Progressive Income Tax

[Connie14]

A new flat tax on revenues for corporations (no deductions) and a flat tax on individuals would make thinks way more simple and fair. 

[MichaelS]

48 minutes ago, Tonik said:

We boomers don't have anyone in school any more, they are not the kids he is talking about.  It's the kids your generation is raising that are the problem.

Boomer kids are the parents....

[MichaelS]

34 minutes ago, Connie14 said:

A new flat tax on revenues for corporations (no deductions) and a flat tax on individuals would make thinks way more simple and fair. 

Flat taxes are inherently not fair.  Easy yes, fair no. 

[MichaelS]

47 minutes ago, motocat12 said:

Our esteemed courts have decided, they're people who are legally required to maximize shareholder profits.

I am also a person trying to maximize profits.  Yet because I am actually a human I am treated worse than a corporation....that makes sense. 

[durk]

2 hours ago, motocat12 said:

40% before any deductions.

"It's true that the statutory tax rate—including state and local taxes—is close to 40 percent, the highest among the developed world. But U.S. companies apply a long list of tax credits, subsidies, loopholes and other giveaways, so most of them pay much less than the top rate. Some, according to an analysis by Citizens for Tax Justice, have figured out how to pay no tax at all.

Total corporate federal taxes fell to about 12 percent of profits from U.S.-based activity in 2011, according to a Congressional Budget Office report. In a separate study, the CBO found that the average tax rate in 2011 among developed countries was 3 percent of gross domestic product—compared with 2.3 percent of GDP in the U.S. "

What I see there is a manipulation of numbers. Not sure I buy what those reports are selling.  I know there are breaks and such but I'm not sure there are that many breaks.  My thoughts are if it was that good and people could get away with paying no taxes we would have a lot more companies staying in the states.  I'm sure the article I quoted may have something stretched as well But it did start to go in detail about how they came up with those figures. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2014/12/11/burger-king-could-save-a-whopping-amount-of-money-by-moving-to-canada/

[Tonik]

22 minutes ago, MichaelS said:

Boomer kids are the parents....

So its the Boomer's fault their kids are bad parents?  Wouldn't it then be the Boomer Parents fault...they raised boomers to not be able to raise their kids? How far back do we og in assigning blame?  Adam and Eve, or some primordial ooze depending upon your god.

How about we blame the current parents since it is their fault.

[Wojo72]

Holy shit. We really need some nice weather so that the kids can go outside and play.

Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk

[Connie14]

48 minutes ago, MichaelS said:

Flat taxes are inherently not fair.  Easy yes, fair no. 

It doesn't get any more fair than everybody paying the same rate.

Edited February 26, 2016 by Connie14

[Bad324]

22 minutes ago, Tonik said:

So its the Boomer's fault their kids are bad parents?  Wouldn't it then be the Boomer Parents fault...they raised boomers to not be able to raise their kids? How far back do we og in assigning blame?  Adam and Eve, or some primordial ooze depending upon your god.

How about we blame the current parents since it is their fault.

C'mon now don't be so crazy. Don't you know there is always someone else to blame other than those directly responsible? 

[Cdubyah]

48 minutes ago, MichaelS said:

Flat taxes are inherently not fair.  Easy yes, fair no. 

God help me.....please define what is fair.

Everyone pays the same rate. You make more, you pay more. You make less you pay less. 
Loopholes closed, tax evasion averted. No more moving shit overseas, to dodge the tax man.

[Tonik]

Just now, Cdubyah said:

God help me.....please define what is fair.

You really have to ask that?  Someone else paying is what he thinks is far. Anyone, as long as it isn't him.

[motocat12]

Flat tire taxes shoud be abolished!

[Tonik]

25 minutes ago, motocat12 said:

Flat tire taxes shoud be abolished!

That would be inflationary.

[Connie14]

2 hours ago, Tonik said:

You really have to ask that?  Someone else paying is what he thinks is far. Anyone, as long as it isn't him.

Tonik: The Hypocrite Hunter!

[MichaelS]

On 2/26/2016 at 3:32 PM, Cdubyah said:

God help me.....please define what is fair.

Everyone pays the same rate. You make more, you pay more. You make less you pay less. 
Loopholes closed, tax evasion averted. No more moving shit overseas, to dodge the tax man.

First there is no data I have seen that says corporations would still not move overseas. 

