View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently April 21st, 2014, 9:29 am



Reply to topic  [ 78 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
 Stop Coddling the Super-Rich 
Author Message
Modmin Dude
User avatar

Joined: December 31st, 2004, 9:55 am
Posts: 11825
Post Re: Stop Coddling the Super-Rich
steensn wrote:
Again... I agree with the premise that we should own our decisions. But I also think that we should support and promote good choices. Kids are a blessing and our future.

First off, ok Whitney "The Children are our future" Steen :wink:
steensn wrote:
No one is getting "paid" to have kids by not paying $1-$2k of taxes per child. They cost much more than that... besides you have to have a job to get the benefit anyways.

Now, to the point...it is more than just the deductions for the little kiddies, it is also the EIC which actually PAYS you to have kids. Yes, in case you didn't know it, someone with kids getting the EIC can get MORE back than they pay it...hence, getting paid to have kids.

_________________
Go Lions!!! headbang.gif

Joe Fauria, MVP!


August 16th, 2011, 12:23 pm
Profile
Post Re: Stop Coddling the Super-Rich
I'd like to see a small national tax, and a flat tax. It has been said that the tax rate would only need to be around 17% as a flat tax. I would be all over that, and so would anyone that makes more than me (and I don't even make that much).

Part of the reason that Buffet only pays around 20%, is that the majority of his money comes from long-terms capital gains investments, that are capped at I believe 15%. He uses a loophole that is supposed to cause investment growth (and it does) as a tax shelter. The problem is, new businesses and new investors don't have that luxury, so they end up paying the 35% rate. Would you rather start up a business and lose 35% here, or go somewhere else, get cheaper labor, and pay the govt around 15%? We need some incentives to bring new jobs, new businesses, and new industries here, rather than overseas. Our current tax structure and business environment is terrible for people getting started.


August 16th, 2011, 12:27 pm
Online
RIP Killer
User avatar

Joined: August 6th, 2004, 9:21 am
Posts: 9254
Location: Dallas
Post Re: Stop Coddling the Super-Rich
steensn wrote:
Again... I agree with the premise that we should own our decisions. But I also think that we should support and promote good choices. Kids are a blessing and our future. No one is getting "paid" to have kids by not paying $1-$2k of taxes per child. They cost much more than that... besides you have to have a job to get the benefit anyways.


So you think the govt of our free nation should be in charge of determining what is good for us and reward us for that. Can O worms brother and if history has taught us anything, well we should know better than that - much better.

_________________
Image
LB Tweet


August 16th, 2011, 12:28 pm
Profile WWW
Post Re: Stop Coddling the Super-Rich
steensn wrote:
Again... I agree with the premise that we should own our decisions. But I also think that we should support and promote good choices. Kids are a blessing and our future. No one is getting "paid" to have kids by not paying $1-$2k of taxes per child. They cost much more than that... besides you have to have a job to get the benefit anyways.


Steen, that's not how the EIC works. An individual that pays NOTHING in taxes throughout the year gets approximately $2,500 per child. It doesn't matter that $2,500 is not enough to raise a child throughout the year... you don't know what living "ghetto fabulous" is all about... They take the $5-6k in tax money, blow it, and count on the state, soup kitchens, food stamps, etc. to bail them out throughout the year. It's ridiculous.


August 16th, 2011, 12:41 pm
Veteran General Manager
User avatar

Joined: May 7th, 2005, 3:25 pm
Posts: 7122
Location: Earth/Sagittarius Dwarf Galaxy
Post Re: Stop Coddling the Super-Rich
TheRealWags wrote:
steensn wrote:
Again... I agree with the premise that we should own our decisions. But I also think that we should support and promote good choices. Kids are a blessing and our future.

First off, ok Whitney "The Children are our future" Steen :wink:
steensn wrote:
No one is getting "paid" to have kids by not paying $1-$2k of taxes per child. They cost much more than that... besides you have to have a job to get the benefit anyways.

Now, to the point...it is more than just the deductions for the little kiddies, it is also the EIC which actually PAYS you to have kids. Yes, in case you didn't know it, someone with kids getting the EIC can get MORE back than they pay it...hence, getting paid to have kids.


Wags,
what your missing is that under any changes anyone here is proposing, the EIC would become a relic of the past. There should be a fixed per person $ deduction. Beyond that fixed price, no deductions. Everyone needs some level of money in order to survive. Whether that be $5K, $10K, $20K per year. That amount should be decided upon and then fixed. Anything beyond that number should be taxed at the same rate as everyone else and all businesses also.


