Jump to content
supraTruth

We need GRADUATED taxation on ALL income

Recommended Posts

 

All of everything below is why I believe we should create a computer program that provides graduated taxation from the medium income to the grossly overpaid, with a top tax bracket of 49% after all deductions.

 

Why should those paid 99% of the income not pay 99% of the taxes instead of only: http://www.cnsnews.c...ent-all-federal ?

 

What is too often forgotten is that those who benefit the most from our system need to support our system the most. They, the CEO's of corporations, need educated workers, and their workers deserve a decent retirement when they are too old to still work. And it is easier for all of us to have our Government provide that retirement and health assistance for those elderly than it is for those CEO's who use their labor to enrich themselves, since owners and bosses change.

 

Also, those CEO's need infrastructure to move their products and employees, and again, government can do that best because of right-of-ways and system longevity.

 

And, of course there is needed policing and defense, again best done by government, OUR U.S.A. GOVERNMENT of WE THE PEOPLE.

 

It is not about raising taxes, it is about shifting the tax burden back to the grossly overpaid, and off the backs of the middle class, barely rich and Public Debt. And there is absolutely no justification for our getting it backwards for the last 30 years.

 

For our system to be fair to all of us, we need more tax brackets; not fewer; graduated taxation for all of us on ALL income.

 

When President Obama signed the extension of the Bush Tax Cuts for the grossly overpaid, he said that we as Americans need to have a national discussion about taxes. The following is a proposal that attempts to return our tax system to one that requires a more equitable share of sacrifice from MULTI-MILLIONAIRES and BILLIONAIRES.

For some 20 years, as we became the most prosperous nation on this planet ever (after all, we paid down WWII Debt and built a space program that landed men on the moon), there were 24 Income Tax Brackets; now there are only 7 Income Tax Brackets. http://en.wikipedia....e_United_States And those earlier years were very good times, with plenty of jobs for everyone.

Contrary to popular opinion, we need more Income Tax Brackets, not fewer.

Below are 16 Marginal Income Tax Brackets that would return us to graduated taxation for the very rich (this is only an example):

No income taxes for any married couple/family with a net income of less than $40,000.00 (after all deductions);

5% for over $40,000.00/year (after all deductions);

and then, 10% for over $80,000.00/year (after all deductions);

and then, 12% for over $100,000.00/year (after all deductions);

and then, 15% for over $200,000.00/year (after all deductions);

and then, 20% for over $300,000.00/year (after all deductions);

and then, 25% for over $500,000.00/year (after all deductions);

and then, 27% for over $800,000.00/year (after all deductions);

and then, 30% for over $1,000,000.00/year (after all deductions);

and then, 33% for over $2,000,000.00/year (after all deductions);

and then, 35% for over $3,000,000.00/year (after all deductions);

and then, 38% for over $5,000,000.00/year (after all deductions);

and then, 40% for over $10,000,000.00/year (after all deductions);

and then, 42% for over $25,000,000.00/year (after all deductions);

and then, 45% for over $50,000,000.00/year (after all deductions);

and then, 47% for over $75,000,000.00/year (after all deductions);

and then, 49% for over $100 million/year (after all deductions).

All of the amounts that these percentages are based on should be adjusted upward every few years to account for inflation.

A top marginal income tax rate of as much as 49% for those married couples making more than $125 million/yr. to support a strong economic system is not unreasonable if we remember that before President John F. Kennedy reduced the top rate in 1964 to 71%, that top Income Tax rate was 81 - 94% for over 20 years, at a time when we became the most prosperous nation this planet has ever witnessed!

I think it fair to say that it is partly because we were one of the first nations ever to tap into the wealth of the ultra-rich with an Income Tax System that it happened here. There is good historical evidence that the decrease in Income Tax rates to such lows of 15% for many of the grossly overpaid, along with ever higher Sales Taxes which affect the poor and middle class the most, has reversed the lowered poverty rates that we were seeing just a few decades ago and widened the gap between the the richest and the poor.

And of course we should simplify the Income Tax Code/Forms by removing conflicting language.

Other important reforms should include:

Removing the Stock Wash Trade Rule presently limited to non-professionals.

Allowing full claim, in the year occurred, all capital losses, presently limited to $3,000/year.

Eliminating the 15% rate now allowed to those holding securities longer than 1 year.

Combine capital gains with income and payroll taxes for the same graduated tax rates. In the interest of fairness, the grossly overpaid who make their money on the rise of stock prices shouldn’t be allowed to pay a smaller percentage than the middle class who work hard for their money.

And yes, those who have benefited the most from our system should pay with equal sacrifice.

It is important to note that RAISING TAX RATES, after deductions, on the grossly overpaid will cause them to INVEST to GET THOSE DEDUCTIONS, and THOSE INVESTMENTS WILL STIMULATE OUR ECONOMY.

And, leaving one individual with more than $51 million (after all deductions) and another with $38,000 (or less) for the year is not socialism; socialism would be leaving them BOTH with $38,000.

The ideal is to have a system that provides us with what we as voters determine desirable to be provided by our government without indebting our children with any more than will benefit them.

