"Hey Mark! If corporations are persons, like the Supreme Court says, why not
tax them the same way as for other "persons"? Why give them a break.
Many of the largest pay no income tax at all under current tax law."Well Mike, I don't agree with the court that they are people. But do you think the bigger businesses should pay more then 15%? I was
just thinking if we had a rather progressive tax on income tax and capital gain
taxes, then corporate taxes could maybe be a bit lower (or higher like you say,
for some of the big business that paid 0%) for big business, and even lower for
the small business right down to zero for really small business, then maybe
business could lower prices and pay higher wages. But hey, maybe
not. What do you think? What should they be set at?
Before we even think if doing this, first we need ensure that all people (who
this new tax applies to) are given a living wage.Oh but wait, when
living wage legislation was proposed by Democrats in years past, Republicans
opposed it.If we passed this 10% tax on the poor, it would do
wonders in riding our society of the surplus population.
People at or even near the poverty line should pay 10% income taxes on top of
all the other taxes they pay?Let me get this straight, we need to
raise taxes on poor people, but fight like heck to ensure the 1% don't pay
a dime more in taxes.I guess if this made sense to me I would be a
Hey Mark! If corporations are persons, like the Supreme Court says, why not tax
them the same way as for other "persons"? Why give them a break. Many
of the largest pay no income tax at all under current tax law.
With a 10% flat tax, rich and poor alike would pay the same fair rate, we would
all see a reduction in our taxes, and the goverment would be flush with money
(no more loopholes or exemptions for the wealthy). Consumers would have more
disposable income to boost the economy and the deficit would be less likely to
run amok. My grandpa had this idea 40 years ago. It's fair,
it's practical, and it makes sense. That's why the government will
never do it.
higvDietrich, IDNo one is exempt from paying tithing. ==========But the BURDEN reamins hirer for those with less.Think about the Widow's mite.The Pahrisees paid the same
"rate", but since they "owned" so much more, their offering
[sacrifice] meant much less to God.The 1% who own 80% of eveything
can doubel their "burden" and not even blink.And If you
conservatives wish to make America a "Chrsitian" nation -- Why do
you protect those with the most, and shun those with the least?That's not what Jesus taught.
Not too long ago the conservative argument was that taxes = stealing. Why do
they want to steal from more people?
Automatically doubled if a war is declared.
@ higv: Actually, lots of people are exempt from paying tithing and everyone
who does pay tithing, does so voluntarily.
No one is exempt from paying tithing. Taxes could work that way too. As for
minimum wage no one is forced to make minimum wage all there life. Can improve.
With the government taking more than there will be less incentive to earn as it
is all gone and higher prices will be paid. So people who make more and pay
more well there goes incentive. And were is minimum wage for business owners who
only make money if enough people patronize to keep them in business.
Why look just at federal income tax when evaluating tax fairness? State taxes
are regressive, falling disproportionately on the poor, as a percentage of
income, than the wealthy. The Corporation for Enterprise
Development released a scorecard for all 50 states. That includes overall tax
rates, where data from the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy shows that
in the median state (Mississippi, as it turns out) the poorest 20 percent pay
twice the tax rate of the top 1 percent. In the worst states, the poorest 20
percent pay five to six times the rate of the richest 1 percent. In UT, the tax
rate for the poor is 9.3% and 4.9% for the wealthy--a 1.9 ratio. In CA it is
10.2% for the poor, 7.4% for the wealthy, 1.4 ratio.
Here's a must read book for every American who cares and is interested in
trying to learn more about some of our recent history.The book is
"Who Stole the American Dream," by Hedrick Smith.It's a
very well balanced and carefully researched look at the roles played by both
major political parties, several Presidents on both sides, and by increasing
corporate greed.Whether one considers themself to be conservative,
liberal, or in between, this book should be one we all study and consider
A surprising biblical fact is that the poor did not pay tithes, but, instead,
received from the tithe. This fact is made especially clear in the gleaning laws
and in the purpose of the tithe. Jesus did not tithe, nor did he sin by failing
to tithe because he was poor and did not own land or herd animals for his
sustenance. The poor were only expected to give free-will offerings to the best
of their ability.FrIis easy to demonstrate that the contents of
every recorded tithe found in the Mosaic Law is only from landowners and
herdsmen of the land of Israel. This was a totally unexpected, yet very clear,
truth about tithing that Bible study with an exhaustive concordance reveals.
Also, strange as it may seem, Scriptural tithing was only intended for a society
sustained almost wholly by agricultural crops and animal herds.But,
why let reality intrude into the religious fantasy of some who believe they have
"truth" and think it should apply to government?
Maudine,Excellent comment! Thanks for your clarification of the economic
realities this letter ignores.
Since we are just pulling stuff off the top of our heads how about this for
federal taxes:Up to 30 thousand a year: 0% taxEvery dollar
over 30 thousand up to 50 thousand: 5 % taxEvery dollar over 50 thousand
up to 1 million: 10% tax1million to 1billion: 40%1 billion to 10
billion: 60%Over 10 billion: 80%No deductions. And the
taxes are figured going upwards. In other words, take out five percent for your
income (all income, from any source capital gains or otherwise. Income is
income) between 30-50 thousand, then what you are left with above 50,000 take
out the 10 percent up to 1 million, whatever is left above a milion take out the
40%, and so on. Do the same thing with coporate rates, but with a
much lower rate, perhaps starting at 0% and topping out at, say, 15%.Maybe add a 1% federal VAT on everything except food, that would satisfy some
people's need that everyone pays in. Then force states to get
rid of property tax on all first houses under $500,000, full 10% over 500,000.
Full 15% over a million.
Or...Here's an idea, lets bring traditional America back!What was the tax rate for top earners in the 50s? Lets bring those rates
Royce, if you can guarantee that each worker in America receives fair pay (fair
being defined by the same criteria that determine a CEO's pay), then I
might think you've got a decent idea here. Without that guarantee, all
you've got here is another scheme to funnel more money into the hands of
those who already have too much and to take money from those who have too
Trouble is, everything you want to be 'agreed upon' will not be
'agreed upon'. And our societal safety net should not have a condition
of religious affiliation associated with it. The foundation of the system
belongs to the state; whatever over and above people can get out of churches is
up to them.
It would take more like a 75% rate to run todays Govt.
Could not agree more. Ownership in the country. Not freeloaders!
Here's an idea: This is supposed to be an income tax, not a working tax.
We should tax all income, regardless of source, the same.We should
start taxing investment income, which does nothing to grow the economy, at the
same rates as all other income is taxed.That makes more sense and
will generate more revenue for expenses than taxing the poor. Additionally, it
will improve the economy because people will actually use their money and spend
it instead of sitting on it or moving it from one account to another.
Minimum wage is $7.25/hour. For an individual who works 40 hours/week, 52
weeks/year, this is $15,080 per year.Out of this $15,080, the
employee already pays $851.76 per year in Social Security and Medicare taxes -
leaving them with $14,228.24 with which to pay for housing, food, clothing, and
transportation to work. You want to take another $1,508 away from them every
year?That would leave them with $12,720.24 - or $1060.02 every
month. Approximately $11.78 for food every day. $353 for housing. $353 for
clothing, personal hygiene, electricity, transportation.And this
assumes the only person they have to care for is themselves. What about the
young rape victim who kept her child? Or the person with the sick spouse? What
are they supposed to do?Oh - and if they get more than $125 in
assistance every month, they are getting more out than they are paying in. Why do so many people think it makes sense for the wealthy to keep their
money but not for the poor to keep theirs?