Taxing the rich - what is the cutoff?

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

Originally Posted by saden1

onlydarksets, your budget isn't realistic, it's someone living beyond their means budget.

Perhaps, but it's not like they are driving around in BMWs with gold-plated 22s and sippin' on $500 bottles of champagne. Households earning more than $250K live very comfortably in any market with any reasonable number of kids, but they are by no means "rich" (which is what this thread is about).

It strikes me as somewhat unfair to say to upper-middle class families, "You make more money than the rest of us, so hand over your money to the rest of us by allowing the government to tax you at a rate that is four times higher than mine." True, those upper-middle class families benefitted from our current government and infrastructure. But let's not act like families earning $250K are just sitting on trust funds their parents set up or merely have to breathe in order to make the cash; that is by far the exception to the rule. Most households earning $250K+ have breadwinners who have to bust their asses to make that kind of money and took enormous risks to get there (see, e.g., school debts incurred without any promise of a good ROI). Many people earning $40-$50K per year work 9-5 jobs. Most people earning $250K work 11 hour days, don't leave work at the workplace, etc. Moreover, even under a flat tax system, their per capita tax burden is far and away more onerous than that which others have to carry.

Don't get me wrong, the lives of those earning $250K or more is not a sob story. But, these people are NOT rich IMO.

[SC Skins Fan]

Originally Posted by Sheriff Gonna Getcha

Perhaps, but it's not like they are driving around in BMWs with gold-plated 22s and sippin' on $500 bottles of champagne. Households earning more than $250K live very comfortably in any market with any reasonable number of kids, but they are by no means "rich" (which is what this thread is about).

It strikes me as somewhat unfair to say to upper-middle class families, "You make more money than the rest of us, so hand over your money to the rest of us by allowing the government to tax you at a rate that is four times higher than mine." True, those upper-middle class systems benefitted from our current government and infrastructure. But let's not act like families earning $250K are just sitting on trust funds their parents set up; that is by far the exception to the rule. Most households earning $250K+ have breadwinners who have to bust their asses to make that kind of money and took enormous risks to get there (see, e.g., school debts incurred without any promise of a good ROI). Moreover, even under a flat tax system, their per capita tax burden is far and away more onerous than that which others have to carry.

Don't get me wrong, the lives of those earning $250K or more is not a sob story. But, these people are NOT rich IMO.

Well frankly this thread is ridiculous because it began with an article about how these people would be nailed if they had to pay an additional 3% on the $50,000 they make over $250K (i.e. the extra $1,500 they wouldn't see each year and that would sink them apparently). I think the whole idea of a progressive tax structure has really flown over a lot of people's heads here. Those tax cuts were bad financial policy to begin with, but if we are so intent on keeping helping those who make significantly more than $250K then let's do some serious cost cutting. Stop paying for the Iraq War with supplementals that hide the true cost, have massive cuts to social programs, cut government spending across the board. I'm sure that will not increase economic inequality and a healthy society is all that important anyway. Get yours if you can get it, if you can't then clearly you were not cut out for the great race of life. Survival of the fittest as Herbert Spencer would say.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by SC Skins Fan

Well frankly this thread is ridiculous because it began with an article about how these people would be nailed if they had to pay an additional 3% on the $50,000 they make over $250K (i.e. the extra $1,500 they wouldn't see each year and that would sink them apparently). I think the whole idea of a progressive tax structure has really flown over a lot of people's heads here. Those tax cuts were bad financial policy to begin with, but if we are so intent on keeping helping those who make significantly more than $250K then let's do some serious cost cutting. Stop paying for the Iraq War with supplementals that hide the true cost, have massive cuts to social programs, cut government spending across the board. I'm sure that will not increase economic inequality and a healthy society is all that important anyway. Get yours if you can get it, if you can't then clearly you were not cut out for the great race of life. Survival of the fittest as Herbert Spencer would say.

Sounds like a good plan to me. Can we also do away with SS? I also would like to see a source that this is a progressive tax the one someone did give was to a post in this thread.

[SC Skins Fan]

Originally Posted by firstdown

Sounds like a good plan to me. Can we also do away with SS.

Yes, government gone. Except for the military and police to protect the God given right of personal property and the rights of Due Process for corporations secured under the 14th amendment. Wouldn't want any revolutionaries thinking they could affect social change by force.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by firstdown

Sounds like a good plan to me. Can we also do away with SS?

That hurts man, that really hurts. What did I ever do to you?

Working on a new Understanding the Issues thread. The next one was going to be about the economy but I think this one pretty well covers it.

Hats off to those of you (you know who you are) who provided extremely insightful information.

Anyhow, I need to give some thought as to what the next topic should be. They start to get especially sensitive now so I must exercise caution.

I'll have something in the next 48 hours though. In the meantime, carry on with this discussion.

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

Originally Posted by SC Skins Fan

Well frankly this thread is ridiculous because it began with an article about how these people would be nailed if they had to pay an additional 3% on the $50,000 they make over $250K (i.e. the extra $1,500 they wouldn't see each year and that would sink them apparently). I think the whole idea of a progressive tax structure has really flown over a lot of people's heads here. Those tax cuts were bad financial policy to begin with, but if we are so intent on keeping helping those who make significantly more than $250K then let's do some serious cost cutting. Stop paying for the Iraq War with supplementals that hide the true cost, have massive cuts to social programs, cut government spending across the board. I'm sure that will not increase economic inequality and a healthy society is all that important anyway. Get yours if you can get it, if you can't then clearly you were not cut out for the great race of life. Survival of the fittest as Herbert Spencer would say.