It is also important to note that as the "Baby Boomers" move into old age, our Social Security and Medicare systems will be stressed with a bulge in recipients for a few decades that will eventually be passed through; but it will take larger contributions (by these listed rates here & an elimination of the Social Security Income Cap) from the grossly overpaid to maintain the compact that our "Greatest Generation" made for their grandchildren to have medical care and a supplementary income when they become the elderly.

Again, our system should be one of graduated taxation for all of us, which is why we need more tax brackets; not fewer.

http://www.aflcio.or...ghest-Paid-CEOs qz.com/74271

And remember, higher taxes on the grossly overpaid would make it harder for them to buy politicians.

What this chart shows us is that, high taxes on the grossly overpaid did not produce less tax revenue; nor does it show less growth in the economy:

us_fed_debt_20c.png

 

Graduated taxation is FAIR because ALL of US are subject to it as we become richer, or at least we should be (unfortunately, since Reagan that ceased to be true, as the tax BURDEN was shifted away from the very rich and onto the backs of the middle class and barely rich:

 

.CNQqqomVAAALlEn.jpgCYhm8a0UQAIiww4.jpg

CYhm8keU0AAN-eH.jpgClbe6PeVAAE4fIj.jpg

 

And finally, if we we are truly worried about earned entitlements and welfare for the disabled bankrupting our safety-nets, then we need to eliminate the Social Security income cap to save Social Security, and make Medicare a graduated taxation on all income to save and expand it as a Public Health Option for all of us, because we all deserve a secure retirement and health care in our senior years, and we can ensure that most easily as a nation, rather than trying to rely on individual companies that too often file bankruptcy while giving their grossly overpaid CEO's enormous "GOLDEN PARACHUTE RETIREMENTS" while at the same time screwing the rest of their employees in their elderly years.

 

To repeat, it is easier for all of US to have our Government provide our retirement income and health assistance than it is for those who use our labor to enrich themselves to provide US with pensions and health care, since owners & bosses change all the time.

 

https://twitter.com/...405103303974913

 

https://twitter.com/supraTruth/status/806281127509966848

 

 

All this is so, all is TRUE. We HAD decades where the Super Rich INVESTED..rolled it over.. because tax rates were HIGH and we PROSPERED. WISER...less brainwashed nations HAVE HEALTH Insurance Systems that work WAY better for LESS cost.

 

Are Americans SUCKERS? Fools? YES.....Obviously. Who ELECTED a gang of FEUDALISTS and Con Artists? Poor Rednecks who ain't in the 1%. Willfull ignorance can COST you bigly.

In FEUDALISM.. the Serfs ranked below cattle. Democracy is supposed to b about the interests of the AVERAGE guy ( likely most of us here)

 

We HAVE a delusional faction that's into cult,emotional crap.. and they fail to see how USED and abused they ARE how they are USED in a VAST PLOT to drag this nation DOWN. Friggin bogus "patriots" who think an urge to SHOOT other Americans is "Patriot"? WTF? They are SELLING OUT.......dirt cheap.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All this is so, all is TRUE. We HAD decades where the Super Rich INVESTED..rolled it over.. because tax rates were HIGH and we PROSPERED. WISER...less brainwashed nations HAVE HEALTH Insurance Systems that work WAY better for LESS cost.

 

Are Americans SUCKERS? Fools? YES.....Obviously. Who ELECTED a gang of FEUDALISTS and Con Artists? Poor Rednecks who ain't in the 1%. Willfull ignorance can COST you bigly.

In FEUDALISM.. the Serfs ranked below cattle. Democracy is supposed to b about the interests of the AVERAGE guy ( likely most of us here)

 

We HAVE a delusional faction that's into cult,emotional crap.. and they fail to see how USED and abused they ARE how they are USED in a VAST PLOT to drag this nation DOWN. Friggin bogus "patriots" who think an urge to SHOOT other Americans is "Patriot"? WTF? They are SELLING OUT.......dirt cheap.

 

I don't see anything wrong with a Feudal system where serfs can be tied to the land in hereditary servitude and ranked below cattle. This would restore honor and servitude to God.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

U don't understand what's fair! Taking away by taxes from those who have very little so that those who have EVERYthing can have EVEN MORE LEFT OVER to invest & WASTE is not fair.

 

It is what each has left after taxes & BASICS that U FAIL to understand.

 

This idiot wants to raise prices @Walmart & on TV's & smart phones, ETC.!

 

Not about jealousy, but u are too much of a partisan idiot to understand that.

lol

Yea, prices will go up on foreign shit

But so will wages

More will have jobs and disposable income due to higher wages

 

You would rather keep everyone poor so all they can afford is cheap foreign shit from Walmart

 

Sacrifice Americans for your precious globalism

Your jealousy tax has been and will continue to be rejected by pretty much everyone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

U almost get it.

 

Quote

 

So U would tax some1 earning $1,000/yr. $100? Yes. Or even if they earned $10,000/yr. $1,000? Yes. Where would they get it? If they "earned" it, they already have it.

 

 

TAXES BEFORE FOOD? SOUNDS ABOUT RIGHT FOR AN idiot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A national sales tax with the first $xx,xxx (fill in the number) exempt is the most fair and most likely to have the highest compliance rate.

 

"Rich" people spend a great deal more money, therefore will pay much more in taxes. No deductions, loopholes etc.

 

Think of all the opportunity costs with so much time NOT being spent on compliance. Although tax-attorneys may not be for this...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A national sales tax with the first $xx,xxx (fill in the number) exempt is the most fair and most likely to have the highest compliance rate.

