Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
napsgear
genezapharmateuticals
domestic-supply
puritysourcelabs
UGL OZ
UGFREAK
napsgeargenezapharmateuticals domestic-supplypuritysourcelabsUGL OZUGFREAK

47% of households will pay no federal income tax

What this all means to me is that I should bust my ass now, make some money and set myself up. Then at 40 retire with my house paid for, my autos paid for, set up a great health care plan and all other major purchases paid for. Finally have a retirement income that puts me at the 48% level of all Americans and bam I will be living great for the rest of my life doing only the things that I want to do and not paying everyone else to live the way I want to live!
 
The top 1% of earners pay 40% of the income taxes. If the system is setup to benefit the really rich, it's not doing a very good job.

Gates, Buffett again top Forbes’ list of richest - Forbes.com- msnbc.com

America's super rich are getting poorer. For only the fifth time since 1982, the collective net worth of The Forbes 400, our annual tally of the nation's richest people, has declined, falling $300 billion in the past 12 months from $1.57 trillion to $1.27 trillion.
 
I am so sick of that retort. More than 50% of the population of this country is made up of households making under $50k a year. Frankly, for a family of three or four, that's dirt.

I worked for an actuary. I knew how much he made, for a fact, and he cleared well over half a million a year, yet he managed to get income tax refunds, when I, a single working mother, was paying out at the end of the year.

The richer you are, the less money you tell the government you make and because the tax laws are so convoluted, you can afford the CPAs and lawyers to help you get away with it.

My simple argument: If rich people and big corporations wanted a flat tax they'd have lobbiests out there pounding down congress' doors. Except congressmen don't want a flat tax, either. People who are in the big money brackets don't want a flat tax because suddenly they'd be held to the same standards everyone else is, the rest of us would probably be paying the same amount.

You're sick of that retort because it's inescapable.

1) Make a list of income earners in American sorted by descenting rank.

2) Look at the income taxes collected from the top 1% of the names.

3) It will be 40% of the taxes collected.

That's great that you worked for someone who made a lot of money yet got refunds. You're working with a sample size of one.

Guess what? I'll get a refund too, because I pay taxes based on quarterly estimates. So every quarter, you write a fat check to the IRS and at year's end, hopefully you've covered your tax bill and recieve a nominal refund.
 
Would everyone please give me the consideration of reading the PROFESSIONAL CPA's response to me? Don't just read what the man said, but what he didn't say.

And I'm sorry, but yes, those who make the lion's share of the profits in this world SHOULD give more than those who do not. That is how tribes have operated for millenia and what enabled humanity to survive long enough to evolve. It is only with our culture, these times of capitalism, that the idea of those who have providing for those who have not has become distasteful.

In pursuit of wealth we lose the core of compassion that makes us most human.
 
Would everyone please give me the consideration of reading the PROFESSIONAL CPA's response to me? Don't just read what the man said, but what he didn't say.

He said it's complicated and that most breaks are designed to encourage people with excess capital to invest in things that create jobs. What hidden tidbit are we missing here?

And I'm sorry, but yes, those who make the lion's share of the profits in this world SHOULD give more than those who do not.

That's how the system works now.

Maybe I should approach this from another angle. Let's say a guy makes $1,000,000 per year. In your mind, what's a fair amount of that sum he should give up to those less fortunate? Forget the specifics of the tax system itself -- how much of that $1,000,000 should go away?
 
He said it's complicated and that most breaks are designed to encourage people with excess capital to invest in things that create jobs. What hidden tidbit are we missing here?
If you can't see it then I probably can't explain it. His implication is that while the legislation is in place to technically provide tax breaks for rich and corporations to enhance commerce in this country, it can be used to just line your pockets and there is no way to prevent that.

Maybe I should approach this from another angle. Let's say a guy makes $1,000,000 per year. In your mind, what's a fair amount of that sum he should give up to those less fortunate? Forget the specifics of the tax system itself -- how much of that $1,000,000 should go away?
Well, let's see. I'm in favor of flat tax ... and out of our income last year, my husband and I actually paid 19% of what we grossed, in taxes (between payroll deductions and quarterlies). So the person who makes $1mil. should, at the least, pay $190,000.

Like I said, I like a flat tax, love the idea in fact. A flat tax with NO loopholes, no safety nets, no hedges. You get paid a certain amount, you fork over your share to the govt. right then and there and it's done. Screw April 15. Cut the IRS staff down by more than half and be done with it. People living at poverty level are exempt.

And as for kids, you just get a reduction in your percentage, say 1%, and THAT's IT. We should be rewarding people who DON'T reproduce, in fact.

But then, I'm in favor of universal healthcare, too ... and ain't like I ever will run for president so I could care less if people like what I say.

When it comes down to it, I feel humans are supposed to help out their fellow man, even if it means they may have to make a few adjustments in their own lifestyle :whatever:
 
If you can't see it then I probably can't explain it. His implication is that while the legislation is in place to technically provide tax breaks for rich and corporations to enhance commerce in this country, it can be used to just line your pockets and there is no way to prevent that.

Well, let's see. I'm in favor of flat tax ... and out of our income last year, my husband and I actually paid 19% of what we grossed, in taxes (between payroll deductions and quarterlies). So the person who makes $1mil. should, at the least, pay $190,000.

Like I said, I like a flat tax, love the idea in fact. A flat tax with NO loopholes, no safety nets, no hedges. You get paid a certain amount, you fork over your share to the govt. right then and there and it's done. Screw April 15. Cut the IRS staff down by more than half and be done with it. People living at poverty level are exempt.

And as for kids, you just get a reduction in your percentage, say 1%, and THAT's IT. We should be rewarding people who DON'T reproduce, in fact.

But then, I'm in favor of universal healthcare, too ... and ain't like I ever will run for president so I could care less if people like what I say.

When it comes down to it, I feel humans are supposed to help out their fellow man, even if it means they may have to make a few adjustments in their own lifestyle :whatever:

I'd be giddy over 19% and no loopholes. With the expiration of Bush's tax cuts coming-up, we'll be back to 40% in income and 40% on dividends as well (so you get double-taxed when you invest).

No loopholes and downsizing the IRS is good stuff too. We disagree on government-run single-payer healthcare, but I'd be fine with just cutting a check to people who truly can't afford it.
 
I can't ait til all the rich move their companies and money outside the coutnry - avoid paying taxes - and all you bitches now have a fucked up government cuz there's no tax money for anything! hahahaha. How's that healthcare and dollar value coming along?? lol!

Maybe then bitches will pay some respect to all the rich people who pay 95% of your taxes.

c
 
Top Bottom