Poll

10 votes (35.71%)
18 votes (64.28%)

28 members have voted

AZDuffman
AZDuffman
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
  • Threads: 219
  • Posts: 11260
July 19th, 2011 at 3:03:35 PM permalink
Quote: s2dbaker

I don't see your point here. How can I, alone, by sending a gift to the treasury of a few thousand dollars, eliminate the deficit?



Point is you say you don't mind higher taxes and in fact want to pay more. So why not send a gift to the Treasury?

You are saying the same as Obama, the Clinton's, and others, "I'm so rich I don't need the tax cut." So put your money where your mouth is and send the "extra" in.
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others
AZDuffman
AZDuffman
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
  • Threads: 219
  • Posts: 11260
July 19th, 2011 at 3:08:59 PM permalink
Quote: boymimbo

To generalize, Republicans have got to accept that raising taxes is a necessary evil and Democrats have got to accept a trillion dollars or so in spending cuts. Will the economy shrink as a result of the cuts in spending: absolutely. But the monetary policy that is currently in place is absolutely unsustainable.



Low taxes are not the problem. Taxes are not particularly low. Spending is now at 25% of GDP were 19-20% of GDP has been normal post-WWII. We need to cut that spending first. $856 billion wasted on a "stimulus" that did nothing and now they say they can't do it by just cutting spending?
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others
avargov
avargov
Joined: Aug 5, 2010
  • Threads: 16
  • Posts: 615
July 19th, 2011 at 4:55:51 PM permalink
Quote: AZDuffman

Low taxes are not the problem. Taxes are not particularly low. Spending is now at 25% of GDP were 19-20% of GDP has been normal post-WWII. We need to cut that spending first. $856 billion wasted on a "stimulus" that did nothing and now they say they can't do it by just cutting spending?



I thought I read somewhere recently that our tax levels are historically low...I gotta find that piece I read. Also, isn't spending higher as a percentage of GDP because we produce next to nothing and we have more folks to pay for.

We will rue the day (very soon) when the dollar ceases to be the world's reserve currency. Hope you got those seeds handy.....
Before you diagnose yourself with depression or low self-esteem, first make sure that you are not, in fact, just surrounded by assholes." ~ William Gibson
AZDuffman
AZDuffman
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
  • Threads: 219
  • Posts: 11260
July 19th, 2011 at 5:06:30 PM permalink
Quote: avargov

I thought I read somewhere recently that our tax levels are historically low...I gotta find that piece I read. Also, isn't spending higher as a percentage of GDP because we produce next to nothing and we have more folks to pay for.

We will rue the day (very soon) when the dollar ceases to be the world's reserve currency. Hope you got those seeds handy.....



Don't confuse MARGINAL RATES with tax LEVELS. Liberals seem to think there is somenting wrong with a low tax rate so they spre this nonsense that int he 1970s we had a 70% rate and now a 31% rate so somehow "the rich" are getting a break. Back then there were many more tax shelters that distorted investment out of the best productivity to tax-favored things. This helped the S&L collapse of the 1980s.

We have a 36% corporate rate, second highest in the world. Tax revenue is in line with historical levels. It is just that the left can't take that Bush lowered Clintons confiscitory rate and it is all they focus on.

We do not "produce next to nothing." We still produce plenty. In addition, GDP includes services. Spending is high because Obama has ramped spending up 28% since the Bush years and wants to load up even more on high-speed rail and other "green jobs" waste.
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others
boymimbo
boymimbo
Joined: Nov 12, 2009
  • Threads: 17
  • Posts: 5988
July 19th, 2011 at 5:40:09 PM permalink
Sigh. Tax revenue is down because the rate is down on the highest 2 percent and because the production of the economy is not there to support the tax base.

Spending is out of control, but you gotta bring revenue in line to balance the budget. That requires raising taxes. There's no reason why all working Americans are making an extra automatic 2 percent this year due to a cut in social security taxes, yet Americans claim that the pension fund will be going broke. This is stimulus, being paid by your government. There's no reason to continue the Bush tax cuts on the rich. What have the rich given back to the economy as a result of the break. It's all of these broad based tax cuts that have to come to an end.

I'm Canadian, and I file tax returns in both countries. The personal tax rate is much lower in the States than in Canada but it has the highest corporate rate as AZ confirms. Add to that the incredible high (and climbing) burden of health care that the corporations are passing on to its employees and I would contend that the US has to balance its tax structure.

Add to that the archaic sales tax system that only the United States has (all other western countries have a form of VAT) and it becomes difficult to own a successful corporation and be headquartered in the United States.
----- You want the truth! You can't handle the truth!
AZDuffman
AZDuffman
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
  • Threads: 219
  • Posts: 11260
July 19th, 2011 at 6:28:04 PM permalink
Quote: boymimbo

Sigh. Tax revenue is down because the rate is down on the highest 2 percent and because the production of the economy is not there to support the tax base.

