Great little story on taxes....

[soulpatch]

When the rich get back 60,000 they can gfo out and buy a new sports car. When I get 100-400 back I go out to buy a new blocker or cathcer.

Same applies just on a larger scale.

Do rich save money? Sure but they also have a lot more disposable income. Even if they spend 10% of their disposable income in a year then that is more then most people spending 100% of their disposable income. The more that sits in the bank and grows then the larger their disposable income grows as well.

They pay more in taxes and thus got more of a break with the tax cut. Poor people barely pay so why should they get more of a break or handout?'


The US deficiet has a lot to do with the goings in the country at the time not due to the tax cuts.....If you think that then you have no right to be in a thread about money.


I would agree that a lot of the loopholes in the tax code needs to be closed as well as more enforcement of the payments due.

[goalies-r-us]

Originally Posted by rbrownie

The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings).
The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33%savings).
The seventh now pay $5 instead of $7 (28%savings).
The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings).
The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% savings).
The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings).

Um, am I the only one who noticed that $2+$5+$9+$14+$49 doesn't add up to $80???

Technicalities aside, I love this story!

[Sprawl]

i had a similar argument with my old man.

he makes about 150,000 before tax.

I make 40,000 before tax.



My "deductions" are 22%
His "deductions" are 45%

my take home is
32,000 and change.

His take home is
103,000 and change


while I appreciate that he is putting a larger percent of his income into taxes. nearly 35,000 more than me.

who's going to be benefitted most by tax cuts?

Toronto's average income is $70,000. Median income of $50,000.

so lets say you giving tax breaks back like Canada just announced.

my income tax goes down to 20%, his goes down to 40%. Net change of 2% for me and 5% for him.

he's getting back 7500 bringing him closer to 110,000.
I get back 800 bring me to 33,000.

who's REALLY benefiting from this tax cut? my extra 800 puts me kraft dinner to eating frozen lasagna. His puts him from the BMW 5 series into a 7 series.

this is why it seems unfair for the poor in reality. According to the original story posted in this thread, such cuts only make sense when the LOWER side get the higher percentage cut. In reality, like canada has just propposed it's the higher side getting the larger % cut.

in reality, the cut i'm receiving is only .5% while the high end is getting as much as 2 - 5%. Oh ya, And to "stimilute economic growth". corporations can expect up to 10% tax deductions

[FRAM]

In all fairness one should take into account the number of peoples per tax bracket. The further up the food chain less peoples per bracket...

[wortchillergoal]

My train of thought on this goes down a different track. If ten men are drinking beer and only hit a $100 tab, they are consuming cheap swill beer. If they are not smart enough to drink a better grade of beer, then they should all be paying more in taxes.

[soulpatch]

Originally Posted by wortchillergoal

My train of thought on this goes down a different track. If ten men are drinking beer and only hit a $100 tab, they are consuming cheap swill beer. If they are not smart enough to drink a better grade of beer, then they should all be paying more in taxes.

For you then you should consider that they have brewed their own top of the line beer and are merely paying for booth time in the local pub and for glasses to drink from.

They brewed their own beer but still want the pub atmosphere to drink it in and the bar wants to have some sort of income from them.

[Sprawl]

Some of the best beer i've drank is cheap 2 buck bar brewed.

some of the worst too

[biguglygoalie]

[leaferguy]

^ This thread is in a recession.

[biguglygoalie]

now its in a depression!

[leaferguy]

It ain't even that great

[TIMMAAYY]

Originally Posted by FRAM

If only there was a way to expose the poor to mass media...

They do that already on the Jerry Springer show.

