Let's be real the wealthy have put in so many loopholes and tax dodges etc. As I have stated earlier Warren Buffett's secretary pays more taxes than he.
The rich stop making money and sit on the beach when they have made enough, is that really your argument, are you kidding. You really want to make that argument for lowering taxes.
McCain has 13 cars, 9 houses. People are making generational wealth so their grandkids would never have to work. How much is enough is really a moral question, I believe.
If you need to make billions I think your prioritys are wrong, but I am not for stopping you just pay the proper percentage of the progressive tax rate that has always been in force in this country.
It's silly on another point the corporate tax is high in this country is because none of them pay it, with floors of accountants working daily to figure how not to pay.
How about a consumption tax? I assume the wealthy buy more? exempt food, and medicine?
10 comments:
McCain has 13 cars and 9 houses!! That's just proving our point right there. What do you think the wealthy do with their money? Stuff it under their mattress? No, they buy stuff like cars and houses and they also (get this, this is the birdie putt for the win) Invest it in the market which helps prop up all of our 401k's including the elderly who can't afford to lose 35% of their retirement savings right now.
Ooops, forgot about that little detail didn't we?
Now T, I asked you a direct question.
Jim + Gary -
A Helpful Reminder: When Clinton proposed raising the top end to 39.6%, almost all the Republicans guaranteed that it would cause a recession and make the 1990's look like the 1970's.
Here is a DIRECT QUESTION:
How come Clinton's tax increase was such a success? How did it raise the Treasury receipts to 20%+ of GDP? Wouldn't the disincentive have prevented this overwhelming success?
One more DIRECT QUESTION:
When Dubya cut taxes, what happened to Treasury receipts? What percentage of GDP came in? How did Dubya's receipts compare to Clintons?
Here's a direct answer:
Women entering the workforce during the 90's increased by 24%. Why? Because of the tax increases they could no longer afford to stay home with the kids, which make Clinton's unemployment rate look great and added immensely to the GDP.
Now if we could just get those 12-year-olds off their butts and out in the workforce where they belong we can all give 50% to the government and everybody wins.
Terry,
Do you just make this stuff up or do you have actual real world knowledge about what you post? Your statement about corporate taxes is naive. Where did you pick that up from?
I happen to run a corporate tax department and I can tell you for fact that you are so far off base that it is sick. Is this how the middle of the liberal bell curve thinks? If a corporation is not paying taxes it is because they are not making money. I suppose you would like to change that as well. The tax code has gotten so complex that most corporations can barely get their returns finished in time. We live in a world where corporations are constantly cutting staffs too hold down costs. I have lots of friends who work for a lot of different corporations in tax departments and can say without reservation that due to SOX and the demands for accounting transparancy the majority of corporate tax departments are understaffed and have a hard time just being reactive. Forget about being proactive or performing advanced tax planning. The other thing you fail to realize in your simplistic view of the corporate world is that income taxes are below EBIT, ("earnings before interest and taxes") (in case anyone asks what it stands for) with most corporations having their management bonuses tied to EBIT. Therefore most corporations do not really care about having floors of accountants working daily on figuring how not to pay. You also fail to realize that big corporations also have to pay income taxes in most states, and if not income than some other type of tax like franchise or gross receipts tax. Many states have minimum amounts that a corp. has to pay. There is also property taxes in just about every county in the US. Than you have sales taxes and the monthly responsibilities associated with that. If you are International in scope than things get ultra crazy. A big Corporation is under audit every year so if you believe for a second that they are getting away with something you are vastly mistaken.
On the other hand the US Federal Corporate Income Tax Rate is the second highest in the world. Almost every country besides the US and Japan who have any standing in the business world have cut their corporate tax rates. Look at Ireland. A pretty small country that has always been fairly poor throughout history. They cut their Corporate Tax Rate to 15% and now have more tax revenues from corporations than ever in history. Corporations do move operations to countries with lower tax burdens eventually. sooner or later management does come to realize that cash flow is important too and when you are profitable a corporation has a fiduciary duty to their stockholders to try and raise the price of the stock. It is fairly straight forward in the end and the writing has been on the wall for sometime. If we the US keep our corporate tax rate as high as it is large profitable multi national corporations will eventually move large portions of their operations to countries with a lower tax rate.
I learn a lot from these post's and I really thank you all sincerely. My point in my post is the tax system fair when some one like Buffett pays less than his secretary And I don't want to hear how the trickle down from rich people's buying keeps the economy going. I get that already. Read my earlier post I am not against the rich. It amazes me that the rich who made their wealth in this country under its laws have such a bitch about taxes. Where else can you have accumulated this much money. Obama is asking you to pay a little bit more, what's wrong you can afford it. I can't believe I just said that. Stop worrying, you always end up okay. I do not remember a time in America when the truly rich were jumping out of windows.And don't bring up the depression bring up Nelson Rockefeller. I remember. Jim I have not forgotten your question, I am working with my advisor Bob G, on an answer. He is back and he says he knows where the bodies are buried and is coming on line to answer all your questions.
This is of course a growing and sharing experience for us all. It is also a lot of fun. Actually, no one in power is listening to us.
I always think one can judge a good argument if afterward we can have a beer.
Now... Dr. G will need to have good manners, he of the vigorous debate. (all I can say folks is get ready for some Bombs)
Obama is asking you to pay a little bit more, what's wrong you can afford it. I can't believe I just said that. Stop worrying, you always end up okay.
Addressing this issue specifically, why don't you propose cutting the scope and size of government? Why is the easy way always to collect more?
Admittedly, Bush was unsuccessful, but he tried.
That is my LOL point to the newly converted economic liberals. Your side is cradle to grave care. Social engineering and helping those who need it to climb the ladder. How come shrinking the size of government never comes first before raising taxes.
Gary:
Oh - so the higher taxes add to the workforce, not subtract. What about all those fat cats that just decide to sit it out?
Your explanation doesn't tell us how the take got over 20%/GDP. Housewives certainly weren't raising the average wage...
Facts is facts and they get in your way.
Rich,
Please see my answer to your questions on your post so you can finally stop using statistics out of context that don't mean a rats ass during our current economic situation. I saw T. Boone Pickens on TV last night and even though he has become somewhat of a darling to the liberals lately he stated that it would be stupid to raise taxes during a recession.
Post a Comment