Should the Wealthy Pay a Higher Percentage in Taxes?

[Media_Truth]

Note the historical tax chart. In US History, the Top Tier Tax rate was typically much higher than it is today. Since the 1980s, with a few yearly exceptions the Top Tier Tax Rate has been dropping sharply. This is about the same time that the deficit started rising sharply.



Most would not dispute these facts. Some will argue that it's not fair to the wealthy. I believe it is. I believe that the wealthy are more reliant on Government than others. They have much more at stake. As an example - when the Nazis took over countries in Europe, they seized mansions, artwork, and other valuables from the wealthy. They took over their businesses. The poor and the middle class also lose out, but what's the expression - "You can't squeeze blood from a turnip". Besides military security, the wealthy also benefit more from economic governmental entities. In other words - they rely on government more.

Robert Reich analyzes the taxes paid by wealthy in the US, versus other countries.

https://www.newsweek.com/robert-reich-why-rich-and-corporations-should-pay-more-tax-670465

The rich aren’t overtaxed. The wealthiest 1 percent in the U.S. pay the lowest taxes as a percent of their income and total wealth of the top 1 percent in any major country – and far lower than they paid in the U.S. during the first three decades after World War II, when the American economy grew faster than it’s been growing since the Reagan tax cuts.

 

[Lutherf]

Basically, nobody really needs more than about $30k/yr to live on so if we want to fix all our problems the simple solution is just to limit incomes to $30k and impose a 100% tax rate on everything above that. Talk about a simple tax code! $1-30k pays nothing. $30k+ pays 100%. You can do taxes on a post card!

The other things we need to do is insure that accumulated wealth is stripped from those who have taken it from others. Anybody with a house worth more than $200k gets their house taken. Anyone with a 401(k) more than $100k gets the excess taken. If you car is worth more than $30k you don't need it and can no longer have it. Jewelry, collectibles and other personal valuables need to be restricted to no more than $5k. Everything else will be taken and handed off to those less fortunate.

If we do these things we will be able to achieve peace and equality and a life that is fair for all. It's the only way we can meet the true American spirit of Constitutional Democracy!

 

[Media_Truth]

Basically, nobody really needs more than about $30k/yr to live on so if we want to fix all our problems the simple solution is just to limit incomes to $30k and impose a 100% tax rate on everything above that. Talk about a simple tax code! $1-30k pays nothing. $30k+ pays 100%. You can do taxes on a post card!

The other things we need to do is insure that accumulated wealth is stripped from those who have taken it from others. Anybody with a house worth more than $200k gets their house taken. Anyone with a 401(k) more than $100k gets the excess taken. If you car is worth more than $30k you don't need it and can no longer have it. Jewelry, collectibles and other personal valuables need to be restricted to no more than $5k. Everything else will be taken and handed off to those less fortunate.

If we do these things we will be able to achieve peace and equality and a life that is fair for all. It's the only way we can meet the true American spirit of Constitutional Democracy!

Ridiculous comments do nothing for your credibility.

 

[Xelor]

Note the historical tax chart. In US History, the Top Tier Tax rate was typically much higher than it is today. Since the 1980s, with a few yearly exceptions the Top Tier Tax Rate has been dropping sharply. This is about the same time that the deficit started rising sharply.

View attachment 67243170

Most would not dispute these facts. Some will argue that it's not fair to the wealthy. I believe it is. I believe that the wealthy are more reliant on Government than others. They have much more at stake. As an example - when the Nazis took over countries in Europe, they seized mansions, artwork, and other valuables from the wealthy. They took over their businesses. The poor and the middle class also lose out, but what's the expression - "You can't squeeze blood from a turnip". Besides military security, the wealthy also benefit more from economic governmental entities. In other words - they rely on government more.