 

"Rich" people spend a great deal more money, therefore will pay much more in taxes. No deductions, loopholes etc.

 

Think of all the opportunity costs with so much time NOT being spent on compliance. Although tax-attorneys may not be for this...

ELITELY OVERPAID CEOs may spend more, but they still have MUCH MORE LEFT OVER after doing so than the poorly or middle class.paid;

 

Replying to @realDonaldTrump

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ELITELY OVERPAID CEOs may spend more, but they still have MUCH MORE LEFT OVER after doing so than the poorly or middle class.paid;

Doesn't matter. You have no right to their money, dumbass.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Doesn't matter. You have no right to their money, dumbass.

Tell it to George Washington who borrowed money for the Revolution & paid it back with taxes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A national sales tax with the first $xx,xxx (fill in the number) exempt is the most fair and most likely to have the highest compliance rate.

 

"Rich" people spend a great deal more money, therefore will pay much more in taxes. No deductions, loopholes etc.

 

Think of all the opportunity costs with so much time NOT being spent on compliance. Although tax-attorneys may not be for this...

 

Tax attorneys will still be working w/ businesses to ensure that the materials they buy to make their product isn't taxed.

 

The IRS will still be working over business's cash registers for the Fed tribute mandated by congress.

 

The rest of us will merely pay all the bill like we do anyways.

 

State's will still be able to drive businesses and the wealthy out of their states by having income tax.

 

 

 

 

 

kj

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

TAXES BEFORE FOOD? SOUNDS ABOUT RIGHT FOR AN idiot.

If you "feel" that strongly about it, figure out the least anyone can get by on for food and then everyone, rich or poor, can take that deduction before taxes. Food before taxes, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Doesn't matter. You have no right to their money, dumbass.

I've said before, the liberal tyrants idea of what's fair in taxation, is based solely on what you have left over after paying what is fair, fair being the same percentage. Their true idea of fairness in taxation is everyone keeping the same amount and government gets the rest. But truly I tell you, I believe there are some of these leftist liberal tyrants that would go even further, that is, they believe it would be fair to force the highest earner to keep less than the lowest earner after being taxed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

All of everything below is why I believe we should create a computer program that provides graduated taxation from the medium income to the grossly overpaid, with a top tax bracket of 49% after all deductions.

 

Why should those paid 99% of the income not pay 99% of the taxes instead of only: http://www.cnsnews.c...ent-all-federal ?

 

What is too often forgotten is that those who benefit the most from our system need to support our system the most. They, the CEO's of corporations, need educated workers, and their workers deserve a decent retirement when they are too old to still work. And it is easier for all of us to have our Government provide that retirement and health assistance for those elderly than it is for those CEO's who use their labor to enrich themselves, since owners and bosses change.

 

Also, those CEO's need infrastructure to move their products and employees, and again, government can do that best because of right-of-ways and system longevity.

 

And, of course there is needed policing and defense, again best done by government, OUR U.S.A. GOVERNMENT of WE THE PEOPLE.

 

It is not about raising taxes, it is about shifting the tax burden back to the grossly overpaid, and off the backs of the middle class, barely rich and Public Debt. And there is absolutely no justification for our getting it backwards for the last 30 years.

 

For our system to be fair to all of us, we need more tax brackets; not fewer; graduated taxation for all of us on ALL income.

 

When President Obama signed the extension of the Bush Tax Cuts for the grossly overpaid, he said that we as Americans need to have a national discussion about taxes. The following is a proposal that attempts to return our tax system to one that requires a more equitable share of sacrifice from MULTI-MILLIONAIRES and BILLIONAIRES.

For some 20 years, as we became the most prosperous nation on this planet ever (after all, we paid down WWII Debt and built a space program that landed men on the moon), there were 24 Income Tax Brackets; now there are only 7 Income Tax Brackets. http://en.wikipedia....e_United_States And those earlier years were very good times, with plenty of jobs for everyone.

Contrary to popular opinion, we need more Income Tax Brackets, not fewer.

Below are 16 Marginal Income Tax Brackets that would return us to graduated taxation for the very rich (this is only an example):

No income taxes for any married couple/family with a net income of less than $40,000.00 (after all deductions);

5% for over $40,000.00/year (after all deductions);

and then, 10% for over $80,000.00/year (after all deductions);

and then, 12% for over $100,000.00/year (after all deductions);

and then, 15% for over $200,000.00/year (after all deductions);

and then, 20% for over $300,000.00/year (after all deductions);

and then, 25% for over $500,000.00/year (after all deductions);

and then, 27% for over $800,000.00/year (after all deductions);

and then, 30% for over $1,000,000.00/year (after all deductions);

and then, 33% for over $2,000,000.00/year (after all deductions);

and then, 35% for over $3,000,000.00/year (after all deductions);

and then, 38% for over $5,000,000.00/year (after all deductions);

and then, 40% for over $10,000,000.00/year (after all deductions);

and then, 42% for over $25,000,000.00/year (after all deductions);

and then, 45% for over $50,000,000.00/year (after all deductions);

and then, 47% for over $75,000,000.00/year (after all deductions);

and then, 49% for over $100 million/year (after all deductions).

