Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Splater
climber
Grey Matter
|
|
|
Apr 18, 2011 - 04:07pm PT
|
John, I am hardly in the position of needing to justify an overall progressive tax rate, when that is the desired goal of most people in the world. It is you, Forbes, and the Kochs that are the exception in thinking that a flat tax is fair.
Especially in the US, where medical costs are a racket, and typically paid at fixed prices, same price for a billionaire as regular worker.
And in a country where the ratio of CEO pay to average pay reached 262 in 2005. Back in 1965, U.S. CEOs in major companies earned 24 times more than an average worker; this ratio grew to 35 in 1978 and to 71 in 1989, passing 100 in the mid 90s.
But if you want flat taxes, please remove the cap on Soc Security earnings at once. For 2010, the regressive Social Security system has ZERO tax on anything over $106800
|
|
Tom
Big Wall climber
San Luis Obispo CA
|
|
|
Apr 18, 2011 - 04:21pm PT
|
About the only abuse of the tax system that I can thnk of by the wealthy is:
Hedge fund professionals to not pay taxes on earned income, but as capital gains, that should probably be changed.
Another capital gains tax scam: a CEO who takes $1 in salary, and then receives $100 million in options, stock, etc.
|
|
Ksolem
Trad climber
Monrovia, California
|
|
|
Apr 18, 2011 - 06:10pm PT
|
For 2010, the regressive Social Security system has ZERO tax on anything over $106800
Just for clarity, that does not mean that a person earning over $106800 pays zero into SS, it means that you pay in until you have earned that much and then you are done for that year. The idea is that it is not fair to take an amount of money which is hugely more than a person will get back.
This is an interesting presentation:
Eat the rich
|
|
Spider Savage
Mountain climber
SoCal
|
|
|
Apr 18, 2011 - 06:26pm PT
|
Bottom line the rich are in control, in the past, now and forever. If you are being paid by someone else it is because someone somewhere was bright enough to make things happen.
So get rich or enjoy being poor.
If you are unhappy it's because you believe the advertising that says you need all this "stuff."
It's your choice to drone away at a "job" or get busy and learn how to play the system. Even a school teach (very honorable work) can start a business on the side and make a ton of money or at least build a nice tax shelter.
Those who wish to only spectate, shall be milked, like cow.
|
|
Klimmer
Mountain climber
San Diego
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Apr 18, 2011 - 07:13pm PT
|
I finally got the original website saved with all the graphics. When I get home I'll try to load it up so everyone can read the entire article with the original graphics/charts.
Some pretty delusional ideas here on ST about wealth and what you are supposed to do with it.
I suppose I'll have to post up what The Good Book says with chapter and verse in regards to the matter, since that is how GOD views it and in the end that is all that matters.
No wonder the World is sooooo screwed up. People don't even know what they heck they are supposed to do and how they are supposed to act with wealth. Unbelievable.
Sometimes I get the feeling, you STers who hold to a "Screw them I got mine," attitude would even put your Mothers out on the street if you had to.
Our nation is in the financial hurt and in the need it is in due to one thing. GREED.
|
|
Spider Savage
Mountain climber
SoCal
|
|
|
Apr 18, 2011 - 07:20pm PT
|
Greed maybe but better defined as "lack of responsibility."
No responsibility for the results of the days work.
No responsibility for who is going to pay. The feeling that some great pool of money will pay for it all so it doesn't matter.
I vote for a national sales tax and a constitutional amendment that the government shall never take more than 5%. Tax at all levels of trade with no loopholes or exceptions.
|
|
Hugh of Lincoln
climber
South Carolina
|
|
|
Apr 18, 2011 - 08:19pm PT
|
I've got to correct a point made by fatrad; hedge professionals usually don't get the benefit of capital gains rates on their income due to the short term nature of their trading activities. Private equity firms, on the other hand, take full advantage of the carried interest loophole to pay cap gains rates on their income.
I agree with fatrad that the carried interest loophole is one of the most egregious parts of the current Internal Revenue Code.
|
|
Klimmer
Mountain climber
San Diego
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Apr 18, 2011 - 08:46pm PT
|
Phewwwwwwwww.
The original article is now back-up and readable on-line.
Almost had to go around it all and post it up.
