Why is it that being 'poor' is assumed to be synonymous with being 'lazy'? There are many hard working people that have chosen professions like being a police officer, firefighter, special ed. teacher, etc... many of them make between $18,000-$28,000 (to qualify for that no-tax paying lower 50%).

Furthermore, it is my philosophy that the "collective" should be a higher priority than the individual. The average income should rise at the expense of the top 1%. An effective way to do this is to levy the highest realistic tax (i.e. the highest people will tolerate before leaving) on the rich. Say my father makes the mean top 1% income ($256,000), and pays 27%... now he makes abour $195,000.. say he pays 44%.. still makes $145,000 and lives better than almost everyone else. Now he must settle for a C320 instead of an E320 CDI. Tragedy. In doing so the government can provide real healthcare to teachers and policemen... to me that is worth it.

Perhaps we can try the flat-tax or "everyone pays $5000" tax. See how long it is before masses of poor people turn to crime and steal in mass from the mega-rich. What good will the "hard earned money" be if society is too stratified and violent to enjoy it.

"That is exactly why we have a constitution, to prevent the collect from being more important than the individual."

Quite true but some individuals are more important than other individuals.

:p

__________________
Happy Benzing
Darryl, Hill
2005 SL55 AMG Kleemanized
1984 500 SEC
1967 W113 California Coupe
[SIGPIC]
https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/myphotos

Just how are you gonna get a tax on wealthy folks which permits their salary to be harvested faster than Hancock Timber Industries can clear cut a forest?

__________________
...Tracy

'00 ML320 "Casper"
'92 400E "Stella"

Here, it is probably impossible. Only places like Japan and Europe, where there is a more community-based structure will people tolerate taxes of above 40%.

It is interesting, in Japan 98% of the population claims themselves as "middle class", even though there are rich and poor also. There the goal seems to be to reach the "middle class", not to get rich.

They don't. The rich get it all back because the poor spend it all. They don't sock it away in a tax shelter like the rich do with their excess dollars. Why would you want to do away with such a diversified market base with such great purchasing power which is (somewhat) immune to economic downturns?

__________________
You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows - Robert A. Zimmerman

Let's start with the Hollywood rich first.

.....Cameron Diaz earned $10 Million for 18 hours of work on Shreck II.

.....Oprah raked in $180 Million in 2003 and is now a Billionaire.

Want higher pay for teachers and cops? (which I am for, BTW) Let's soak the folks who make ABSURD amounts of money for little to no investment. I'm sure Oprah doesn't need private jets or extra security...she can subsist on $1-$2 Million, no?

Same with Ms. Diaz. Pay her 18 hours X Union wages for her efforts. Not some silly nine-figure amount.

The rappers will be next on the "TAX" list

The only thing I would like to do away with is the sense of entitlement that I see sweeping this country. If I pay 6 times the amount of federal income tax as Joe Blow, do I receive 6 times the benefit? Of course not, and why not? Why am I not getting what I pay for? Why am I subsidizing Joe? I've been on both sides of this coin. I lived paycheck to paycheck for a few years and my feelings on this subject haven't changed one bit. I felt no sense of entitlement then, and I feel none now. If you're capable of contributing to our society, you should be obligated to do so, and receive the financial compensation that our capitalist society deems appropriate.

If you want to eliminate tax shelters, then let's eliminate them. If everyone were to pay the same amount of federal tax, there would be no shelters, nor any reason to seek them out. The rich would still pay much more in taxes than the poor via sales and property taxes.

I'm with you there, brother. That is truly capitalism run amock, and let's not even venture into the sports world...

The tax deduction comes in the form of mortgage interest expense. There is an additional tax deduction in the form of property tax which is deductible from Federal returns (perhaps also state returns in some states). Unless you occupy a house as a primary residence - meaning you have to prove you live there 4 days a week for at least a year, you are obligated to pay capital gains when you sell the place. Plus you can employ this deduction for 2 "houses" only.

Saying it is unfair is akin to saying money pored into a 401(K) or other retirement plan, due to the tax deferral, is also unfair. Personally I’d give my income to a bank in the form of mortgage long before I’d be willing to give the same cash to the gov, and get nothing other than the opportunity to continue to work in return. Which we already get.

In a similar light someone can buy a boat or an RV, and as long as it has a galley and a head, and i think is of a minimum size, it too can be considered a 2nd home, eligible for all the tax deductions, plus a 30 year mortgage. In the end, this is done to help the various indistries (home, boat, RV, and even airplane), and to further the iron fist of capitalism.

Take this opportunity away and folks would simply work less. I predict if the tax deduction for a "2nd home" was to go away, you’d see 10s of millions of houses, boats, airplanes, and, of course, RVs go up for sale overnight. Good-by cushy bonus $$ for the States. And all that interest income that Banks pay taxes on? Gone.

