How To Tax The Rich[W:632,649]

[Geoist]

Level the field?
To level the field you have to stop gouging the wealthy.

We are all gouged on our labor and products, wealthy or poor.

Taxing wealth?
What a ridiculous idea, especially as it was already taxed.

Keep saying something is ridiculous and absurd without substance. Maybe you'll convince someone.

We are taxed on things that should not be taxed (after all, why should you pay more if you work more?). Land dues should be the only necessary 'tax.'

Taxing land?
It already is, but shouldn't be beyond the fist sales tax.

We have a property tax, which taxes part of the value of the land+your improvements. A pure LVT taxes the value of the land-your improvements. Why should the man who builds a hospital pay a higher tax than his neighbor who sits on an empty site? Why should that speculator profit from his neighbor's hospital?

 

[Joe Steel]

It is interesting to chart the death rate in Iraq over the past 30 years or so. Ranged from 8 to 14.5 per 1000 per year prior to 2003 then dropped to 5.2, 5.1 and lower. At 25 million population, that would mean c. 75,000 lives saved a year by the invasion. I realize that Americans don't care about Iraqis but a combination of the UN sanctions and Saddam's wars with Iran and Kuwait as well as his own people. The world is better off with him gone. I thought that everyone knew that the WMD stuff was just the rationale to do what should have been done. And the population went from 22 million to 31 million after the invasion. ...

Lies, damn lies and statistics.

Where did you get your numbers?

 

[Eric7216]

Lies, damn lies and statistics.

Where did you get your numbers?

World Almanac published each year by the NY Times, using UN figures.
Just grabbed 2 of them now. In 2000, death rate was 6.56, infant mortality rate was 62.41, life expectancy was 65.54 for males. In 2008 death rate was 5.3, infant mortality was 47 life expectancy was 68.
(2000 must have been a good year for the Saddam era)

It should be easy to look at the population growth and ask yourself why the population went up so much when a war was going on and all the refugees were leaving. We were lied to about the 600,000 Iraqis killed.

 

[Eric7216]

social engineering aside (which is not a legitimate government function) I detest giving a government power to enact the wet dreams of the envious. We libertarians and most conservatives believe in the family and the wealth of a family should not be raped by bureaucrats

I don't call it social engineering. The money you earn is your money. When you die, you have no need for the money you earned. We could do like mythical India and burn that wealth at death. Social engineering would be wanting to give your money to someone who did not earn it. Normally when someone gets money they pay taxes on it. Social engineering would say that money given to a child or grandchild should be tax free but money given to the neighbor down the street who worked should be taxed.

And it has nothing to do with envy. Children are not the same as the parent. They are their own people. They should not be responsible for the debts of their parents or the earnings of their parents.

 

[Eric7216]

That is great. You ever hear of these concepts of freedom, liberty? You're ****ting all over them with your belief that parents should give thier wealth to thier children cause the children "didnt earn it". What terrible pov.

Well, our country was largely founded by people who were not the eldest son who inherited everything. We were founded by people who inherited nothing and had to work and achieve and we have done rather well with that concept.

 

[Renae]

Well, our country was largely founded by people who were not the eldest son who inherited everything. We were founded by people who inherited nothing and had to work and achieve and we have done rather well with that concept.

You are either trolling, or have a very warped view of reality. What I choose to do with my wealth isn't any of your business. Continuing to care for my loved ones by passing on my accumilated wealth is my right and should not be punished by envious people with misguided principles and a hate for those who achieve.

 

[Papa bull]

There are people who consider the government to be their mommy and daddy and believe all good things come from mommy and daddy and so whatever you got from mommy and daddy should be theirs when you die.

I'm not of that school of thought. The government is not our mommy, daddy or wet nurse. What you earn is not the government's stuff on loan to citizens. It's yours to do with as you please and to bequeath to whomever you please.

 

[Excon]

We are all gouged on our labor and products, wealthy or poor.

And? That does not justify gouging the wealthy even more.

Keep saying something is ridiculous and absurd without substance. Maybe you'll convince someone.

What is rediculous is you not realizing that the fact that it has already been taxed is the substance.

We are taxed on things that should not be taxed (after all, why should you pay more if you work more?).

There should be no tax on personal income. Only on sales.

Land dues should be the only necessary 'tax.'

Not. Land is sold and becomes property.
As property, other than it's sale, it should not be subjected to more taxation.

We have a property tax, which taxes part of the value of the land+your improvements.

Stop being dishonest.
It doesn't just tax part of it.
Regardless. It is still wrong to tax that which is already owned.

A pure LVT taxes the value of the land-your improvements.

:doh
It is still wrong to tax that which is already owned.

Why should the man who builds a hospital pay a higher tax than his neighbor who sits on an empty site? Why should that speculator profit from his neighbor's hospital?

No one should be paying any tax on any property.
But as it is, the land with the hospital is worth more because it has private industry on it which increases the value of the land. Do you really not understand that?
Why are you calling the neighbor a speculator? That is just wrong.