Spending is out of control, but you gotta bring revenue in line to balance the budget. That requires raising taxes. There's no reason why all working Americans are making an extra automatic 2 percent this year due to a cut in social security taxes, yet Americans claim that the pension fund will be going broke. This is stimulus, being paid by your government. There's no reason to continue the Bush tax cuts on the rich. What have the rich given back to the economy as a result of the break. It's all of these broad based tax cuts that have to come to an end.

I'm Canadian, and I file tax returns in both countries. The personal tax rate is much lower in the States than in Canada but it has the highest corporate rate as AZ confirms. Add to that the incredible high (and climbing) burden of health care that the corporations are passing on to its employees and I would contend that the US has to balance its tax structure.

Add to that the archaic sales tax system that only the United States has (all other western countries have a form of VAT) and it becomes difficult to own a successful corporation and be headquartered in the United States.



First, it is not "the Bush tax cuts for the rich" it is "the Bush tax cuts for all taxpayers." All taxpayers got a cut, some of 100%.

What "have the rich given back?" What are they supposed to "give back?" But they do run businesses, hire people, buy lots of products and services, and still pay about 40% of all individual income taxes. What more do you want? Should Steve Wynn give away rooms for free to "give something back" for his tax cut even after employing thousands of people?

Tax revenue is down because the Obama Administration is the greatest wet blanket to business and job creation in 70 years. (borrowed from Steve Wynn)

Here are some numbers. Constant dollars in billions:

2000 2,053
2001 1,991
2002 1,854
2003 1,782
2004 1,880
2005 2,154
2006 2,407
2007 2,568
2008 2,524
2009 2,105
2010 2,163
2011 2,174 (est)


Revenue went down 2001-2003 with the dot0com bust, recession, and 9-11. After 2003 the Bush tax-cuts-for-all-taxpayers revenue went UP in 2004-2007. In 2007 the democrats took congress and had a very anti-business attitude, but it didn't really fall until 2008 and the mortgage meltdown. Under Obama and flat tax rates revenue has grown slower than under Bush who cut taxes.

The Bush cuts drive Obama, democrat party members, and their greedy supporters nuts. Why someone would be so hateful to say to someone paying an already confiscatory 40%+ combined tax rate "NOT ENOUGH, DO YOUR PART!" escapes me.


Why someone would actually want higher taxes escapes me, but if you want, make a gift to the Treasury. You can do so here:
http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/gift/gift.htm
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others
rxwine
rxwine
Joined: Feb 28, 2010
  • Threads: 161
  • Posts: 9206
July 19th, 2011 at 6:58:42 PM permalink
If I'm offered a 1,000,000 dollars a year job at 50% tax rate, or a $30,000 dollar a year job at 1%.

Nope it wouldn't bother me at all to take a 50% rate. You?
Quasimodo? Does that name ring a bell?
AZDuffman
AZDuffman
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
  • Threads: 219
  • Posts: 11260
July 19th, 2011 at 7:14:27 PM permalink
Quote: rxwine

If I'm offered a 1,000,000 dollars a year job at 50% tax rate, or a $30,000 dollar a year job at 1%.

Nope it wouldn't bother me at all to take a 50% rate. You?



The 50% rate would bother me every paycheck, why on earth does the government have a right to that much of a person's money?

If you want to pay 50%, pay 50% of what you are currently making. I gave the link earlier.

But I don't get the point of the question? Who has a choice between such job offers?

A flat tax is still the best idea. And everyone pays no matter how low their income.
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others
timberjim
timberjim
Joined: Dec 5, 2009
  • Threads: 33
  • Posts: 398
July 19th, 2011 at 7:28:02 PM permalink
Quote: boymimbo

Sigh. Tax revenue is down because the rate is down on the highest 2 percent and because the production of the economy is not there to support the tax base.
.



How about you give us some real numbers on the revenue collected from the top 2%? You pick the time span. I suggest the time since 2000, since that is what most of us have been talking about. Has it been going up or down?

While you are at it, why don't you tell us all how much of the total income the top 2% earn and how much of the total taxes they currently pay? What percentage should they pay to be "fair"?

You have very strong opinions, so you must already have these facts at hand. I look forward to seeing your answer.
s2dbaker
s2dbaker
Joined: Jun 10, 2010
  • Threads: 51
  • Posts: 3259
July 19th, 2011 at 7:32:56 PM permalink
Quote: rxwine

If I'm offered a 1,000,000 dollars a year job at 50% tax rate, or a $30,000 dollar a year job at 1%.

Nope it wouldn't bother me at all to take a 50% rate. You?

Wouldn't bother me in the slightest. Although I already pay at the top rate, I can afford to pay a lot more.
Someday, joor goin' to see the name of Googie Gomez in lights and joor goin' to say to joorself, "Was that her?" and then joor goin' to answer to joorself, "That was her!" But you know somethin' mister? I was always her yuss nobody knows it! - Googie Gomez

  • Jump to: