Jump to content
spktruthinlove

Tax The Rich More? How Would That Help You?

Recommended Posts

50% of American already pay effectly no taxes. They make back more than they pay in. Why should anyone be on the hook for more when the Government (both Democrats and Republicans) cannot even come up with a viable budget with in their means?

 

Magnus, EVERYONE in the USA pays appreciable amounts of federal taxes.

 

The working poor (that cannot afford automobiles and ill served by insufficient public transportation), are generally not eligible for Medicaid or any affordable employers’ provided group insurance. (Equally to all other wage earners), they pay 7.65% FICA tax upon EACH & EVERY Dollar of wages which is generally their ENTIRE revenues.

In addition the employers’ shares of payroll taxes are passed on to ALL final customers; (which include government spending that’s paid for by all taxpayers).

 

[Your auto repair bill’s itemized labor is limited to mechanics’ labor upon your vehicle. It does not include the entire labor imbedded within your bill. It does not include the labor for maintaining the shops hydraulic lift or production or delivery of auto parts.

 

I don’t have any statistics to offer but it’s unreasonable to believe that Labor imbedded within all final prices can possibly be less than 1/3 and I hope it doesn’t exceed ½ of those prices. Thus employers’ portions of FICA are the equivalent to a general federal sales tax between 2.616% and 3.977%.

(Unlike a sales tax, employers’ FICA discourages hiring and thus is particularly detrimental to the median wage and thus decreases all compensation of labor).

 

Wage earners directly and indirectly pay in excess of 10.26% to 11.62% of their ENTIRE wage incomes only for FICA payroll taxes.

Considering that Romney and Buffet directly pay extremely insignificant portions and indirectly pay less than 4% of their incomes for FICA, it’s apparent that taxes based upon payrolls are extremely regressive.

 

[0.0765 / (3] – 0.0765)] = 0.0261672

[0.0765 / (2 – 0.0765)] = 0.03977

[0.0765 + 0.03977] =11.627%

 

Respectfully, Supposn

Edited by Supposn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I look at it this way:

 

Rich people use more of the commons (roads/public safety/utilities) than do poor and middle class. They should be expected to pay taxes consistent with what they use. People become rich and still use common resources-- they don't just get magically rich without using roads/sewers/trash collection, etc.

 

The Romans built roads, public forums, theaters, and all kinds of plumbing and sewers and such. It was mostly the rich who paid for this because IT MADE THE ROMAN EMPIRE STRONGER. It was patriotic. The Roman Empire lasted 500 years because the rich cared about the whole empire. An empire that wants to fold quickly (USSR- about 70 years) sacrifices the needs of the commons for the needs of a few. The US should learn something from history- or perhaps it HAS learned from history: all about the Roman Third Century Crisis and the fall of the USSR, and it simply wants to give it all up and become a third-world backwater.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why are these talking points here? They belong on some tea bagger thread on the NHB forum.

 

Probably because it isn't a talking point, but reality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think there's a whole lot the rich could easily pay. And their paying it wouldn't hurt the economy none, actually it most would help it a lot.

 

I don't just want the rich to pay more so I don't have to. I want to pay, but for the right things. I like the simple concept of public school, it should be equal to all, no matter who. Same thing with Healthcare. I know that sounds like a collective, it has to. What I don't like is the government lying to the people, either directly, or indirectly.

 

The smarter we all are, the better our government will be, but only if we participate. I think in a way that sounds painful to many.

Who has the time?

 

Look, if people are aware of the truth, about how oligarchs control their government, they can do things. Not just attend protest rallies, but also conduct massive boycotts. Stick it where it talks, the money, that is.

 

Oh yeah, if the rich want to express their freedom of speech, let them just like all the rest do. Why don't they go protest out on the street --- oh yeah, they don't have the time.

 

 

Peace!

Edited by TheOldBarn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎4‎/‎5‎/‎2012 at 6:30 PM, Landru Guide Us said:

1. By the top 1% paying more taxes, we can reduce taxes on the productive part of society (the working class), so they can pay more and invest in small business, increasing revenue even more.

 

2. Most economic dysfunction derives from the investment habits of the superrich, who drive wild speculation, bubbles and other economic pathology. The less money they have, the more economic stability we have since normal people invest in the real economy.

 

3. Most money held by rich is wasted in low productivity investments like hedgefunds. Taxing it and then putting it into infrastruture increases productivity and hence wealth for everybody.

 

That was easy.

As this is my maiden post, I may have missed some aspects of this discussion. If so, my apologies.

 

What I miss here is any discussion of the potential "single tax" solution, which would resolve many of the inadequaties of the current tax system. For those unfamiliar with this idea, one variant is given in the link below.

 

As I understand it, the single-tax would be a flat-rate tax levied on unearned income, but not on labor.

 

One variant is given here: http://dollarsandsense.org/archives/2006/0306gluckman.html

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, matrixx8 said:

As this is my maiden post, I may have missed some aspects of this discussion. If so, my apologies.

 

What I miss here is any discussion of the potential "single tax" solution, which would resolve many of the inadequaties of the current tax system. For those unfamiliar with this idea, one variant is given in the link below.

 

As I understand it, the single-tax would be a flat-rate tax levied on unearned income, but not on labor.

 

One variant is given here: http://dollarsandsense.org/archives/2006/0306gluckman.html

 

The flat tax in general is a right-wing scheme to yet again shift taxation off the rich onto everyone else. This is an unusual variant in excluding labor from taxation.


It's an interesting idea, but radical enough I suspect it will not gain much traction. And we should start with lower-hanging fruit - simply taxing unearned income at the SAME rate as earned income would be a huge change in that direction, before we talk about taxing only unearned income.

 

The bottom line to any of these issues is that they aren't about the merits, they're about the power of who will decide what's done, and that power belongs to the rich.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...