Wade
  • Wade
  • Veteran Member
11 years ago

Your numbers are too low, thresholds and tax %. The idea of a graduated tax system is to help the impoverished build themselves up. A 10% tax on the wealthy is spitting in the face of people who work with their hands and backs. I don't quite understand your insistence on letting the lucky people off like freeloaders - but that's your thing.

Originally Posted by: DakotaT 



Because I don't believe most of the wealthy are freeloaders any more than I believe most of the poor are freeloaders. Most of the wealthy are, IMO, wealthy because they have helped create a great deal of wealth.

Paris HIltons, rich wall street lawyers, millionaire congress critters -- these are the exception, not the rule.

And the impoverished don't need tax revenues to build themselves up. They need opportunities to show the world what they can do. And who have those opportunities typically come from? People who are wealthier than they are who are willing to trade part of the wealth for the services of those who are less wealthy.

I'd have no problem with taxing Paris and the lawyers and the congresspeople at 80 percent ... if someone could show me how to distinguish the useless rich in a reasoned/systematic way from the wealthy who work hard and provide productive value. I dare you, or anyone, to put 100 random American multi-millionaires in a room, all of them strangers to you and to the national media, and pick the 5 or 10 who are useless appendages on society.

IMO it can't be done.

And that means every time we try to punish those useless appendages by progressive taxes or whatever, we're going to take away another chunk of the incentives the non-useless rich have to stay in this country and use their above average skills of creating wealth for us to share.

*THAT* is why I think progressive taxation is about as dumb, and as hubristically ignorant, an idea as man has come up with.

It is less effective than your guillotine would be, less honest, and easier for those useless rich to avoid.



And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.
Romans 12:2 (NKJV)
gbguy20
11 years ago

I am inclined to agree with you as far as 10% goes, although I'm sure my ideas on what government should be spending greatly differs from what you or Wade thinks. But I really don't think the government could fund any better than vital transportation, the judicial system, and a third-rate military with money like that. What do you think is a more fair % for the income tax brackets listed in the original post? Whether it's for the country we live in or the ideal country in your mind, I guess that's up to you.

Originally Posted by: Porforis 



This post brings up my thoughts that most of the governments programs shouldn't exist anyways. Eliminate the tons and tons of social programs and other spending that wastes our tax revenue and you will not need the higher tax brackets.
DakotaT
11 years ago

This post brings up my thoughts that most of the governments programs shouldn't exist anyways. Eliminate the tons and tons of social programs and other spending that wastes our tax revenue and you will not need the higher tax brackets.

Originally Posted by: gbguy20 



Care to be more specific on the social programs?
UserPostedImage
DakotaT
11 years ago

Because I don't believe most of the wealthy are freeloaders any more than I believe most of the poor are freeloaders. Most of the wealthy are, IMO, wealthy because they have helped create a great deal of wealth.

Paris HIltons, rich wall street lawyers, millionaire congress critters -- these are the exception, not the rule.

And the impoverished don't need tax revenues to build themselves up. They need opportunities to show the world what they can do. And who have those opportunities typically come from? People who are wealthier than they are who are willing to trade part of the wealth for the services of those who are less wealthy.

I'd have no problem with taxing Paris and the lawyers and the congresspeople at 80 percent ... if someone could show me how to distinguish the useless rich in a reasoned/systematic way from the wealthy who work hard and provide productive value. I dare you, or anyone, to put 100 random American multi-millionaires in a room, all of them strangers to you and to the national media, and pick the 5 or 10 who are useless appendages on society.

IMO it can't be done.

And that means every time we try to punish those useless appendages by progressive taxes or whatever, we're going to take away another chunk of the incentives the non-useless rich have to stay in this country and use their above average skills of creating wealth for us to share.

*THAT* is why I think progressive taxation is about as dumb, and as hubristically ignorant, an idea as man has come up with.

It is less effective than your guillotine would be, less honest, and easier for those useless rich to avoid.


Originally Posted by: Wade 



You know Wade, you keep insisting that these millionaire/billionaires are the hard working epitomy of what man is suppose to be and we are just horrible people to expect them to be taxed. Well if what you've been saying is true, why is it necessary to have President push for national health care? Surely these righteous men and women that have scaled to the top of humanity would be taking good care of all their employees in terms of wage and insurance and other benefits that ensures the has a good life. Afterall, without the workers the businesses of these people couldn't run or be efficient or even be profitable could they? So is it wrong of me to call them hogs at the trough, or is my judgement accurate?

On the other side of my argument, I have always talked about fairness. Do we really have an even playing field from cradle to grave in this country for everyone? If the answer is yes, then please explain why. Great character is needed for a person to be born in poverty and pull themselves up by the bootstraps. The person born with the silver spoon, not so much, success for this person is a ho-hummer!
UserPostedImage
DakotaT
11 years ago

I am inclined to agree with you as far as 10% goes, although I'm sure my ideas on what government should be spending greatly differs from what you or Wade thinks. But I really don't think the government could fund any better than vital transportation, the judicial system, and a third-rate military with money like that. What do you think is a more fair % for the income tax brackets listed in the original post? Whether it's for the country we live in or the ideal country in your mind, I guess that's up to you.

Originally Posted by: Porforis 



I've already laid it out - married filing jointly - the first $50K is tax free -no deductions or credits thereafter. Single people the first $25K.

Next - you eliminate special incomes at different tax rates. Interest income and income from capital gains is taxed the same as real work income.

Next - no more caps on SS taxes. All income is subject to SS.

