Maximum taxation - good or bad?

[nnmartin]

Many of the responses to the 'maximum salary' thread were in disagreement to the proposal. However, some people seemed to favour the idea of high taxes for the rich as a way of creating more equality and , in theory, more progress.

So what is the general view on this , and what should the maximum be?

How about 80% as a top band for those earning over 200K?

Personally I prefer the maximum wage idea but accept that it is a little extreme for most people.

How about a minimum tax band?

Shouldn't everyone have to contribute something , even if it is only a low amount such as 10%?


or who favours, everyone paying a flat rate of 25% regardless of income?

 

[nnmartin]

any takers to this thread?

probably been done 100 times already and dull old stuff, but who knows.........

 

[Reverend Rick]

Martin, you have to let folks become rich before you tax them like rich folks. While you may think that 200K is a big deal, after current tax rates, it can or cannot buy very much depending on where you live.

A rich person to me is someone who does not have to work and can keep their own schedule. They can travel at will and live anywhere they desire.

It would be hard to live like that on 200K. Don't get me wrong or take offense, 200K enables a person to have a nice life, but that hardly is rich.

The top 1% make Billions with a B. These are the fat cats you rail against.

If you where to win 1 million in the lottery, you would really be surprised at how little that money can do for you after current taxes.

There are middle class millionaires now. A million really used to be something. If you had a million you could live like my description of what a rich person is. Not so any more. The bar has been raised.

Here is what is fair to me:

0 to 1 million 15% tax
1 million to 10 35 % tax
10 million and up 80% tax

Why beat up the guy just starting to get ahead? Let him grow up to be a big fish and then have him for dinner. Tax the rich, sure. 200K is well off but hardly rich by any means.

 

[Sunstone]

Here is what is fair to me:

0 to 1 million 15% tax
1 million to 10 35 % tax
10 million and up 80% tax

I can agree to that provided it brought in sufficient revenue to run the country.

 

[Reverend Rick]

I can agree to that provided it brought in sufficient revenue to run the country.

I believe it would. You want to raise revenues? Eliminate loop holes, not raise taxes.

 

[Sunstone]

I believe it would. You want to raise revenues? Eliminate loop holes, not raise taxes.

That makes a lot of sense if you can find the political will to do it. I wonder -- if elections were publicly funded -- would our politicians be more inclined to eliminate loopholes? I suspect that as things stand today, our politicians find it too easy to sell favors, such as loopholes in the tax code, in order to raise the money they need for reelection.

 

[Reverend Rick]

We move the goal post too much. Take the home mortage interest deduction for instance. On the surface it makes sense until you start enabling folks to purchase million dollar homes or back in the day, second million dollar homes.

Most rich folks would rather have a 30% tax rate and then deduct everything. Myself, I believe we could rake in more money with a 15% rate if we eliminated ALL deductions.

 

[Sunstone]

We move the goal post too much. Take the home mortage interest deduction for instance. On the surface it makes sense until you start enabling folks to purchase million dollar homes or back in the day, second million dollar homes.

Most rich folks would rather have a 30% tax rate and then deduct everything. Myself, I believe we could rake in more money with a 15% rate if we eliminated ALL deductions.

I'd have to see an analysis of the numbers, but in principle I like your proposal quite a bit.

 

[Reverend Rick]

I'd have to see an analysis of the numbers, but in principle I like your proposal quite a bit.

The problem with my proposal is it is too damn simple. You make a 100K, you owe 15,000 period. No need for CPA's and crooked senators providing loop holes for their buddies. You make 200K write a friggin check for 30K and be done with it. Rich folks don't like simple, they can't cheat any more.

 

[swamplizard]

A flat tax is regressive and favors the rich. Caps on particular forms of income, such as wages only offers the wealthy the flexibility to convert forms of income. Parameters of income, such as a floor and ceiling would be a more fair scenario, but it would likely never be accepted until humans become evolved socially and individually. Just my 2 cents to the general topic.

best regards,
swampy

 

[Reverend Rick]

Myself, I don't like trusting my livelyhood to the CPA's. I would rather have an undisputed tax return where I can sleep at night knowing I am paid in full and there can be no audit that can cause me problems later. All these forms, tax revisions and schedules make it to where no one knows for sure that they took everything they where entitled to or took something that will bite them in the butt later.

 

[swamplizard]

One other thing good folks, sales taxation is one of the most regressive and oppressive forms of taxation implemented.

best,
swampy

 

[Revoltingest]

A flat tax is regressive and favors the rich.

If uber-wealthy Romney pays only about 15% in taxes, a flat tax wouldn't necessarily be any more regressive than our current system.
I still propose.
- Everyone pays 15%.
- No personal deductions.
- Everyone gets $10K/year.
- Government has to get by on this & no more.

Note: Most of what I pay isn't in income taxes. It's property taxes, sales taxes, intangibles taxes, etc.

 

[swamplizard]

If uber-wealthy Romney pays only about 15% in taxes, a flat tax wouldn't necessarily be any more regressive than our current system.
I still propose.
- Everyone pays 15%.
- No personal deductions.
- Everyone gets $10K/year.
- Government has to get by on this & no more.

Note: Most of what I pay isn't in income taxes. It's property taxes, sales taxes, intangibles taxes, etc.

Hey Rev,

x% of lower income equates to less expendable resources for the impoverished.

You are right about the many taxes you pay and the etc is a longer list than the prior.

best,
swampy

 

[Revoltingest]

x% of lower income equates to less expendable resources for the impoverished.

Giving'm $10K/yr makes the burden very progressive.
The poor make out like bandits. Wait...that doesn't sound right.

Best of all, you pay no taxes on the flies you catch!
(I want the lizard vote.)

 

[nnmartin]

Here is what is fair to me:

0 to 1 million 15% tax
1 million to 10 35 % tax
10 million and up 80% tax

I am no taxation expert for sure, but these figures seem incredibly low.

The government would go bust at these rates surely?

 

[nnmartin]

I still propose.
- Everyone pays 15%.
- No personal deductions.
- Everyone gets $10K/year.
- Government has to get by on this & no more.

the same question for you as well.

how could the govt possibly exist on these figures?

how could it afford the military, infrastructure, welfare, health system, schools etc...?

 

[Revoltingest]

the same question for you as well.
how could the govt possibly exist on these figures?
how could it afford the military, infrastructure, welfare, health system, schools etc...?

Military: No wars except in self-defense.
Infrastructure: States should handle that which shouldn't be done by the Fed.
Welfare: $10K/yr/person ain't enuf?
Schools: State level funding.
Health: No Obamacare.....but that quagmire (no, not you, Quaggy) is another issue.

 

[blackout]

100% flat tax. for everyone.

it will greatly simplify everything.

 

[Levite]

I say:

First $25K income is tax free.

$25-50K taxed at 12.5%
$50-100K taxed at 15%
$100-500K taxed at 20%
$500K-1M taxed at 30%
$1M-10M taxed at 35%
$10M-50M taxed at 50%
$50M-100M taxed at 80%
$100M+ taxed at 92.5%

I also would favor capital gains taxes at a flat 25% for gains income up to $500K, at 50% on gains income between $500K and $1M, and at 75% on gains income above $1M.

I favor closing tax loopholes that benefit earners and capital gainers bringing in seven plus figures per year.

And I also favor a VAT on high-end luxury goods (i.e., more than one automobile per driver per family, second homes, yachts, etc.).