|
Reading some of that Washington Times article makes me sick.
One, the federal government could take every single penny of wealth from Uncle Warren and his 400 billionaire friends - confiscate all of the stocks, bonds, real estate and other investments they own - and leave them paupers. The haul would total $1.3 trillion.
The government could take every penny of income from every household that earns $250,000 or more and end up with $1.4 trillion.
That combined $2.7 trillion would not even come close to covering this year’s $3.7 trillion of federal spending.
So, because it won't outright solve the deficit problem in one fell-swoop, nothing should be done about it? That has to be the absolute, worst, weakest, most pathetic fucking argument I've heard in my life, and yet TV stations, pundits and Republicans the country-over keep regurgitating it.
Everyone should just stop working and go on unemployment benefits. Working isn't going to make us all millionaires in a single day, so why bother?
|
Taxes were invented by the elite for the elite. They would tax farmers and wage war using their money.
In present day we have the nation state. The nation state is controlled by the elite so the tax is still something for the rich and against the poor.
In the US people seem to think it is the reverse. But if it wasn't for the state almost all the multinationals in the fortune 500 would have gone bankrupt and all those rich elite we now praise so much wouldn't have a penny.
Also, media are owned by corporations. Media serve their own interest. No matter how left wing of a journalist you can somehow fight, they are going to have right wing bias because they are going to be biased in favour of their own interests. Which means serving their owners and serving their advertisers.
The US president election is a complete joke. One of the most undemocratic elections on the planet. Basically the elite nominate two of their own and these two candidates are marketed like any product to the voters.
Politics never enters the debate and every statement these candidates make is based first and foremost on target audience studies.
These same elites also have brought us this failed economic system. No matter how big the failures, they aren't even willing to debate making changes. This whole financialization of the economy is idiotic. We have tons of resources dedicated to just betting on stuff. It's one big casino that doesn't produce anything and just pumps around money. In fact it is worse because in the end a whole lot of fake money and fake growth is created. Always bubbles are inflated. They gamble with other people's money to inflate a bubble. Then they can rake in profits just before or as the bubble bursts. Those that made the right bet get a lot of money by taking insane risk with other people's money. Those who lose lose almost nothing. But the people whose money they used loose everything.
The only power the people still have is to take out all their money. Take if off the banks and let all banks collapse. The elite is so fearful of the people doing this that this statement I made right now is illegal in my country. I can't tell people to take the money off the bank because it can create a bank run.
|
This thread is a perfect example of why I have little faith in humanity these days. I couldn't even wade through all the stupid comments on the first page, let alone the following 30.
Some of you could really stand to be better educated on this subject before posting your opinions as facts.
|
On August 19 2011 15:15 crms wrote:Show nested quote +On August 19 2011 15:06 Ympulse wrote:Is that really what passes as journalism? That's the equivalent of a forum troll's "NO U" wow that article was sad. I hate the argument that 'well this would be a drop in the bucket compared to what the national debt is, 1.2 trillion if you take all their money.' Warren never makes the claim a fair tax on the extreme wealthy would cure the national debt, all he's calling for is the super rich pay the same % as the average person. WHAT IN THE FUCK IS SO WRONG WITH THAT?
There is nothing wrong with that. Warren Buffet is just not telling you the complete truth. he gets most of his money from capital gains which is taxed at 15% and he has his own business so he can write off as much of his expenses as possible. Every person in america over the age of 18 can own their own business, even if it is just a name, by doing so you can make most of your expenses tax free and that is the other big break for people like warren buffet.
You should get a business license and start investing in the stock market, then you can reduce your tax rate to below 17.4% simply by being in a different tax bracket.
|
On August 18 2011 08:52 Bombmk wrote:Show nested quote +On August 18 2011 07:12 gimpy wrote:
Seeing a bunch of children argue about economics is irritating.