9 Things The Rich Don't Want You To Know About Taxes
April 13th, 2011 DAVID CAY JOHNSTON
http://wweek.com/portland/article-17350-9_things_the_rich_dont_want_you_to_know_about_taxes.html
1. Poor Americans do pay taxes.
2. The wealthiest Americans don’t carry the burden.
3. In fact, the wealthy are paying less taxes.
4. Many of the very richest pay no current income taxes at all.
5. And (surprise!) since Reagan, only the wealthy have gained significant income.
6. When it comes to corporations, the story is much the same—less taxes.
7. Some corporate tax breaks destroy jobs.
8. Republicans like taxes too.
9. Other countries do it better.
David Cay Johnston is a columnist for tax.com and teaches the tax, property and regulatory law of the ancient world at Syracuse University College of Law and Whitman School of Management. He has also been called the “de facto chief tax enforcement officer of the United States” because his reporting in The New York Times shut down many tax dodges and schemes, just two of them valued by Congress at $260 billion. Johnston received a 2001 Pulitzer Prize for exposing tax loopholes and inequities. He wrote two bestsellers on taxes, Perfectly Legal and Free Lunch. Later this year, Johnston will be out with a new book, The Fine Print, revealing how big business, with help from politicians, abuses plain English to rob you blind.
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
|
Apr 18, 2011 - 11:31pm PT
|
Also lost in the AP article, is this: Not only did the 400 highest incomes pay tax at a lower rate than before, but so did everyone else. We dropped the capital gains rate to 15%, and almost all enormous incomes come from liquidation of capital gains. Obama & Co. aren't talking about those rates; they want to raise the rates on salaries.
The Top 400 saw their effective tax rate drop from 26% in 1992 to 16% but the lower income people went from 10% to 9%. This is not a comparable savings.
To boot, the top 400 were making 100 million more a year each over that period while incomes for the poorer folks got no such increases.
If fact, CEO pay increased 26% just LAST YEAR while worker pay increased 2% so don't believe the hype. The rich are getting richer and it's not cause they work 26% harder in a year than their workers. They bought the system and make their own salaries in bed with their Board
We're being fleeced as the GOP wants to kill medicare under the false premise that we can't afford it but never mention the expensive wars or spiraling (up) incomes of the elite. I know know how John E can fail to see the inequity of all this, since he's obviously not in the top 1%
Peace
Karl
peace
Karl
|
|
Fritz
Trad climber
Choss Creek, ID
|
|
|
Apr 19, 2011 - 12:08am PT
|
Right on Klimmer!
I spent too many years in Sun Valley Idaho, watching the very-rich force out the merely wealthy.
It always hurt me, whenever I drove by the Hailey/Sun Valley airport and looked at 10-30 corporate/pleasure jets, that were not parked in Sun Valley for corporate business. I suspect the Bush-era tax cuts bought a lot of corporate/pleasure jets.
Here's another slant on the problem from Mother Jones magazine.
http://motherjones.com/politics/2011/02/income-inequality-in-america-chart-graph
|
|
Klimmer
Mountain climber
San Diego
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Apr 19, 2011 - 12:32am PT
|
Fritz,
Great article. Thanks. That's a keeper also :-)
|
|
marv
Mountain climber
Bay Area
|
|
|
Apr 19, 2011 - 12:59am PT
|
please quantify with some precision the key term "rich"
|
|
John Moosie
climber
Beautiful California
|
|
|
Apr 19, 2011 - 01:08am PT
|
please quantify with some precision the key term "rich"
It is the basic scenario of.. if you have to ask.
The first article says those whose income is more then a million a year.
20 years ago, to be considered Texas rich, you needed to be worth at least 100 million. I don't know what it is now, but I know that it has gone up.
|
|
Banquo
Trad climber
Morgan Hill, CA (Mo' Hill)
|
|
|
Apr 19, 2011 - 11:52am PT
|
|
|
CrackAddict
Trad climber
Joshua Tree
|
|
|
Apr 19, 2011 - 07:27pm PT
|
Jan, your facts about Corporate taxes are deceptive. For one, you give the amount the companies were refunded, but not how much they paid. You don't get a refund on taxes you didn't pay (unless you get a refundable credit, but I am not aware of those for corporate taxes). Even GE this year paid corporate taxes close to 10%, despite all the hoopla in the press about it not paying any.
