Joe Biden said it is time for corporations and the richest Americans to “start paying their fair share” of taxes as he hit the road on Monday in a concerted effort to promote his administration’s huge new infrastructure and welfare spending plans totaling about $4tn.
Speaking at a community college in Norfolk, Virginia, on Monday afternoon, the US president made the case for increasing taxes on the wealthiest in the US in order to help fund his ambitious $1.8tn American Families Plan and $2tn infrastructure plan.
Biden increases US refugee cap to 62,500 amid backlash over earlier plan – as it happened
The packages would provide funds for childcare and free universal pre-school education facilities, as well as massive programs to rebuild America’s crumbling transport systems and public-sector housing in ways that also contributes to government action on the climate crisis.
The top 10% pay 71% of the income tax, how much more should they pay, what is the correct %?
These days, some people want to impose a new Buffett tax on millionaires while others are outraged that low income people pay no income taxes at all and still others want to cut taxes on “job creators.” All in the name of fairness.
Is the tax code fair? Should it be?
It all depends on what you mean by fair, of course but at an Urban Institute panel this week, two economists, a tax historian, and a philosopher agreed that in many important ways, it very likely is not.
Fairness is one of those concepts that makes economists really nervous. Because it is so subjective and impossible to measure, they usually avoid the idea entirely, preferring to stick with what they can count.
Still, my Tax Policy Center colleague Gene Steuerle, Brookings Institution economist Belle Sawhill, Tax Analysts historian Joe Thorndike, and Howard University philosophy professor Charles Verharen joined moderator Greg Ip, The Economist’s U.S. economics editor, in tackling the issue. The result was a fascinating look at a complicated issue from some very different perspectives.
Well they get 90% of all income and have 90% of all wealth, so it only seems fair they pay 90% of all tax.The top 10% pay 71% of the income tax, how much more should they pay, what is the correct %?
According to the latest Fed data, the top 1% of Americans have a combined net worth of $34.2 trillion (or 30.4% of all household wealth in the U.S.), while the bottom 50% of the population holds just $2.1 trillion combined (or 1.9% of all wealth).Well they get 90% of all income and have 90% of all wealth, so it only seems fair they pay 90% of all tax.
The top 10% pay 71% of the income tax, how much more should they pay, what is the correct %?
But they won the game, we reward the winners, tax is punishment for not working hard enough.According to the latest Fed data, the top 1% of Americans have a combined net worth of $34.2 trillion (or 30.4% of all household wealth in the U.S.), while the bottom 50% of the population holds just $2.1 trillion combined (or 1.9% of all wealth).
Top 1% Of U.S. Households Hold 15 Times More Wealth Than Bottom 50% Combined
New data available from the U. S. Federal Reserve shows that the wealth gap in America has widened and economic inequality has increased in 2020 amidst a coronavirus pandemic that has disproportionately impacted low-wage service workers and people of color.www.forbes.com
The top 10% is less of a problem than the top 1%.
you will never get a straight answer to that question.The top 10% pay 71% of the income tax, how much more should they pay, what is the correct %?
You live in France, what's this "we" bullshit?From the Guardian: Joe Biden Taxes Corporations Richest Americans
Excerpt:
The free-ride is over guyz-'n-galz. And, it's been a lonnnnng wait! But, it's time to pay your fair share.
Since when? Since Reckless-Ronnie-RAYGUN zapped us yokels to pay a larger share of the Federal budget by lowering Upper-income Taxation. His 1981 Business Deductions also helped to enrich their Net Worth even further.
All that illicit money gone to the rich and super-rich so they could leave it to their "kids" (to play-with).
What a waste of Taxable Income that could be employed to enhance generally America's standard-of-living. Whazzat?
Like this!
(1) A national-healthcare-plan that drops quickly upper-income costs of doctors and healthcare-in-general for everybody. (Uncel Sam's is the most expensive health-care in the developed world!) And,
(2) Free- or Nearly-free post-secondary education that prepares our young for this Brave New World of Services Industries that require a much higher level of education. Regardless of one's level of education, there should be free (or nearly free) post-secondary schooling available to learn any trade or simply go on to degree-related schooling. And not all states need the same post-secondary education-plan - if national in nature, the cost of the schooling can be assumed by Federal-spending and open to all comers.
My Point: Both of the above are necessities throughout the country - in some places more than others. But all states should be allowed to pursue the same objectives as stated above. The Federal government must assume the cost - as it does for the DoD!
