I believe in a simple solution. Take the entire tax code-- and burn it. Totally toast. Now, introduce a ONE PAGE, ONE LINE tax code.<br />
No loop holes. No havens. No creative accounting. No write offs. No nothing.<br />
10%. Period. From everyone. Period. For everything. Period.<br />
From the guy who makes 10,000 a year, to the guy that makes 10,000,000,000,000 a year. Whatever. 10%.<br />
If it is good enough for God, and the immense fortune that is the Vatican and the mega-churches prove it is, it's good enough for regular man.
Can't help it... always was a fan of Jack Kemp and George Aiken. Folks who knew that PEOPLE were good for business, not profit margins.
And the answer we hear shouted from rooftops by our "progressive" brethren is: THEIR FAIR SHARE! Just what is that anyway, and who is responsible and who isn't? To me, a fair share would be all of us paying the same % of our income. A flat tax, and I echo that from a great many like minded people here and out in the real world.
Why have aspirations of being in the top 1%? Where is the equality of a country's responsibility to every citizen yet promotes equal opportunity? Basically we have a tax system that has a negative incentive to be successful.
I really do not mind the taxes. I can afford them. But the problem comes in the fact that many pay no federal taxes. Many Europeans see our media and think things are so unbalanced here but do not realize that all but the extreme poor in their nations pay taxes while our citizens on a whole pay almost nothing compared.
Yes they should pay more. The forbes top 400 wealtiest Americans is out. 400 people now have a combined wealth of 1.7 trillion dollars. To give you a perspective on this 1.7 trillion would employe 17 million people at 100,000/year or 34 million at 50,000/yr. Is it fair for 400 people to have all that money?<br />
During the Eiesinhower administration (Republican) the top tax braket was 70%. Today its 35%. During that time period until the 1970's we had the largest growth of the middle class ever. Regardless what the Republicans tell you the proof is in the the results. When the ones that make the most are requiered to get that money back into the system the middle class grows. The top 10% still live a very good life that the rest of us will never know. <br />
Since the 1970's middle class income has not grown much while the wealtiest's income has grown so much we have the inequility we see today. I have to ask how much is enough? And as I see it there is never enough for the top 10%. I mean really does anyone need a billion dollars?
20% of the people control 80% of the wealth. They can pay 80% of the taxes.<br />
Mussolini had blackshirts. Hitler had brownshirts. The Wall Street slime have blueshirts, dumb people willing to work against their own interests for the benefit of the rich.
A lot of the responses to this post seem to be confusing the tax rate or percentage of their income paid , with the percentage of the total amount of taxes paid by the top 10% of tax payers.<br />
When viewed correctly puck's figures are correct!<br />
They pay way more than their fair share.
Every so often someone out there comes up with something like this and some people like us spread it as fact and some others buy it hook line & stinker
No they don't. Loopholes and tax cuts mean that even though they are supposed to pay 35 percent, many don't even pay 5 percent. The government should make it a certain percantage for all equally and no loopholes or tax cuts. If everything is the same and held to a standard, all paying the same percentage of taxes, then that would truely be equality.
Ask the corporations how much more they should pay. They own the government and they receive 50% more welfare cash than social programs. The corporations are also making such record profits in the worst economy since the great depression the banks have started charging them for depositing their billions.<br />
The simple fact is the whole system is crooked as a 3 dollar bill. Tax loopholes are provided for those who can pay the most for them and everybody else is squeezed to make up the difference. Obama is the only one pushing for reform of the system while the republicans fight him every step of the way and insist on keeping taxes on the wealthy and corporations at 40 year all time lows.
oh, that's for your main man, Obama, to decide, I'm afraid... Romney won't make them pay more... he's one of them! truth is in every developed country, and that's according to OECD figures, not something I'm making up, the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer...<br />
it's really hard to give a definite figure here... and it would be unfair to tax the top 10% in the same way... what should be taken into account is their 'real contribution' to society... I mean, if you are making your money by producing all the stuff you sell in China, for instance, well, you are not really contributing to the economy... because you're making China richer and your country poorer...<br />
gosh, I could write a whole essay about this but this is EP's Questions and Answers...
I can see both sides of the argument. I know several accounting techniques, let's just say the top 10% aren't hurting and no... I'm not seeing all that many jobs created to justify giving out more tax breaks....on the other hand...why should a successful person pay for two wars the may not have agreed with or cosigned for....at the end of the day, if you live or work in the US, this includes those of you that had the environmental conditions allowed you to do better that everyone else, pay up. I have a feeling that the debt could lead to national security issues.
Name your source please. I wonder how much of the amount taxed is claimed back through loop holes or property ownership, etc. I've read several articles that speak of their tax rate but can't seem to find any about the actual bottom line.<br />
Sure, it is basic math to think that if we all contribute a similar % of our income, the wealthy will contribute more as a whole. Now ask what % of their wealth is applied to indulgences compared to the 90% that can't afford an education or vacation.
I see, that is just for federal income tax. There are many other taxes to consider for the bottom line. I wonder what that bottom line is.
Those types of statististics are a distortion and over-simplistic in my view..<br />
Would be interesting to know how much of the overall wealth is owned by the top one percent for instance..Would be interesting to know if the top one percent even pay tax..<br />
There is also a huge cost associated with the consumeristic lifestyles of the super-rich..How rich must the rich get and how poor do you want the poor to be ??<br />
There are many ways to look at numbers..Not all things are best viewed in numerical terms.<br />
However much the top 10% pay,...they still have way too much money..If they had to do an honest days work for the money,..it would take them thousands of years...
there is no real proof of this
you can look it up on the irs website. they have a complete breakdown of almost every possible statistic.
anyone can put figures together to support their position