Taxing the rich - what is the cutoff?

mredskins · 06-13-2008, 03:38 PM

I will have to agree $250K a year if you are manging your money correctly that tax squeeze should mean nothing to you. the problem is a lot of those people are living like they make $300K or $400k a year. Basically above their means.

SmootSmack · 06-13-2008, 04:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mredskins

I will have to agree $250K a year if you are manging your money correctly that tax squeeze should mean nothing to you. the problem is a lot of those people are living like they make $300K or $400k a year. Basically above their means.

People at all levels live "above thier means" Such as the person working the overnight drive-in shift at Wendy's wearing the $200 Nikes and playing on their iPhone.

ArtMonkDrillz · 06-13-2008, 04:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

People at all levels live "above thier means" Such as the person working the overnight drive-in shift at Wendy's wearing the $200 Nikes and playing on their iPhone.

Leave me out of this.

Sorry, I have no place in this thread, but I'm really bored.

Sheriff Gonna Getcha · 06-13-2008, 04:04 PM

It depends on where you live. A $250,000 salary goes a lot farther in the middle of nowhere than it does in downtown Manhattan. Unfortunately, I think it's hard to implement a tax scheme with COLAs.

onlydarksets · 06-13-2008, 04:21 PM

I don't think anyone is saying this is going to break the bank or push someone to foreclosure. The point is more that politicians speak of the top 2% as if they fly private jets around the world for dinner. 3% for a $250k income family probably does make a difference.

saden1 · 06-13-2008, 05:01 PM

It's really difficult to throw out a hard number/range without serious research and analysis. It's complex...you have to take locale and inflation into consideration. The number certainly can't be a hard figure because we'll eventually run into AMT tax like issues. One thing is for sure though, the well off won't be starving and will certainly be benefiting from all that this country has to offer.

Finally I'd like to add that our tax system is a progressive tax system which means the tax brackets can be adjusted. The question then becomes "what's a reasonable tax bracket structure?" If you don't like the progressive tax system, that's entirely a different matter.

Slingin Sammy 33 · 06-13-2008, 05:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by saden1

Finally I'd like to add that our tax system is a progressive tax system which means the tax brackets can be adjusted. The question then becomes "what's a reasonable tax bracket structure?" If you don't like the progressive tax system, that's entirely a different matter.

The income tax is progressive. However most folks in the U.S. pay more in the regressive payroll tax.

GhettoDogAllStars · 06-13-2008, 05:15 PM

I am against the federal income tax. I would like to see the states tax the income of their constituents, and have the federal government get its money from the states when it needs it. That way the state's tax would be more inline with the cost of living in that area (like Saden said).

When you really think about it, the federal income tax is not much different from a tax imposed by a King -- a prime motive for The Framers to create this country. Seems like we're back to square one.

I'm sure there are problems, but this approach seems much better to me.

724Skinsfan · 06-13-2008, 08:30 PM

1) If you offer me and my wife a 250k income, I guarantee we can live comfortably in any city with our two boys. Some housing areas of certain cities may be off-limits, of course.

2) I agree with Slingin' Sammy: you can't keep taxing the well-to-do just because they have the money. {Pssst...sounds like someone likes the Fair Tax idea}

3) On the other hand, since they're are already hard-working, entrepreneurially spirited individuals, if you do tax them more they'll just work that much harder to make up the difference. It's a win-win situation.

hesscl34 · 06-13-2008, 09:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 724Skinsfan

1) If you offer me and my wife a 250k income, I guarantee we can live comfortably in any city with our two boys. Some housing areas of certain cities may be off-limits, of course.

2) I agree with Slingin' Sammy: you can't keep taxing the well-to-do just because they have the money. {Pssst...sounds like someone likes the Fair Tax idea}

3) On the other hand, since they're are already hard-working, entrepreneurially spirited individuals, if you do tax them more they'll just work that much harder to make up the difference. It's a win-win situation.

"If you offer".. people that make money have a right to send their kids to private school and have nice car and nice homes. They do not deserve to get taxed more because they are wealthy and enjoy a higher standard of living than most. Take from the rich and give to the poor?? ... I think not when we are talking about $250k. If you want to go after Billionairs that have money to blow that's one thing, but $250k is not a lot when you live in an area like CA or DC... Obama says that millionairs and billionairs need to pay more, well $250k is not even close to a million IMO.

724Skinsfan · 06-13-2008, 10:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hesscl34

"If you offer".. people that make money have a right to send their kids to private school and have nice car and nice homes. They do not deserve to get taxed more because they are wealthy and enjoy a higher standard of living than most. Take from the rich and give to the poor?? ... I think not when we are talking about $250k. If you want to go after Billionairs that have money to blow that's one thing, but $250k is not a lot when you live in an area like CA or DC... Obama says that millionairs and billionairs need to pay more, well $250k is not even close to a million IMO.

What point of mine are you disagreeing with? I'm fairly certain my post said nothing about people earning 250k deserve to get taxed more.

hesscl34 · 06-17-2008, 10:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 724Skinsfan

What point of mine are you disagreeing with? I'm fairly certain my post said nothing about people earning 250k deserve to get taxed more.