"The wealthiest 1 percent of the population earn 19 percent of the income but pay 37 percent of the income tax. The top 10 percent pay 68 percent of the tab. Meanwhile, the bottom 50 percent—those below the median income level—now earn 13 percent of the income but pay just 3 percent of the taxes. These are proportions of the income tax alone and don’t include payroll taxes for Social Security and Medicare."
When the majority can vote themselves benefits at the expense of the minority, the system is broken, and will fail. We have 50% of the population paying 3% of the taxes, and they want more, and can vote themselves more. A flat tax is the only fair tax. Shared burden. Apart from the assinine, yet constantly reoccuring, call for a flat tax, you are forgetting something. Those making the income at the top have a far larger share in society than they are paying taxes for. They gain much more from having a functional market driven society than the ones at the bottom. If a foreign power invaded and took over tomorrow a substantional percentage of people would probably not even see a drop in living standards. But a lot of rich people might see their living standards drop far beyond their taxation level percentagewise. Consequently the military is not protecting everyone equally. Equally if sanitation, electricity, roads, police and firefighting disappeared over night. Percentagewise those services provide an increasingly bigger insurance/service the larger your income. Increasing much faster than the tax brackets as you go up in income. The progressive tax system as it is currently constructed in the US is only a sorry little patch on that disparity. When the top 400 people own as much of the country as the bottom 156 million the current tax brackets are a joke. Those 400 people are effectively invested in the country, compared to the bottom 50%, at a factor of 390000 to 1. Good thing the goverment is not an insurance company... But you could go your way of course. And then you would soon remember the recent riots in London as only a small prelude to what happens when you disenfranchise the majority of a population. I can recommend a little French history.
Do either of your arguments REALLY matter? It isn't the amount of money our government brings in and from who. It is the continuous waste of money that is brought in and lack of incentive for businesses to exist here. Both of those situations lead to our current economic situation not a problem with taxing and who we tax.
Think on it.
|
On August 19 2011 17:22 UnknownReclaimer wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2011 06:41 Megatronn wrote:
If he's so concerned why doesn't he just give his money away to some poor families? o.o He's actually a part of a group of billionaires in the USA that plans to donate over half of his money to charity at the time of his death. I've heard a bunch of stories about how he doesn't tip well, and a bunch of other stuff like that, but considering that he's going to be giving billions away when he dies, I don't really have a problem with that. My biggest issue with the rich and taxes is that they don't really pay taxes. If you look at most of them they find every single loophole and don't end up paying anything. While I think that is okay for families that are poor and don't make hardly anything, I don't think it is right that the super rich can get away with that. Not only are the tax rates for the super rich at one of the lowest rates in American history, some of them don't even have to pay because of these loopholes. While I do agree that there has been rampant spending for years, we simply haven't been taking in enough taxes either. And I'm afraid that I have to agree with Mr. Buffet, that we have to stop coddling the rich. The argument that it should go up for everyone is frankly asinine. I personally make around 10-15k a year. I work about 35 hours a week (all I can get), I'm single, share an apartment with friends, and I'm saving up to go to college. As of right now I pay no taxes, other than sales tax on various items. If taxes were to be raised, I simply couldn't afford them. I work hard, and am working to go to college and get a good job. Taking money away from hard working low income people such as myself leaves no opportunity for us to go to college to get the better pay jobs. All it does is keep the poor people poor, and keep the rich people rich.
I am in the exact same position. The thing that you aren't noticing is that the amount of money that we generate in taxes is not worth the time and money it takes to sort through our irs forms. I would propose to remove all taxes on people that make the bottom 50% of the population because we don't contribute at all.
Edit: also, right now the bottom 40% are actually paid to work and the middle 20% of the country pays for it. the top 40% pays the government.
|
On August 20 2011 09:51 ixi.genocide wrote:
Every person in america over the age of 18 can own their own business, even if it is just a name, by doing so you can make most of your expenses tax free and that is the other big break for people like warren buffet.
You should get a business license and start investing in the stock market, then you can reduce your tax rate to below 17.4% simply by being in a different tax bracket.
