OK folks, we have talked taxes, class warfare, deficits and the horse is almost dead.
I reread all the posts and posit this question.
How about we raise the tax rate 2% for everybody? All fair and square.
Seems fair to me. What say we? 2% 5k, 2% 500K same deal.
I mean if the goal is to eliminate the deficit, let's all participate.
Comments?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
We also must cut spending.
The problem with your proposal is that it doesn't buy Barry any votes.
I think at this moment in time it is probably more important to stabilize the economy and make sure that people keep their jobs. If this thing keeps rolling southward and more companies bankrupt or eliminate large numbers of people from the workforce than revenues will still not increase when you raise taxes. This was part of the problem when we went into the great Depression.
Rome wasn't built in a day and we can't solve one problem by creating an even bigger one.
People are worried now and many are hunkering down. But what doesn't solve any problems is jealously pointing at others in our society who have been very successful with and demanding that you get some of their money because they can afford to give you some. Obama is a master of this and it will come back to him if he wins the election.
Remember: Thou shall not covet thy neighbor's house nor his wife, nor his male servant, nor his female servant, nor his ox, nor his donkey, nor anything that is your neighbor's.
OK, but my point is, to address Rich, why not increase taxes on everyone? If the deficit is so important, let's everyone pitch in.
Can't wait.
Stop it. If you're going to introduce common sense to the proceedings we're all going home. However, what about Mary the single parent in Poughkeepsie NY with a pregnant teenage daughter, no health insurance, a broken carborator, a splintered wisdom tooth, halitosis, crabs, low sex drive, a nasty case of the yips, a glass eye and only two movie channels?
You heartless bastard.
As long as she does not want government funding for her abortion! 0:),
I agree with Mark that we need to cut spending. There is no question about that. Any spending will ultimately need to be paid for with tax dollars.
We also need to be careful about raising taxes in a recession. I am very comfortable raising taxes on the top end since there is an abundance of wealth to be tapped and recent history shows that a top end of 39.6% does not impair growth. I completely acknowledge that there is a point where there are diminishing returns and thus I'm quite satisfied topping out at that tried and true number.
If we are taxing the lower ends and the middle it will reduce consumption, which is the last thing you want to do in a recession. No increases except for the top end.
I advocate revenue neutral carbon taxes right now to be offset by a 50% +/- reduction in payroll taxes (employer and employee sides). Obviously, a portion of the carbon tax, as well as changes described below, would be dedicated to FICA/Med so that it is - again - revenue neutral.
Since consumers are able to modify their energy consumption, this would be a tax cut for those that choose to do so.
I would remove the cap on the payroll tax. I would add a second AMT - Alternative MAXIMUM Tax - so that taxpayers will not be subject to total income taxes in excess of 39.6%.
I would treat dividends as business expenses on corporate returns thus eliminating double taxation of corporate profits and dividends. I will be able to afford this due to the payroll tax cap elimination noted above. I would also eliminate all the loopholes so that reported corporate earnings are the same as taxable corporate earnings.
I would consequently raise the tax on dividends back to that of ordinary income, just as in the '90s.
I would raise the capital gains tax back to 20%, as it was in the 1990's. This rate would still be roughly half of ordinary income tax rate, which is favored treatment by any definition.
I would tax all estates at the capital gains rate as if the assets were sold on the date of death. I would maintain the spousal exemption.
I would create a new inheritance tax, the rate to mirror that of ordinary income after first $100K, with the proceeds to be applied off budget, directly to retirement of federal government debt. This would begin to structurally address our debt problem and assist in building credibility with world financial markets (our creditors).
Speaking of which - I am amazed that anyone wants to buy our bonds. We have to get our financial house in order ASAP, before the market loses confidence and asks us to pay higher and higher rates on Treasuries. Our creditors need to know the adults are in charge and that we have a plan in place to balance the budget and pay down the debt that we have so aggressively piled up. Its what any creditor would expect from a debt-laden borrower.
That's it for now. More later.
Post a Comment