How to Join Member's Area Private Library Search Today's Topics p Login
Main Forums Discussion Tech Talk Mature Content Archives
   Nav Win
 Discussion
 The Alley
 Go Home, Congress...   [ Page: 1  2  3  ]
 50 51 52 53 54 55 56
Follow us on Facebook

 Moderated by: Ron   (Admins )

 
User Options
Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Admin Print Send ECard
Passions in Poetry

Go Home, Congress...

 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 08-22-99
Posts 23002


50 posted 10-29-2011 09:57 PM       View Profile for Denise   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Denise

I don't know why rich people should have to pay a higher tax percentage rate anyway.

15% from a rich person is quite a bit more than 15% from me. Why does the 'percentage rate' have to go up the more you earn? I've never understood that nor thought that it was 'fair'.

Have a single rate that everyone pays on the income that they earn or the profits that they make. That way everyone pays the exact same percentage on their respective incomes. Do away with the loopholes and tax shelters. Where I might have to pay $4,000 on my income, a wealthier person may pay $400,000, or more, at the same rate. How is that unfair to me or someone who earns even less than me?
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


51 posted 10-30-2011 01:04 AM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K




     What demands do people with very large amounts of money make on the country and its resources as opposed to people with very small amounts of money, Denise?  I once had relatives who owned a meat packing plant.  They employed a large number of people and they were personally very nice people and I loved them a lot.  I still believe that having them pay the same, say, 15% in taxes would have been wrong.  Their trucks caused a lot more wear on roads, for example, which meant the town was constantly repairing roads leading to and from their plant, and when you dump large amounts of animal waste down the sewers, which are meant for everybody, that makes the processing of that waste much more difficult and expensive.  When you add to that the fact that the meat processing plant's solution was to flush the drains with large amounts of acid on a regular basis, you have a pollution problem on top of the other problems, and a much accelerated wear problem on the sewers which my relative's meat packing plant certainly didn't want to pay.  They wanted to take money in, not pay it out.

     The fifteen percent business wouldn't have even come close.  You can see this being replayed across the country for many businesses.

     On the other end of the spectrum, you have people whose incomes place them in extreme poverty, and to take 15% of that would put them in danger, or put their kids in danger.  In fact, though it seems fair, a flat tax turns out to be a regressive tax in which the burden falls most heavily on the poor, who can least afford it.  That is why it is unfair, and that is why it is almost always you will find the wealthy supporting it; it breaks heavily in their favor and it punishes the poor for being poor.

     In fact many of the poor work as hard as the rich.  They're simply nowhere nearly as well rewarded.

     I suspect you've had people go over this material with you before, Denise, but I thought I'd give it a try.  I hope I was at least a little helpful.
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 08-22-99
Posts 23002


52 posted 10-30-2011 10:20 PM       View Profile for Denise   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Denise

I don't know. Bob. Are the 'rich' more of a burden financially on society than the 49% who pay NO Federal income tax yet also receive benefits from the Treasury? And yes, I know they pay other payroll taxes if they work, and also sales taxes, but so do the 'rich' and the rest of us non-rich who aren't among the 49%.
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


53 posted 10-31-2011 01:15 AM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



     That might be worth discussion, Denise, but you haven't responded to what I said in reference to your last question about the 15% flat tax yet; and before I cooperate in changing the subject to something else entirely, I'd like some resolution on the first topic you brought up.  I thought I'd given a fair response about why a flat tax was a bad idea — because it tended to  take a higher amount of real income from the poor than the rich, and because it uses food and shelter monies to subsidizes investment and luxury items.  If money is to be re-distributed, it should probably be taken from luxury items and at least some speculative investments to underwrite food and shelter — at least that's what our religions tell us.

     While flat taxes have the poor underwriting the rich.

     At least some of the rich are somewhat concerned about that, and I would suggest that more should be.

     You asked me to explain why this was a bad idea, and I did, but now I find the subject is no longer of interest.  Was there something unclear about   my explanation?  Is the reasoning faulty?
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 08-22-99
Posts 23002


54 posted 10-31-2011 01:25 PM       View Profile for Denise   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Denise

Thanks for explaining it, Bob. I just don't agree with you on the issue.
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


55 posted 10-31-2011 07:13 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K


quote:

I don't know. Bob. Are the 'rich' more of a burden financially on society than the 49% who pay NO Federal income tax yet also receive benefits from the Treasury? And yes, I know they pay other payroll taxes if they work, and also sales taxes, but so do the 'rich' and the rest of us non-rich who aren't among the 49%.



http://wweek.com/portland/article-17350-9_things_the_rich_dont_want_you_to_know_about_taxes.html


http://www.anitra.net/homelessness/columns/anitra/eightmyths.html


http://www.tax.com/taxcom/taxblog.nsf/Permalink/CHAS-89LPZ9
     I found the above articles very much to the point.  The third article reviews the net effects of the Bush tax cuts and what they’ve done to the economy.  If you want to compare the cost of those with the net cost of the welfare portioned out to the poor over that same period of time, I think you’ll see the figures are pretty straightforward.

     The economist who wrote the tax article suggests that Republicans simply don’t understand their economic and tax policy and keep pushing it anyway, despite the evidence that keeps coming in.  He believes that it’s just coincidence that the policy seems to pay off in such a grand fashion for the Republican donors.  Personally, I credit Republicans with a bit more on the ball than that.

     He also gives an actual figure for what Warren Buffet pays as a percentage of his income in state, local and Federal taxes.  If my wife and I were able to do that, I can’t tell you how thrilled we’d be.  If you could do that, at least a decent chunk of your financial worry would be lessened.  Buffet’s famous secretary paid 22%, which suggests she was doing pretty well.  Buffet’s rate was apparently one-one-hundredth of that.

     Anyway, have a look at these three articles and let us know what you think, if there’s anybody but the two of us talking here at this point.  

     Thank you very much, by the way, for getting back to me on my last post.  If you had to agree, I’d start to worry.  Having the subject changed without notice, though, was simply disorienting; acknowledgement that you’d heard yet still disagreed was all that I needed.
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


56 posted 11-01-2011 11:19 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



     Had a chance to give these a look yet, Denise?  Any thoughts?

     I did my best to answer your question.  If you feel unclear about any of this, I'll have another look and see if I can give you more detail.
 
 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
All times are ET (US) Top
  User Options
>> Discussion >> The Alley >> Go Home, Congress...   [ Page: 1  2  3  ] Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Print Send ECard

 

pipTalk Home Page | Main Poetry Forums

How to Join | Member's Area / Help | Private Library | Search | Contact Us | Today's Topics | Login
Discussion | Tech Talk | Archives | Sanctuary



© Passions in Poetry and netpoets.com 1998-2013
All Poetry and Prose is copyrighted by the individual authors