GOP to Jobless: Drop Dead

[BlueStreak]

Originally Posted by d-ray657

Yes they do. A lot of people have become rich providing substandard housing and jalopies to poor people. They will use underlings to deal with the riff raff whose money they take. Poor people still buy groceries. In many cases, the poor will pay higher prices for goods or services, because they can't afford to buy them in bulk. Because there are plenty of poor people, those who target those markets have plenty of customers. I don't think Sam Walton got rich by catering to the yuppies. Wal-Mart has created thousands of crappy jobs (to replace the jobs lost in local stores that were run out of business by Wally Martindales.)

Regards,

D-Ray

Tell it, D!

Dave

[merrylander]

At one point in time Bill Gates was a poor college student. He created a few jobs. How about the first Apple computers. Bill Hewlett and Tony Packard started in a garage. Wealthy people are too busy wallowing in their money to create jobs. Even Warren Buffett does not create jobs, he just buys up companies.

[whell]

Originally Posted by d-ray657

It's gonna take both taxes and cuts. Your numbers sound fishy to me. What is the 44.6% composed of? Most of the numbers I've seen shows that actual rate collected from the top incomes in the 20's.

Regards,

D-Ray

Current Highest Federal income tax rate = 35%
FICA Tax = 6.2%
Medicare Tax = 1.45%
Total tax on income - 42.65

Under PPACA, the Medicare tax will increase to 2.35% for income earned over $200K. Total income tax = 43.35%

That's the story for taxes on income. Individuals who have a combination of W-2 income and investment income (or just investment income) will pay an additional Medicare tax of 3.8% under changes enacted by PPACA. This could push their total tax rate up towards the 44.6% level.

[Fast_Eddie]

Ahh. It's unfortunate that I don't fall into the top tax bracket, so I can’t speak from personal experience- but it's my belief that people who fall into the scenario you describe above don't actually *pay* anywhere near 42.65% of their income in taxes. If fact, I suspect it is much, much less than that.

In 2007, Warren Buffett rather famously derided the tax system that allows him, the third richest man in the world, to pay less in taxes than his secretary.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/mon...cle1996735.ece

I believe the truth of the matter is, that for all the talk of "taxing the rich", our current system allows them many, many loopholes to prevent them from paying anything close to the rates often bantered about by the conservative pundits. Buffet claims he paid less than 18% while making no effort to pay less than his share.

I think the sad truth is, the convoluted tax system is set up the way it is on purpose. It allows the wealthy folks, a.k.a. the lawmakers, to point at a number and say "look, that's almost half my income that goes to taxes!" while at the same time providing them myriad ways to avoid paying taxes that are not available to you and me. I'd love to see a much simplified tax system for that reason, and the "fair tax" you posted about yesterday is sounding better and better to me. I love the idea of national Sales Tax. I tend to save money and not spend a lot. My taxes would drop like a rock. I've also long been in favor of an increased gas tax to build motivation for using less gas - increasingly a security issue. Everything about the "fair tax" seems to reward good behavior and punish poor decisions. That makes sense to me.

[noonereal]

Originally Posted by whell

And does anyone really believe that the BEST path to deficit reduction is raising taxes?

hook line and sinker

honest Whell this is just shocking

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by whell

And does anyone really believe that the BEST path to deficit reduction is raising taxes? We're already in a recession, so lets take money out of the economy where it might actually be put to use, just so we can make government flush?

Actually the only path to deficit reduction is a combination of spending cuts and tax increases. We tried the big tax cut thingie about exactly 10 years ago. How'd that work out?

[Fast_Eddie]

Originally Posted by whell

And does anyone really believe that the BEST path to deficit reduction is raising taxes? We're already in a recession, so lets take money out of the economy where it might actually be put to use, just so we can make government flush?

I do *not* think higher taxes are the *best* way to address the deficit. They are part of the solution to the deficit problem, but, no, on the whole we'll have to cut spending to address the deficit. That's why programs like the health care bill that actually reduce the defict are so important.

I *do* however, feel that higher taxes are the best, and maybe *only* way to attack the debt. Paying back what we owe can only be done with actual capital. It has to come from somewehre. We're not paying enough now to pay for what we already spend. We'll have to make some "extra payments", as it were, to get out from under the debt.

[piece-itpete]

They create jobs by buying things? Sure, but that is a far far cry from building a company with 100s or 1000s or 10,000s of jobs. Sam did that.

Pete

[whell]

Originally Posted by Fast_Eddie

Ahh. It's unfortunate that I don't fall into the top tax bracket, so I can’t speak from personal experience- but it's my belief that people who fall into the scenario you describe above don't actually *pay* anywhere near 42.65% of their income in taxes.

My post wasn't referring to marginal tax rates. I was referring to income tax rates.

[whell]

Originally Posted by finnbow

Actually the only path to deficit reduction is a combination of spending cuts and tax increases. We tried the big tax cut thingie about exactly 10 years ago. How'd that work out?

So, we should raise taxes in the middle of an economic recession / depression? Even Krugman admits that when FDR did it, it lengthened the depression.