Second lets look at some numbers.  10% tax.  Person making $25,000, you take $2.5k on top of all the other taxes you still have to pay.  They now have at most $22.5k to live on, to save etc.  Second person is making $200,000.  You take $20,000.  They still have $180k.  Which one of these has to choose between food, shelter clothing because of the taxes?  Not the person making $200k.  What good is it to the economy, to our society to have 1/10 of the low income taken by taxes?  Is it fair to make someone have to choose between those things?  I certainly don't believe so. 

 

Maybe your definition of fair is your hand is your hand and if it sucks screw you we as a society don't give a crap. 

[MichaelS]

On 2/26/2016 at 3:34 PM, Tonik said:

You really have to ask that?  Someone else paying is what he thinks is far. Anyone, as long as it isn't him.

I pay my taxes so I don't know what the hell you are talking about. 

[MichaelS]

On 2/26/2016 at 3:05 PM, Tonik said:

So its the Boomer's fault their kids are bad parents?  Wouldn't it then be the Boomer Parents fault...they raised boomers to not be able to raise their kids? How far back do we og in assigning blame?  Adam and Eve, or some primordial ooze depending upon your god.

How about we blame the current parents since it is their fault.

Don't be ridiculous.  Now who doesn't want to take responsibility?  Sure looks like you. 

[Tonik]

5 minutes ago, MichaelS said:

Don't be ridiculous.  Now who doesn't want to take responsibility?  Sure looks like you. 

I most certainly take responsibility for my kid. I obviously did a great job. And he is doing great with his. I get some minor partial credit for that.

 

Edit:  And he pays more in taxes than you make. You're welcome, from both of us since I get partial credit.

Edited February 29, 2016 by Tonik
Adding snark.

[Cdubyah]

18 hours ago, MichaelS said:

First there is no data I have seen that says corporations would still not move overseas. 

Second lets look at some numbers.  10% tax.  Person making $25,000, you take $2.5k on top of all the other taxes you still have to pay.  They now have at most $22.5k to live on, to save etc.  Second person is making $200,000.  You take $20,000.  They still have $180k.  Which one of these has to choose between food, shelter clothing because of the taxes?  Not the person making $200k.  What good is it to the economy, to our society to have 1/10 of the low income taken by taxes?  Is it fair to make someone have to choose between those things?  I certainly don't believe so. 

Maybe your definition of fair is your hand is your hand and if it sucks screw you we as a society don't give a crap. 

 

When you overtax people or corporations, they begin to move money offshore, as soon as, it begins to cut into the profit margin. Or, they find a loophole in the tax code that prevents them from losing money. When a person loses money, they try to plug that hole regardless of stature in society.
I don't dispute your numbers. But shouldn't that give someone making $25k more incentive to work harder/smarter to make a better living?  When did this nation flat out settle for $25k? When did that become the normal? I've been at $25k, and yes it sucked. But I didn't want to stop there.

When you begin to put the tax burden of the entire county on the top 1% of Americans, whether it be corps or individuals, those people are going to thumb their nose to the rest of the nation and stop producing. Liken it to a group project in school. You had the smart kid wanting to succeed (rich), the average student just wanting to pass (middle class), and the underachiever (poor) who thought school was dumb and a waste of time. The underachiever knew the other two would carry the weight of the project because they wanted to pass. So the smart kid, and the average student had to take on the extra work of the underachiever. Making it subsequently harder to reach the end goal. Sure they probably passed, but eventually, those kids would get burnt out from doing all of the work. The next project, or the 3rd project would likely have different results.

I'm quite far from your last assumption. People will always need a hand up, and I'm all for giving them one.
However, once a person makes a conscious decision to stop growing, learning, earning, because they get more from the government, my hand up now has become a hand out. Eventually, I will retract my hand because I feel that no effort is being made to stand up and walk along side of me.

The rich will continue to get rich, and the poor will continue to get poorer, because neither side is willing to compromise.

[MichaelS]

On 3/1/2016 at 9:34 AM, Cdubyah said:

 

When you overtax people or corporations, they begin to move money offshore, as soon as, it begins to cut into the profit margin. Or, they find a loophole in the tax code that prevents them from losing money. When a person loses money, they try to plug that hole regardless of stature in society.
I don't dispute your numbers. But shouldn't that give someone making $25k more incentive to work harder/smarter to make a better living?  When did this nation flat out settle for $25k? When did that become the normal? I've been at $25k, and yes it sucked. But I didn't want to stop there.

