@averagejoe1said Sorry, just a little hog humor. A play on the ‘hogging’ of a hedge. As to your other point, it assumes all citizens carry their weight. I know, sounds cruel to tell slackers to go to work, but all the lib programs seem to be telling slackers ‘we got you covered’, but here are folks who may say ‘Hey, wait a minute, that just ain’t right!’ Your group-is showing, do y’all n ...[text shortened]... from me to run his tractor. Wonder how all this will change when y’all make everybody exactly equal.
And what percentage of people are non-working "slackers" IYO? Are you including the elderly on Social Security? Children and teenagers in schools? Mothers with infant children?
@averagejoe1said Simple. Why would how hard someone works be a factor in determining how much tax they should pay? It would be irrelevant how 'Hard' they work. I could have easily said how long, or how smart they work, ,or, how lucky they were that a guy bought his real estate that day. Point is, he comes home with more money than Jack. So to recap, take 'hard' out of it, sorry. Bill makes more money than Jack, why should Bill pay more of a percentage than Jack?
If the goal is to maximize prosperity in a society, then someone with a higher income should pay a higher percentage of taxes.
If you oppose progressive taxation, then you do not think that taxation policy should be set in such a way as to maximize prosperity. This begs the question: what goal do you think taxation policy ought to achieve?
@ponderablesaid It seems there is some disagreement between some posters on the side.
I will begin with a thesis which we can discuss and then work to the next on time.
There should be no difference in taxation regardless of the source of the profit.
With this I mean that profit from capital and profit from work (speak wage) shouldn't be tretade differently.
While there is inherited wealth I believe the tax on capital
gains should be higher than that of earned income.
However the close one comes to eliminating inherited wealth
(ie through death duties and inheritance tax) then I believe it
fair that tax on capital gains should be reduced (theoretically
to zero if there is no inheritance).
@averagejoe1said Before a final ‘way to collect federal income tax’ can be agreed upon’ , I would think we should agree, first, it is ok for Bill to make More Money than Jack. The key factor is that Bill works harder,
Why would how hard someone works be a factor in determining how much tax they should pay?
@wolfgang59said While there is inherited wealth I believe the tax on capital
gains should be higher than that of earned income.
However the close one comes to eliminating inherited wealth
(ie through death duties and inheritance tax) then I believe it
fair that tax on capital gains should be reduced (theoretically
to zero if there is no inheritance).
IMO, inheritances should be treated as income to the beneficiaries in the year they receive it.
Perhaps there could be some reasonable threshold in the case of small inheritances; I think $10,000 or so.
@kazetnagorrasaid If the goal is to maximize prosperity in a society, then someone with a higher income should pay a higher percentage of taxes.
If you oppose progressive taxation, then you do not think that taxation policy should be set in such a way as to maximize prosperity. This begs the question: what goal do you think taxation policy ought to achieve?
Actually my off the cuff proposal is pretty close to what has been the median inheritance over the last 40 years:
Zagorsky’s 2012 research is based on the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1979 that has interviewed some 7,500 baby boomers in their 20s, 30s, and 40s a total of 23 times since 1979. The median inheritance was $11,340, not exactly a king’s ransom.
According to the 2012 study, about 20% of families receive an inheritance and another 14% or so expect to inherit something. That’s a relatively concentrated group of Americans.
@no1maraudersaid I suppose every single proposal every made by anybody could be vulnerable to the same childish response.
If only you could see how childish you are, sitting behind your computer twiddling your imaginary dials (let's see what happens when we make it 20k, nah let's make it 5k, let's make it $10 024.34), controlling the lives of millions of real people.
@wajomasaid If only you could see how childish you are, sitting behind your computer twiddling your imaginary dials (let's see what happens when we make it 20k, nah let's make it 5k, let's make it $10 024.34), controlling the lives of millions of real people.
In the Real World, decisions on levels of taxation are decided by political processes impacted by the opinions of the People not determined by Randian notions believed in by a tiny majority.
@suziannesaid Just like it's "only coincidence" that the purpose of all three of these is that they serve your fears.
WHY are conservatives SO afraid of EVERYthing?
Why can't we focus not on FEARing other people, but instead on HELPing other people?
EDIT: And oh yeah, I meant PEOPLE, not corporations.
KingAndrew might say the Lord helps those who help themselves. One thing I know, theUSA has wonderful programs for the poor in this country, which can successfully chug along if the rest of us do our part, work hard,pay taxes which pay for those programs. We are #1 economy in the world. Now you know why all the immigrants want to come here, but I digresss. Let’s not screw it (the country, the economy) up. THAT is what Conservatives are SO afraid of. Were You asking a question? No need, just say it as a fact. But, we’re not much scared of anything else.
@whodeysaid I always get a kick out of this Ben Franklin quote
"It would be thought a hard government that should tax its people one tenth part."
LMAO!!
I dont even think our libs are thinking percentage any more, Its more like all they can get. Frankly, their weak productive capabilities actually will REQUIRE all of the money of the conservative/republican producers.
fair taxation
16 Feb '19 16:53
Back to Top