All of the amounts that these percentages are based on should be adjusted upward every few years to account for inflation.

A top marginal income tax rate of as much as 49% for those married couples making more than $125 million/yr. to support a strong economic system is not unreasonable if we remember that before President John F. Kennedy reduced the top rate in 1964 to 71%, that top Income Tax rate was 81 - 94% for over 20 years, at a time when we became the most prosperous nation this planet has ever witnessed!

I think it fair to say that it is partly because we were one of the first nations ever to tap into the wealth of the ultra-rich with an Income Tax System that it happened here. There is good historical evidence that the decrease in Income Tax rates to such lows of 15% for many of the grossly overpaid, along with ever higher Sales Taxes which affect the poor and middle class the most, has reversed the lowered poverty rates that we were seeing just a few decades ago and widened the gap between the the richest and the poor.

And of course we should simplify the Income Tax Code/Forms by removing conflicting language.

Other important reforms should include:

Removing the Stock Wash Trade Rule presently limited to non-professionals.

Allowing full claim, in the year occurred, all capital losses, presently limited to $3,000/year.

Eliminating the 15% rate now allowed to those holding securities longer than 1 year.

Combine capital gains with income and payroll taxes for the same graduated tax rates. In the interest of fairness, the grossly overpaid who make their money on the rise of stock prices shouldn’t be allowed to pay a smaller percentage than the middle class who work hard for their money.

And yes, those who have benefited the most from our system should pay with equal sacrifice.

It is important to note that RAISING TAX RATES, after deductions, on the grossly overpaid will cause them to INVEST to GET THOSE DEDUCTIONS, and THOSE INVESTMENTS WILL STIMULATE OUR ECONOMY.

And, leaving one individual with more than $51 million (after all deductions) and another with $38,000 (or less) for the year is not socialism; socialism would be leaving them BOTH with $38,000.

The ideal is to have a system that provides us with what we as voters determine desirable to be provided by our government without indebting our children with any more than will benefit them.

It is also important to note that as the "Baby Boomers" move into old age, our Social Security and Medicare systems will be stressed with a bulge in recipients for a few decades that will eventually be passed through; but it will take larger contributions (by these listed rates here & an elimination of the Social Security Income Cap) from the grossly overpaid to maintain the compact that our "Greatest Generation" made for their grandchildren to have medical care and a supplementary income when they become the elderly.

Again, our system should be one of graduated taxation for all of us, which is why we need more tax brackets; not fewer.

http://www.aflcio.or...ghest-Paid-CEOs qz.com/74271

And remember, higher taxes on the grossly overpaid would make it harder for them to buy politicians.

What this chart shows us is that, high taxes on the grossly overpaid did not produce less tax revenue; nor does it show less growth in the economy:

us_fed_debt_20c.png

 

Graduated taxation is FAIR because ALL of US are subject to it as we become richer, or at least we should be (unfortunately, since Reagan that ceased to be true, as the tax BURDEN was shifted away from the very rich and onto the backs of the middle class and barely rich:

 

.CNQqqomVAAALlEn.jpgCYhm8a0UQAIiww4.jpg

CYhm8keU0AAN-eH.jpgClbe6PeVAAE4fIj.jpg

 

And finally, if we we are truly worried about earned entitlements and welfare for the disabled bankrupting our safety-nets, then we need to eliminate the Social Security income cap to save Social Security, and make Medicare a graduated taxation on all income to save and expand it as a Public Health Option for all of us, because we all deserve a secure retirement and health care in our senior years, and we can ensure that most easily as a nation, rather than trying to rely on individual companies that too often file bankruptcy while giving their grossly overpaid CEO's enormous "GOLDEN PARACHUTE RETIREMENTS" while at the same time screwing the rest of their employees in their elderly years.

 

To repeat, it is easier for all of US to have our Government provide our retirement income and health assistance than it is for those who use our labor to enrich themselves to provide US with pensions and health care, since owners & bosses change all the time.

 

https://twitter.com/...405103303974913

 

https://twitter.com/supraTruth/status/806281127509966848

 

 

AGREE... 100%

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Doesn't matter. You have no right to their money, dumbass.

What is the difference between having $500 million vs $700 million? Or $10 billion vs. $12 billion?

 

At a certain point it goes from sickening rich to just stupid.

 

I'm sure dip shits like you would be fine with eventually .5 % of the population owning 99.5% of everything because "they earned it and deserve it".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://twitter.com/supraTruth/status/887560126889996288

Just stupid to let the ELITELY pd. of even more than $300M in a yr. that don't even want to pay their employees $15/hr. to SKATE on GRADUATED taxation that the middle class & BARELY rich are subject to.

Not fair that the ELITELY OVERPAID are in same TAX BRACKET as a family EARNING $1/2M https://twitter.com/supraTruth/status/869111874045919232 

https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2016-golden-parachutes/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/17/2017 at 5:55 PM, rightturnsonly said:

I've said before, the liberal tyrants idea of what's fair in taxation, is based solely on what you have left over after paying what is fair, fair being the same percentage. Their true idea of fairness in taxation is everyone keeping the same amount and government gets the rest. But truly I tell you, I believe there are some of these leftist liberal tyrants that would go even further, that is, they believe it would be fair to force the highest earner to keep less than the lowest earner after being taxed.

Such a whopper of a lie.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

JFK. Economic Club of New York. Dec. 14, 1962.

But the most direct and significant kind of Federal action aiding economic growth is to make possible an increase in private consumption and investment demand--to cut the fetters which hold back private spending. In the past, this could be done in part by the increased use of credit and monetary tools, but our balance of payments situation today places limits on our use of those tools for expansion. It could also be done by increasing Federal expenditures more rapidly than necessary, but such a course would soon demoralize both the Government and our economy. If Government is to retain the confidence of the people, it must not spend more than can be justified on grounds of national need or spent with maximum efficiency. I shall say more on this in a moment.
The final and best means of strengthening demand among consumers and business is to reduce the burden on private income and the deterrents to private initiative which are imposed by our present tax system; and this administration pledged itself last summer to an across-the-board, top-to-bottom cut in personal and corporate income taxes to be enacted and become effective in 1963.
I am not talking about a "quickie" or a temporary tax cut, which would be more appropriate if a recession were imminent. Nor am I talking about giving the economy a mere shot in the arm, to ease some temporary complaint. I am talking about the accumulated evidence of the last 5 years that our present tax system, developed as it was, in good part, during World War II to restrain growth, exerts too heavy a drag on growth in peace time; that it siphons out of the private economy too large a share of personal and business purchasing power; that it reduces the financial incentives for personal effort, investment, and risk-taking.
In short, to increase demand and lift the economy, the Federal Government's most useful role is not to rush into a program of excessive increases in public expenditures, but to expand the incentives and opportunities for private expenditures.
Under these circumstances, any new tax legislation--and you can understand that under the comity which exists in the United States Constitution whereby the Ways and Means Committee in the House of Representatives have the responsibility of initiating this legislation, that the details of any proposal should wait on the meeting of the Congress in January. But you can understand that under these circumstances, in general, that any new tax legislation enacted next year should meet the following three tests:
First, it should reduce net taxes by a sufficiently early date and a sufficiently large amount to do the job required. Early action could give us extra leverage, added results, and important insurance against recession. Too large a tax cut, of course, could result in inflation and insufficient future revenues--but the greatest danger is a tax cut too little or too late to be effective.
Second, the new tax bill must increase private consumption as well as investment. Consumers are still spending between 92 and 94 'percent of their after-tax income, as they have every year since 1950. But that after-tax income could and should be greater, providing stronger markets for the products of American industry. When consumers purchase more goods, plants use more of their capacity, men are hired instead of laid off, investment increases and profits are high.
Corporate tax rates must also be cut to increase incentives and the availability of investment capital. The Government has already taken major steps this year to reduce business tax liability and to stimulate the modernization, replacement, and expansion of our productive plant and equipment. We have done this through the 1962 investment tax credit and through the liberalization of depreciation allowances--two essential parts of our first step in tax revision which amounted to a 10 percent reduction in corporate income taxes worth $2.5 billion. Now we need to increase consumer demand to make these measures fully effective--demand which will make more use of existing capacity and thus increase both profits and the incentive to invest. In fact, profits after taxes would be at least 15 percent higher today if we were operating at full employment.
For all these reasons, next year's tax bill should reduce personal as well as corporate income taxes, for those in the lower brackets, who are certain to spend their additional take-home pay, and for those in the middle and upper brackets, who can thereby be encouraged to undertake additional efforts and enabled to invest more capital.
Third, the new tax bill should improve both the equity and the simplicity of our present tax system. This means the enactment of long-needed tax reforms, a broadening of the tax base and the elimination or modification of many special tax privileges. These steps are not only needed to recover lost revenue and thus make possible a larger cut in present rates; they are also tied directly to our goal of greater growth. For the present patchwork of special provisions and preferences lightens the tax load of some only at the cost of placing a heavier burden on others. It distorts economic judgments and channels an undue amount of energy into efforts to avoid tax liabilities. It makes certain types of less productive activity more profitable than other more valuable undertakings. All this inhibits our growth and efficiency, as well as considerably complicating the work of both the taxpayer and the Internal Revenue Service.
These various exclusions and concessions have been justified in part as a means of overcoming oppressively high rates in the upper brackets--and a sharp reduction in those rates, accompanied by base-broadening, loophole-closing measures, would properly make the new rates not only lower but also more widely applicable. Surely this is more equitable on both counts.
Those are the three tests which the right kind of bill must meet and I am confident that the enactment of the right bill next year will in due course increase our gross national product by several times the amount of taxes actually cut. Profit margins will be improved and both the incentive to invest and the supply of internal funds for investment will be increased. There will be new interest in taking risks, in increasing productivity, in creating new jobs and new products for long-term economic growth.
Other national problems, moreover, will be aided by full employment. It will encourage the location of new plants in areas of labor surplus and provide new jobs for workers that we are retraining and facilitate the adjustment which will be necessary under our new trade expansion bill and reduce a number of government expenditures.
It will not, I'm confident, revive an inflationary spiral or adversely affect our balance of payments. If the economy today were operating close to capacity levels with little unemployment, or if a sudden change in our military requirements should cause a scramble for men and resources, then I would oppose tax reductions as irresponsible and inflationary; and I would not hesitate to recommend a tax increase, if that were necessary. But our resources and manpower are not being fully utilized; the general level of prices has been remarkably stable; and increased competition, both at home and abroad, along with increased productivity will help keep both prices and wages within appropriate limits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, supraTruth said:

Such a whopper of a lie.