When you begin to put the tax burden of the entire county on the top 1% of Americans, whether it be corps or individuals, those people are going to thumb their nose to the rest of the nation and stop producing. Liken it to a group project in school. You had the smart kid wanting to succeed (rich), the average student just wanting to pass (middle class), and the underachiever (poor) who thought school was dumb and a waste of time. The underachiever knew the other two would carry the weight of the project because they wanted to pass. So the smart kid, and the average student had to take on the extra work of the underachiever. Making it subsequently harder to reach the end goal. Sure they probably passed, but eventually, those kids would get burnt out from doing all of the work. The next project, or the 3rd project would likely have different results.

I'm quite far from your last assumption. People will always need a hand up, and I'm all for giving them one.
However, once a person makes a conscious decision to stop growing, learning, earning, because they get more from the government, my hand up now has become a hand out. Eventually, I will retract my hand because I feel that no effort is being made to stand up and walk along side of me.

The rich will continue to get rich, and the poor will continue to get poorer, because neither side is willing to compromise.

I get what you are saying about a disincentive to work but I don't think that has ever proven out in the numbers.  Even when the top tax rate was double what it is currently.  Some people look at the dollar figure and use that to argue the 1% pay their share or too much or whatever your opinion.  But when you start looking at percentages then you see the real story that they can pay a lower rate than someone that is making $70K a year which is not what I would consider rich. 

As for the low income person's incentive.  Everyone's story is different.  But I will say the current system is broken.  The system creating a disincentive to earn more.  It needs to taper off so there is still an incentive to continue to try to earn more.  As much as some on here probably think I'm some bleeding heart liberal I do think there should be limits.  Either time, dependents etc. 

Another thing to look at is why do people working 40 hours a week at a job still need government assistance?  Essentially us tax payers subsidize corporations more than people think about because they pay an artificially low wage then we pick up the remainder that people need to live.  Corporations should be billed for these services making them pay the true market wage. 

[Connie14]

Companies do pay the market wage.  If their market value was higher, they would have an incentive to move to the higher paying job. 

[AreYouSerious?]

5 hours ago, Connie14 said:

Companies do pay the market wage.  If their market value was higher, they would have an incentive to move to the higher paying job. 

Ha!  Only if you move companies regularly

http://talkliketheboss.com/your-company-stealing-your-salary/

[Connie14]

8 hours ago, AreYouSerious? said:

Ha!  Only if you move companies regularly

http://talkliketheboss.com/your-company-stealing-your-salary/

I don't know if anyone that hasn't changed companies for better pay or opportunities. That's what's great about a free market economy.

In today's technologically advanced society, market rates of different careers is easy to attain.  It is also advantageous to keep contacts with old co-workers and friends from college.  This helps to keep an understanding of the market place.

Edited March 5, 2016 by Connie14

[zx3vfr]

On February 24, 2016 at 4:00 PM, what said:

After all my deductions (not many) and so on, I ended up paying about 30% of my income in taxes last year. Not sure what you have to make in order to be paying this mythical 15-20% but I'd like some.

You're doing it wrong. I pay 0% federal taxes and I actually gotta credit of $400 this year. 

 

Under 50k combined income a year, married filing jointly, 2 kids.

[zx3vfr]

15 hours ago, MichaelS said:

I get what you are saying about a disincentive to work but I don't think that has ever proven out in the numbers.  Even when the top tax rate was double what it is currently.  Some people look at the dollar figure and use that to argue the 1% pay their share or too much or whatever your opinion.  But when you start looking at percentages then you see the real story that they can pay a lower rate than someone that is making $70K a year which is not what I would consider rich. 

As for the low income person's incentive.  Everyone's story is different.  But I will say the current system is broken.

Sure, it's broken. No one wants to give up their free shit.

15 hours ago, MichaelS said:

Another thing to look at is why do people working 40 hours a week at a job still need government assistance?  Essentially us tax payers subsidize corporations more than people think about because they pay an artificially low wage then we pick up the remainder that people need to live.  Corporations should be billed for these services making them pay the true market wage. 

Then work more than 40 hours per week. I've worked any where from 60-90 hours every single week since I've been 18 years old.

every year I manage to work more and more yet my take home pay doesn't go up proportionally with the cost of groceries, heating fuel electricity, and you know what buttercup I fucking go bust by ass harder and harder to take care of my family. And it makes me fucking sick when people like you think the poor are not responsible for their decisions.... Sure there are plenty of people with disabilities that truly cannot be integrated into society but if you're able bodied person you should be busting ass to get somewhere. Go on indeed.com and search for jobs in your city. Theres fuck ton of them.

get one that pays $12 an hour, yes there's plenty, get the pell grant, go on food stamps bust ass at work, go to school then get yourself out of poverty... It's not that fucking hard.