Sidetracking to get away from all the bullshit and trying to help those save on their taxes.
Learned this from my parents ages ago and hell, it works like a charm. A lot of people I know do this.
|
On August 20 2011 09:56 NoobSkills wrote:Show nested quote +On August 18 2011 08:52 Bombmk wrote:On August 18 2011 07:12 gimpy wrote:
Seeing a bunch of children argue about economics is irritating.
"The wealthiest 1 percent of the population earn 19 percent of the income but pay 37 percent of the income tax. The top 10 percent pay 68 percent of the tab. Meanwhile, the bottom 50 percent—those below the median income level—now earn 13 percent of the income but pay just 3 percent of the taxes. These are proportions of the income tax alone and don’t include payroll taxes for Social Security and Medicare."
When the majority can vote themselves benefits at the expense of the minority, the system is broken, and will fail. We have 50% of the population paying 3% of the taxes, and they want more, and can vote themselves more. A flat tax is the only fair tax. Shared burden. Apart from the assinine, yet constantly reoccuring, call for a flat tax, you are forgetting something. Those making the income at the top have a far larger share in society than they are paying taxes for. They gain much more from having a functional market driven society than the ones at the bottom. If a foreign power invaded and took over tomorrow a substantional percentage of people would probably not even see a drop in living standards. But a lot of rich people might see their living standards drop far beyond their taxation level percentagewise. Consequently the military is not protecting everyone equally. Equally if sanitation, electricity, roads, police and firefighting disappeared over night. Percentagewise those services provide an increasingly bigger insurance/service the larger your income. Increasing much faster than the tax brackets as you go up in income. The progressive tax system as it is currently constructed in the US is only a sorry little patch on that disparity. When the top 400 people own as much of the country as the bottom 156 million the current tax brackets are a joke. Those 400 people are effectively invested in the country, compared to the bottom 50%, at a factor of 390000 to 1. Good thing the goverment is not an insurance company... But you could go your way of course. And then you would soon remember the recent riots in London as only a small prelude to what happens when you disenfranchise the majority of a population. I can recommend a little French history. Do either of your arguments REALLY matter? It isn't the amount of money our government brings in and from who. It is the continuous waste of money that is brought in and lack of incentive for businesses to exist here. Both of those situations lead to our current economic situation not a problem with taxing and who we tax. Think on it.
That's right 5+ years of lowering taxes and increasing spending due to operations costs of wars all while business sector speculation ran rampant causing a bubble that eventually bust clearly wasn't the cause of such a large deficit. I mean come on we cut taxes left and right and all those business just came flocking here =p. Clearly we have a spending issue after we cut our revenue and ramped up spending due to wars how in the world could that happen? i mean all the logic is there you increase how much you spend and then take home less money borrowing money from a brother and creditors i mean you can keep doing this forever!
|
Guys, guys . . .think of it this way . . .the rich invest or save a much much larger share of their income and wealth . . providing capital to create new wealth.
If you cut taxes on the poor, they'd just end up spending it.
This shit has to be like . . calculated out to ensure the best possible economic health of the country and the government.
|
On August 20 2011 10:15 semantics wrote:Show nested quote +On August 20 2011 09:56 NoobSkills wrote:On August 18 2011 08:52 Bombmk wrote:On August 18 2011 07:12 gimpy wrote:
Seeing a bunch of children argue about economics is irritating.
"The wealthiest 1 percent of the population earn 19 percent of the income but pay 37 percent of the income tax. The top 10 percent pay 68 percent of the tab. Meanwhile, the bottom 50 percent—those below the median income level—now earn 13 percent of the income but pay just 3 percent of the taxes. These are proportions of the income tax alone and don’t include payroll taxes for Social Security and Medicare."