 

[Excon]

then you would advocate murder of legislators who passed such taxes?

If a law was passed allowing such, which passed court scrutiny, it wouldn't be murder.
Just saying.

 

[TurtleDude]

I don't call it social engineering. The money you earn is your money. When you die, you have no need for the money you earned. We could do like mythical India and burn that wealth at death. Social engineering would be wanting to give your money to someone who did not earn it. Normally when someone gets money they pay taxes on it. Social engineering would say that money given to a child or grandchild should be tax free but money given to the neighbor down the street who worked should be taxed.

And it has nothing to do with envy. Children are not the same as the parent. They are their own people. They should not be responsible for the debts of their parents or the earnings of their parents.

what people like you seem to forget is that I make a decision while I am still alive what happens to my money and I tire of parasites, utopians, socialists or "do gooders" saying they have a greater claim on its disposition than I do

 

[TurtleDude]

Well, our country was largely founded by people who were not the eldest son who inherited everything. We were founded by people who inherited nothing and had to work and achieve and we have done rather well with that concept.

and those people often worked hard because they wanted to give their sons and daughters a better life than they had. That seems to be something missing in your posts

 

[Jack Fabulous]

Well, our country was largely founded by people who were not the eldest son who inherited everything. We were founded by people who inherited nothing and had to work and achieve and we have done rather well with that concept.

Redistribution is redistribution no matter if you take my hard earned money before I die or wait until after I'm dead. You still did nothing which entitles you or anyone else to MY stuff.

I worked for it. I PAID TAXES ON IT. And if I want to give it to my kids, grandkids, or anyone else that is my decision to make.

 

[Reformedfindlay]

Such is the beginning of the terrible habit of hording ****loads of cash instead of putting it to use. Thank god I convinced my parents to not be afraid to spend money on things like houses, renovations, building. My goal is to have no inheritance other than perhaps property, actual saved money being passed down to me would leave a terrible taste in my mouth.

 

[Reformedfindlay]

Redistribution is redistribution no matter if you take my hard earned money before I die or wait until after I'm dead. You still did nothing which entitles you or anyone else to MY stuff.

I worked for it. I PAID TAXES ON IT. And if I want to give it to my kids, grandkids, or anyone else that is my decision to make.

Like father unlike son, Like Donald Trump's competent dad unlike Donald Trump's inherit everything spraypaint-my-face-when-I'm-old dumb lazy ass.

 

[Jack Fabulous]

Such is the beginning of the terrible habit of hording ****loads of cash instead of putting it to use. Thank god I convinced my parents to not be afraid to spend money on things like houses, renovations, building. My goal is to have no inheritance other than perhaps property, actual saved money being passed down to me would leave a terrible taste in my mouth.

Houses, property, businesses, investments, etc... ARE saved money. Think about it.

 

[Reformedfindlay]

Houses, property, businesses, investments, etc... ARE saved money. Think about it.

And then in first half of the sentence above I stated property but clearly you seem to just prove some sort of incompetence. Not to mention renovating and building properties unlike hoarding cash and passing it down affects the economy in a much more positive way. We are spenders, you are hoarders.

 

[Jack Fabulous]

And then in first half of the sentence above I stated property but clearly you seem to just prove some sort of incompetence. Not to mention renovating and building properties unlike hoarding cash and passing it down affects the economy in a much more positive way. We are spenders, you are hoarders.

Inheritance means passing down something of value. Wealth. Wealth can have many forms and, yes, one of those forms can be cash.

But regardless, what I choose to do with my money, my property, my investments, that I have earned, that I have already paid taxes on, is nobody's business but my own.

 

[haymarket]

If a law was passed allowing such, which passed court scrutiny, it wouldn't be murder.
Just saying.

Killing somebody in cold blood is NOT murder!?!?!?!?!? By what standards is that even possible?

 

[Excon]

Killing somebody in cold blood is NOT murder!?!?!?!?!? By what standards is that even possible?

Did you not read and understand the reply?
A law that allows for the killing would not be murder.
As murder is defined by law.

 

[Eric7216]

Redistribution is redistribution no matter if you take my hard earned money before I die or wait until after I'm dead. You still did nothing which entitles you or anyone else to MY stuff.

I worked for it. I PAID TAXES ON IT. And if I want to give it to my kids, grandkids, or anyone else that is my decision to make.

Well, first of all, I don't want your damn money I just don't think that your children should get it tax free because, as you stated, they "still did nothing which entitles them or anyone else to MY stuff."

So you are against all income taxes? What difference do you see between someone working, earning money, paying taxes on that money, and someone not working, not earning that money, and not paying taxes on it simply because someone gave them the money? I guess in your world the employer could give you money as a gift and not as a salary and therefore you wouldn't have to pay taxes on it.