I have to wonder whether this whole debate is about what is fiscally wise or what "feels right." The former issue is up for debate as I highly doubt that anyone here is qualified to say with a very high degree of certainty that any tax scheme is what is best for our country. The latter issue is I think what is dominanting the conversation. I never would have thought that a discussion about tax schemes could become so heated.

[saden1]

Originally Posted by Sheriff Gonna Getcha

Perhaps, but it's not like they are driving around in BMWs with gold-plated 22s and sippin' on $500 bottles of champagne. Households earning more than $250K live very comfortably in any market with any reasonable number of kids, but they are by no means "rich" (which is what this thread is about).

It strikes me as somewhat unfair to say to upper-middle class families, "You make more money than the rest of us, so hand over your money to the rest of us by allowing the government to tax you at a rate that is four times higher than mine." True, those upper-middle class families benefitted from our current government and infrastructure. But let's not act like families earning $250K are just sitting on trust funds their parents set up or merely have to breathe in order to make the cash; that is by far the exception to the rule. Most households earning $250K+ have breadwinners who have to bust their asses to make that kind of money and took enormous risks to get there (see, e.g., school debts incurred without any promise of a good ROI). Many people earning $40-$50K per year work 9-5 jobs. Most people earning $250K work 11 hour days, don't leave work at the workplace, etc. Moreover, even under a flat tax system, their per capita tax burden is far and away more onerous than that which others have to carry.

Don't get me wrong, the lives of those earning $250K or more is not a sob story. But, these people are NOT rich IMO.

You're preaching to the choir in regards to people making 250K not being rich, these people have to work day in day out after all. I do however find it odd some feel that 250K is not enough.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by saden1

You're preaching to the choir in regards to people making 250K not being rich, these people have to work day in day out after all. I do however find it odd some feel that 250K is not enough.

I agree the debate over if 250k is enough to live on has really moved this thread in a different direction. As I said earlier its more about "Is It Fair" to push more tax burden onto them?

[saden1]

Originally Posted by firstdown

I agree the debate over if 250k is enough to live on has really moved this thread in a different direction. As I said earlier its more about "Is It Fair" to push more tax burden onto them?

As a single guy that makes roughly half of that I think it's fair. Would I like to get more of my money back? Sure would. Do I feel burdened by taxes? No. Why is roughly half of my property taxes going towords local school districts when I don't have any kids? I don't know, but I do know that I went to public schools and it's the right thing to do....etc...etc...etc.

We've beat this subject to death. Time to explore a new subject. Take it aways SmootSmack.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by saden1

As a single guy that makes roughly half of that I think it's fair. Would I like to get more of my money back? Sure would. Do I feel burdened by taxes? No. Why is roughly half of my property taxes going towords local school districts when I don't have any kids? I don't know, but I do know that I went to public schools and it's the right thing to do....etc...etc...etc.

We've beat this subject to death. Time to explore a new subject. Take it aways SmootSmack.

Not to keep this going but where you say you do not feel burdened by the taxes you pay I do with a family of four. I'm self employed so each month I have to wright a big check to the Fed. and one to the state. Then at the end of the year they say my business grew but I did not take home any more pay and have to pay taxes on this so called growth. I think eveyone should have to pay their own taxes as it would cause allot more people to start thinking about whats happening to all their money. Heck, ask a person what they pay in fed and state taxes and most have no clue at all just what they bring home.

[saden1]

Originally Posted by firstdown

Not to keep this going but where you say you do not feel burdened by the taxes you pay I do with a family of four. I'm self employed so each month I have to wright a big check to the Fed. and one to the state. Then at the end of the year they say my business grew but I did not take home any more pay and have to pay taxes on this so called growth. I think eveyone should have to pay their own taxes as it would cause allot more people to start thinking about whats happening to all their money. Heck, ask a person what they pay in fed and state taxes and most have no clue at all just what they bring home.

I don't understand...if you're not growing you shouldn't be paying taxes on anything beyond your taxable revenue. If inflation and rising costs is taking it's toll on you then I feel you but understand that you're not the only one hurting in that regard.

As for small business operation, why are you filing your taxes every? Unless your revenue is extensive shouldn't you be filing quarterly or annually? Anywho, my parents own a small business. They have 10 or so employees and they let ADP handle their payroll taxes and a CPA do their taxes quarterly. I've heard them complaining about business being slow these days because people are cutting back on their spending and that's about it. I'm sure they wouldn't mind paying less taxes but they're not hurting because of taxes. I'm sure your situation is different but I don't know by how much.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by saden1

I don't understand...if you're not growing you shouldn't be paying taxes on anything beyond your taxable revenue. If inflation and rising costs is taking it's toll on you then I feel you but understand that you're not the only one hurting in that regard.

As for small business operation, why are you filing your taxes every? Unless your revenue is extensive shouldn't you be filing quarterly or annually? Anywho, my parents own a small business. They have 10 or so employees and they let ADP handle their payroll taxes and a CPA do their taxes quarterly. I've heard them complaining about business being slow these days because people are cutting back on their spending and that's about it. I'm sure they wouldn't mind paying less taxes but they're not hurting because of taxes. I'm sure your situation is different but I don't know by how much.

I have a S corp. so if on paper my business grows but I do not pay myself anymore money at the end of the year even though I did not take the money out of the business I have to pay taxes on that money. I've been hit a couple of times but back a few years we increased my pay and my 2 employees so this did not happen again. Its like I have to run the corp. so at the end of the year its in the negative and not the positive. My CPA does my payroll and my quarterly taxes. I've always paid my state and federal payroll taxes monthly then at the end of the quarter they just subtract out what I have allready paid and I send in the difference. I think every business has to send in their estimated payroll taxes each month because if mine is late any month they fine me. I'd hate to wait and pay it all every quarter because it would seem even that much worse.