Robert Reich analyzes the taxes paid by wealthy in the US, versus other countries.

https://www.newsweek.com/robert-reich-why-rich-and-corporations-should-pay-more-tax-670465

The rich aren’t overtaxed. The wealthiest 1 percent in the U.S. pay the lowest taxes as a percent of their income and total wealth of the top 1 percent in any major country – and far lower than they paid in the U.S. during the first three decades after World War II, when the American economy grew faster than it’s been growing since the Reagan tax cuts.

Should the Wealthy Pay a Higher Percentage in Taxes?

Higher than what?

• Higher than Trump's tax revisions will have wealthy folks paying? Yes.

Red:
I wouldn't say wealthy folks have more at stake. I would say they, as a result of government spending, realize greater absolute gains than do all others, and they realize greater proportionate gains than do nearly all middle income taxpayers, but probably not most low income taxpayers.

 

[celticwar17]

I've heard the literal tax brackets might have been higher, but amount of taxes/percentages actually being paid was significantly lower than what it seems.... there were tons of work arounds back then as well... no one was paying that high in taxes.

 

[joko104]

The super wealthy don't pay taxes because the essentially write the tax code, granting themselves exemptions. Accordingly, the tax rates are irrelevant to them.

Income taxes should be a universal flat tax - no exceptions and no exemptions.

 

[Bucky]

This is one of the silliest threads started here at dp.

The wealthy already pay a higher tax.

 

[Media_Truth]

This is one of the silliest threads started here at dp.

The wealthy already pay a higher tax.

Do you want to explain why Warren Buffett claims that "he pays a lesser tax percentage than his secretary"? That said, I think they should pay a substantially higher tax, with a top tier akin to what they were paying in the 1970s.

 

[TurtleDude]

Ridiculous comments do nothing for your credibility.

sort of like claiming the rich are more dependent on the government than those who live on public assistance

 

[Media_Truth]

sort of like claiming the rich are more dependent on the government than those who live on public assistance

Are you saying that those that live on public assistance are all a certain Party? Please show all measures you would take to eliminate public assistance.

 

[TurtleDude]

Are you saying that those that live on public assistance are all a certain Party? Please show all measures you would take to eliminate public assistance.

I didn't. My first move would be to gradually reign in the commerce clause expansions imposed by FDR and ultimately make welfare a state based program-not federal. As a state based program-obvious checks and balances would exist that do not exist with a federal program

 

[joko104]

Some years ago, a true bi-partisan committee all of retired members of Congress of both political parties addressed the topic of taxes. They agreed that talking about the tax rate is irrelevant to the super rich because they are who essentially write the tax code. Accordingly, not only do they not pay any income taxes, instead the government pays them.

For that reason, they said the ONLY solution is to establish a NO EXEMPTIONS flat tax that allowed NO way for the super rich to bribe Congress for tax exemptions. All of the retired Republicans and Democrats on the committee agreed.

Congress and the President basically threw it finding and recommendation into the trash.

All the talk about taxing "the rich" NEVER actually means taxing the rich. It means taxing successful mom and pop businesses, not the super rich. Make the highest tax rate 99% - and they still won't pay a dollar in income taxes.

All the talk of Democrats in Congress of "taxing the rich" is always a lie. NONE OF THEM EVER propose closing any loopholes that exempt the super rich in any specific ways. Not one of them. Not even Bernie.

 

[Bullseye]

Note the historical tax chart. In US History, the Top Tier Tax rate was typically much higher than it is today. Since the 1980s, with a few yearly exceptions the Top Tier Tax Rate has been dropping sharply. This is about the same time that the deficit started rising sharply.

View attachment 67243170

Most would not dispute these facts. Some will argue that it's not fair to the wealthy. I believe it is. I believe that the wealthy are more reliant on Government than others. They have much more at stake. As an example - when the Nazis took over countries in Europe, they seized mansions, artwork, and other valuables from the wealthy. They took over their businesses. The poor and the middle class also lose out, but what's the expression - "You can't squeeze blood from a turnip". Besides military security, the wealthy also benefit more from economic governmental entities. In other words - they rely on government more.

