Posted on 08/01/2011 6:46:11 PM PDT by yetidog
Forgive me for asking…but what is so wrong about raising taxes to some negotiated extent on the most wealthy taxpayers in the US? While I know this question violates conservative orthodoxy, there are a lot of folks in the US who make a lot of money…some of it easily earned (inherited), some of it by talent (professional athletes), some of it by luck (actors and lottery winners) and some of it by a lot of hard work and perseverance. Now I agree that $250,000 is not the place to start, but maybe 5 million (or some other negotiable figure and percentage) is. And I know that revenue gained from “raising taxes on the rich” is a mere drop in the bucket, but an negotiated agreement to do so would destroy a persistent liberal argument that makes a lot of sense to many voters in the country. Not every rich person is the key to unemployment nor or they particularly deserving of protection because they are among the 5% or so that pay 80% of the taxes. This is not a matter of class envy nor income distribution, rather it addresses about the only rational argument that liberals still have in the ongoing fiscal policy debate.
How’ve you lasted on here so long?
Ibtz
IBTZ
The more money you give gummint, the more it will spend. Our survival requires starving this beast.
This would be acceptable to you unless you were to get into the 5 million or level?
The problem with the income tax is that it doesn't tax existing wealth, only the creation of new wealth. As such, it serves as a barrier to entry to the upper classes of American society for those Americans who elect to climb the social ladder through hard, honest work.
HEY YETI!
It ain’t YOUR money!
Why should we? They already pay the lion’s share.
Besides, we could confiscate every dime that they make, along with everything they own and it wouldn’t make a dent in the spending that the left has committed us to.
How about this. EVERYONE is taxed at 20% of their income, regardless. No deductions. How is that not fair if everyone is treated equally?
I’m an “old school” American. How much money someone has is none of my or the government’s damn business. If “the poor” want a BIG government, then THEY should be willing to pay for it. Thou shalt not covet.
That was already tried - it's called the Alternative Minimum Tax. Unfortunately for Americans, this tax now hits middle-class Americans the hardest, especially those in areas with high costs of living. Truly wealthy Americans are still free to exploit other sections of the Federal tax code to shelter their wealth (new or existing) from taxation.
Maybe you should be asking why do 48% pay no federal taxes whatsoever.
|
For one, taxing a group of people simply to score political points is about as immoral as it gets. That's what Democrats do, and that's why we stand against those actions.
Flat tax solves all of this class warfare BS.
Yeah, and you’ll never get a wealth tax that would raise real money because the true rich will never stand for it.
Taxing the rich won’t solve the problem either in the near term or long term. The rich aren’t responsible for creating this mess. I’m not rich by any stretch of the imagination, I”m near the bottom of the middle class. But, let’s get real here. The rich aren’t responsible for this mess, neither are the middle class, or the seniors or our veterans. Yet, all of these classes of individuals will get punished by Washington because Washingont couldn’t reign in the excess spending and debts they have incurred on current and future generations. It’s Washington’s hope that we’re all poor and that there are only two classes of people: The rich in Washington and then all the rest of us.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.