For a change, use this poll and comment space to discuss whether those who can most afford it should be treated the same as the rest of us or should they be treated differently. In other words, ignore the issue of raising taxes vs. cutting spending. That has been discussed to death. This is purely about who pays for what taxes there are. Tied up with this is keeping or eliminating tax loopholes and other things that allow the wealthy to pay less taxes. Discuss!
President Obama will propose that people earning more than $1 million a year pay at least the same tax rate as middle-class earners to help reduce the soaring budget deficit, according to administration officials.
Obama will call the plan the “Buffett rule” after billionaire investor Warren E. Buffett, a supporter of his who recently called the tax system unfair, noting that it lets him pay a lower rate than his secretary does.
The plan would replace the complicated alternative minimum tax, which was enacted decades ago to ensure that the wealthy paid at least some income taxes, according to the officials, who requested anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the matter publicly.
No more deficit
All hail B!
http://bit.ly/oKHs7Z
lol -Surprise!
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/New-government-fees-pepper-apf-4120540659.html?x=0&.v=2
Best line in the article:
welcome to “NewSpeak 2.0″
..brought to you by the
“Thieves on The Hill Gang”
-film at 11
-s
(Orwell would be proud)
They are arguing in court that the insurance mandate is a tax.
#119–Pres Amabo==thank you for the link. Yes, that is very much what I saw. Good to know it has a name and like everything else that is “new” to me, it has a history.
Lots of good ideas/review in that link. Just another “touchstone” to keep in balance looking for the sweet notes in the cacaphony (sic–my words are better than real ones) of convinced dogmatic advocates.
I wish I knew “everything.” then maybe I could be dogmatic myself.
Yea, verily.
The current tax system is too complex with too many exemptions and deductions. If you eliminate the exemptions and deductions, tax everyone at a lower rate, you might be able to generate more income. You will also need to reduce spending. The problem is that the 90% of our politicians are rich. Why in the world would they want to change a system that benefits them?
We already have a simple, relatively flat tax system. It’s called the Alternative Minimun Tax. It’s only a matter or time until everyone is paying it. The tax rates everyone is anguishing about today don’t matter because they don’t really apply to the AMT – it’s a totally separate taxation system. The only downside is that you pay more under the AMT than under the current system.
I think I have reached my monthly quota for wasting time on this blog, but I am glad I stuck it out to see President Amabo’s link which points out the fact that bobbo’s wealth redistribution system of the day was once called “Practical Christianity”. Are you torn between your hatred of Christians and love of wealth redistribution?
cranky–I did have to overcome an involuntary gag reflex at reading that but while I am anti-thiest it doesn’t have an emotional component of “hate” just the intellectual appreciation of it in a category with lots of overlap with Taro Card Reading, Astrology, Anti-Global Warming or any other crackpot set of beliefs==and I’m not “for” wealth distribution as such. The system really should be set up so that people can’t get that wealthy to begin with, then redistribution doesn’t have to happen, or rephrased, if the working masses aren’t ripped off to begin with, then the government doesn’t need to step in to stop the Revolution that will eventually follow.
Looks like there is going to be lots of analysis about “fair” taxing policies and Class Warfare. About time these all got a good airing.
Cranky–we both suspect that Christian Redistribution of Wealth is suspect. But lets say you have a job you like to do===that was my case for every job I ever had. Now imagine the government would pay you subsistence wages to do nothing. Which would you choose? Call me crazy–but I would always choose working. I don’t envy people on the dole, don’t feel jealous. If it keeps them from breaking into my house to steal, and keeps my taxes lower by needing fewer services, why wouldn’t a sane person chose that system?
Makes sense to me—IF, thats a big if, IF it worked. Now, too many people, including all dogmatic libertarians would be against the such a system even when they actually would benefit from them.
THAT is a very religious/anti-human point of political view. And not by coincidence===I’m against it.
Yea, verily. Catch you up the first of next month?
Is this Buffet tax of which Obama speaks an increase in the capital gains tax? Sounds real good. Lets tax all the money that comes from regular people’s 401ks and while we are at it, let’s make it impossible for small businesses to attract any investment income. Small businesses create jobs, so there goes those jobs out the window.
The capital gains tax is set lower than the income tax for a reason. We want investments and we want people to make a profit on those investments so they can invest in jobs for this economy. I guess Obama doesn’t care about creating jobs.
Benji–who is this “we” you speak of? Sounds like just the same group you reference: those idiots who think rich people provide jobs.
Thats Puke Big Lie #1. What was it about Bush’s 8 years of tax cuts makes you believe just the opposite of what we are all suffering from right now?
Jobs: a complicated multi-factorial interactive matrix of more elements than we even know.
Why don’t you believe Puke Lies when the tax credit for moving jobs overseas is terminated?
Until then: VOTE ALL “NO NEW TAXES” RETARDS OUT OF OFFICE.
>the tax credit for moving jobs overseas
I keep reading about this on liberal sites. Could someone explain it to me? Seems like an easy thing to eliminate. I’ve never seen any IRS forms with a deduction for sending jobs overseas.