The post-secondary education-costs in the US are legendarily expensive - they are far, far too much and thusly an effective barrier against learning ... !
I gave a straight answer, the truth will set you free, but it's going to piss you off, first.you will never get a straight answer to that question.
France, the US, it's the same thing!You live in France, what's this "we" bullshit?
Why do we need to raise taxes when we have a printing press?From the Guardian: Joe Biden Taxes Corporations Richest Americans
Excerpt:
The free-ride is over guyz-'n-galz. And, it's been a lonnnnng wait! But, it's time to pay your fair share.
Since when? Since Reckless-Ronnie-RAYGUN zapped us yokels to pay a larger share of the Federal budget by lowering Upper-income Taxation. His 1981 Business Deductions also helped to enrich their Net Worth even further.
All that illicit money gone to the rich and super-rich so they could leave it to their "kids" (to play-with).
What a waste of Taxable Income that could be employed to enhance generally America's standard-of-living. Whazzat?
Like this!
(1) A national-healthcare-plan that drops quickly upper-income costs of doctors and healthcare-in-general for everybody. (Uncel Sam's is the most expensive health-care in the developed world!) And,
(2) Free- or Nearly-free post-secondary education that prepares our young for this Brave New World of Services Industries that require a much higher level of education. Regardless of one's level of education, there should be free (or nearly free) post-secondary schooling available to learn any trade or simply go on to degree-related schooling. And not all states need the same post-secondary education-plan - if national in nature, the cost of the schooling can be assumed by Federal-spending and open to all comers.
My Point: Both of the above are necessities throughout the country - in some places more than others. But all states should be allowed to pursue the same objectives as stated above. The Federal government must assume the cost - as it does for the DoD!
The post-secondary education-costs in the US are legendarily expensive - they are far, far too much and thusly an effective barrier against learning ... !
Yeah
Half of America doesn't make enough money to pay taxes. Do you see anything wrong with that?
And that top 10% (which I am one) earns half of all income generated.
Leaving 50% for 90% of Americans.
Half of America doesn't make enough money to pay taxes.
TAX FAIRNESS? WHAT'S THAT?
There is no one figure that matters. It is the entire set - from the Poverty Threshold income level ($25K for a family of four) up to the very top.
That is nothing easy to do and post on a forum.
So, what I will do is post this proposal that has been made, and if you like we can discuss its elements. From the Tax Policy Center: Is the US Tax System Fair
Excerpt:
Now, YOU propose an answer to the question titled above ...
There is no one figure that matters
The top 10% pay 71% of the income tax, how much more should they pay, what is the correct %?
They don't pay income tax, were that the only tax in America..........They can't even pay 1 single dollar?
They just got 1,400 dollars in Biden bucks$$$$
Things would level off? Nonsense.The tax code is what it is, because you can't take form people what they do not have, blood from a stone. You want things to be fair, let's raise the minimum wage to $35 an hour, make employers pay 10% for pension funds and 100% of healthcare costs. It would be a cluster duck for a while, many businesses would fold, unemployment would skyrocket along with prices, but over time things would level off because the top 10% would no long be able to get rich by exploiting workers that do the work.
The top 10% pay 71% of the income tax, how much more should they pay, what is the correct %?
From the Guardian: Joe Biden Taxes Corporations Richest Americans
Excerpt:
The free-ride is over guyz-'n-galz. And, it's been a lonnnnng wait! But, it's time to pay your fair share.
Since when? Since Reckless-Ronnie-RAYGUN zapped us yokels to pay a larger share of the Federal budget by lowering Upper-income Taxation. His 1981 Business Deductions also helped to enrich their Net Worth even further.
All that illicit money gone to the rich and super-rich so they could leave it to their "kids" (to play-with).
What a waste of Taxable Income that could be employed to enhance generally America's standard-of-living. Whazzat?
Like this!
(1) A national-healthcare-plan that drops quickly upper-income costs of doctors and healthcare-in-general for everybody. (Uncel Sam's is the most expensive health-care in the developed world!) And,
(2) Free- or Nearly-free post-secondary education that prepares our young for this Brave New World of Services Industries that require a much higher level of education. Regardless of one's level of education, there should be free (or nearly free) post-secondary schooling available to learn any trade or simply go on to degree-related schooling. And not all states need the same post-secondary education-plan - if national in nature, the cost of the schooling can be assumed by Federal-spending and open to all comers.
