their fair share, period.

3. That's what I figured. An 8 yr old would think flying such an avatar "cool", but I had to ask just to be sure.

Thanks for your candor. :D

I asked this earlier in the thread but never got an answer so I'll ask you. To me the tax burden is a very complex question with, obviously, many opinions on how to do it.

Here, however, is my question. If the top 1% of the country controls 95% of the country's wealth should they then not be responsible for 95% of its taxes? How would this be unfair? If a person earns 95% of the money that is out there and taxes must be paid on that earned money why wouldn't they pay 95% of the taxes?

Jim made a good point.A flat tax is the way to go. No loop poles no bullshit.

But they are not using 95% of the services the government provides.

This is a good one also , never thought of that.

Beat me to it.

Kane -- I'm kind of surprised by you on this. The fundamentals of your question are of a much too simplistic view of the argument. The simplistic answer I'm inclined to give is that if the gov't followed your model they would invariably be penalizing the successful for being successful. Now, where is the incentive for anyone else to become successful if the more they earn the more they are penalized (all the while watching other less successful, and all the welfare people, the lazy people, etc. get off with paying much lower %'s and in some cases 0.00!), and where is the incentive for the country's successful to stay in that country, or at the very least invest in it's economy, and keep their wealth inside the country?

Answer: none whatsoever.

Conversely, giving the wealthy the evil tax breaks that so many are critical of opens up doors for the truly successful. They are incentivized to do more business, hire more people, spend more money in the community and into the country's economy.

Tax them yes, but evenly, and fairly across the board. The bigger picture and long term projections say that doing this is always going to be better than simply raising their taxes to the tune of millions and in some cases billions simply because "they can afford it".

And then, when someone you know (or maybe a lot of people you know) get laid off from their long-held jobs at the factory, people again blame the rich guy at the top.

God forbid anyone place the blame where it belongs... on the shoulders of the government that decided it was the top 5% who should shoulder 95% of the economic burden so that the other 95% could...what?

And ultimately some of that blame has to fall on those who voted to elect that government.

But it's easier to blame the greedy rich guy. All rich people are greedy, after all. Right?

You're a moron.. All those % stats you quoted are typical spin to build support for the rich to not pay taxes... They're completely flawed in that the fundamental premise of those stats is that the gross tax revenue is a fixed number... It blows my mind that people in a country that is so fucking far in debt that foreign companies are buying it up don't realize they need a much higher level of tax revenue.

What's "fair" is that both people should be getting taxed at the same rate.. OR.. you "invest" in that 60,000 person by giving them a lower tax rate so that she pays less in tax now so that she can build up the income to generate even more tax revenue at a later date when her yearly revenue rises. Long term thinking would be attempting to move more and more people into higher income levels to generate even more tax revenue instead of the current trend of pushing more and more people to lower levels.

In the end you can't have any discussion about taxes without talking about spending. If our government, both dem and repub, would actually be fiscally responsible our taxes could be lower no matter what tax bracket you are in. Until that happens there will never be a fair tax

A flat tax will not work. If you tax everyone at, say, 10% it may be fair, but it will not raise enough money to plug the bleeding holes of the governments accounting records. In the end if our government is going to continue to spend money like a drunk in a strip club you have to then do what is best for the economy. I read recently that 80% of the economy is made up from consumer spending. That means the working people that make up 95% of the tax payers in the country power the economy by buying shit that they don't need. If they have more money to spend they will and it will help improve the economy. Don't believe me? What do you think the recent economic stimulus check was all about? If you give them tax breaks they will continue to spend because they don't know any better. most people are natural born consumers. The rich will continue to get rich. Would an income tax raise on the rich drive some of them offshore? Possibly. But if you crank up taxes on the middle class it can bring the economy to screeching hault.

They are, however, providing this wealth to the rich. Without buyers companies have nobody to sell stuff to. Without workers they have nobody to make their products which they then sell to the same people that are working for them. Basic business 101 is that you need a good team in order to grow your business. If 95% of the people helped make you rich what is wrong with you paying a little more in taxes and still being rich while leaving them some extra money to continue buying your stuff with?

The problem is alot of people listen to pundits. Pundits play a role like they are one of the regular people and actually they aren't.They are rich men and women, so they are basically serving themselves not their viewership for the most part.

OH sure.... It's not secret.. Maybe you don't even realize you do it.

You for sure have views that lean towards Republican/McCain and you jump in pretty much every Obama thread, with some anti Obama statement.

I have noticed this with lots of Dem/left views, you lean to the right. Nothing wrong with that. But if you don't, then this is even more confusing.

What is your draw to McCain? I feel voting for him is like voting for the bully that told you he is going to take your bike away, beat you up, and kick you in the balls. It's just illogical.

Dude, I think you are way off base on this one. The government and taxes are to blame for layoffs? What about when the government gives the company you work for 20 million dollars to help them pay the bill for moving their plant to some third world country where they can pay workers $2 a day? That has nothing to do with taxes and everything to do with greed and the government encouraging it.

What about when you work for the auto makers and your union has has struck a deal that is so over the top that it eventually causes the company to no longer be able to afford to pay you? Or that same company put all its eggs in the SUV basket only to see gas prices double and people stop buying SUVs? How are taxes to blame for that.

I worked for a company that overestimated how many printers they would sell. They worked a ton of overtime and hired a bunch of temps and cranked up production. they filled the warehouse then realized they weren't selling. They laid off a ton of people. Taxes had nothing to do with that.

Most layoffs come from poor managment, poor spending or a downturn in the economy not because taxes on the business owners are too high.

The reason Buffett pays less is tax is because they are factor in his investments, which anyone can do, and get lower tax, no tax, get paid and role it over, pay less tax, ect.. all legal and all done by just about any financial advisor.

Her numbers do not include her personal investments, just her wages.

What's he doing? He wants lower taxes all around, so he can pay less than 16%. His secretary probably does pay less 30% after you add in her investments, or maybe give it another 20 years.... things sure do add up in the investment game.

I am from Canada, and all I care about is the last time their was a Democrat as president I was getting almost 50-60 cents on the US dollar...I don't care what you fucks do, just get your fucking dollar back to normal!