Wasn't disagreeing, was just quoting you..

saden1 · 06-13-2008, 10:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hesscl34

"If you offer".. people that make money have a right to send their kids to private school and have nice car and nice homes. They do not deserve to get taxed more because they are wealthy and enjoy a higher standard of living than most. Take from the rich and give to the poor?? ... I think not when we are talking about $250k. If you want to go after Billionairs that have money to blow that's one thing, but $250k is not a lot when you live in an area like CA or DC... Obama says that millionairs and billionairs need to pay more, well $250k is not even close to a million IMO.

Come on now, why single out billionaires? Larry Ellison should be able to buy that 200 million dollar yacht. Gas isn't cheap these days and that bad boy costs a boatload to fill up. Those private jets don't pay for themselves either. You know, the sad thing is that due to rising costs and gas prices a lot of wealthy people are losing their yachts these days. It's just not right!

Slingin Sammy 33 · 06-14-2008, 03:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 724Skinsfan

2) I agree with Slingin' Sammy: you can't keep taxing the well-to-do just because they have the money. {Pssst...sounds like someone likes the Fair Tax idea}

You caught me, LOL!

Daseal · 06-13-2008, 09:30 PM

I find it ironic the same people against taxes are the same people for spending $4,000 a minute in Iraq.

06-13-2008, 03:38 PM	#1
mredskins Gamebreaker Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 13,007	Re: Taxing the rich - what is the cutoff? I will have to agree $250K a year if you are manging your money correctly that tax squeeze should mean nothing to you. the problem is a lot of those people are living like they make $300K or $400k a year. Basically above their means.

06-13-2008, 04:04 PM	#4
Sheriff Gonna Getcha Franchise Player Join Date: Feb 2004 Age: 46 Posts: 8,317	Re: Taxing the rich - what is the cutoff? It depends on where you live. A $250,000 salary goes a lot farther in the middle of nowhere than it does in downtown Manhattan. Unfortunately, I think it's hard to implement a tax scheme with COLAs.

06-13-2008, 04:21 PM	#5
onlydarksets Playmaker Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: all up in your business Posts: 2,693	Re: Taxing the rich - what is the cutoff? I don't think anyone is saying this is going to break the bank or push someone to foreclosure. The point is more that politicians speak of the top 2% as if they fly private jets around the world for dinner. 3% for a $250k income family probably does make a difference. __________________ Stop reading my signature.

06-13-2008, 05:01 PM	#6
saden1 MVP Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Seattle Age: 46 Posts: 10,069	Re: Taxing the rich - what is the cutoff? It's really difficult to throw out a hard number/range without serious research and analysis. It's complex...you have to take locale and inflation into consideration. The number certainly can't be a hard figure because we'll eventually run into AMT tax like issues. One thing is for sure though, the well off won't be starving and will certainly be benefiting from all that this country has to offer. Finally I'd like to add that our tax system is a progressive tax system which means the tax brackets can be adjusted. The question then becomes "what's a reasonable tax bracket structure?" If you don't like the progressive tax system, that's entirely a different matter. __________________ "The Redskins have always suffered from chronic organizational deformities under Snyder." -Jenkins

06-13-2008, 05:15 PM	#8
GhettoDogAllStars Playmaker Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Denver Age: 43 Posts: 2,762	Re: Taxing the rich - what is the cutoff? I am against the federal income tax. I would like to see the states tax the income of their constituents, and have the federal government get its money from the states when it needs it. That way the state's tax would be more inline with the cost of living in that area (like Saden said). When you really think about it, the federal income tax is not much different from a tax imposed by a King -- a prime motive for The Framers to create this country. Seems like we're back to square one. I'm sure there are problems, but this approach seems much better to me. __________________ To succeed in the world it is not enough to be stupid, you must also be well-mannered.

06-13-2008, 08:30 PM	#9
724Skinsfan Playmaker Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Roanoke, VA Posts: 3,508	Re: Taxing the rich - what is the cutoff? 1) If you offer me and my wife a 250k income, I guarantee we can live comfortably in any city with our two boys. Some housing areas of certain cities may be off-limits, of course. 2) I agree with Slingin' Sammy: you can't keep taxing the well-to-do just because they have the money. {Pssst...sounds like someone likes the Fair Tax idea} 3) On the other hand, since they're are already hard-working, entrepreneurially spirited individuals, if you do tax them more they'll just work that much harder to make up the difference. It's a win-win situation. __________________ "I hope I'm getting better. I hope you haven't seen my best." - Jim Zorn

06-13-2008, 09:30 PM	#15
Daseal Puppy Kicker Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Arlington, Virginia Age: 42 Posts: 8,341	Re: Taxing the rich - what is the cutoff? I find it ironic the same people against taxes are the same people for spending $4,000 a minute in Iraq. __________________ Best. Player. Available.

Taxing the rich - what is the cutoff?

Parking Lot