Robert Reich analyzes the taxes paid by wealthy in the US, versus other countries.

https://www.newsweek.com/robert-reich-why-rich-and-corporations-should-pay-more-tax-670465

The rich aren’t overtaxed. The wealthiest 1 percent in the U.S. pay the lowest taxes as a percent of their income and total wealth of the top 1 percent in any major country – and far lower than they paid in the U.S. during the first three decades after World War II, when the American economy grew faster than it’s been growing since the Reagan tax cuts.

The top 3% pay 50% of income tax revenue while making about 30% of the income. What used to be or what happens in other countries is superfluous bull poo.

 

[MrWonka]

I believe that the wealthy are more reliant on Government than others.

There is a saying in the legal profession that "possession is 9/10ths of the law." Well if that's true, what good is the law if you don't have any possessions?

The truth is that about 90% of what the government does is protect wealthy people from poor people. It forces all transfers of property to take place through mutual consent transactions which are generally a good thing to do, however, it enormously favors those who already have the property.

Even things like Welfare, food stamps, Medicare, unemployment... These things are in many way defense spending. They keep people out of desperation which makes them less likely to want to resort to criminal acts to survive.

 

[Bullseye]

Basically, nobody really needs more than about $30k/yr to live on so if we want to fix all our problems the simple solution is just to limit incomes to $30k and impose a 100% tax rate on everything above that. Talk about a simple tax code! $1-30k pays nothing. $30k+ pays 100%. You can do taxes on a post card!

The other things we need to do is insure that accumulated wealth is stripped from those who have taken it from others. Anybody with a house worth more than $200k gets their house taken. Anyone with a 401(k) more than $100k gets the excess taken. If you car is worth more than $30k you don't need it and can no longer have it. Jewelry, collecthttps://www.debatepolitics.com/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=1069221709ibles and other personal valuables need to be restricted to no more than $5k. Everything else will be taken and handed off to those less fortunate.

If we do these things we will be able to achieve peace and equality and a life that is fair for all. It's the only way we can meet the true American spirit of Constitutional Democracy!

Yeah, that'd work!! :roll:

 

[Bullseye]

Ridiculous comments do nothing for your credibility.

Does seem to stop you from doing it.

 

[jaeger19]

Note the historical tax chart. In US History, the Top Tier Tax rate was typically much higher than it is today. Since the 1980s, with a few yearly exceptions the Top Tier Tax Rate has been dropping sharply. This is about the same time that the deficit started rising sharply.

View attachment 67243170

Most would not dispute these facts. Some will argue that it's not fair to the wealthy. I believe it is. I believe that the wealthy are more reliant on Government than others. They have much more at stake. As an example - when the Nazis took over countries in Europe, they seized mansions, artwork, and other valuables from the wealthy. They took over their businesses. The poor and the middle class also lose out, but what's the expression - "You can't squeeze blood from a turnip". Besides military security, the wealthy also benefit more from economic governmental entities. In other words - they rely on government more.

Robert Reich analyzes the taxes paid by wealthy in the US, versus other countries.

https://www.newsweek.com/robert-reich-why-rich-and-corporations-should-pay-more-tax-670465

The rich aren’t overtaxed. The wealthiest 1 percent in the U.S. pay the lowest taxes as a percent of their income and total wealth of the top 1 percent in any major country – and far lower than they paid in the U.S. during the first three decades after World War II, when the American economy grew faster than it’s been growing since the Reagan tax cuts.

Your top federal tax rates are meaningless.
Come on man.. we have been over this already. those top federal tax rates are meaningless because they are not effective tax rates.

and in fact.. if you looked at the taxation between 1945 and 1980.. the poor and middle class paid a higher effective rate than they do now.

Now.. does the effective tax rate on the wealthy need to go up? Probably but only because Trump just lowered them to too low a level. But lets dispense with the... "we need to raise rates to 90%".. bs.

