Parts Catalog Accessories Catalog How To Articles Tech Forums
Call Pelican Parts at 888-280-7799
Shopping Cart Cart | Project List | Order Status | Help



Go Back   PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum > General Discussions > Off-Topic Discussion

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 02-13-2004, 09:26 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: secret
Posts: 3,044
Who's Paying the Most Taxes???

This doesn't surprize me but I'm sure someone will take issue with it!http://www.house.gov/jec/press/2003/09-26-03b.htm

Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 02-13-2004, 10:14 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Milford, DE
Posts: 1,558
I'm so tired about hearing the manta about the "rich not paying their fair share"

The top 10% of wage earners now pay 65% of the total tax bill - To me, this is not exactly the picture of "fairness" Unless of course your guiding principle is "from each according to their abilities, to each according to their needs"

So for my friends on the other side of this issue please tell me...

How much of the burden would the top 10% have to pay before you would consider it "fair"?
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 02-13-2004, 11:34 AM
*
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Tiki Island Texas
Posts: 1,049
Does anyone know where I can find a graph of what is considered the poverty level, along with the median and average income over the last 25 years or so. I think you’ll find the average rising much faster than the median, but that’s only my perception – I don’t have the data. What I didn’t see in that report was if we’re talking only about personal income – I suspect not. Including corporate taxes in those numbers should adjust everything thing to the high side. Your point is none the less valid, but I’m not convinced this is an accurate picture – all taxpayers is different from individuals. What is amazing to me is how low the median is – I think the poverty level for a family of four is considered to be near nineteen thousand dollars, or 2/3 of the median.
__________________
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
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 02-13-2004, 12:27 PM
*
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Tiki Island Texas
Posts: 1,049
I just looked at the data table – it seems this is based on individual returns
__________________
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
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 02-13-2004, 12:45 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: secret
Posts: 3,044
Another thought to keep in mind here. The top percentile is made up of people whose efforts stimulate the entire economy. They create jobs that allow others to pay taxes as well as creating goods and services that are taxed also. So, their contribution is actually more that what you see here.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 02-13-2004, 12:54 PM
rickg's Avatar
User friendly
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Utah!!
Posts: 4,494
I'm not a tax expert, so probably shouldn't get involved here. But....
An example:
Back in the 70's, my dad (an engineer at Boeing) was talking with his brother-in-law(a successful plumber). They started comparing incomes, ect. Turns out my uncle made approx twice(yearly gross, I assume) what my dad did. But he only paid half the taxes. He was able to write off most everything he owned as a buisness expense, plus vacations. He and his wife would take a cruise to some exotic island retreat, meet one of his buisness buddies there, and they'd both get to write it off as a "buisness trip". Hmmm...fair?
I'll consider the top 10% paying their "fair share" if/when we ever get to a flat rate percentage income tax system.
__________________
past MB rides:
'68 220D
'68 220D(another one)
'67 230
'84 SD
Current rides:
'06 Lexus RX330
'93 Ford F-250
'96 Corvette
'99 Polaris 700 RMK sled
2011 Polaris Assault
'86 Yamaha TT350(good 'ol thumper)
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 02-13-2004, 01:12 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: secret
Posts: 3,044
Good point Rick. Question I would have is how much 'economy' did your Dad create verses your uncle? Also how much risk did your Dad take in his job as opposed to your uncle being self employed and facing boom or bust daily?
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 02-13-2004, 01:25 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: secret
Posts: 3,044
Yeh, and if they get cocky and try not being rich anymore we'll fine them and MAKE them stay rich!!!
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 02-13-2004, 01:51 PM
rickg's Avatar
User friendly
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Utah!!
Posts: 4,494
Quote:
Originally posted by Cap'n Carageous
Good point Rick. Question I would have is how much 'economy' did your Dad create verses your uncle? Also how much risk did your Dad take in his job as opposed to your uncle being self employed and facing boom or bust daily?
I don't see how any of that qualifies a person from paying less taxes. I suppose that means that police officers should be tax exempt.(Actually, there may be an arguememnt there). A person chooses his course, whatever the risk. Heck,if my dad didn't do his job, there would be alot more 747's falling out of the sky. How do you qualify that kind of risk? If my uncle didn't do his job, at the worst you'd have clogged up drains. And why can't I take a vacation, make contact with a machine shop, or tool supplier, somewhere, and write it off as a "job expense"? Too many silly loopholes for those who know how to use(abuse) them.
No. Sorry. For me, one of the "little guys", everyone should be required to pay their "fair share".
__________________
past MB rides:
'68 220D
'68 220D(another one)
'67 230
'84 SD
Current rides:
'06 Lexus RX330
'93 Ford F-250
'96 Corvette
'99 Polaris 700 RMK sled
2011 Polaris Assault
'86 Yamaha TT350(good 'ol thumper)
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 02-13-2004, 02:05 PM
*
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Tiki Island Texas
Posts: 1,049
"They create jobs that allow others to pay taxes as well as creating goods and services that are taxed also. "

Well now I’m speaking from the gut and in broad generalizations that don’t have real data. That is, it’s data that we’re now creating and will see in the future. It’s all the IMHO kind of thing. I’m a speculator, so it’s just my way, but I think you’d find more of the stimulus your referring too coming from deeper in the pack. At the upper end I think we’re seeing more and more involvement in the secondary financial markets and less in actual job creation. The rally in the market is maybe the biggest result of the tax cut. If this was from new issues or IPO’s then yes, you’d be spot on – but it’s not. What I see are more and more benefit coming from the performance of shares without any better quality of goods and services. Quarterly profits are generated, by lowering benefits and quality, and expanding in cheaper labor markets – that’s a real cut in benefits to a mill worker. Over time economies will develop in those foreign places so that they will be the significant consumer - so it will all work out – but where will that leave us.

