Flat Tax...

[Geowitz]

Yeah, you mentioned that - I don't agree with your reasoning, sorry. I think of it in a different context though. It may not tell the whole story, but it isn't skewed. Are we just playing semanics? Either way we both understand what it means.

I as a homeowner know that it is not really an asset of mine. It's a liability(as long as you're paying a mortgage). It costs me money. A lot of people have been tricked into thinking their home is an asset. It's not. Giving tax incentives for paying interest and being in debt is why the majority of people in America will stay stuck in the rat race. Don't get me wrong, everyone needs a house to live in and it's worth it, but the home interest deduction should never be anyones incentive(or even secondary incentive, or even a justification) to buy a home.

[Fargin_Bastige]

Originally Posted by Geowitz

Yeah, you mentioned that - I don't agree with your reasoning, sorry. I think of it in a different context though. It may not tell the whole story, but it isn't skewed. Are we just playing semanics? Either way we both understand what it means.

I as a homeowner know that it is not really an asset of mine. It's a liability(as long as you're paying a mortgage). It costs me money. A lot of people have been tricked into thinking their home is an asset. It's not. Giving tax incentives for paying interest and being in debt is why the majority of people in America will stay stuck in the rat race. Don't get me wrong, everyone needs a house to live in and it's worth it, but the home interest deduction should never be anyones incentive(or even secondary incentive, or even a justification) to buy a home.

A home is an asset. Why wouldn't it be? Generally, a home goes up in value, in contrast to a vehicle that usually depreciates. Even though you are paying a mortgage, you shouldn't be in a negative equity situation.

[jim schmidt]

Last time I looked into it the percentage of tax paid by the top twenty percent (after deductions) was within a few points of the share of money they earned. They actually paid taxes at a rate of about 17.5% after deductions. (All from memory from about two years ago. It was documented here before the crash.) I had to look deep into IRS data to find tables that showed the rate they actually paid, rather than the gross tax rate. It may still be there somewhere.

Plus they got to be rich. The leisure class has nothing to cry about. And you shouldn't be fooled by their crying.

[Geowitz]

As long as you have a mortgage it's not an asset. It costs you money every month to the bank as well as regular and unforseen maintenance issues. House values do not always go up. Value is subject to market forces. Therefore on a financial statement for most people who have a mortgage the house payment is a liability payable to the bank, BUT it's an asset collectable by the bank. Your house/mortgage is an asset to the bank not you. You fault on it and they get your house. Equity doesn't mean a thing to a bank when filling out a financial statement unless your trying to borrow more money. All that counts is you owe someone a hell of a lot of money and couldn't pay it off right now in liquid assets.

And if you have to try to sell quickly to be able to pay the bank back that proves that it's not an asset. Assets make money. Investment is a closer word, but a house would qualify as a bad investment in my book unless it creates more money than it costs.

[Geowitz]

An asset makes money. A liability costs you money. Even when you do have it payed off it costs you money in maintenance and utility bills. Appreciation only happens when you sell if at all. That's not an asset, it's windfall profit.

[Geowitz]

Anyways, I'm sorry, lets get back to topic. I think we all agree that the more you make the more you should typically have to pay in taxes. I'm not really comfortable with this on the surface, but I figure I pay more than some, but am able to use more governemnt services than those who make less than me.Those who make more than me use government services and infrastructure more than I do so they should pay more in taxes.

How about user fees though? Larger corporations use a lot more infrastructure than the little guy. Should user fees be more prominent?

[bumblebee]

Originally Posted by BusaDave

It is skewed when these numbers are used to conclude that 7% of the taxable population paying 51% of all the money is unfair to the 7% without taking into account what percentage of the total income they make. Didn't I say that once already?

Personally, I think a graduated tax system is fine and simplifying the tax code to reduce administrative costs would be a good thing. I have no problem whatsoever with those who benefit most from society also contribute the most.

Ultimately you are going to have problems with ANY tax change that requires people to pay more taxes by redistributing the tax burden, particularly by those who contribute large amounts to political parties.

I seriously doubt that most homeowners would share your view of the home interest deduction.

I think it depends on what you consider a benefit...Illegal aliens coming to this country, participating in the underground economy, are not paying anything, but yet, their kids are enrolled in public schools and they are provided with free healthcare when they show up in the emergency rooms, they are collecting/abusing food stamp and welfare programs, burdening the judicial system and straining the social assets of the communities where they...They seem to be deriving great benefits without paying...And if you think it is not a problem...talk to the mayors of communities in Arizona, new Mexico, Texas, Florida and Southern California

[hybrid]

Originally Posted by bumblebee

talk to the mayors of communities in Arizona, new Mexico, Texas, Florida and Southern California

Ummmm leave New Mexico out of that statement. I live here, this is the capitol of stupidity. People are actually righteous about the illegals here. Go fucking figure.....


All I am saying is that you should pay a fair amount of tax by what you are afforded.

If I pay 40% actual tax then so should someone else making ten times more than me.

Has anyone ever really figured out what we pay in taxes? Canada might not be too off with 50% being I get taxed pretty damn hard and pay sales tax on everything. Im sure more than half of my money goes into taxes of some sort by the end of the year. Hell, I own a small business and I dont get any real kick ass deductions.

[BusaDave]

Originally Posted by bumblebee

I think it depends on what you consider a benefit...Illegal aliens coming to this country, participating in the underground economy, are not paying anything, but yet, their kids are enrolled in public schools and they are provided with free healthcare when they show up in the emergency rooms, they are collecting/abusing food stamp and welfare programs, burdening the judicial system and straining the social assets of the communities where they...They seem to be deriving great benefits without paying...And if you think it is not a problem...talk to the mayors of communities in Arizona, new Mexico, Texas, Florida and Southern California

Where did I say anything about illegal aliens or the underground economy? We are discussing methods of collecting taxes. Specifically, I was addressing the notion that the wealthy are being mistreated by showing that the % of total taxes they pay are not out of line with the % of total income they make.

[bumblebee]

Originally Posted by BusaDave

Where did I say anything about illegal aliens or the underground economy? We are discussing methods of collecting taxes. Specifically, I was addressing the notion that the wealthy are being mistreated by showing that the % of total taxes they pay are not out of line with the % of total income they make.

But the poor people pay no taxes...it is the vanishing middle class that is funding all this spending, I am being hit with the high tax brackets and the alternative minimum tax...and I am by no means rich. Do you not believe that by placing a higher burden of taxes on the people/families making between 60 and 150K per year you are actually discouraging people from finishing college and become prosperous?? Would it be fair to my employees if every business decision I make is based on what my taxes will be versus the growth and prosperity of the company, which they all get to share in via higher wages and better benefits??

[jim schmidt]

Originally Posted by bumblebee

But the poor people pay no taxes...it is the vanishing middle class that is funding all this spending, I am being hit with the high tax brackets and the alternative minimum tax...and I am by no means rich. Do you not believe that by placing a higher burden of taxes on the people/families making between 60 and 150K per year you are actually discouraging people from finishing college and become prosperous?? Would it be fair to my employees if every business decision I make is based on what my taxes will be versus the growth and prosperity of the company, which they all get to share in via higher wages and better benefits??

You have 75 employees (who all get full family health coverage, btw) and you make under 150K? Something doesn't compute!

You're right about one thing. But it's not the poor who are riding on your back. The middle class is being suckered by the leisure class. And if you are truly doing that poorly, you're among them. You probably also need a new tax accountant.

[Napalm]

Originally Posted by Fargin_Bastige

I'm for the graduated tax with less loopholes. You make more, you pay more. As it should be.

How is a graduated tax fair? Just because they have more money the government should be able to take more?

I'd go with true flat tax with no additional benefits and no additional hardship to anyone, as it should be.

[bumblebee]

Originally Posted by jim schmidt

You have 75 employees (who all get full family health coverage, btw) and you make under 150K? Something doesn't compute!

You're right about one thing. But it's not the poor who are riding on your back. The middle class is being suckered by the leisure class. And if you are truly doing that poorly, you're among them. You probably also need a new tax accountant.

I am an accountant...must be why I retired at 42 to become a full time Dad to my two children under 10...Currently I am involved in a non-profit...where our admin costs are less than 8 % of the gross...the money is going to the people who truly need it...Some of us Jim, have a MUCH better handle on this than you realize...

[Geowitz]

^^^
LOL, I like it.

Originally Posted by bumblebee

Some of us Jim, have a MUCH better handle on this than you realize...

Self permeating intellectual superiority clouds certain realizations.

[Geowitz]

Originally Posted by jim schmidt

The middle class is being suckered by the leisure class.

LOL, so it's not the rich anymore, it's the "leisure" class. As if they do nothing but sit around and sip champagne on yachts.