August 16th, 2011, 12:44 pm
Profile
RIP Killer
User avatar

Joined: June 26th, 2006, 1:03 pm
Posts: 13429
Post Re: Stop Coddling the Super-Rich
TheRealWags wrote:
steensn wrote:
Again... I agree with the premise that we should own our decisions. But I also think that we should support and promote good choices. Kids are a blessing and our future.

First off, ok Whitney "The Children are our future" Steen :wink:
steensn wrote:
No one is getting "paid" to have kids by not paying $1-$2k of taxes per child. They cost much more than that... besides you have to have a job to get the benefit anyways.

Now, to the point...it is more than just the deductions for the little kiddies, it is also the EIC which actually PAYS you to have kids. Yes, in case you didn't know it, someone with kids getting the EIC can get MORE back than they pay it...hence, getting paid to have kids.


True, but I was promoting changing the starting minimum not a EIC ;) You'd have to make money to see any benefit.

_________________
regularjoe12 - "You are crackin me up! really! HILARIOUS um let me quote some intellgent people in this coneversation: Steensn:"


August 16th, 2011, 12:55 pm
Profile
RIP Killer
User avatar

Joined: June 26th, 2006, 1:03 pm
Posts: 13429
Post Re: Stop Coddling the Super-Rich
wjb21ndtown wrote:
steensn wrote:
Again... I agree with the premise that we should own our decisions. But I also think that we should support and promote good choices. Kids are a blessing and our future. No one is getting "paid" to have kids by not paying $1-$2k of taxes per child. They cost much more than that... besides you have to have a job to get the benefit anyways.


Steen, that's not how the EIC works. An individual that pays NOTHING in taxes throughout the year gets approximately $2,500 per child. It doesn't matter that $2,500 is not enough to raise a child throughout the year... you don't know what living "ghetto fabulous" is all about... They take the $5-6k in tax money, blow it, and count on the state, soup kitchens, food stamps, etc. to bail them out throughout the year. It's ridiculous.


Again, I am not promoting an EIC but rather a change in the kickin minimum for paying. Hafta make money to get the benefit.

_________________
regularjoe12 - "You are crackin me up! really! HILARIOUS um let me quote some intellgent people in this coneversation: Steensn:"


August 16th, 2011, 12:56 pm
Profile
Modmin Dude
User avatar

Joined: December 31st, 2004, 9:55 am
Posts: 11825
Post Re: Stop Coddling the Super-Rich
steensn wrote:
TheRealWags wrote:
steensn wrote:
Again... I agree with the premise that we should own our decisions. But I also think that we should support and promote good choices. Kids are a blessing and our future.

First off, ok Whitney "The Children are our future" Steen :wink:
steensn wrote:
No one is getting "paid" to have kids by not paying $1-$2k of taxes per child. They cost much more than that... besides you have to have a job to get the benefit anyways.

Now, to the point...it is more than just the deductions for the little kiddies, it is also the EIC which actually PAYS you to have kids. Yes, in case you didn't know it, someone with kids getting the EIC can get MORE back than they pay it...hence, getting paid to have kids.


True, but I was promoting changing the starting minimum not a EIC ;) You'd have to make money to see any benefit.

Ok, gotcha! :wink:

_________________
Go Lions!!! headbang.gif

Joe Fauria, MVP!


August 16th, 2011, 12:57 pm
Profile
RIP Killer
User avatar

Joined: June 26th, 2006, 1:03 pm
Posts: 13429
Post Re: Stop Coddling the Super-Rich
I still can't get the inner commie out though that sees the less income rich persons need to contribute a lesser % if it is a matter of eating your next meal or not and paying rent.

_________________
regularjoe12 - "You are crackin me up! really! HILARIOUS um let me quote some intellgent people in this coneversation: Steensn:"


August 16th, 2011, 4:44 pm
Profile
Commissioner of the NFL – Roger Goodell
User avatar

Joined: August 7th, 2004, 4:47 am
Posts: 10943
Location: Sterling Heights, MI
Post Re: Stop Coddling the Super-Rich
So much to discuss here. :lol:

Pablo wrote:
well unless you are sly and no women in her right mind would take his hand

That's probably because I have her hands tied to the bedposts while I'm having my way with her, but I digress. :lol:

Just for the hell of it, let's propose a 10% wealth tax and see how quickly Buffett shuts up about it. Seriously. He's old and won't be concerned about future profits because he's already wealthy. But, if you try to take away what he's already earned, I bet he'd squeal like a little girl at a Justin Beiber concert. Just saying and attempting to put it in context. Of course, I wouldn't be in favor of doing this, but I guarantee you he wouldn't be in favor of it either.