 

[Eric7216]

You are either trolling, or have a very warped view of reality. What I choose to do with my wealth isn't any of your business. Continuing to care for my loved ones by passing on my accumilated wealth is my right and should not be punished by envious people with misguided principles and a hate for those who achieve.

That response has nothing to do with what I wrotet. Unlike you, I admire those who achieve while you like the idea of trust fund playboys jetsetters and assorted layabouts living off of your achievements. The guys who wrote the book The Millionaire Next Door made it clear that the more successful children of wealthy parents earned their own way and relied little on the parents wealth.

You should do what you want with your wealth. Give to whatever you choose. I sure don't want any of it nor am I the least envious of you for having earned money. But it is a bad idea to make idle rich out of your descendants.

And I find it very ironic. I am arguing that money needed to run the country, for defense, justice, etc., should come not so much from income taxes on the achievers who are best able to use that money effectively, but from estate taxes. The person who earned the money is dead and doesn't need it. While you apparently want to tax the earners. Or else you believe that government can run for free.

 

[Jack Fabulous]

Well, first of all, I don't want your damn money I just don't think that your children should get it tax free because, as you stated, they "still did nothing which entitles them or anyone else to MY stuff."

So you are against all income taxes? What difference do you see between someone working, earning money, paying taxes on that money, and someone not working, not earning that money, and not paying taxes on it simply because someone gave them the money? I guess in your world the employer could give you money as a gift and not as a salary and therefore you wouldn't have to pay taxes on it.

There's a bunch of stuff here that you are dead wrong about.

First of all...

Well, first of all, I don't want your damn money I just don't think that your children should get it tax free

They won't be getting ANYTHING "tax free". I already paid taxes on it and the last time I checked the inheritance tax in this country is pretty damn high. TOO HIGH.

Second...

because, as you stated, they "still did nothing which entitles them or anyone else to MY stuff."

"They" are MY kids. I'll give them anything I damn well please... entitled or not.


Third...

So you are against all income taxes?

Where in the hell did you come up with this whopper of a strawman? Total fabrication of nonsense and an epic failure on your part.

Finally...

What difference do you see between someone working, earning money, paying taxes on that money, and someone not working, not earning that money, and not paying taxes on it simply because someone gave them the money?

Now we're getting to the meat and potatoes of the real source of your messed up world view. You're simply jealous. You're jealous of the fact that there really are people in this world who were born of rich and prosperous parents and are able to skate through life having everything handed to them and doing nothing for it. Get over it. Fools and their money are soon parted and the world is also full of privileged morons who squandered everything.

You just hit high water marks for dishonest, jealous, and clueless with a single post.

Bravo.

 

[haymarket]

Did you not read and understand the reply?
A law that allows for the killing would not be murder.
As murder is defined by law.

Perhaps you did not understand my post. The LAW I was talking about was one to increase taxes upon the rich.

What LAW are you talking about that would legalize the murder of people who would do that? I really do NOT understand what you are referring to as it makes no sense thrown in to the conversation between Turtle and myself. So please do clarify your position.

 

[Green Man]

This article makes some fresh and not-so-fresh proposals on how to reform/improve our tax system. I don't necessarily agree with everything they suggest, but there are a few great ideas, particularly #5 and #6:

5. More taxes on wealth, less on income. We should refocus our taxation away from the taxation of economically useful activity and onto the holding of wealth, discouraging the hoarding of valuable cash, land or possessions. This would be much more sensible for the overall economy whilst raising as much revenue or more.

6. Tax land ownership. The greatest source of wealth is the ownership of land and yet it is only lightly taxed in the UK. The simplest way to change this would be to revalue council tax bands (we're still on 1991 values) and add lots of new bands so people with expensive houses pay much more. Better still would be a land value tax, an annual tax on the underlying value of land owned (rather than the value of buildings that occupy it). This is a policy that has been recommended by economists from across the political spectrum, and could wholly replace current taxes like council tax and stamp duty. Done right, it would mean lower bills or equal bills for the vast majority of the population, and substantially increased taxation on the top 10%.



It is a shame we focus so much on income tax and not on alternative forms on taxation that will actually level the playing field.

I would prefer no taxes at all. But from a federal perspective, I would prefer that the federal government tax the states, not individuals.

 

[Excon]

Perhaps you did not understand my post. The LAW I was talking about was one to increase taxes upon the rich.

Not to me you weren't.
You specifically said to me: "Killing somebody in cold blood is NOT murder!?!?!?!?!? By what standards is that even possible?"

As I said: "If a law was passed allowing such, which passed court scrutiny, it wouldn't be murder.
Just saying."


So no you didn't understand what was said to you.
Which does figure.
Killing that is legal is not murder.

What LAW are you talking about that would legalize the murder of people who would do that? I really do NOT understand what you are referring to as it makes no sense thrown in to the conversation between Turtle and myself. So please do clarify your position.

Bs! You are playing a game now. You clearly know what he said, and you clearly know what you said to in reply.
My reply was pointing out that if such was codified into law as being legal, it wouldn't and couldn't be murder.