__________________
...Tracy

'00 ML320 "Casper"
'92 400E "Stella"

“Take this opportunity away and folks would simply work less. I predict if the tax deduction for a "2nd home" was to go away, you’d see 10s of millions of houses, boats, airplanes, and, of course, RVs go up for sale overnight. Good-by cushy bonus $$ for the States. And all that interest income that Banks pay taxes on? Gone.”

I doubt that. A deduction is only a discount, and one that can be better negotiated with cash in hand. Real estate is a separate animal, because it floats on the financing, unless it’s free and clear.
Last time I checked I get to keep some portion of every new dollar I make, so that it never costs me anything to make more.
The craziest thing I’ve yet heard is the idea that everyone pays the same amount. GermanStar – please check the data at the beginning of this thread and come up with a number.
Just like someone said – the rich really don’t pay taxes – money has a homing instinct. It just seems to hurt as you rise to the top.

__________________
89 300E
79 240D
72 Westy
63 Bug sunroof
85 Jeep CJ7
86 Chevy 6.2l diesel PU

"The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane."
Marcus Aurelius

Were folks with money to not get deductions/deferments and the like, most would simply work less rather than get sodimized with the chain-saw-like tax structure as it exists now. What is better, to let someone direct some of their earnings into a safe harbor that still makes mega $$$ for the state or give them a choice of work and get chain-sawed up the tushy, vs. do less and only get reamed with a dermal tool. One way you create an incentive to have more money flowing. The other way the only you create an incentive for folks to do less work, create less money, support fewer “needful” things courtesy of their tax dollars.

Were the tax laws changed so that wealthy folks didn’t have to support the parasites, er, less “fortunate” in society, that would be a different story. In your life has any state changed the way they tax?

__________________
...Tracy

'00 ML320 "Casper"
'92 400E "Stella"

I'm not sure where I fit in as far as my income percentage. I probably don't even want to know. But, I do know this. I pay monthly payroll taxes, Federal and state. I pay tax on interest for monies that I save and invest. I pay sales tax on everything I buy including everything it took to build my home. In addition I am priviledged to pay annual property taxes based largely on the cost of those building materials and someone else's judgement of how well I did assembling those materials. I'm punished yearly for working hard to
SAVE money!!!


Health care is a joke. Case in point. A friend of mine has worked hard all his life and saved for his retirement. He is self employed. An adult son of his had moved off to become an assistant football coach at a large university. He developed cancer. After the university treats him for nearly a year some bean counter noticed that his cancer was a pre-existing condition. He had to pay them back $28,000 and take his son back in his care. In other words they kicked him out and he went back home. Now the young man takes cancer tratments that cost $1500 a session. Again out of my friend's nestegg. My friend says he doesn't mind except that when they walk in the room it is filled with illegal immigrants and others with no visible means to pay that kind of money. I just tell him I'm paying for those people.

Not sure i follow. The solution doesn't fit the premise. No mortgage payment, no mortgage interest expense. Few that buy a 1st or 2nd "home" have this opportunity to pay cash. The whole point of buying a home is the leveraged appreciation you get over time. Otherwise, just pay rent.

And if making more income pushes you into the next tax braket...

Perhaps some. I thought the topic was income taxes. if you live off of a tax exempt inheritence, or don't have any income through work, investment, etc. That's a different story.

__________________
...Tracy

'00 ML320 "Casper"
'92 400E "Stella"

Why is that crazy? Do the rich benefit from government more than the poor? Should the rich be forced to pay $500 for a $30 shirt just because they have the money? Perhaps the rich should be forced to affix $5 stamps to have the postal service deliver their mail. The people that benefit the most should pay the most. If we are all supposed to benefit equally than why shouldn't we share the burden equally? It doesn't sound crazy to me...

A flat tax percentage is horridly unfair because it still abuses those who make more $$$ just because they make more $$$. Take the taxes gained from income, divide it amongst those who make income and use that as a flat tax. A basic rule of making money is to make it on volume and not to target those who make more $$$. Of course a basic rule of taxation is that everyone is a target. Heck, there is about 190 million income tax payers in the USA. Charge em $5,000 each and the problem is, or ought to be solved with $950 b in no cost money for the nation. Calculate the loss of salaries for CPAs, lawyers, and bookkeepers, plus all those IRS agents (except the rake users, of course) and the gain to the country is incalculable.

BTW there is no one in Seattle that makes a B a year. They all live across the lake, in Bellevue’s suburbs. A name that has a significant 2nd and 3rd meaning.

__________________
...Tracy

'00 ML320 "Casper"
'92 400E "Stella"