I hate EIC and any other entitlements which refund a taxpayer more than they paid in. If you paid $1,000 in federal tax that year, that's the most you should get back. Not $2,000, $5,000, or $10,000. Unfortunately, I know a few people that do this every year and it's a shame.

In case you didn't know, the US has the second highest corporate tax rate in the world behind Japan. Due to the loopholes, tax breaks and credits, and subsidies, the large corporations don't pay anything close to 35% though. Guess who does? The small businesses which drive our economy. They don't have the resources, profits, or available cash to take advantage of those schemes, unlike the big boys. Therefore, they get screwed and are unable to compete in a lot of cases. That's why I say we should lower the tax rate and eliminate the bullshit. This will reduce crony capitalism and level the playing field for all businesses, big or small. It would also make us more of a free market system in which the consumer will ultimately win with more choices and lower prices. The government should not be allowed to determine the winners and losers in this. The American people should.

The best argument for a Fair Tax, or National Sales Tax, is that the underground economy would be forced to pay taxes as well. But that's the only benefit I see from it. In my eyes, I see it as just another tax politicians will use to spend even more money. The madness has got to stop sometime. What's next? A TV tax like they've got in the UK, a mileage tax, a pet tax, or the amount of oxygen you breathe tax? Don't give politicians another avenue of taxation because they will simply spend more money. They can't help themselves.

As for the Flat Tax which I favor, most people peg it at 12% to keep revenues the same. However, I prefer that it begins at 15% with the extra 3% being constitutionally mandated to reduce the debt. This should be included in a Balanced Budget Amendment. Once the debt is paid off in 100 years (if we're lucky), the rate could be reduced.

While this isn't a progressive income tax, we could protect the poor through the use of the standard and dependent deductions. I would put it at $10K per, but that is arbitrary. This way a family of four wouldn't pay tax on their first $40K of income. A single person would only have their first $10K exempt. Conversely, the richer you are, the higher percentage of income gets taxed since the $10K-$40K deduction would only be chump change to someone making over $1M. A single guy earning $20K would pay 15% of $10K, while a single milionaire would pay 15% of $990K. That sounds fair to me.

_________________
Image


August 16th, 2011, 4:44 pm
Profile
Modmin Dude
User avatar

Joined: December 31st, 2004, 9:55 am
Posts: 11825
Post Re: Stop Coddling the Super-Rich
steensn wrote:
I still can't get the inner commie out though that sees the less income rich persons need to contribute a lesser % if it is a matter of eating your next meal or not and paying rent.

Huh??? :confused:

_________________
Go Lions!!! headbang.gif

Joe Fauria, MVP!


August 16th, 2011, 4:47 pm
Profile
RIP Killer
User avatar

Joined: June 26th, 2006, 1:03 pm
Posts: 13429
Post Re: Stop Coddling the Super-Rich
TheRealWags wrote:
steensn wrote:
I still can't get the inner commie out though that sees the less income rich persons need to contribute a lesser % if it is a matter of eating your next meal or not and paying rent.

Huh??? :confused:


At the lower income levels I still see a need to not tax those persons based on # of people the income is supporting. That 15%-20% equals to actual meals and rent checks, not ipods and nikes for them. I don't like a FULLY true flat tax, there should be a floor at minimum based on income and dependents.

_________________
regularjoe12 - "You are crackin me up! really! HILARIOUS um let me quote some intellgent people in this coneversation: Steensn:"


August 16th, 2011, 4:53 pm
Profile
Commissioner of the NFL – Roger Goodell
User avatar

Joined: August 7th, 2004, 4:47 am
Posts: 10943
Location: Sterling Heights, MI
Post Re: Stop Coddling the Super-Rich
steensn wrote:
I still can't get the inner commie out though that sees the less income rich persons need to contribute a lesser % if it is a matter of eating your next meal or not and paying rent.

Inner commie? The first step to recovery is admitting you have a problem to begin with. Seek help before it's too late. :lol:

Under my above proposal, the very poor would pay no tax, while the percentage of your income subject to tax would increase along with your income upto 15%. For instance, single dude making $20K would pay an effective $7.5% rate. Single guy making $30K would pay an effective 10% rate. Someone making $100K, would have an effective rate of 13.5%. Those making atleast a million would be very close to the full 15% though.

