Taxation
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
13-02-2012, 09:47 AM
RE: Taxation
(13-02-2012 08:51 AM)morondog Wrote:  
(13-02-2012 07:30 AM)Azaraith Wrote:  
(13-02-2012 06:00 AM)Smooshmonster Wrote:  I get the "why would they bother" argument. But in reality, are people who are making 1m a year really working harder than the fireman who earns 32,000 or the teacher who makes 30,000? Either way they're still making almost five times as much after tax. Are they really working three times as hard? Or is what they're doing that much more important to society? Are they really going to say: "Fuck it, this isn't worth it, I'll go be a schoolteacher"?

Maybe.

Yes, they do work harder... I happen to work for a firm where the higher ups make quite a bit and I've got a pretty good taste for what they actually do. I work 55-60 hours per week and they're there as long as I am or longer sometimes. They also have unique skills that are much more rare and more difficult to develop than that of a fireman or teacher. What they are doing drives much of the growth in the economy, creating jobs, etc. Very few would say "fuck it, I'll be a schoolteacher" but many would retire earlier or pick less stressful careers, or even move to a different country.

Also they take more responsibility and risk. It's a huge fucking massive deal to be a CEO of a company employing lots of people. *He's* the guy - every month the buck stops with him. In small business at least it's a huge worry to have to pay your employees every month, in big business investors and shareholders are all shouting at you, and newsmen and other people are all waiting for you to fail - no one will ever do that for the same salary as some lower ranking guy - they'd rather leave all the stress and be lower ranking themselves.

I don't entirely agree with that point. There's higher pay and then there's obscenely higher pay. I have run my own business and it is stressful and time-consuming. But I have seen so many CEOs who were not only not as smart and capable as they thought/professed, but were not as smart as many working for them; they certainly weren't worth their obscenely higher pay.

Investors/boards seem to hire primarily former CEOs as CEOs, even when their track record is questionable. Many capable people would be happy to be CEOs at a quarter or tenth as much as many CEOs get.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
13-02-2012, 09:48 AM
RE: Taxation
You think that 50% on everything over 150K is fair? Fair to the government? Fair to the poor? Fair to the rich? How is that fair?

“Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it's time to pause and reflect.”

-Mark Twain
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-02-2012, 10:04 AM (This post was last modified: 13-02-2012 10:08 AM by N.E.OhioAtheist.)
RE: Taxation
(13-02-2012 09:48 AM)germanyt Wrote:  You think that 50% on everything over 150K is fair? Fair to the government? Fair to the poor? Fair to the rich? How is that fair?

That is not thousand. he is talking pounds. check the exchange rate.
In the 50's the taxes on the rich was 90% in the USA. With all the loop holes and write offs they never paid that. We never had a flat tax here. Hell GE didn't pay one dime of taxes. is that fair??
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-02-2012, 10:21 AM
RE: Taxation
(13-02-2012 10:04 AM)N.E.OhioAtheist Wrote:  
(13-02-2012 09:48 AM)germanyt Wrote:  You think that 50% on everything over 150K is fair? Fair to the government? Fair to the poor? Fair to the rich? How is that fair?

That is not thousand. he is talking pounds. check the exchange rate.
In the 50's the taxes on the rich was 90% in the USA. With all the loop holes and write offs they never paid that. We never had a flat tax here. Hell GE didn't pay one dime of taxes. is that fair??

I'm pretty sure that no matter the exchange rate, 150000 is one hundred and fifty thousand. I could be wrong though. I never went to college. Rolleyes

Rates were high because of loopholes. If they had fixed the loopholes they probably would have been able to tax them at moderate marginal tax rates. And no, it's not fair that GE didn't pay any taxes. I'm all for tax reform. I'm a fan of simplified progressive tax rates. But 50%? Seriously. Keep half my hard earned money. Fuck that. How is laying our economy on the backs of the rich any more ethical or right than laying on the middle class?

No need to answer that last sentence. I'm sure you'll say that it's because they have the means to pay more. As if they should feel obligated to.

“Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it's time to pause and reflect.”

-Mark Twain
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-02-2012, 10:32 AM (This post was last modified: 13-02-2012 10:44 AM by N.E.OhioAtheist.)
RE: Taxation
(13-02-2012 10:21 AM)germanyt Wrote:  
(13-02-2012 10:04 AM)N.E.OhioAtheist Wrote:  
(13-02-2012 09:48 AM)germanyt Wrote:  You think that 50% on everything over 150K is fair? Fair to the government? Fair to the poor? Fair to the rich? How is that fair?

That is not thousand. he is talking pounds. check the exchange rate.
In the 50's the taxes on the rich was 90% in the USA. With all the loop holes and write offs they never paid that. We never had a flat tax here. Hell GE didn't pay one dime of taxes. is that fair??