The thing about Corporate taxes though is that they are a DOUBLE tax. Employees in the company already pay income tax. Shareholders pay Capital gains tax. Why would we want to tax money that would normally go into building a business? If they decide to just distribute the money to their CEOs, at least the CEOs pay income tax at a minimum of 28% (the alternative minimum tax).
And contrary to the above articles, we have an extremely top-heavy tax system in the U.S. - the richest 2% pay almost 50% of the taxes and the poorest 48% pay no taxes at all (this includes almost half of the middle class!). Even the so called "socialist economies" of Europe have a much flatter tax system.
What really needs to be done is to flatten and simplify the tax system, getting rid of all the loopholes. And EVERYONE should pay taxes, even if it is only a small fraction of their income (for the lowest incomes). If you vote, you should have skin in the game. Nobody should be able to vote themselves benefits without some idea of how the costs feel.
|
|
John Moosie
climber
Beautiful California
|
|
|
Apr 19, 2011 - 07:58pm PT
|
And contrary to the above articles, we have an extremely top-heavy tax system in the U.S. - the richest 2% pay almost 50% of the taxes and the poorest 48% pay no taxes at all (this includes almost half of the middle class!). Even the so called "socialist economies" of Europe have a much flatter tax system.
I take it you didn't read the article.
|
|
CrackAddict
Trad climber
Joshua Tree
|
|
|
Apr 19, 2011 - 09:39pm PT
|
Sure I read it - I am talking about Income taxes though, not sales tax, etc.
The article says the richest 1% pays 38% of all income taxes collected by the IRS, while the poorest 48% paid 0. Does that sound like the rich are getting a free ride on income taxes? Not to me.
This opinion piece debunks a lot of the anti-Reagan-tax-cut hysteria:
http://www.politicalforum.com/political-opinions-beliefs/117391-real-reagan-economic-record-responsible-successful-fiscal-policy.html
Under Reagan's tax cuts, "even if one counts the Social Security payroll tax, the share of total federal taxes increased between 1980 and 1989 for the following groups:
For the top 1 percent of taxpayers, from 12.9 percent in 1980 to 15.4 percent in 1989;
For the top 5 percent of taxpayers, from 27.3 percent in 1980 to 30.4 percent in 1989; and
For the top 20 percent of taxpayers, from 56.1 percent in 1980 to 58.6 percent in 1989.
On the other hand, the share of total federal taxes, if one includes the Social Security payroll tax, declined for four groups:
For the second-highest 20 percent of taxpayers, from 22.2 percent in 1980 to 20.8 percent in 1989;
For the middle 20 percent of taxpayers, from 13.2 percent in 1980 to 12.5 percent in 1989;
For the second-lowest 20 percent of taxpayers, from 6.9 percent in 1980 to 6.4 percent in 1989; and
For the lowest 20 percent of taxpayers, from 1.6 percent in 1980 to 1.5 percent in 1989.17 "
And let's not forget that even after the cuts, tax revenues DOUBLED under Reagan. Unfortunately, Federal Spending Doubled also during this period, and herein lies the problem.
Anyone trying to argue that people were better off before Reagan clearly was not alive during the Carter era.
|
|
Banquo
Trad climber
Morgan Hill, CA (Mo' Hill)
|
|
|
Apr 20, 2011 - 11:56am PT
|
Taxes in the US may not be as high as people believe. For example, corporate tax rates in the US are very high compared to most industrial nations but it seems like the big corporations avoid this by means of loopholes. The same is true for personal incomes, the rates at the top are high but the top income makers don't pay. Middle income people and middle income businesses may tend to pay more taxes. I sure know I pay taxes.
Anyway, one way to look at how high taxes are in the US is to measure total tax revenues as percent of GNP
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_tax_revenue_as_percentage_of_GDP
In the link you can sort by clicking on the column header. The US is 28% which is number 128 of 180. This is low for an industrial nation. Combine this fairly low total tax revenue with a very high military budget and we are in trouble.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditures_per_capita
|
|
Reilly
Mountain climber
The Other Monrovia- CA
|
|
|
Apr 20, 2011 - 12:09pm PT
|
"...the 35% US corporate tax rate in 2010 was second highest only to Japan...
Taking into account all US tax breaks, the average effective rate was 27.7% for large companies during the 2006-09 period...
The US rate ranked sixth highest globally and fourth highest among Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development nations."
today's LA Times - "Support Builds for a Business Tax Cut"
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!