When the majority can vote themselves benefits at the expense of the minority, the system is broken, and will fail. We have 50% of the population paying 3% of the taxes, and they want more, and can vote themselves more. A flat tax is the only fair tax. Shared burden. Apart from the assinine, yet constantly reoccuring, call for a flat tax, you are forgetting something. Those making the income at the top have a far larger share in society than they are paying taxes for. They gain much more from having a functional market driven society than the ones at the bottom. If a foreign power invaded and took over tomorrow a substantional percentage of people would probably not even see a drop in living standards. But a lot of rich people might see their living standards drop far beyond their taxation level percentagewise. Consequently the military is not protecting everyone equally. Equally if sanitation, electricity, roads, police and firefighting disappeared over night. Percentagewise those services provide an increasingly bigger insurance/service the larger your income. Increasing much faster than the tax brackets as you go up in income. The progressive tax system as it is currently constructed in the US is only a sorry little patch on that disparity. When the top 400 people own as much of the country as the bottom 156 million the current tax brackets are a joke. Those 400 people are effectively invested in the country, compared to the bottom 50%, at a factor of 390000 to 1. Good thing the goverment is not an insurance company... But you could go your way of course. And then you would soon remember the recent riots in London as only a small prelude to what happens when you disenfranchise the majority of a population. I can recommend a little French history. Do either of your arguments REALLY matter? It isn't the amount of money our government brings in and from who. It is the continuous waste of money that is brought in and lack of incentive for businesses to exist here. Both of those situations lead to our current economic situation not a problem with taxing and who we tax. Think on it. That's right 5+ years of lowering taxes and increasing spending due to operations costs of wars all while business sector speculation ran rampant causing a bubble that eventually bust clearly wasn't the cause of such a large deficit. I mean come on we cut taxes left and right and all those business just came flocking here =p. Clearly we have a spending issue after we cut our revenue and ramped up spending due to wars how in the world could that happen? i mean all the logic is there you increase how much you spend and then take home less money borrowing money from a brother and creditors i mean you can keep doing this forever!
Agreed unfortunately the USA is too stupid to send a message to DC and even if they did we would only get a different set of corrupt people for another 4 years. If it was 1 year term limit then we could really change things up. If you participate in one waste of money, one event of corruption, or one thing that benefits the few instead of the country then you're out. That would be awesome, but again we produce the masses not the intelligent.
|
On August 20 2011 09:51 ixi.genocide wrote:Show nested quote +On August 19 2011 15:15 crms wrote:On August 19 2011 15:06 Ympulse wrote:Is that really what passes as journalism? That's the equivalent of a forum troll's "NO U" wow that article was sad. I hate the argument that 'well this would be a drop in the bucket compared to what the national debt is, 1.2 trillion if you take all their money.' Warren never makes the claim a fair tax on the extreme wealthy would cure the national debt, all he's calling for is the super rich pay the same % as the average person. WHAT IN THE FUCK IS SO WRONG WITH THAT? There is nothing wrong with that. Warren Buffet is just not telling you the complete truth. he gets most of his money from capital gains which is taxed at 15% and he has his own business so he can write off as much of his expenses as possible. Every person in america over the age of 18 can own their own business, even if it is just a name, by doing so you can make most of your expenses tax free and that is the other big break for people like warren buffet. You should get a business license and start investing in the stock market, then you can reduce your tax rate to below 17.4% simply by being in a different tax bracket.
Oh my god. You seriously need to figure out wtf you are talking about. The fact that you call expenses 'tax free' is pretty funny (I think you mean tax deductible). The fact that you think you can just create your own business and put all your expenses on it is HILARIOUS. Seriously dude, you have no idea what you're talking about - you don't even have any idea what is legal.
This thread is a slightly more intelligent version of the CNN or Fox News comment boards. Everyone thinks they know what they are talking about, when in reality, they don't. People need to understand that they should be WITHHOLDING judgment until they educate themselves fully on the topic. When people don't do this, they for whatever reason get attached to the first logical sounding argument they hear from whatever side they tend to agree with. That's not logical people, that's emotional.
|
On August 20 2011 09:56 NoobSkills wrote:Show nested quote +On August 18 2011 08:52 Bombmk wrote:On August 18 2011 07:12 gimpy wrote:
Seeing a bunch of children argue about economics is irritating.
"The wealthiest 1 percent of the population earn 19 percent of the income but pay 37 percent of the income tax. The top 10 percent pay 68 percent of the tab. Meanwhile, the bottom 50 percent—those below the median income level—now earn 13 percent of the income but pay just 3 percent of the taxes. These are proportions of the income tax alone and don’t include payroll taxes for Social Security and Medicare."
When the majority can vote themselves benefits at the expense of the minority, the system is broken, and will fail. We have 50% of the population paying 3% of the taxes, and they want more, and can vote themselves more. A flat tax is the only fair tax. Shared burden. Apart from the assinine, yet constantly reoccuring, call for a flat tax, you are forgetting something. Those making the income at the top have a far larger share in society than they are paying taxes for. They gain much more from having a functional market driven society than the ones at the bottom. If a foreign power invaded and took over tomorrow a substantional percentage of people would probably not even see a drop in living standards. But a lot of rich people might see their living standards drop far beyond their taxation level percentagewise. Consequently the military is not protecting everyone equally. Equally if sanitation, electricity, roads, police and firefighting disappeared over night. Percentagewise those services provide an increasingly bigger insurance/service the larger your income. Increasing much faster than the tax brackets as you go up in income. The progressive tax system as it is currently constructed in the US is only a sorry little patch on that disparity. When the top 400 people own as much of the country as the bottom 156 million the current tax brackets are a joke. Those 400 people are effectively invested in the country, compared to the bottom 50%, at a factor of 390000 to 1. Good thing the goverment is not an insurance company... But you could go your way of course. And then you would soon remember the recent riots in London as only a small prelude to what happens when you disenfranchise the majority of a population. I can recommend a little French history. Do either of your arguments REALLY matter? It isn't the amount of money our government brings in and from who. It is the continuous waste of money that is brought in and lack of incentive for businesses to exist here. Both of those situations lead to our current economic situation not a problem with taxing and who we tax. Think on it.
What is the cause of the lack of incentives for business?
I'd say it's mainly high wages compared to other countries.
|
Mr. Buffet is a bleeding heart. if he wants to petition the government to tweak the taxes for the top 1% of america so he and his liberal government cronies can all pat themselves on the back and make themselves feel better, he is sure welcome to.
This will all do nothing to remove the cloud of government debt from over america. we are living in a country where 50% of people don't pay taxes. The expansion of the welfare state and the ballooning entitlement complex of americans have reached unsustainable levels, and the super-rich neither have anything to do with it nor can they solve the problem with their money. get real.
|
On August 20 2011 10:55 gogogadgetflow wrote:
Mr. Buffet is a bleeding heart. if he wants to petition the government to tweak the taxes for the top 1% of america so he and his liberal government cronies can all pat themselves on the back and make themselves feel better, he is sure welcome to.
This will all do nothing to remove the cloud of government debt from over america. we are living in a country where 50% of people don't pay taxes. The expansion of the welfare state and the ballooning entitlement complex of americans have reached unsustainable levels, and the super-rich neither have anything to do with it nor can they solve the problem with their money. get real.
Yes tax the people who's % of wealth that you could tax would be so minuscule and pointless that all you'd do is make them miss bill payments instead of the super rich who can not only afford the raised taxes but would only burden the few instead of the many, and it would burden those who could take such a burden instead of those to which it may break their backs. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few/one.
Also you do know liberalism have nothing to do with revenue it's a core belief of essentially rights when talking about the US, ie right to own a gun, right to due process etc. Liberal is a closer to social not fiscal standing.
|
On August 20 2011 10:55 gogogadgetflow wrote:
Mr. Buffet is a bleeding heart. if he wants to petition the government to tweak the taxes for the top 1% of america so he and his liberal government cronies can all pat themselves on the back and make themselves feel better, he is sure welcome to.