I'm pretty sure that no matter the exchange rate, 150000 is one hundred and fifty thousand. I could be wrong though. I never went to college. Rolleyes

Rates were high because of loopholes. If they had fixed the loopholes they probably would have been able to tax them at moderate marginal tax rates. And no, it's not fair that GE didn't pay any taxes. I'm all for tax reform. I'm a fan of simplified progressive tax rates. But 50%? Seriously. Keep half my hard earned money. Fuck that. How is laying our economy on the backs of the rich any more ethical or right than laying on the middle class?

You understood quite clearly what I was saying but you had to be a jurk. I will keep a close eye on every line you write. I know you are a Ron Paul supporter even when he is a religious nut job. So 150 pounds are equal to $236,539. a year at today's rate.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-02-2012, 04:56 PM
RE: Taxation
All you people who think 50% is excessive, what are the tax rates where you are and what do you think would be a fair system?

I'm interested to hear other countries/peoples ideas.

Best and worst of Ferdinand .....
Best
Ferdinand: We don't really say 'theist' in Alabama. Here, you're either a Christian, or you're from Afghanistan and we fucking hate you.
Worst
Ferdinand: Everyone from British is so, like, fucking retarded.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-02-2012, 04:59 PM
RE: Taxation
(13-02-2012 04:56 PM)Hughsie Wrote:  All you people who think 50% is excessive, what are the tax rates where you are and what do you think would be a fair system?

I'm interested to hear other countries/peoples ideas.

I think we have to keep progressive tax rates as low as possible to fund small and limited government. If the economy was booming under small government and most people had savings and disposable income we probably wouldn't even need to discuss what is and isn't fair. It wouldn't even be an election year topic of discussion because no one would really need to complain about it.

“Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it's time to pause and reflect.”

-Mark Twain
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-02-2012, 06:59 PM (This post was last modified: 13-02-2012 07:08 PM by Azaraith.)
RE: Taxation
(13-02-2012 04:56 PM)Hughsie Wrote:  All you people who think 50% is excessive, what are the tax rates where you are and what do you think would be a fair system?

I'm interested to hear other countries/peoples ideas.

35% is the highest marginal tax rate here. I pay 26% in the US, but would be paying 32% in the UK (effective tax rate, based on total tax paid vs. gross non-adjusted income).

IMO, a perfect governmental system would only involve itself where necessary (ie much smaller than it is now) and services on top of the necessary/fundamentals would be charged for (with exceptions for those below a well-defined poverty line. I define the "fundamentals" as police, fire, medical, infrastructure, necessary environmental & industry regulation, and a minimal safety net (w/ strict measures to exclude the lazy/leeches).

My definition of poverty line would not include children as a consideration (my medical system would subsidize birth control to the extent that it would be very cheap for those that can pay and free to those that can't). In my "dictatorship," having children would be disincentivised as much as possible (to curb overpopulation, strain on resources, etc), but there would be no laws restricting child bearing (aka China's "one child" policy).

The poverty line would be drawn at the point where one can afford basic necessities only (food, shelter and utilities) as an average across the US (where cost of living is high, people would likely have to relocate to a cheaper locale). If you can afford cable, tv, iPhones, etc you aren't gonna be below that line. Based on current figures, I'd estimate that line at $15-18k/year for an individual (I know I can easily survive on that, if I cut costs significantly)... Adding a spouse and kids complicates the picture (spouses add income, but by living together reduce some expenses significantly - would take longer to figure than I care to spend on this thread).

Anyway, my tax system would be super simple. Individuals/families below the poverty line wouldn't pay any tax, individuals/families making over the poverty line would pay 25% (adjusted so that it wouldn't reduce anyone's post-tax income to below the poverty line). Individuals/families making over $200k per year would pay 33%. Individuals/families making over $1m per year would pay 40%. There would be no deductions, loopholes, exceptions, etc. You make $1m per year, by any means (salary, investments, foreign income, etc) you are paying $400k in taxes. Donations are still tax deductible. Churches and other non-charities would not be tax exempt - tax exempt status would be hard to achieve and would require demonstrable benefit to the world (not just the US).

By the way, I'm taking over the world whether you like it or not. Dissenters will be punished by being forced to sing Justin Bieber (yes, sing, not listen to) songs until they consent. Refusal to sing results in forced listening to Rebecca Black until they sing. Be prepared to refer to me as World President. Big Grin Cool Tongue

Better without God, and happier too.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-02-2012, 08:09 PM
RE: Taxation
(13-02-2012 04:59 PM)germanyt Wrote:  
(13-02-2012 04:56 PM)Hughsie Wrote:  All you people who think 50% is excessive, what are the tax rates where you are and what do you think would be a fair system?

I'm interested to hear other countries/peoples ideas.

I think we have to keep progressive tax rates as low as possible to fund small and limited government. If the economy was booming under small government and most people had savings and disposable income we probably wouldn't even need to discuss what is and isn't fair. It wouldn't even be an election year topic of discussion because no one would really need to complain about it.

The US govt spends 1/3 of the budget on Offense, more than every other industrialized nation combined. If we drastically cut that, everyones taxes could be dropped by a quarter%.

What do you think?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: