Sport Bikes banner

21 - 40 of 49 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
173 Posts
Discussion Starter #21
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?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,600 Posts
BusaDave said:
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
 

·
RESIDENT ASSHOLE
Joined
·
8,497 Posts
bumblebee said:
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.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,900 Posts
bumblebee said:
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.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,600 Posts
BusaDave said:
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??
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,682 Posts
bumblebee said:
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.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,600 Posts
jim schmidt said:
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...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
173 Posts
Discussion Starter #30
jim schmidt said:
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.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,734 Posts
But should taxation really be based on income? I've often wondered if a consumption tax wouldn't be a little more equitable. Sort of do away with income tax and create a type of sales tax to replace it. If I make a good living but save like crazy for things like my kids' college fund and retirement, should I have a similar burden to someone else with the same income and no family obligations but who has all the latest toys? Eliminate the loopholes, simplify the system, and do the math to determine what % of consumption tax would work. Then likely eliminate 80% of the current beaucracy that has to deal with making our current tax system work. I'm thinking out loud here so don't ask me for any facts or figures since I don't have any, but just presenting another avenue of discourse.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,682 Posts
bumblebee said:
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...
I have about thirty years of managing or consulting to nonprofits, including years as the CFO of a ten million dollar indigent health provider, and stints as CAO, COO and CEO of others. These companies ranged from 3/4 of a million to 14 million in annual revenues. When I was CFO, I also managed the finances for the seven subsidiaries including one that was a profit company. These companies served people with severe mental illness, victims of trauma, homeless kids and abused and neglected kids. I'm hardly as uninformed as you'd like to guess.

It was actually the lifetime accumulation of sad stories that make me recently move on to teaching. I wanted to provide a service to people who didn't have a sad story.

Frankly, I think running a nonprofit is much harder than running a profit business. So why don't you just reveal the real story? I'm a big fan of the nonprofit sector. What do they do? What do you do? I'm wondering if they agree with the idea that the poor are responsible for our tax rate?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,682 Posts
TejasFJR said:
But should taxation really be based on income? I've often wondered if a consumption tax wouldn't be a little more equitable. Sort of do away with income tax and create a type of sales tax to replace it. If I make a good living but save like crazy for things like my kids' college fund and retirement, should I have a similar burden to someone else with the same income and no family obligations but who has all the latest toys? Eliminate the loopholes, simplify the system, and do the math to determine what % of consumption tax would work. Then likely eliminate 80% of the current beaucracy that has to deal with making our current tax system work. I'm thinking out loud here so don't ask me for any facts or figures since I don't have any, but just presenting another avenue of discourse.
This idea is popular too, but collecting sales tax has a huge cost. And a consumption tax falls more heavily on people who don't have any excess revenue and must spend every dime they make, every month. It's regressive in this way.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
173 Posts
Discussion Starter #35
I mentioned this idea before or atleast what I think your talking about. More popularly known as "user fees".
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
173 Posts
Discussion Starter #37
Yeah, true. They've been trying to introduce user fees in general aviation, but not decrease your other tax burdens. As a pilot this would have been horrible for me. Flying is expensive enough as it is and luckily for now it's not gonna happen. Most likely to occur in the future though. Currently it is just another extra avenue for revenue, but I was refering to it more as a replacement. It's just how you define it. Like you said earlier though, the collection can be quite burdensome. One thing I think would be interesting though is that people would more readily see how much they actually give to the government. Most people think their refund is some sort of free money at the end of the year, not realizing it was theirs in the first place.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,900 Posts
bumblebee said:
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??
No.

We're discussing a flat tax or a progessive tax with a lower rate and no deductions, although I would support an exemption for income below a poverty income. I am not advocating failing to pay tax obligations.
 

·
Show them to me...
Joined
·
5,983 Posts
jim schmidt said:
This idea is popular too, but collecting sales tax has a huge cost. And a consumption tax falls more heavily on people who don't have any excess revenue and must spend every dime they make, every month. It's regressive in this way.
I may misspeak, because it has been a while since I read this. One idea to eliminate this was to give a sort of pre refund (if this makes sense) at the beginning of every month. Something along this line of thinking:

A family now that pays no taxes (because of EIC or whatever) must spend at least x amount of dollars. The taxes on this would be y amount of dollars. To offset this, everyone gets a pre refund of y dollars. Those who are barely getting by would spend the bare min to get by, and this y dollars would mean the did not actually pay any taxes. Those of us who have much more and spend much more would pay much more in taxes.

Along those lines, I would not be taxed on what I saved for retirement or kids college fund, etc, but truly on what I consumed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,682 Posts
EEfz6 said:
I may misspeak, because it has been a while since I read this. One idea to eliminate this was to give a sort of pre refund (if this makes sense) at the beginning of every month. Something along this line of thinking:

A family now that pays no taxes (because of EIC or whatever) must spend at least x amount of dollars. The taxes on this would be y amount of dollars. To offset this, everyone gets a pre refund of y dollars. Those who are barely getting by would spend the bare min to get by, and this y dollars would mean the did not actually pay any taxes. Those of us who have much more and spend much more would pay much more in taxes.

Along those lines, I would not be taxed on what I saved for retirement or kids college fund, etc, but truly on what I consumed.
You could certainly have a consumption plan that works and is not regressive. It's just that -- like all tax plans -- its the details that matter.
 
21 - 40 of 49 Posts
Top