It’s like that picture of the Duck who painted himself into a corner. In order to take the tax burden from the top we’ve got to raise up the bottom. There’s just no money down there anymore. Waste, not the spending, is a great bit of the problem. We’re going to have to go to a very complicated tax law I’m afraid.
__________________
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
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 02-13-2004, 02:11 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Milford, DE
Posts: 1,558
Ok Rick but you have not answered my question.....

How much of the burden should say the top 10% pay? Its currently 65% Should it be 75%? 85% 95%? Or maybe we should try Botnsts approach - let them pay it all. Seems "fair" to me - of course I'm not in the top 3%.

Re your uncle - Tax laws drastically changed in 1986 under the TEFRA act (tax equity fairness reform act) this act closed almost all loopholes and droped top marginal rates to reflect the closed loopholes. Of course as the years have gone by the rates have increased and the loopholes have remained pretty much plugged.
BTW the percentage of taxes paid by the top 1% of taxpayers went UP after TEFRA. It's currently higher than its EVER been.

Who is John Gault?
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 02-13-2004, 02:24 PM
rickg's Avatar
User friendly
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Utah!!
Posts: 4,494
Quote:
Originally posted by TimFreeh
Ok Rick but you have not answered my question.....

How much of the burden should say the top 10% pay? Its currently 65% Should it be 75%? 85% 95%? Or maybe we should try Botnsts approach - let them pay it all. Seems "fair" to me - of course I'm not in the top 3%.

Re your uncle - Tax laws drastically changed in 1986 under the TEFRA act (tax equity fairness reform act) this act closed almost all loopholes and droped top marginal rates to reflect the closed loopholes. Of course as the years have gone by the rates have increased and the loopholes have remained pretty much plugged.
BTW the percentage of taxes paid by the top 1% of taxpayers went UP after TEFRA. It's currently higher than its EVER been.

Who is John Gault?
Ok. I'll give you the loop hole thing, I suppose. Like I said, I'm not a tax expert, which may make all my opinions null and void anyway. But I know there are still a plethora of ways a crafty, well funded person can find tax deductions that I could never use.
How much? As I said earlier, it should just be a flat-rate percentage for everybody. What ever it would take, 30%, 50%? I don't know. I'll leave that to the experts. But no sliding scale. No phoney tax write-offs. Limit the tax shelters.
Any kind of write-offs should be ones available to all income levels. Medical expenses come to mind right off. Mortgage interest is a good one too.
I realize I'm living a pipe dream. It'll more than likely never happen. It'd require a total rethink of everything and everybody. And I don't see that happening in my lifetime.
__________________
past MB rides:
'68 220D
'68 220D(another one)
'67 230
'84 SD
Current rides:
'06 Lexus RX330
'93 Ford F-250
'96 Corvette
'99 Polaris 700 RMK sled
2011 Polaris Assault
'86 Yamaha TT350(good 'ol thumper)
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 02-13-2004, 02:36 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: secret
Posts: 3,044
Except for a twelve year period when I was self employed, I have NEVER had enough deductions to even qualify filing long form. So I know I haven't cheated. But if I could I would. I know some reasonably well off people who donate to charities to keep Uncle Sam from robbing them. It irritates the hell out of me that the gov't can waste my entire lifetime tax contribution in the wink of an eye and not even be able to account for it!!
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 02-13-2004, 02:52 PM
*
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Tiki Island Texas
Posts: 1,049
“Lets only make rich people pay taxes to support all of the rest of us. We pop say, the top 3% with all of the tax burden and the rest of us get a free government and free benefits.”

Although you may have meant this tongue in cheek. It’s what is actually, slowly happening. It’s like the miracle of compounding turned on it’s head gone mad
__________________
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
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 02-13-2004, 04:00 PM
Orkrist
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
No kidding, Crash9. The "wealthy" do keep the lights on, don't they?

Its especially disturbing to see some of the recent changes in Estate/Inheritance taxes. The rich get srewed again, and can't pass on their legacy to their heirs without paying a hefty toll on at least one of the succeeding two generations at least.

I'm no expert but have a better than layman's understanding of the tax code. Owning your own business is great for taxes, too. So much is deductible but you must keep good records and beware the audit. My brother is s sole proprietor and has been audited two years consecutively!

Here's a good deal thats about to close up. If you own a "small" business, you can deduct up to $100K in personal business expenses a year for commercial equipment (I may have posted this before). That includes vehicles with gross weights over 6K lbs. So, that means Rovers and Hummer H2s, which many people are buying for their "small" businesses and deducting the entire cost. I don't know the specifics, if they are amortized or you take the chunk in the purchase year or not.

Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On




All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:58 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0
Copyright 2024 Pelican Parts, LLC - Posts may be archived for display on the Peach Parts or Pelican Parts Website -    DMCA Registered Agent Contact Page