28 total posts
By unarguable weight of truth. And by all sane evidence. In present-day America the harder you work the less money you make.
Tell me where I'm wrong. It's just a fact. It may not make sense, but there you go.
You got your cake eaters and the rest. Money makes money. Hard work makes harder work. Harder work makes lesser and lesser money.
Just the way it is. And then there's war. And who pays for it.
I'm about at an end here.
Do the sort of work that pays you 100% returns free from taxation. What is that you may ask? Do your own repairs on house, car, boat, etc. Go fishing on the cheap. Raise some of your own food such as chickens and eggs, veggies. Sink a well if you can, and hopefully have your own septic. Get off the grid using wind, also solar power for both electric generation and passive heating source. Lower your cost of living by doing more for yourself and you can live comfortably for a lot less, work a part time job for cash, pay a lot less in taxes.
MORLOCK !!! DANGER! DANGER!
This bifrication of one race of humans, into two. Economic cannibalism. The feeding of one part of us upon the labor of others.
And taxes on cannablistic money should be lower than on labor? Come on! This existance of ours is not a game. It's not "how to beat the other guy". We're in it together. And there is a limit!
We are a herd of monkeys. This isn't a bad thing. It's absolutly amazing how far we've come! To this point, ignorance has been a well guarded and inforced tool.
I'm not arguing against vast and humungus piles of money, per se'. It just seem to me that some measure of respect for our progress should go to people other than the pampered and privileged.
Some of us go forth and do battle with Gods physical world every day. Some other of us tell stories for a living. Should the story tellers really pay a lesser tax rate?
I spent the last 6 or 8 years of my (carpenter) working life
putting up crown mold, and fancying up rich peoples houses. I worked under the wing of a major kiss-***. When we left the place it looked like petticoats. I'm grateful for the hours. I was never cheated.
I was taxed at 28%, pulse SS. They paid 15%, period.
I did everything in my power to give these people
their pedicoats in the most effecent way I could. I busted my ***. All my tools were already in the truck and I'd been studying time-and-motion as a religion, for forty years.
But who were these people? Mostly they were ones we would not tolerate on the slab with us. Whiny babies. Ones who didn't see the need to route an electric cord in a way where it wouldn't get snagged. And when it did, wouldn't go back to untangle it.
So, inorder not to have to deal with them and an eduction that applies to the real world, ... I guess, we give them free money.
A good deal? There is no dealing with whiny-baby, story-tellers-for-a-living. Stomping-on-the-rest-of-us, type people. They're just warlocks. Cannibals. Ubbers. Non dealers with real work. Not havers to get their hands dirty because they have the rest of us to do that, ers.
And pay-lessers in taxes. Even though gererations forward will owe interest on what they should have, but didn't, pay.
All in the name of killing SS and Medicare.
and without all those horrible people
paying you to do work for them, what would you have? You were working the system, they just worked it better.
taxes are like a bell curve for grading. There's a spot at which the most will be raised, but if the rates aren't enough then less will be raised, if the rates are too much, also less will be raised. History would suggest an overall flat tax rate at 10% should be the optimum, higher near 15% if exempting low incomes.
>>>taxes are like a bell curve for grading. There's a spot at which the most will be raised, but if the rates aren't enough then less will be raised, if the rates are too much, also less will be raised. History would suggest an overall flat tax rate at 10% should be the optimum, higher near 15% if exempting low incomes.<<<
Actually, I see the point and don't disagree with it on principal. Above a 50 or 60% tax rate, human nature causes some unproductive behaviors. The percent is dependant on the times and the atmosphere.
Things have changed though. Used to be, when we went to war the rich gave a bit of money and the rest gave some of their kids. Now, with the whole "starve the beast" strategy, the little guy is being sectioned off one against the other.
define flat tax
flat tax = same tax rate for everyone
no matter what the income.
A "true" flat tax?
A true flat rate tax is a system of taxation where one tax rate is applied to all income with no deductions or exemptions.
so no differentation of income source
no difference in single, married, family, no per dependent deduction. No allowance for medical cost, no credit for investment losses. 20% (or whatever turn out to be needed) on gross income.
What you going to do about corporate taxes?
Just a straight percentage of income, peroid.
Do you truly think a 20% off the top would be fair between someone making 20K and someone making 200K annually?
No allowance for basic shelter and food huh?
I'd might go along with it maybe with $20K deduction, make if for everyone regardless of income. That would help with the strain of basic shelter, clothing, and food on the lower income.
It might work but not without changes to pay scales
I can't help but feel that the progressive tax structure is part of what is causing the current disparity between the lowest and highest earners. We could do something closer to a flat tax if the income curve could be more linear as well. Soaking the rich only provides good tax revenue as long as people remain rich. As soon as you take away a larger part of their income, that money won't grow and they'll not be as rich unless they find some other way to raise their own revenue...and raise it they will but it will come out of the pockets of those of less means. This, I believe, is on thing that causes the rich to get richer & the poor to get poorer. We need to get the low to high earnings curve and the percent of people at each pay grade to run as a linear slope. We may still need to have a low end threshold as a safety net. I think our entire tax code could be made more fair but not in one sweeping move. We'd need incomes and prices to be allowed to stabilize as we worked toward a tax that was simple and more flat.
a reasonable view, wanna be President?
the complexity of this exception, deduction, etc in tax regulation makes the current setup impossible to work fairly in my opinion.
They grew out of reasonable intents maybe, with some good old fashing influence buying thrown in.
But they just keep adding, never removing, so complexity makes it impossible for people to even tell what is actually happening.
People complain about
have 'tax shelters' offshore (like the Cayman's); however, there is a different that most don't realize. Having investments in other countries while the money was made here in the US requires that they pay the tax rate required by our code; however, if a company actually opens a branch overseas and uses local people to work there (such as GM or McDonald's), that particular branch or company only pays taxes to that country based on THEIR taxable requirements. NO money comes back to the US because otherwise it would be taxed by the Feds at the highest corporate level in the WORLD. About forty years ago (maybe less, can't remember) there was a deal made with corporations that if they repatriated that money, it would be taxed at a very low rate.......the money flooded back here and into the economy and jobs were almost immediately created at a very high level. This administration won't even consider a deal like that.
When money comes back, that's inflation.
About the only thing we've got going for us is that we can print money here, send it there, and it doesn't come back.
Yahoo! What a system!
that's the wisest thing you've said yet.
Tax Wealth, Not Income!
Po'folk spend every peney they make. They got no wealth!
Why do we keep on defending privledge so? Even to the point of milking the poor more and more? You can call it double jeopardy. Or double taxation if you like.
The poor are paying interest to the rich (who own the debt).
When you increase
taxes on the 'rich', you actually end up with a trickle down effect because the rich will increase their prices for their products and services that the 'poor' need in order to get that money back. Don't constantly blame the 'rich' for protecting themselves...blame the politicians that want to take whatever they can from the 'rich' KNOWING that the 'poor' will be the ones hit the hardest by the government greed. Just like the tobacco tax.......the ones who smoke the most are the poor and lower middle class.......
That was the problem with Nixon's
Wage and Price Control program. At first it seemed to work, and it did serve to slow the changes and give everyone time to reconsider, but if it had stayed too long, then jobs would have disappeared and instead of price control you'd have lack of goods to sell. Thankfully someone had enough sense to see it's socialism effects and dump it.
I watched a show tonight
where the villain was MNU. Muti-National United.
Maybe I do gripe about the Reps a bit too much. And the Dems, not as much as they deserve. It's really a battle between the two kinds of money after all. We're all supposedly, both laborer AND investor. I know it feels a bit silly to constantly have your left hand trying to slap sense into your right. And visy verca.
So from now on the blame goes to where the pain (and unfairness) comes from. But DOH! That's the rich, isn't it?
Guy up, how 'bout it.
Anyone who says that at some point enough money
is enough has a point. At some point, it's not about having more toys but about having power and influence. One thing I saw in the last election was interesting, however. Both candidates had their own stable of very wealthy donors. For one man the stable was heavily populated with business and industry people. For the other, it was populated with people in the music and entertainment industry. One candidate even brought his friends on stage with him during the campaign to entertain the audiences. You guess which donor stable was able to buy more in the way of voter influence. The answer should be easy but the message not a good one. Maybe one problem with our country is the priorities of the people. Maybe we don't care as much about how we think we'll be in the future as how we feel at the very moment. Who needs to worry about debt? Let's be happy now! Is that what we've become?
All foreign aid needs to stop until our own are taken care of! If they can't pass a budget then maybe they should have their paychecks put on hold until they get the job done that they were elected to do! Who else gets paid for not doing the job????
BO for one LOL
AMEN SISTER :)
along with Congress
Note to moderators