 

[MrWonka]

The top 3% pay 50% of income tax revenue while making about 30% of the income. What used to be or what happens in other countries is superfluous bull poo.

Not sure where you're getting these facts, but I don't believe they are quite accurate.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wealth_inequality_in_the_United_States

A September 2017 study by the Federal Reserve reported that the top 1% owned 38.5% of the country's wealth in 2016

 

[jaeger19]

sort of like claiming the rich are more dependent on the government than those who live on public assistance

Some of the rich do receive way more money from the government than those on public assistance.

 

[jaeger19]

I didn't. My first move would be to gradually reign in the commerce clause expansions imposed by FDR and ultimately make welfare a state based program-not federal. As a state based program-obvious checks and balances would exist that do not exist with a federal program

Blue states would likely thank you.

red states..like mine.. not so much..

 

[digitusmedius]

Let's see what one of the founders thought about taxing the wealthy:

As to the suggestion of double taxation, the answer is plain. The wants of the Union are to be supplied in one way or another; if to be done by the authority of the federal government, it will not be to be done by that of the State government. The quantity of taxes to be paid by the community must be the same in either case; with this advantage, if the provision is to be made by the Union that the capital resource of commercial imposts, which is the most convenient branch of revenue, can be prudently improved to a much greater extent under federal than under State regulation, and of course will render it less necessary to recur to more inconvenient methods; and with this further advantage, that as far as there may be any real difficulty in the exercise of the power of internal taxation, it will impose a disposition to greater care in the choice and arrangement of the means; and must naturally tend to make it a fixed point of policy in the national administration to go as far as may be practicable in making the luxury of the rich tributary to the public treasury, in order to diminish the necessity of those impositions which might create dissatisfaction in the poorer and most numerous classes of the society. Happy it is when the interest which the government has in the preservation of its own power, coincides with a proper distribution of the public burdens, and tends to guard the least wealthy part of the community from oppression!

The Avalon Project : Federalist No 36

 

[TurtleDude]

Some of the rich do receive way more money from the government than those on public assistance.

true -like some rich Democrats or those who have cushy government contracts but the percentages are such that those on assistance are far more likely to be dependent on the government than most rich folks.

 

[Bullseye]

Higher than what?

• Higher than Trump's tax revisions will have wealthy folks paying? Yes.

Red:
I wouldn't say wealthy folks have more at stake. I would say they, as a result of government spending, realize greater absolute gains than do all others, and they realize greater proportionate gains than do nearly all middle income taxpayers, but probably not most low income taxpayers.

We finished the fiscal year with a 4% increase in revenue from individual income tax. And seen strong GDP growth. So let's kill that momentum because some loonies are worried the rich don't pay their "fair share" whatever the heck that is. Media_truth seems to resurrect this topic about once a month.

 

[MrWonka]

if you looked at the taxation between 1945 and 1980.. the poor and middle class paid a higher effective rate than they do now.

That's because they made enough money to require it. If poor and middle-class people had a higher effective tax rate today that would be considered a good thing because it would mean they were making more money on average.

Now.. does the effective tax rate on the wealthy need to go up? Probably but only because Trump just lowered them to too low a level. But let's dispense with the... "we need to raise rates to 90%".. bs.

Nobody is arguing such a thing. What we're arguing is that we shouldn't be running a deficit. By simply returning to Obama's tax brackets we could likely be running a surplus today. Given that reality, there's no reason we couldn't make health care more affordable and make all the other necessary investments we need to make as a society in things like education, infrastructure, and science.

 

[TurtleDude]

Blue states would likely thank you.

red states..like mine.. not so much..

generous welfare doling states would be inundated by those seeking to live off the public teat. This would force such states to take more and more from net tax payers =and many of them would flee to less generous states. This would cause overly generous states to go bankrupt. Which is exactly what the founders had in mind as to why states-not the government-should handle almost all domestic issues.