The Wealthy Do Pay Income Taxes

I understand that you guys selfishly want to pay no taxes, but my answer applies globally too. Do you know how much wealth is stored offshore?

 

So I guess Prager U. has a bad reputation?

But can you dismiss their argument about the laffer curve peeking at the 33% tax rate ???

 

Let's not forget that France raised its tax rate to 70% and all the rich people fled.

You can't raise the tax rate too high.

 

Actually, there is a significant difference. Wealth is accumulated assets and requires no income. Income is money earned.

because the wealthy generally dont earn high incomes. Their money comes from other means, such as capital gains. Claiming the rich dont pay enough income taxes and they need to be raised is no different than saying the middle class dont pay their fair share of capital gains taxes and they should be raised on them.

There is no obligation between wealth and need to pay more for anything.

How does taxing successful people change median income for the middle class?
How does higher taxes change who pays for politicians?
How does higher taxes change the fact that kids today are unmotivated morons without the motivation to get a decent education?

The answer to all of these is that it doesnt. You just want to punish the rich for being more successful than you.

 

Well, then "saint" Reagan is off limits, also, being decades ago.

 

Wealth is accumulated income.
I once thought the flat tax was fair, until it was pointed out what a windfall for the wealthy it would be.
Yes, the rich need to pay more - as they did in earlier years.
Disagreeing with your ideology does not make my points worthless.

 

Do you seriously not see a difference between the post WW2 boom and the 80's? I will give you that there is also significant difference between the 80's and today, but they are not as significant.

Wealth is accumulated assets, not income.

I dont understand your view of fair. How can anything be more fair than everyone paying the same percentage? A flat tax would not just be salary either. It would be proceeds from all income streams. Whether they be salaries, capital gains, trust funds, or annuities.

 

Are you suggesting that wealth - at some point- was not earned ?

You are speaking nonsense and creating a straw man. Who said that income tax should be the only tax ? The poor do not pay capital gains tax because they have no capital gains.

What does any of this have to do with paying taxes on the basis of wealth or even total income.

According to who. Standing on a soap box and making a naked claim is not an argument for much. Why should there not be a tax on wealth ?

One thing that we probably can agree on is that we have way too much gov't. That said, back in the 50's/60's the corporate/worker tax split was 50/50. Now it is 20/80. Obviously the middle class is paying the corps share of the taxes and would have more money if they did not have to shoulder this burden.

Perhaps you are happy about paying McDonalds share of the taxes (they need roads, police, sewage, infrastructure just as much as you do) but I am not.

Those who are successful (make money via capital gains) get a huge tax break. Why should they not pay the same on income as the middle class on income earned through labor.

You are spouting ingested doctrine fed to you by the robber barons who create this propaganda to keep the worker in a state of indentured servitude.


.

 

I knew you would deny what history proves.

 

Well it's not just me. You say illogical and ridiculous things to anyone with whom you disagree. "Wealth is accumulated assets" that are bought with income. duh.

If you don't know the difference between the 80s and today, you are dreadfully uninformed.

Since the corporate elite already take the bulk of what the workers produce, a flat tax on them just lets them get away with it. But of course you can't see that.

 

Im saying wealth was taxed in the year it was earned as income.

It isnt a strawman. The middle class pay their 15% capital gains on their investments just like everyone else. the difference is that they rarely see taxes that are paid by their IRAs.

According to the same sources that claim the rich do have that obligation. Because that wealth was already taxed once, when it was earned as income.

You can blame globalists for most of those wage differences. The US has lost a ver large percentage of the higher paying manufacturing jobs in the US because of the corporate taxes and workers wages in this country. I posted an article a few days ago about how $3k of every big 3 car you buy goes to legacy costs.

The top 10% of income earners pay like 75% of taxes. How does that make the middle class paying the lions share?

I dont see what McDonalds has to do with anything. They pay people minimum wage for unskilled labor and their crappy food is still expensive. You want to raise their wages to $15 and pay the added costs of their food, and everything else? As it is, many of their employees are going to replaced in the near future anyways.

Im not sure what that has to do with taxes though.

Those who are successful (make money via capital gains) get a huge tax break. Why should they not pay the same on income as the middle class on income earned through labor.

You are spouting ingested doctrine fed to you by the robber barons who create this propaganda to keep the worker in a state of indentured servitude.


.[/QUOTE]

 

Your utopian socialist society in which everyone lives on the same scraps, regardless of effort or talent will come eventually. Those like you already outnumber people who wish to succeed or fail based on our own.

 

Agreed.
.

So what. The costs of protecting that wealth - and providing the wealthy with various services have gone up.

So what .. If someone is earning 1 billion dollars a year ... should they not pay more than someone earning 20,000 ? You are spewing spoon fed robber baron propaganda.

What part of "you are paying McDonalds share of the Taxes" did you not understand ?

 

Not true my friend. Greed is wanting more than you got. Not wanting to share is stingy. If you want more, then work for it, don't expect the government to take it from someone else and give it to you. If you are stingy with what you work for and don't want to share, that is your business.

 

Not according to your MessiahRushie!!!! If they are paying income tax, then they will NOT become wealthy.
The Truth About Taxes
August 6, 2007

RUSH: I've told you before: the income tax is designed to keep people like his [Buffett's] secretary from becoming wealthy! There is no "wealth" tax. So this is a big misnomer. ...
But there's no tax on wealth. There is a tax on income, and the tax on income is designed to keep everybody who is not wealthy from getting there.
I'm talking about genuine wealth, not the way Democrats define "rich."

August 7, 2007
CALLER: And, you know, and the way our tax system works, we have an overly complex system, which in and of itself is a problem, but the way our tax system works and the way the tax laws are written, it's based on a few kind of like hinge numbers like adjusted gross income and taxable income, and while the soak the rich -- or however you choose to describe it -- really doesn't come down that way. It really comes down to much lower income levels.

RUSH: It does, exactly, and here's the dirty little secret if you ever to pull it off. It's hard. This is why most people don't understand the tax-the-rich business. You've got to structure your life so you have no "earned" income. I'm out of time. I'll explain that. There's a category called earned income versus other kinds of income. Earned income is what the income tax rate is on. That's how "the rich" do it. They don't have "earned" income.

END TRANSCRIPT

 

That assumes that everyone has the same ability to generate income and accumulate wealth.

That is a patently FALSE assumption

 

Nope. Stinginess is due to greed.

 

The top 10% pay about 70% of all income taxes and the top 1% pay 37%. The top 50% pay 97.6%. There are several reasons for this. The first is that income inequality is high in the US and the top 1% have 20% of all income, the top 10% have 50% of income. This is due to most economic growth going to the rich and currently 60% of economic growth go to the top 1%.

The income tax is also our most progressive tax and other taxes aren't as progressive or are actually regressive. The rich pay 29%, the middle class pays 25%, and the poor pay 17.5%. Estimates do vary some show more of a difference between high and middle income taxes and what it shows is that our system isn't as progressive as you think.


http://www.vox.com/cards/federal-taxes-explained/state-and-local-taxes-are-regressive-heres-why





State

 

Of course we are not all equal. Who would assume that? But it's not the government's job to assure everyone has the same income. My income is more than a lot of people and a lot of people's income is more than mine. So what? I don't want anything anyone has earned and I don't want to give any of my income to others. But a progressive tax works as an equalizer of incomes. That discourages initiative and achievement. The more you make the more the government takes and the more they give away to others. That is a good deal for losers and slackers.

 

And you're reading skill are nothing to be desired. Try harder Kode!

 

The top 10% of all income earners in the United States (150K and above) pay 71% of all Federal Taxes. The rich already pay more than their fair share.

 

You get wealth from disposable income. The rest of your post is worthless.

 

Uh no, they don't. You're cherry picking federal taxes. They pay 71% of income taxes not federal taxes and they have more than 71% of the income.

 

I am a big fan of a flat tax. All incomes after the first $30K get hit for 20%. No other federal taxes other than fees and duties.

It won't happen because the rich would have to pay more than they do now.

 

Of course the "Carter Economy" had noting to do with the ending of our wars in SE Asia and a doubling of energy prices and the "Reagan Economy" had nothing to do with the PC boom along with Reagan's quadrupling the deficit.