The only thing I can think of is that the US taxes all corporate income everywhere, while other countries only tax income earned in that country. So a company can save taxes by sending operations to other countries. That is not the same thing.
Mike–I don’ know. Like you, all I hear is the pundits talk about it but left and right both agree so it must be true?
USA doesn NOT TAX profits earned overseas. It another exemption/break/dodge/payoff. It should stop immediately. I don’t know if that is the tax “credit” or whatever they are talking about or if there is more involved.
Its all part of the pandering to the desires of the rich not to pay their fair share and sadly only a part of what has restructed the labor market in the USA.
Worse times are still coming. We are past the tipping point on US job development as well and this current unemployment rate is only the first few inches of the rising tide.
Structural Unemployment.
VOTE ALL “NO NEW TAXES” RETARDS OUT OF OFFICE.
#128 – “The system really should be set up so that people can’t get that wealthy to begin with” Now, that is a damned interesting statement. What would be my incentive to work if I can’t better *my* standard of living?
======================
I did have a great idea this morning while taking my second dump. Our current system is really limiting our revenue collection ability. Why are we restricting our tax collection to Americans? We should be collecting income taxes from citizens of other countries as well. We’re just letting them skate by and hurting ourselves unnecessarily in the process.
#133–PA==one of my favorites would be that corporate officers could only be paid up to a multiple of the average non-corporate wage. That would incentivize CEO’s to make the business successful and the employees richer rather than only an opportunity to line his own pockets.
Tax capital gains like ordinary income.
Tax individual stock transers at some nominal amount.
There ya go. Three very simple things that would magically spread the income around negating the need to steal from the rich.
I’m thinking a simple “no deductions/exemptions” tax code could really be helpful as well. Details to be modeled.
Our system right now has been totally corrupted by the SuperRich. Any change would be for the better===except further tax cuts for the job creators.
VOTE ALL “NO NEW TAXES” RETARDS OUT OF OFFICE.
US does tax profits earned overseas. That is why companies set up foreign entities to keep the money there.
So? You want to follow the paper trail instead of the money?????
Typical shill.
http://usdebtclock.org/
#5 “The only sensible thing to do is a flat tax”
#6 “good reason for a flat tax”
#10 “Consumption tax. That’s it. No other tax.”
#11 “A true flat tax, no deductions for kids, mortgages”
#21 “They should raise taxes on the poor.”
#23 “So, absolutely NO to any tax system based on how much one “can” pay.”
#33 “Producers don’t pay taxes; consumers do.”
#38 “Once you increase the taxes of the rich, prices on everything goes up”
#40 “How about NO tax?”
#45 “Tax consumption not income….”
#64 “The math is real easy on this one.”
#81 “if you took a random sampling of the educated population”
#103 “anyone who isnt’ a moron should understand this”
Where does this idea come from that a straight percentage is fair? If you have to couch your argument as something ‘only a child’ or ‘only an idiot’ wouldn’t get it looks like you’re not very confident in what you’re saying.
After all, who are you going to explain it to if not an idiot or child?
It seems obvious to ME that lowering taxes on the poor is more likely to produce more consumption, because propensity to spend each dollar earned is greater when you have fewer dollars. Similarly, propensity to save each marginal dollar is greater when you have already covered every logical and illogical need.
I think the operational goal of a tax system is to get the most cash possible without the taxes themselves decreasing economic activity.
Taxing people into the poorhouse isn’t a good idea, because then they can’t buy anything. Since we are in a demand destruction feedback loop that will only make the problem worse.
Conversely, if big corps and the top income quartile are holding record cash they look like awfully inviting targets.
If the rentier class is going to take their marbles and go home why shouldn’t the masses take their lunch money? These folks are supposedly the engine of growth. If they idle the engine and decide to take a decade off the equation has got to change, no?
Hey Chris–nice review. You almost expressly say the tax breaks/inducements given to the job creators hasn’t been used to create jobs====so take the tax breaks back!!! And I’d say add a penalty for 8 years.
Teach those pricks not to take advantage of the Public just because they get their shill into office. Make them dread the payback that will come later.
Course, to get pay back, you need a Pres with a backbone.
VOTE ALL “NO NEW TAXES” DOGMATIC SHILLS OUT OF OFFICE.
#139
I don’t look at in a punitive way. If somebody does something unethical with billions of dollars we ought to just send the cops instead. Really try and find the problem.
This is more of adding an ante into a slow poker game. If you recognize that people are just sitting on their cash give them an incentive to put more into play.
The situation prior to 2008 was different, traditional boom-bust cycles in specific markets. Now it’s a world wide investor revulsion.
Since it’s as much psychological as anything else, we need either big money or big government to get some action going. It’s possible to incentivize big money back in the game through tax policy.
That’s the essential choice I see right now. Government can do the work directly and present you with the bill OR government creates a penalty for capital that wants to ride the bench.