[azdave]

So your saying that because of taxes it is causing the wealthy to slow down. Your also saying the goal to become rich is now derailed because of taxes How can that be since Bush has given you your tax cuts there should be much more motivation to overachieve and become extremely wealthy. Thank George for all your tax cuts and for the huge national debt and huge deficit. Hopefully our kids are all billionaires so they can afford to pay the debt that W is leaving them. Infrastructure is falling apart but we can have the money to rebuild Iraq's. Jobs are flowing overseas so the unemployment rate is going up, oops there goes some tax dollars. Dollar at its lowest level in years but hey that's okay it allows us to export more. Oops we don't manufacture too much here anymore so the weak dollar actually hurts us. Oh well 7 years of George's economic policies and all I can say is wow those tax cuts are really working out

[husker30]

Originally Posted by soulpatch

When the rich get back 60,000 they can gfo out and buy a new sports car. When I get 100-400 back I go out to buy a new blocker or cathcer.

Same applies just on a larger scale.

Do rich save money? Sure but they also have a lot more disposable income. Even if they spend 10% of their disposable income in a year then that is more then most people spending 100% of their disposable income. The more that sits in the bank and grows then the larger their disposable income grows as well.

They pay more in taxes and thus got more of a break with the tax cut. Poor people barely pay so why should they get more of a break or handout?'


The US deficiet has a lot to do with the goings in the country at the time not due to the tax cuts.....If you think that then you have no right to be in a thread about money.


I would agree that a lot of the loopholes in the tax code needs to be closed as well as more enforcement of the payments due.

Here is how I look at it. Our tax system is completely regressive.

Local Tax
First, let's look at property tax. Most property is except from taxation such as stocks and bonds. The poor rarely have any stocks and bonds while this makes up the majority of the upper class' assets. Also, the home is almost 100% of the assets for most middle class families. Yet the home makes up a small fraction of the upper class' assets. Under this policy the middle and lower class are taxed on a higher proportion of their assets. All this does is pass taxes onto the consumers, not the savers. The poor spend 100% of their incomes so they are taxed on 100% of their income. Tax REAL property or the total assets to even out the tax burden.

State Tax
Like above, sales tax is regressive to income. Because the poor spend 100% of their incomes, they pay a higher proportion of their incomes on sales tax. I'm in a hurry so I will do the math later. To spread out the burden, tax the sale of all goods and services (including lawyer fees, accounting and medical services)

Federal Tax
With a good accountant, the upper class should be able to get out of almost all taxes. The tax code is full of so many loopholes that most rich do not pay their share of taxes. For example, no income above $97,000 is taxed for Social Security.

I'm sorry I didn't clarify what I was talking about. The surplus was in government spending money. It had nothing to do with the trade deficit, which should be a totally different thread.

[Crease_Flounder]

Originally Posted by husker30

As nice as that sounds, there is no way, considering the current corporate attitudes, that that statement is true. Corporate companies will take the money and hold onto it. Rich people mostly save their money. If you want to stimulate the economy, give the money to people that spend a majority of their incomes.

The big factor that is overlooked in this statement is HOW the very rich and corporations save their money. They don't put it into a huge mattress or giant vault so that they can roll around in it. They put it back into securities, stocks, investment, venture capital investing, etc. Corporations invest in smaller companies and R&D in order to get a better return on those monies or to be more competitive. The additional cashflow and investing allows other companies to spend more, hire more people, etc, then those people and companies spend it again, and on and on, thus continuously putting the money back into the system and stimulating the economy. The whole way down the line, the government is taxing that money. Instead of one ridiculous tax on the original investment, they tax the crap out of the same money all the way down the line.

Even if you think that rich folks and giant corporations will only act in their own best interests, which they do most of the time, their prospecting for a better-than-average or better-than-bank return on their funds is good for the rest of us down the line and better for the government because of the increased taxes.

"Could that also be because the IRS cracked down on corporate taxes? In 2004, 94 percent of major corporations pay less than 5 percent of their incomes in taxes. How can that be when the corporate tax rate is 35%? Instead of cutting taxes, the IRS should focus on getting the money the government is owed."

Taxing corporations directly is silly. Who do you think pays for all of it in the end, anyway? You, the consumer, when they raise fees/prices to compensate for the higher taxes!