Truly I tell you, that is what is in your heart.  You despise the rich so much, that you would tax them below the poorest among us if you could have what your heart desires.  Social justice.  It isn't enough to bring the rich down to the level of the poor, but since they knew what it was like to be rich, they must be made to know what it is like to be even poorer than the poor to even things out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/27/2017 at 5:55 PM, rightturnsonly said:

Truly I tell you, that is what is in your heart.  You despise the rich so much, that you would tax them below the poorest among us if you could have what your heart desires.  Social justice.  It isn't enough to bring the rich down to the level of the poor, but since they knew what it was like to be rich, they must be made to know what it is like to be even poorer than the poor to even things out.

Just NOT true; so why CONtinue to repeat this OBVIOUS LIE?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/27/2017 at 12:53 PM, supraTruth said:

Such a whopper of a lie.

Don't pretend you wouldn't like to see Trump with less than nothing in his wallet.  You'd steal that too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/27/2017 at 11:01 AM, superds77 said:

Can you define 'fair share' for us? SPECIFICALLY?

Graduated taxation on all income for ALL of US is "fair share" for ALL of US:

All of everything below is why I believe we should create a computer program that provides graduated taxation from the medium income to the grossly overpaid, with a top tax bracket of 49% after all deductions.

 

Why should those paid 99% of the income not pay 99% of the taxes instead of only:http://www.cnsnews.c...ent-all-federal ?

 

What is too often forgotten is that those who benefit the most from our system need to support our system the most. They, the CEO's of corporations, need educated workers, and their workers deserve a decent retirement when they are too old to still work. And it is easier for all of us to have our Government provide that retirement and health assistance for those elderly than it is for those CEO's who use their labor to enrich themselves, since owners and bosses change.

 

Also, those CEO's need infrastructure to move their products and employees, and again, government can do that best because of right-of-ways and system longevity.

 

And, of course there is needed policing and defense, again best done by government, OUR U.S.A. GOVERNMENT of WE THE PEOPLE.

 

It is not about raising taxes, it is about shifting the tax burden back to the ELITELY OVERPAID and off the backs of the middle class, barely rich and Public Debt. And there is absolutely no justification for our getting it backwards for the last 30 years.

 

For our system to be fair to all of us, we need more tax brackets; not fewer; graduated taxation for all of us on ALL income.

 

When President Obama signed the extension of the Bush Tax Cuts for the grossly overpaid, he said that we as Americans need to have a national discussion about taxes. The following is a proposal that attempts to return our tax system to one that requires a more equitable share of sacrifice from MULTI-MILLIONAIRES andBILLIONAIRES.

 

For some 20 years, as we became the most prosperous nation on this planet ever (after all, we paid down WWII Debt and built a space program that landed men on the moon), there were 24 Income Tax Brackets; now there are only 7 Income Tax Brackets. http://en.wikipedia....e_United_States And those earlier years were very good times, with plenty of jobs for everyone.

 

Contrary to popular opinion, we need more Income Tax Brackets, not fewer.

 

Below are 16 Marginal Income Tax Brackets that would return us to graduated taxation for the very rich (this is only an example):

 

No income taxes for any married couple/family with a net income of less than $40,000.00 (after all deductions);

5% for over $40,000.00/year (after all deductions);

and then, 10% for over $80,000.00/year (after all deductions);

and then, 12% for over $100,000.00/year (after all deductions);

and then, 15% for over $200,000.00/year (after all deductions);

and then, 20% for over $300,000.00/year (after all deductions);

and then, 25% for over $500,000.00/year (after all deductions);

and then, 27% for over $800,000.00/year (after all deductions);

and then, 30% for over $1,000,000.00/year (after all deductions);

and then, 33% for over $2,000,000.00/year (after all deductions);

and then, 35% for over $3,000,000.00/year (after all deductions);

and then, 38% for over $5,000,000.00/year (after all deductions);

and then, 40% for over $10,000,000.00/year (after all deductions);

and then, 42% for over $25,000,000.00/year (after all deductions);

and then, 45% for over $50,000,000.00/year (after all deductions);

and then, 47% for over $75,000,000.00/year (after all deductions);

and then, 49% for over $100 million/year (after all deductions).

 

All of the amounts that these percentages are based on should be adjusted upward every few years to account for inflation.

 

A top marginal income tax rate of as much as 49% for those married couples making more than $125 million/yr. to support a strong economic system is not unreasonable if we remember that before President John F. Kennedy reduced the top rate in 1964 to 71%, that top Income Tax rate was 81 - 94% for over 20 years, at a time when we became the most prosperous nation this planet has ever witnessed!

 

I think it fair to say that it is partly because we were one of the first nations ever to tap into the wealth of the ultra-rich with an Income Tax System that it happened here. There is good historical evidence that the decrease in Income Tax rates to such lows of 15% for many of the grossly overpaid, along with ever higher Sales Taxes which affect the poor and middle class the most, has reversed the lowered poverty rates that we were seeing just a few decades ago and widened the gap between the the richest and the poor.

 

And of course we should simplify the Income Tax Code/Forms by removing conflicting language.

