% of income you should play in taxes.

Discussion in 'Politics Discussion' started by gmckee1985, Nov 20, 2014.

  1. Muthoni

    Muthoni Guest

    Joined:
    Aug 2014
    Posts:
    247
    Likes Received:
    0
    I think that everybody should pay a set percentage of tax from their income. People living below poverty line should be exempted from paying taxes. Furthermore, they should be helped to raise the standard of living so that they can also contribute to funding the government by eventually being able to pay taxes regularly.
     
  2. My401K

    My401K Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 2014
    Posts:
    221
    Likes Received:
    3
    The tax system varies based on where you live. I don't know much about taxes outside of NY. What most people think is that the tax you pay is just what is with held from your check, the truth is taxation goes well beyond that. When you add it all up you might find that you pay extraordinary high amounts. In NY there is sales tax, there is fuel tax, there is income tax, there are tolls, sewer tax, library tax, state federal and village (or Town) taxes and the list goes on and on. I estimate I pay about 65% of my income in taxes. I really do not make to much and barely am middle class, if even. I would love to see a flat tax but I doubt that will happen before I retire. At the very least I would like to see the state ease back on some of the taxes, 8.075% sales tax is high, I understand the tax on gasoline is also very high, yet no matter what I have to drive and I have to eat. If all the extra money after taxes is used to survive there is no money left for investing or savings and pretty soon we will all depend on the government for our retirements. Not a great plan.
     
  3. Strykstar

    Strykstar Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 2014
    Posts:
    370
    Likes Received:
    1
    That's why I defend a flat tax rate, you can't say that's not fair.
    If you earn little money, you don't pay much, if you're a millionaire, you're doing a big contribution, just have everyone pay, 10% or 15% of their total earning and that seems pretty fair to me.
     
  4. crimsonghost747

    crimsonghost747 Senior Investor

    Joined:
    Mar 2014
    Posts:
    1,722
    Likes Received:
    6
    I disagree about a flat rate being fair. Sure it does sound fair... but put it like this. You are a student, working a part time job. You earn.. say $800 a month. On the other hand you have a rich guy pulling in $7000 a month from his job.

    Say the tax rate is 20%. (which seems more or less realistic) Take 20% from the student, and he is left with $640. Also known as "time to look for food from the garbage."
    Wouldn't it be smarter... and more fair... to have this rich guy pay an extra $160? With 20% he would pay $1400 per month. Add in $160 and the student can go with 0% tax (and eat food :D) while the rich guy pays 22% instead of 20%.

    This is the basic idea behind progressive tax. Add 2% to the high tax brackets, and you can deduct 20% from the lowest one. 2% will not destroy the financials of anyone, but saving 20% on taxes will help those who earn less.
     
  5. Gelsemium

    Gelsemium Senior Investor

    Joined:
    Apr 2014
    Posts:
    937
    Likes Received:
    2
    I am with you crimsong, I feel the richer should pay more taxes because after all they will still have a lot more money after taxes, it's nonsense to make the poor poorer.
     
  6. Strykstar

    Strykstar Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 2014
    Posts:
    370
    Likes Received:
    1
    But they're not paying the same amount, they are paying the same PERCENTAGE, the rich person is still paying more, the richer they are the more they pay.
    You can't expect the top earners to give the poor a free ride, that's not an equal rights society.
     
  7. Fools_RushL_In

    Fools_RushL_In Guest

    Joined:
    Dec 2014
    Posts:
    1
    Likes Received:
    0
    The theory behind progressive taxation is that a certain amount of income is required to exist. Every dollar earned by these people is IMMEDIATELY put into the economy. A flat tax is foolish, as is the notion that people at the lower end of the spectrum must pay income taxes or it's unfair.

    In 2012 I paid a greater percentage in federal income tax than did Mitt Romney. I had $130K of family taxable income (net of $160K before deductions); he grossed $20M. That's a difference of 12,400%, folks.

    The poor pay F.I.C.A. on ALL of their income and a MUCH larger percentage of their income in sales taxes. Most state income taxes are fairly flat as well.

    Perhaps if taxes on the super-rich were higher instead of the historically low rates paid on their obscene salaries, bonuses, and dividends maybe the money would be used to pay their workers better and/or reinvest in their businesses.
     
  8. My401K

    My401K Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 2014
    Posts:
    221
    Likes Received:
    3
    yes, I would love to see something wrote into the convoluted jaragon of the IRS, some sort of provision that would increase corp taxes on corportaions that are showing gains yet have not increased the work forces.

    Sadly those with money also have much more access to ways to differ the tax liabilities. It isn't that everyone deserves to be rich (although I am sure we all would like that) To me it is more about shouldering the burdens equally. I don't know where we are heading with all the changes in taxes, health care and the economy. It feels like the future is sort of bleak regardless of the positive spin the talking heads would have us believe.
     
  9. Gelsemium

    Gelsemium Senior Investor

    Joined:
    Apr 2014
    Posts:
    937
    Likes Received:
    2
    I am not talking about a free ride, but we do see the opposite happen many times, poor people pay taxes while the reach somehow managed to avoid them.
     
  10. JR Ewing

    JR Ewing Super Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2014
    Posts:
    4,950
    Likes Received:
    39
    What actual % did you end up paying in 2012?

    Romney is retired and lives mostly or entirely on passive income generated from investments in retirement savings on money that was already taxed once. He already paid tens of millions or more on his $250 mil net worth fortune when he was earning money.

    I'm all for reinvestment in one's business (which Romney certainly did), but if you are sole or majority owner of a company, you can pay yourself as you see fit. As long as no laws are broken, it's your company. I can choose not to invest in it, not to do business with you, or not work for you if I don't like it.

    If someone earns a billion dollars over 40 years, pays roughly half of that in taxes, spends some of the second half, and invests some of that second half they already paid ~ 50% in state, local, and federal corporate and individual taxes, should they AGAIN pay half on interest, dividends, AND capital gains taxes? Should it ALL be taxed at ~ 50% again? The object of the game is not to MAXIMIZE one's taxable income for themselves or their business - it's to MINIMIZE it. There's nothing "patriotic" about giving the Washington hacks more of your money - I'd rather give some of mine to private charities than just give the govt more of it - much of which is wasted.

     

Share This Page