Tax the rich!!!

[KrazyHorse]

You're making the mistake of being a petit bourgeois John.

[Dauphin]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse
However, at least the "corporate tax" is actually called that. By saying it I'm not seeking to relabel it. Those who call the estate tax the "death tax" are seeking to relabel it and thus must have a compelling reason for doing so (other than the fact that they dislike the tax)

If this had been an argument about calling it the "corporate profit tax" then I would have been agnostic...

Fair enough, I just have a 'rose by any other name....' philosophy.

As a sidenote the other way, if people call social security a tax, even though according to the (UK) govenment and tax office its not a tax, would you tell them to stop trying to relabel it?

[Sava]

You know, I'd rather have highly progressive income taxes on inviduals than complicated tax codes for corporations. I'd rather corporations be taxed (if at all) in a simple manner. I think individual income taxes should be high for the top 1% bracket. I don't have any exact rates because it would depend on what kind of budget we have. Social Security taxable income should not be taxed at like $87,000 or whatever it is. That's insanely regressive.

Here's what I would like to see taxed... all in a progressive manner:
capital gains
estate inheritances
income, but much more simplicity than now
corporate bonuses

I don't like the sales tax, but I think we should use it to tax things like alcohol and drugs (After legalized of coursE) in order to fund rehab and addiction programs.

I think federal taxes should help the education system by supplementing the incomes of teachers in problem districts in order to attract better teachers. It's stupid to punish school districts that are bad. How does that help improve things? That's why the whole concept of "NO CHILD left behind" is dumb.

Basically, I want to see wealth and high income taxed. We should have a tax policy that encourages social mobility for lower classes, creating a larger middle class and consumer base. Consequently, the economy will boom because 75% of our economy is consumer driven. If our consumer base is healthy and successful, businesses will benefit. We should aim to have wealth being created more for the working and middle classes so that the money can "trickle up" to businesses via consumer spending.

It should be a delicate balance so that success is not discourage by higher taxes on higher incomes. But even if the top 1% are taxed at 90%, there will still be incentive to work to gain that income level. Making $20 million and getting taxed 90% is still a hell of a lot better than making $20,000. I don't think people will want to stay poor just to avoid paying taxes.

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Dauphin


Fair enough, I just have a 'rose by any other name....' philosophy.

As a sidenote the other way, if people call social security a tax, even though according to the (UK) govenment and tax office its not a tax, would you tell them to stop trying to relabel it?

It's not quite a tax. Only contributors are eligible for its benefits.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by JohnT


I'm having my first day off since June 27th, and even today I've fielded 7 phone calls about various subjects and made a run to the bank. Clue in to the real world for once, Kid.

Isn't Kid an accountant? Why don't you give him a job? Surely you'd enjoy your finances overseen by someone so obviously competent.

[JohnT]

Originally posted by Arrian
Ok, is the search function broken?

Since Kid is still on about being misrepresented, I wanted to go back and find what I (and now Vel) was talking about. But the search function keeps telling me there are no matches, even if I simply search for a thread with "communism" or "capitalism" in the title.

-Arrian

There's:

Is Profit Different from Unfair Tax?

Is Profit Different from Unfair Tax Pt. 2

You participated quite a bit in the above two, Arrian.

New Communism vs. Capitalism Thread

I've got some of the others saved on my computer at work. If these aren't them, let me know and I'll send ya the links.

[JohnT]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse
You're making the mistake of being a petit bourgeois John.

Only if you're foolish enough to believe in such silly nostrums.

[Arrian]

I'm thinking of a thread even before the first "profit is unfair tax" thread...

-Arrian

[KrazyHorse]

My point was that if you were a grand bourgeois you'd be sitting pretty....

[JohnT]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
Isn't Kid an accountant? Why don't you give him a job? Surely you'd enjoy your finances overseen by someone so obviously competent.

Not only that, but he's an accountant because he couldn't selflessly devote his life to public service: he quit his teaching job.

[Arrian]

Oh, and one more thing:

YOU SAVED THE THREAD LINKS ON YOUR HARDDRIVE? Why?

-Arrian

[Japher]

Trickle up, trickle down... why don't we compromise and find something right in the middle.

Estate Tax: No tax up to X amount, incremental tax brackets based on how much is given to charity/gov vs. how much is given to each individual. Make this proactive so that if someone gives to charity/gov prior to death tax incentives can be given on the estate.

Income Tax: Flater wider tax brackets with waiver time when entering new tax bracket.

Capital Gains: Higher percentage base with steeper decline on time based investments. I.e. 40-50% capital gains on investments occuring within 1 year, 30-40% on gains made within 2 years, etc... The starting percentage would be a component based on tax bracket either when invested or realized.

Dividends: Tax free upto a certain amount per quarter.

Bonus: Taxed as capital gains which should be based on tax bracket.


Thus, those with tons of money will be free to continue to make it, it will only take more time for them not to get taxed as much. Also, those climbing the ladder have better opportunity to do so.

[JohnT]

Originally posted by Arrian
Oh, and one more thing:

YOU SAVED THE THREAD LINKS ON YOUR HARDDRIVE? Why?

-Arrian

No, I saved the threads, not just the links.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
That's not what you said. You said getting rich was a result of working hard. It's not.

And how does being a good manager preclude working hard? And working hard magnifies talent.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse
That's the most idiotic argument I've ever heard you make, skywalker.

The estate tax is based entirely on the amount of estate you leave, just like the income tax is based entirely on how much income you have. Just because you are taxed at 0% on the first X dollars of income and are taxed at 0% on the first Y dollars of estate doesn't mean that they aren't income taxes and estate taxes respectively.

Calling the estate tax a death tax is like calling the income tax a head tax.

Normal person: It's an income tax because it's based entirely around the amount of income you have

Idiot: But they don't take anything away from the first 3000$ so it can't be an income tax. I think it's a head tax because only people with heads are taxed. Down with headless tyranny.

Normal person:

Gepap's argument was: it's not a death tax because it doesn't necessarily happen when you die. I was simply applying that to the income tax.