Wealth and Liberalism..a connection?

[Holden McGroin]

So if we had a modified flat tax, where the first 30,000 (or some appropriate level) was tax free,  and the rest was taxed at some moderate percentage, no deductions for anything.......




naw, never happen.

[popeye]

It's interesting to me that people think money used to fund government services is "their money", but debt incurred to fund those same services is not "thier debt".

[muckmaw]

Originally posted by GScholz
How does buying BMW's help your economy? I can see how it helps German economy, but not yours. Injecting more money at the top is not much help for a society that imports most of its luxury products.

Holden McGroin, our tax system works pretty well. As your income increases so does the percentage of tax you pay, but not as much as the percentage of increased income of course. If you make less than a certain amount (aprox. $13.000) you pay no income tax. Income tax ranges from 24% to 56% depending on income.

Dealerships, Service centers, Manufacturing plants domestically (Not sure about BMW on domestic manufacture). Add in Marketing, Advertising, Utilities...etc.

It all goes around and around.

Even if BMW is a bad choice, pick another car company. You know the spirit behind the words.

[Ripsnort]

Originally posted by GScholz
How does buying BMW's help your economy? I can see how it helps German economy, but not yours.  

BMW's are assembled here in the USA by American workers(the hot-selling Z4 and X5). These workers are paid handsomely and place that money back into the economy.  2/3 of our economy is based on consumer spending.

[LoneStarBuckeye]

Originally posted by Silat

Originally posted by Twist
I snagged this off the web, some of you may well recognize the source:

Only The Rich Pay Taxes
 
Top 50% of Wage Earners Pay 96.09% of Income Taxes
 
{QUOTE]


Yes its fuzzy math again:} Of course the rich pay a bigger %. They make the most money. If we all pay 20% in fed tax then of course the earner making $200000 contributes more $ but not more of a % of income.

In a seemingly never-ending campaign to 'give the rich a break,' the top marginal income tax rate has been reduced from its all-time high of 91% to the current 33%. This reflects the failure of our society to properly educate the people about citizenship, responsibility, and duty. To the continuous detriment of social progress, Americans have been convinced (by Republicans) that the money they pay in taxes belongs to them rather than to society, and that they have a right to keep as much as they can tear away from the 'thuggish' IRS. This is unfortunate, and will have to be reversed eventually. We need a restoration of fiscal responsibility, and a recognition of the essential fact that those who benefit most from society have the largest obligation to give back. Until we return to this (once common) understanding, Republicans will continue to erode the fabric of our society by offering the rich a free ride and encouraging the politics of greed.

I don't really know where to start in responding, but do you actually think that the top marginal tax rate should be over 90%?!  That is outrageous!  There once was a country that espoused the mantra "From each according to his ability.  To each according to his need."  I can't remember which it was, but I don't think it's around anymore.  Why is that?  Lots of reasons, I suspect, but primary among them is that its social-economic underpinnings are diametric to human nature.

[GRUNHERZ]

Silat is a communist and when I'm done with school and start earning some real money it's gonna be a cold day in hell if I let a communist POS like that interfere in my life again by stealing all my money...

Silat shut the hell up right now, start packing and move to cuba - you will simply love it there. Dont even bother rersponding, just move there now.

And no it's not worth it trying to argue sensibly with you - you will not change your sick view until the last breath you draw unless you see the error in yiour thinking yourself....

As of now you are an idiot.  

BTW feel free to send me 90% of your money - I'm a poor college student and tuition is expensive...

[popeye]

The top tax rate in the USA was above 90% from 1944 to 1957.

[GRUNHERZ]

Originally posted by popeye
The top tax rate in the USA was above 90% from 1944 to 1957.

And save for WW2 it was stupid strangle on US prosperity - IIRC one of the best things Kennedy ever did was his massive tax cut..

[LoneStarBuckeye]

Originally posted by popeye
The top tax rate in the USA was above 90% from 1944 to 1957.

Do you think that would be a positive thing today?  If so, why?  I'm genuinely curious as to how one defends a practice that seems, to me, larcenous.

[popeye]

As noted above, the high tax rates were effected to pay for WWII and the Korean War.  I'm not sure how such a policy was justified to the taxpayers, but I'd guess it was seen as a reasonable sacrifice in a time of national emergency.  I believe the estate tax was also implemented to pay for WWII, as well as a tax on excess "war profits" of corporations.

I don't think 90 percent rates would be justified today, but it does seem unusual that the only people called to do significant sacrifice are those in the military and their families, and those who rely on government programs falling to budget cuts, while the $2000-a-plate crowd gets new tax breaks.

Of course, these are different times.

[LoneStarBuckeye]

Originally posted by popeye
I don't think 90 percent rates would be justified today, but it does seem unusual that the only people called to do significant sacrifice are those in the military and their families, and those who rely on government programs falling to budget cuts, while the $2000-a-plate crowd gets new tax breaks.

Of course, these are different times.

I'm not sure I agree with you about "the only people called to do significant sacrifice," unless you're limiting that group to people who put their lives at risk to protect the rest of us (and even then I don't entirely agree).  I would agree that our men and women in uniform are undercompensated, but there are a number of others I would add to that list, such as teachers.  

In any case, I'm curious as to where you think the "$2000-a-plate crowd" begins?  Really, how much does one have to make to get into this club?  In other words, how much money does one have to make until those who make less are willing to say, "Screw you, buddy!  You make so much money that I don't care how much tax you pay!  All I know is that YOU'RE NOT PAYING ENOUGH!"?  I'd really like to know, because I suspect that many would be surprised just how little one has to make before the screws of the current tax code (e.g., higher marginal rates, disappearing deductions, AMT, etc.) start to kick in.

[mietla]

Originally posted by Silat


In a seemingly never-ending campaign to 'give the rich a break,' the top marginal income tax rate has been reduced from its all-time high of 91% to the current 33%. This reflects the failure of our society to properly educate the people about citizenship, responsibility, and duty. To the continuous detriment of social progress, Americans have been convinced (by Republicans) that the money they pay in taxes belongs to them rather than to society, and that they have a right to keep as much as they can tear away from the 'thuggish' IRS. This is unfortunate, and will have to be reversed eventually. We need a restoration of fiscal responsibility, and a recognition of the essential fact that those who benefit most from society have the largest obligation to give back. Until we return to this (once common) understanding, Republicans will continue to erode the fabric of our society by offering the rich a free ride and encouraging the politics of greed.

I can't believe that someone can actually think like that.

You've got to be trolling...

[Toad]

From:

 Tax Rates, Tax Revenues and Economic Growth

This study investigates the international relationship between tax rates and tax revenues. Based on an econometric analysis of taxes in 103 countries, we conclude that:
On the average, governments collect the highest possible revenue when they take about 43.2 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) in taxes.

If governments try to take a larger share of private sector income, the tax base will shrink so much that total tax collections will actually go down.

For specific taxes, governments collect the highest amount of revenue when tax rates equal 22.5 percent for the income tax, 12.5 percent for the sales tax and 13.2 percent for taxes on international trade.

And:



Not to mention:


Summary of Federal Individual Income Tax Data, 2000

Note that those rich basteegeezes in the Top 25% of all payers are paying 84% of ALL INCOME TAXES.

We need to soak these suckers a WHOLE LOT MORE... these Kings of Commerce are making over $55,000!!! for pete's sake!

[midnight Target]

Telling mispeak or just funny chit?

trying to see it from another point of you

[Creamo]

Originally posted by mietla
I can't believe that someone can actually think like that.

You've got to be trolling...

That's what I was thinking, but he seemed dead serious.