_________________
Image


August 16th, 2011, 4:57 pm
Profile
Online
RIP Killer
User avatar

Joined: August 6th, 2004, 9:21 am
Posts: 9254
Location: Dallas
Post Re: Stop Coddling the Super-Rich
steensn wrote:
TheRealWags wrote:
steensn wrote:
I still can't get the inner commie out though that sees the less income rich persons need to contribute a lesser % if it is a matter of eating your next meal or not and paying rent.

Huh??? :confused:


At the lower income levels I still see a need to not tax those persons based on # of people the income is supporting. That 15%-20% equals to actual meals and rent checks, not ipods and nikes for them. I don't like a FULLY true flat tax, there should be a floor at minimum based on income and dependents.


steensn, you need a reality check. I know plenty of poor people who haven't worked in a long time, somehow they still manage to have an iPhone and wear Nikes.

Reality check - spend some time in a 3rd world country with their poor and you will understand what poor really means. Honestly, I'm meet very few poor people in the US - most "poor" people I've meet are simply "lazy" and therefore poor by choice. Furhermore, most poor people I've meet I simply wanted to shake them and tell them to get off their big butts and do something productive.

Reality check - go find some poor people, if they were hurting for food wouldn't they be skinny. In reality, I know very few skinny poor people - in fact almost all of the ones I know (in this country) are very heavy.

Reality check - kids are expensive. You know who has the most kids, yeah poor people who really can't afford them in the first place.

Reality check - have you ever looked in a poor persons fridge and/or where they keep their food. You will find almost no ingredients to cook food with, but all packaged crap food. Think chips, candies, TV meals, beer. This has little to do with the price of food (cause often this food is expensive), it goes back to them being lazy.

You remind me of my college professors, they all lived in a theoretical world, not the real world. Their theories made sense, until you applied them to real people and suddenly they didn't actually pan out as expected. Shocking I know.

Again, I know to some I may sound like I don't have any empathy for these people, that couldn't be further from the truth. I see well intended programs having the exact opposite effect as they were supposed to have from the outset.

Our Declaration of Independence starts "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal" - why the hell can't we treat all men as if they were created equal? Imagine what would happen if we started treating everyone as equals - the results would be amazing - people would start acting more like, wait for it, equals. We need to empower people by treating them as equals, not by "coddling" them, rich or poor.

_________________
Image
LB Tweet


August 16th, 2011, 5:42 pm
Profile WWW
Pro Bowl Player

Joined: September 13th, 2007, 12:43 pm
Posts: 2564
Post Re: Stop Coddling the Super-Rich
I find your posts somewhat ironic, Pablo. In that, I used to think like that, too. But the world can't work that way.

Why was the New Deal enacted? It was a bribe. A payoff.

Go look up the father of the welfare state: Otto von Bismarck.

He invented the welfare state so that the poor of Germany did not revolt. He gave them crumbs so that they did not have a Communist revolution.

There's a reason we give poor people disability and welfare when they don't deserve it. Admittedly, they don't. There are many, many people who simply contribute nothing to society and everyone would be better off if they simply died. (Note: this is part of the reason why I support abortion)

However, they are there. And our moral code prevents us from slaughtering them or rounding them up in concentration camps.

Paying them off is much cheaper then letting them run amok. Because, if you're poor, and you have no job, and no house, and can't afford food what's to stop you from taking it? When you have nothing, you have nothing to lose.

That's what we've seen in London: people who have nothing going out and taking it. And if we cut welfare, that's going to happen here, too.

You have to do the cost-benefit analysis. It's cheaper to cut these people checks then it is to clean up their messes. I'll pay my share for welfare if it means my BMW isn't going to missing out of my driveway tomorrow.

Unfortunately, I feel like the US is--at this point--in a complete death spiral. If you don't cut the welfare, the country is going to go broke. At the same time, if you do cut it, you're going to have riots and a complete collapse of the system. I'm not really sure what the solution is anymore.

Also, on Buffet: the dude probably feels guilty. Alot of his fortune he only has because of the government in the first place, and I think he realizes this. Take his Goldman Sachs investment. Made billions because the government bailed out the firm.


August 16th, 2011, 7:29 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 78 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Majestic-12 [Bot] and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by STSoftware.