This will all do nothing to remove the cloud of government debt from over america. we are living in a country where 50% of people don't pay taxes. The expansion of the welfare state and the ballooning entitlement complex of americans have reached unsustainable levels, and the super-rich neither have anything to do with it nor can they solve the problem with their money. get real.
In the same vein, why don't all the people arguing for cuts to entitlements drop their "socialist" shackles?
I want all Tea Party/Republicans to drop SS, Medicare, Medicaid, and any other government funded program, especially the politicians.
|
On August 20 2011 11:34 Adila wrote:Show nested quote +On August 20 2011 10:55 gogogadgetflow wrote:
Mr. Buffet is a bleeding heart. if he wants to petition the government to tweak the taxes for the top 1% of america so he and his liberal government cronies can all pat themselves on the back and make themselves feel better, he is sure welcome to.
This will all do nothing to remove the cloud of government debt from over america. we are living in a country where 50% of people don't pay taxes. The expansion of the welfare state and the ballooning entitlement complex of americans have reached unsustainable levels, and the super-rich neither have anything to do with it nor can they solve the problem with their money. get real. In the same vein, why don't all the people arguing for cuts to entitlements drop their "socialist" shackles? I want all Tea Party/Republicans to drop SS, Medicare, Medicaid, and any other government funded program, especially the politicians.
Roads are pretty gosh darn socialist too...come to think of it, it seems everything in America maintained by the government is in danger of being labeled socialist by the right.
|
On August 20 2011 11:41 Elegy wrote:Show nested quote +On August 20 2011 11:34 Adila wrote:On August 20 2011 10:55 gogogadgetflow wrote:
Mr. Buffet is a bleeding heart. if he wants to petition the government to tweak the taxes for the top 1% of america so he and his liberal government cronies can all pat themselves on the back and make themselves feel better, he is sure welcome to.
This will all do nothing to remove the cloud of government debt from over america. we are living in a country where 50% of people don't pay taxes. The expansion of the welfare state and the ballooning entitlement complex of americans have reached unsustainable levels, and the super-rich neither have anything to do with it nor can they solve the problem with their money. get real. In the same vein, why don't all the people arguing for cuts to entitlements drop their "socialist" shackles? I want all Tea Party/Republicans to drop SS, Medicare, Medicaid, and any other government funded program, especially the politicians. Roads are pretty gosh darn socialist too...come to think of it, it seems everything in America maintained by the government is in danger of being labeled socialist by the right.
Yes those who are extremists might have that view, but common middle of the road people can view things this way...
SS - Good idea except when government can take money out of it.
Welfare - Good idea, but not regulated nearly enough.
Healthcare - People want to put too much effort into this one. For children they should make it mandatory imo, but for adults who were smart enough to last to adulthood they should be able to make their own choices. If/when someone dies because of it, it was their choice.
On August 20 2011 10:52 ControlMonkey wrote:Show nested quote +On August 20 2011 09:56 NoobSkills wrote:On August 18 2011 08:52 Bombmk wrote:On August 18 2011 07:12 gimpy wrote:
Seeing a bunch of children argue about economics is irritating.
"The wealthiest 1 percent of the population earn 19 percent of the income but pay 37 percent of the income tax. The top 10 percent pay 68 percent of the tab. Meanwhile, the bottom 50 percent—those below the median income level—now earn 13 percent of the income but pay just 3 percent of the taxes. These are proportions of the income tax alone and don’t include payroll taxes for Social Security and Medicare."
When the majority can vote themselves benefits at the expense of the minority, the system is broken, and will fail. We have 50% of the population paying 3% of the taxes, and they want more, and can vote themselves more. A flat tax is the only fair tax. Shared burden. Apart from the assinine, yet constantly reoccuring, call for a flat tax, you are forgetting something. Those making the income at the top have a far larger share in society than they are paying taxes for. They gain much more from having a functional market driven society than the ones at the bottom. If a foreign power invaded and took over tomorrow a substantional percentage of people would probably not even see a drop in living standards. But a lot of rich people might see their living standards drop far beyond their taxation level percentagewise. Consequently the military is not protecting everyone equally. Equally if sanitation, electricity, roads, police and firefighting disappeared over night. Percentagewise those services provide an increasingly bigger insurance/service the larger your income. Increasing much faster than the tax brackets as you go up in income. The progressive tax system as it is currently constructed in the US is only a sorry little patch on that disparity. When the top 400 people own as much of the country as the bottom 156 million the current tax brackets are a joke. Those 400 people are effectively invested in the country, compared to the bottom 50%, at a factor of 390000 to 1. Good thing the goverment is not an insurance company... But you could go your way of course. And then you would soon remember the recent riots in London as only a small prelude to what happens when you disenfranchise the majority of a population. I can recommend a little French history. Do either of your arguments REALLY matter? It isn't the amount of money our government brings in and from who. It is the continuous waste of money that is brought in and lack of incentive for businesses to exist here. Both of those situations lead to our current economic situation not a problem with taxing and who we tax. Think on it. What is the cause of the lack of incentives for business? I'd say it's mainly high wages compared to other countries.
The lower wages of other countries are a very small incentive compared to the MASSIVE tax break compared to US companies who are taxed extremely heavily.
|
I still find it amazing how some people can label Warren Buffet, one of the richest men in the world a "socialist" for his comments on tax parity. It just smacks of ignorance. As does the sweeping generalizations labeling low income earners as lazy or as all looking for a free ride, or even suggesting that all high income earners are all oppressive slave masters to the lower class. There are many great ideas out there from both sides of this issue, it simply makes it hard to sift through the valuable arguments, when such obviously uninformed arguments get thrown into the mix.
It usually helps to think a little before spouting off on the first outrageous comment that pops into one's head. Let's do better TL community.
|
On August 20 2011 09:58 ixi.genocide wrote:Show nested quote +On August 19 2011 17:22 UnknownReclaimer wrote:On August 17 2011 06:41 Megatronn wrote:
If he's so concerned why doesn't he just give his money away to some poor families? o.o He's actually a part of a group of billionaires in the USA that plans to donate over half of his money to charity at the time of his death. I've heard a bunch of stories about how he doesn't tip well, and a bunch of other stuff like that, but considering that he's going to be giving billions away when he dies, I don't really have a problem with that. My biggest issue with the rich and taxes is that they don't really pay taxes. If you look at most of them they find every single loophole and don't end up paying anything. While I think that is okay for families that are poor and don't make hardly anything, I don't think it is right that the super rich can get away with that. Not only are the tax rates for the super rich at one of the lowest rates in American history, some of them don't even have to pay because of these loopholes. While I do agree that there has been rampant spending for years, we simply haven't been taking in enough taxes either. And I'm afraid that I have to agree with Mr. Buffet, that we have to stop coddling the rich. The argument that it should go up for everyone is frankly asinine. I personally make around 10-15k a year. I work about 35 hours a week (all I can get), I'm single, share an apartment with friends, and I'm saving up to go to college. As of right now I pay no taxes, other than sales tax on various items. If taxes were to be raised, I simply couldn't afford them. I work hard, and am working to go to college and get a good job. Taking money away from hard working low income people such as myself leaves no opportunity for us to go to college to get the better pay jobs. All it does is keep the poor people poor, and keep the rich people rich. I am in the exact same position. The thing that you aren't noticing is that the amount of money that we generate in taxes is not worth the time and money it takes to sort through our irs forms. I would propose to remove all taxes on people that make the bottom 50% of the population because we don't contribute at all. Edit: also, right now the bottom 40% are actually paid to work and the middle 20% of the country pays for it. the top 40% pays the government.
That's not actually true at all. They make a killing of the interest that the tax us throughout the year. Even if they have to pay it all back they still have the whole years worth of income to make interest off of. Most people pay little to no taxes, but that's after the refund checks for most people.
|
Hell, at that income level you could tax them 90% and they'd still have enough money to play starcraft all day.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