My Point: Both of the above are necessities throughout the country - in some places more than others. But all states should be allowed to pursue the same objectives as stated above. The Federal government must assume the cost - as it does for the DoD!
The post-secondary education-costs in the US are legendarily expensive - they are far, far too much and thusly an effective barrier against learning ... !
Free ride is over? Does that mean that the half that pays no taxes is finally going to begin paying taxes?From the Guardian: Joe Biden Taxes Corporations Richest Americans
Excerpt:
The free-ride is over guyz-'n-galz. And, it's been a lonnnnng wait! But, it's time to pay your fair share.
Since when? Since Reckless-Ronnie-RAYGUN zapped us yokels to pay a larger share of the Federal budget by lowering Upper-income Taxation. His 1981 Business Deductions also helped to enrich their Net Worth even further.
All that illicit money gone to the rich and super-rich so they could leave it to their "kids" (to play-with).
What a waste of Taxable Income that could be employed to enhance generally America's standard-of-living. Whazzat?
Like this!
(1) A national-healthcare-plan that drops quickly upper-income costs of doctors and healthcare-in-general for everybody. (Uncel Sam's is the most expensive health-care in the developed world!) And,
(2) Free- or Nearly-free post-secondary education that prepares our young for this Brave New World of Services Industries that require a much higher level of education. Regardless of one's level of education, there should be free (or nearly free) post-secondary schooling available to learn any trade or simply go on to degree-related schooling. And not all states need the same post-secondary education-plan - if national in nature, the cost of the schooling can be assumed by Federal-spending and open to all comers.
My Point: Both of the above are necessities throughout the country - in some places more than others. But all states should be allowed to pursue the same objectives as stated above. The Federal government must assume the cost - as it does for the DoD!
The post-secondary education-costs in the US are legendarily expensive - they are far, far too much and thusly an effective barrier against learning ... !
You can't even get us $15 an hour, because of all the same arguments you are making are being made by those blocking it.Things would level off? Nonsense.
Things would stay exactly the same, and higher unemployment would not diminish. It would remain higher.
The Tax Code is dependent upon the type of government that is voted into office. It can change the code, if its "congress" allows it to happen.
Raising the minimum-wage to $35/hour (from $7.25 today) will push even more Manufacturing Industry jobs to Mexico and start pulling Services Industry jobs into Canada. It's that stoopid.
We need to double the MW and 42% of Americans earnig less than $15 an hour, so doubling-it is where we should start first. And I dare mention that we must absolutely get more people through post-secondary education because we wont be creating the that many jobs at $15/hr or 20/hr. Those rates are for jobs that are already gone to Mexico!
Exception to that rule: The mean hourly wage for waiters/waitresses is only $13.20 an hour (data-point from here), which is close to doubling the present minimum-wage and not far from the MW that is most projected.
But it wont create jobs that are not already existent! Because waitressing is the kind of job that cannot be sent to Mexico! And even a slight increase of the MW to 15 or 16 dollars an hour will have no effect whatsoever on jobs of that type. (Entry level jobs for would be secretaries in the US is already 13 to 26 dollars an hour. (The latter value - $26/hour - being that of a secretarial job in a large American city.)
With Honors is a movie in which Joe Pesci plays a homeless wino who winds up in a Harvard classroom for reasons straining the willing suspension of disbelief.Free ride is over? Does that mean that the half that pays no taxes is finally going to begin paying taxes?
It does not piss me off I dont care how much you take from the rich to prolong the spending sugar high Washington is on.I gave a straight answer, the truth will set you free, but it's going to piss you off, first.
The tax code is what it is, because you can't take form people what they do not have, blood from a stone. You want things to be fair, let's raise the minimum wage to $35 an hour, make employers pay 10% for pension funds and 100% of healthcare costs. It would be a cluster duck for a while, many businesses would fold, unemployment would skyrocket along with prices, but over time things would level off because the top 10% would no long be able to get rich by exploiting workers that do the work.
We didn't get in this situation over night, and it's going to take some real shared pain to get out of it, but if we stayed the course through the bad years, everyone would be better off in the long run. People would still get rich by actual invention and innovation, and that would be fine, most people don't want to be rich, they just want the comforts of a middle class life.
They don’t take from the rich any longer. They take from your kids.It does not piss me off I dont care how much you take from the rich to prolong the spending sugar high Washington is on.
Democrats control all 3 houses, they should pass whatever laws they want and take accountability for them, good and bad results.
I am tired of everyone playing the blame game.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?