Is it right to raise taxes on the Wealthy ?

Page 3 of 10 [ 157 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 10 Next

Joined: 12 Oct 2011
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,328

01 Dec 2011, 2:49 pm

Why not? the highest bracket has benefited a lot from the economic turn down. It definitely won't break them, making them survive on a diet of ramon noodles and tap water, not even close.

Dox47
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,670
Location: Seattle-ish

01 Dec 2011, 5:05 pm

ruveyn wrote:

Dope peddlers give away some of their product for free in order to "hook" new customers. So you would favor keeping the dope peddlers in business because so many are dependent on them?

The government hooked its victims and you wish to preserve that relation?

ruveyn

Good analogy; I'm not quite cynical enough to believe that the primary motivation for government aide was to foster dependency and thus secure votes, but I'm getting there.

_________________
Your boos mean nothing, I've seen what makes you cheer.

- Rick Sanchez

Inuyasha
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Jan 2009
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,745

01 Dec 2011, 5:30 pm

JakobVirgil wrote:

zer0netgain wrote:

MarsCoban wrote:

Inuyasha wrote:

So you're basically asking if it is okay and fair to raise taxes on small business owners, which it is not fair.

I know some small business owners. By no stretch of the imagination are they wealthy.

The problem is how the IRS looks at you.

If you are a sole proprietor where your business income is reported on your 1040 via a Schedule C, the IRS might choose to look at you based on your GROSS income (even if you're going to have a lot of expenses come out of it).

If you elect to be a corporation or an LLC that elects to be taxed as a corporation, your business income can never be factored as your own income until you get a check from the business. Keeps the financial affairs strictly divided.

As I understand it, the way the "tax the rich" mentality hurts a lot of people is that the number is set too low. If the IRS sees your "gross income" as a dividing line for new tax requirements, you get hurt. More so, people in high cost-of-living areas would get hit with new tax requirements even though, after living expenses, they really don't keep that much money.

the top 1% is not a horrible place to put the line.
I think we should divide the low beta rich (job producers) from the high beta rich, market gamblers and parasites that
reduce jobs.

I'm getting sick of the class warfare BS of trying to set one American against another American to distract people from the fact that Obama's policies have been making things worse.

androbot2084
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 23 Mar 2011
Age: 65
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,447

01 Dec 2011, 5:51 pm

Taxes should be based on ones ability to pay.

Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

01 Dec 2011, 5:52 pm

Inuyasha wrote:

JakobVirgil wrote:

zer0netgain wrote:

MarsCoban wrote:

Inuyasha wrote:

So you're basically asking if it is okay and fair to raise taxes on small business owners, which it is not fair.

I know some small business owners. By no stretch of the imagination are they wealthy.

the top 1% is not a horrible place to put the line.
I think we should divide the low beta rich (job producers) from the high beta rich, market gamblers and parasites that
reduce jobs.

I'm getting sick of the class warfare BS of trying to set one American against another American to distract people from the fact that Obama's policies have been making things worse.

Well, then you should really be tired of hearing Fox, Limbaugh, and Beck crying how the poor rich are being scapegoated, and how, according to Erick Cantor, anyone who speaks out against the tax cuts for the rich are motivated by envy and malice.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

01 Dec 2011, 5:57 pm

ruveyn wrote:

Kraichgauer wrote:

I would hardly consider providing food and shelter to people in need to the the equivalent to dope pushers.
Is it better to just let those people die?

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

It would be better if acts of charity were not compelled at gun point. What do you think Law is. It is
enFORCEd. Without guns and jails it would not be obeyed. So you think the hungry of the world should be fed by making slaves of those who can produce and distribute food?

ruveyn

I really doubt that any producers - at least in this country - are going to be enslaved in order to feed the masses.
And sometimes, people have to be motivated by force of laws in order to get things done, such as tax collection, or being drafted into the service (when we still had such a thing).

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

androbot2084
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 23 Mar 2011
Age: 65
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,447

01 Dec 2011, 6:00 pm

Slavery is not an issue because machines do most of the work.

Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

01 Dec 2011, 6:12 pm

androbot2084 wrote:

Slavery is not an issue because machines do most of the work.

Slavery in this sense, I think, means workers being kept down as an underclass dependent on their corporate masters.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

androbot2084
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 23 Mar 2011
Age: 65
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,447

01 Dec 2011, 6:15 pm

Rich people complain that they are slaves just because they have to pay for food stamps for unemployed workers and would rather let these workers starve so the rich can get their tax break.

ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 89
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

01 Dec 2011, 7:21 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:

androbot2084 wrote:

Slavery is not an issue because machines do most of the work.

Slavery in this sense, I think, means workers being kept down as an underclass dependent on their corporate masters.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

They are free to go to their bowls to beg.

ruveyn

androbot2084
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 23 Mar 2011
Age: 65
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,447

01 Dec 2011, 7:23 pm

Rich people don't help beggars.

ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 89
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

01 Dec 2011, 7:24 pm

androbot2084 wrote:

Rich people don't help beggars.

Middle class people do.

ruveyn

MarsCoban
Pileated woodpecker

Joined: 27 Jan 2011
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 175
Location: Colorado

01 Dec 2011, 9:28 pm

Seems like the rich would want healthy and contented slaves, as it seems logical to believe that they would be more productive, and less likely to rebel. With what's happening now, the rich are really only going to end up kicking themselves in the a**. I don't believe that most people feel the need to be filthy rich, but I think that most people do enjoy having disposable income, and not having to struggle just to pay for the essentials. The rich could remain filthy rich (a little less filthy, though, as they wouldn't have quite as much blood on their hands), if they would only allow the poor to be...rich enough.

By taking care of oneself, one is also taking care of the whole. But by taking care of the whole, one is also taking care of oneself.

_________________
I try to prevent my ego from obscuring my greatness.

Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

02 Dec 2011, 1:48 am

ruveyn wrote:

Kraichgauer wrote:

androbot2084 wrote:

Slavery is not an issue because machines do most of the work.

Slavery in this sense, I think, means workers being kept down as an underclass dependent on their corporate masters.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

They are free to go to their bowls to beg.

ruveyn

A little hard hearted, isn't it?

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

Dox47
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,670
Location: Seattle-ish

02 Dec 2011, 1:52 am

Kraichgauer wrote:

A little hard hearted, isn't it?

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

A buck gets you two he comes back with "better than soft headed" or something to that effect.

_________________
Your boos mean nothing, I've seen what makes you cheer.

- Rick Sanchez

Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

02 Dec 2011, 1:58 am

Dox47 wrote:

Kraichgauer wrote:

A little hard hearted, isn't it?

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

A buck gets you two he comes back with "better than soft headed" or something to that effect.

Maybe so, maybe so.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

Page 3 of 10 [ 157 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 10 Next

Jump to:

Is it right to raise taxes on the Wealthy ? Post Reply New Topic

Is it right to raise taxes on the Wealthy ?