 

Other important reforms should include:

Removing the Stock Wash Trade Rule presently limited to non-professionals.

Allowing full claim, in the year occurred, all capital losses, presently limited to $3,000/year.

Eliminating the 15% rate now allowed to those holding securities longer than 1 year.

Combine capital gains with income and payroll taxes for the same graduated tax rates. In the interest of fairness, the grossly overpaid who make their money on the rise of stock prices shouldn’t be allowed to pay a smaller percentage than the middle class who work hard for their money.

 

And yes, those who have benefited the most from our system should pay with equal sacrifice.

It is important to note that RAISING TAX RATES, after deductions, on the grossly overpaid will cause them to INVEST to GET THOSE DEDUCTIONS, and THOSE INVESTMENTS WILL STIMULATE OUR ECONOMY.

 

And, leaving one individual with more than $51 million (after all deductions) and another with $38,000 (or less) for the year is not socialism; socialism would be leaving them BOTH with $38,000.

 

The ideal is to have a system that provides us with what we as voters determine desirable to be provided by ourgovernment without indebting our children with any more than will benefit them.

 

It is also important to note that as the "Baby Boomers" move into old age, our Social Security and Medicare systems will be stressed with a bulge in recipients for a few decades that will eventually be passed through; but it will take larger contributions (by these listed rates here & an elimination of the Social Security Income Cap) from the grossly overpaid to maintain the compact that our "Greatest Generation" made for their grandchildren to have medical care and a supplementary income when they become the elderly.

 

Again, our system should be one of graduated taxation for all of us, which is why we need more tax brackets; not fewer.

 

http://www.aflcio.or...ghest-Paid-CEOs qz.com/74271

 

And remember, higher taxes on the grossly overpaid would make it harder for them to buy politicians.

 

What this chart shows us is that, high taxes on the grossly overpaid did not produce less tax revenue; nor does it show less growth in the economy:

us_fed_debt_20c.png

 

Graduated taxation is FAIR because ALL of US are subject to it as we become richer, or at least we should be; unfortunately, since Reagan that ceased to be true, as the tax BURDEN was shifted away from the very rich and onto the backs of the middle class and barely rich:

 

.CNQqqomVAAALlEn.jpgCYhm8a0UQAIiww4.jpg

CYhm8keU0AAN-eH.jpgClbe6PeVAAE4fIj.jpg

 

And finally, if we we are truly worried about earned entitlements and welfare for the disabled bankrupting our safety-nets, then we need to eliminate the Social Security income cap to save Social Security, and make Medicare a graduated taxation on all income to save and expand it as a Public Health Option for all of us, because we all deserve a secure retirement and health care in our senior years, and we can ensure that most easily as a nation, rather than trying to rely on individual companies that too often file bankruptcy while giving their grossly overpaid CEO's enormous "GOLDEN PARACHUTE RETIREMENTS" while at the same time screwing the rest of their employees in their elderly years.

 

To repeat, it is easier for all of US to have our Government provide our retirement income and health assistance than it is for those who use our labor to enrich themselves to provide US with pensions and health care, since owners & bosses change all the time.

 

https://twitter.com/...405103303974913

https://twitter.com/supraTruth/status/930693933876867074

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/27/2017 at 11:01 AM, superds77 said:

Can you define 'fair share' for us? SPECIFICALLY?

Graduated taxation on all income for ALL of US is "fair share" for ALL of US:

All of everything below is why I believe we should create a computer program that provides graduated taxation from the medium income to the grossly overpaid, with a top tax bracket of 49% after all deductions.

 

Why should those paid 99% of the income not pay 99% of the taxes instead of only:  http://www.cnsnews.c...ent-all-federal ?

 

What is too often forgotten is that those who benefit the most from our system need to support our system the most. They, the CEO's of corporations, need educated workers, and their workers deserve a decent retirement when they are too old to still work. And it is easier for all of us to have our Government provide that retirement and health assistance for those elderly than it is for those CEO's who use their labor to enrich themselves, since owners and bosses change.

 

Also, those CEO's need infrastructure to move their products and employees, and again, government can do that best because of right-of-ways and system longevity.

 

And, of course there is needed policing and defense, again best done by government, OUR U.S.A. GOVERNMENT of WE THE PEOPLE.

 

It is not about raising taxes, it is about shifting the tax burden back to the ELITELY OVERPAID and off the backs of the middle class, barely rich and Public Debt. And there is absolutely no justification for our getting it backwards for the last 30 years.

 

For our system to be fair to all of us, we need more tax brackets; not fewer; graduated taxation for all of us on ALL income.

 

When President Obama signed the extension of the Bush Tax Cuts for the grossly overpaid, he said that we as Americans need to have a national discussion about taxes. The following is a proposal that attempts to return our tax system to one that requires a more equitable share of sacrifice from MULTI-MILLIONAIRES and BILLIONAIRES.

 

For some 20 years, as we became the most prosperous nation on this planet ever (after all, we paid down WWII Debt and built a space program that landed men on the moon), there were 24 Income Tax Brackets; now there are only 7 Income Tax Brackets. http://en.wikipedia....e_United_States And those earlier years were very good times, with plenty of jobs for everyone.

 

Contrary to popular opinion, we need more Income Tax Brackets, not fewer.

 

Below are 16 Marginal Income Tax Brackets that would return us to graduated taxation for the very rich (this is only an example):

 

No income taxes for any married couple/family with a net income of less than $40,000.00 (after all deductions);

5% for over $40,000.00/year (after all deductions);

and then, 10% for over $80,000.00/year (after all deductions);

and then, 12% for over $100,000.00/year (after all deductions);

and then, 15% for over $200,000.00/year (after all deductions);

and then, 20% for over $300,000.00/year (after all deductions);

and then, 25% for over $500,000.00/year (after all deductions);

and then, 27% for over $800,000.00/year (after all deductions);

and then, 30% for over $1 million/year (after all deductions);

and then, 33% for over $2 million/year (after all deductions);

and then, 35% for over $3 million/year (after all deductions);

and then, 38% for over $5 million/year (after all deductions);

and then, 40% for over $10 million/year (after all deductions);

and then, 42% for over $25 million/year (after all deductions);

and then, 45% for over $50 million/year (after all deductions);

and then, 47% for over $75 million/year (after all deductions);

and then, 49% for over $100 million/year (after all deductions).

 

All of the amounts that these percentages are based on should be adjusted upward every few years to account for inflation.

 

A top marginal income tax rate of as much as 49% for those married couples making more than $125 million/yr. to support a strong economic system is not unreasonable if we remember that before President John F. Kennedy reduced the top rate in 1964 to 71%, that top Income Tax rate was 81 - 94% for over 20 years, at a time when we became the most prosperous nation this planet has ever witnessed!

 

I think it fair to say that it is partly because we were one of the first nations ever to tap into the wealth of the ultra-rich with an Income Tax System that it happened here. There is good historical evidence that the decrease in Income Tax rates to such lows of 15% for many of the grossly overpaid, along with ever higher Sales Taxes which affect the poor and middle class the most, has reversed the lowered poverty rates that we were seeing just a few decades ago and widened the gap between the the richest and the poor.

 

And of course we should simplify the Income Tax Code/Forms by removing conflicting language.

 

Other important reforms should include:

Removing the Stock Wash Trade Rule presently limited to non-professionals.

Allowing full claim, in the year occurred, all capital losses, presently limited to $3,000/year.

Eliminating the 15% rate now allowed to those holding securities longer than 1 year.

Combine capital gains with income and payroll taxes for the same graduated tax rates. In the interest of fairness, the grossly overpaid who make their money on the rise of stock prices shouldn’t be allowed to pay a smaller percentage than the middle class who work hard for their money.

 

And yes, those who have benefited the most from our system should pay with equal sacrifice.

It is important to note that RAISING TAX RATES, after deductions, on the grossly overpaid will cause them to INVEST to GET THOSE DEDUCTIONS, and THOSE INVESTMENTS WILL STIMULATE OUR ECONOMY.

 

And, leaving one individual with more than $51 million (after all deductions) and another with $38,000 (or less) for the year is not socialism; socialism would be leaving them BOTH with $38,000.

 

The ideal is to have a system that provides us with what we as voters determine desirable to be provided by ourgovernment without indebting our children with any more than will benefit them.

 

It is also important to note that as the "Baby Boomers" move into old age, our Social Security and Medicare systems will be stressed with a bulge in recipients for a few decades that will eventually be passed through; but it will take larger contributions (by these listed rates here & an elimination of the Social Security Income Cap) from the grossly overpaid to maintain the compact that our "Greatest Generation" made for their grandchildren to have medical care and a supplementary income when they become the elderly.

 

Again, our system should be one of graduated taxation for all of us, which is why we need more tax brackets; not fewer.

 

http://www.aflcio.or...ghest-Paid-CEOs qz.com/74271

 

And remember, higher taxes on the grossly overpaid would make it harder for them to buy politicians.

 

What this chart shows us is that, high taxes on the grossly overpaid did not produce less tax revenue; nor does it show less growth in the economy:

us_fed_debt_20c.png

 

Graduated taxation is FAIR because ALL of US are subject to it as we become richer, or at least we should be; unfortunately, since Reagan that ceased to be true, as the tax BURDEN was shifted away from the very rich and onto the backs of the middle class and barely rich:

 

.CNQqqomVAAALlEn.jpgCYhm8a0UQAIiww4.jpg

CYhm8keU0AAN-eH.jpgClbe6PeVAAE4fIj.jpg

 

And finally, if we we are truly worried about earned entitlements and welfare for the disabled bankrupting our safety-nets, then we need to eliminate the Social Security income cap to save Social Security, and make Medicare a graduated taxation on all income to save and expand it as a Public Health Option for all of us, because we all deserve a secure retirement and health care in our senior years, and we can ensure that most easily as a nation, rather than trying to rely on individual companies that too often file bankruptcy while giving their grossly overpaid CEO's enormous "GOLDEN PARACHUTE RETIREMENTS" while at the same time screwing the rest of their employees in their elderly years.

 

To repeat, it is easier for all of US to have our Government provide our retirement income and health assistance than it is for those who use our labor to enrich themselves to provide US with pensions and health care, since owners & bosses change all the time.

 

https://twitter.com/...405103303974913

https://twitter.com/supraTruth/status/930693933876867074

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All income? Does this mean the bottom 45-50% will have to start paying federal income taxes? 

 

Sign me up. 

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...