The graduated rates start at 15% from $50,001 to $100K and jump a percentage every $50K and cap off at 30%.

We'd be ought of debt in 5 years. Of course the sailboat industry might take a hit. [sarcasm]


UserPostedImage
Porforis
11 years ago

Right now this is a pretty impossible question to answer. With all the different taxes that are about. Corporate, payroll, income, state, gas and on and on. What really needs to be discovered, is how much tax revenue is needed. Once that is found, determine how much of total income is needed to provide that amount. And tax each person at that rate.

Originally Posted by: PackFanWithTwins 



That's pretty much what I'm asking. I'm not asking you to add up the hundreds of little taxes and fees and figure out how much taxes we'd need to charge everyone to meet our needs, I'm asking how much of someone's income they should have to "owe" to society. If you think the government should scale back spending dramatically in certain sectors, your figures will reflect that.
Wade
  • Wade
  • Veteran Member
11 years ago

That's pretty much what I'm asking. I'm not asking you to add up the hundreds of little taxes and fees and figure out how much taxes we'd need to charge everyone to meet our needs, I'm asking how much of someone's income they should have to "owe" to society. If you think the government should scale back spending dramatically in certain sectors, your figures will reflect that.

Originally Posted by: Porforis 



Which is where I'm coming from with my 10% figure.

IMO it is just that sort of scaling-back that is called for. IMO a *HUGE* fraction of what government now does it shouldn't be doing with.

Because, IMO, the people who work for the government and do those things are *not* better at doing them just because they happen to get paid by the government for doing them.

And many of them are, ahem, a lot worse.

Again, IMO.


And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.
Romans 12:2 (NKJV)
Fan Shout
dfosterf (12h) : Maybe
Mucky Tundra (12h) : Yes
Zero2Cool (13h) : No.
Mucky Tundra (15h) : End of a Degu-era
dhazer (16h) : Steelers sign Patterson because of new kickoff rule interesting
Zero2Cool (19h) : Former #Packers TE Josiah Deguara is signing a 1-year deal with the Jaguars, per source.
Zero2Cool (20h) : They do not do it for "content sake".
dfosterf (28-Mar) : For the record, I enjoy Beast and Mucky drafts
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : Haha
Mucky Tundra (27-Mar) : No time for talking! Back to work beast!
beast (27-Mar) : You saw only 4,201 of my mocks? 🥺 I think that means you missed more than half of them 😢
dfosterf (27-Mar) : Does anyone know what Lambeau field improvements got put on hold? My guess would be for the 2025 draft
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : It's like listen, you made 4,201 mocks, no shit.
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : Cuz during the draft "I had them mocked there!" as if it's amazing.
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : They're fun to do once in awhile. It's people who think they are "content" that annoy me.
dfosterf (27-Mar) : Against tbd
dfosterf (27-Mar) : Answer to your question is yes, it's a Thursday, will be the Chiefs aga
dfosterf (27-Mar) : Luckily for all concerned, I don't post them. I did one, but that was like 25 mocks ago
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : NFL 2024 gonna start Sept 5th isn't it???
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : Ugh... kids these days!
dfosterf (27-Mar) : I'm gonna go do some more mock draft hell instead 🤪
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : Did we do one of those prediction threads yet for 2024 season?
dfosterf (27-Mar) : In my city, they are playing the nimby game, in order to keep some railroad tracks vs. 2 professional sports teams and a concert venue.
dfosterf (27-Mar) : And/Or a city council, of which I haven't seen a good one in a very long time
dfosterf (27-Mar) : That sounds like a Mayor, not a city.
buckeyepackfan (26-Mar) : Packers halt scheduled 80mil upgrade of stadium until lease agreement talks are restarted
Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : City of Green Bay puts Packers' Lambeau Field lease talks on hold
buckeyepackfan (26-Mar) : Packers 1 of 3 teams to vote no on new kickoff rule.
Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : Packers sign another Kicker
dfosterf (26-Mar) : Lengthy explanation at PFF if you click the link
dfosterf (26-Mar) : Kickoff rules officially changed.ngthy explan
Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : lol
Cheesey (26-Mar) : 2009? No thanks! One open heart surgery is enough!
dfosterf (26-Mar) : Good for you!
Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : Yes. That's the one.
dfosterf (26-Mar) : Is that "Lady Dugan" per chance?
dfosterf (26-Mar) : Crystal?
dfosterf (26-Mar) : Please refresh my memory
Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : Alan posts. Crystal back in my life. It's 2009 all over again! Lol
Mucky Tundra (26-Mar) : BAH GAWD! THAT'S CHEESEYS MUSIC!
Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Gutekunst said early stages of Jordan Love contract being discussed.
Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Shouldn't be penalized cuz official screwed up
Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Yeah, challenge until you are incorrect twice.
Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Fining them is the goal, per the people who made the rule anyway.
dfosterf (25-Mar) : Still waiting on the kickoff rule changes. Did hear yesterday that the touchback proposal will now be the 30 yard line, not the 35
dfosterf (25-Mar) : Probably speed of game issues with your proposal
dfosterf (25-Mar) : Hopefully the refs don't get in the habit of throwing flags on this
beast (25-Mar) : I think when it comes to Challenges should get two strikes, so unlimited challenges as long as they keep winning them, but 2 wrong then done
dfosterf (25-Mar) : Still subject to the fines etc
dfosterf (25-Mar) : Yes, I should have been more specific. Also, they are now saying it would be a 15 yard penalty. That makes more sense .
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2023 Packers Schedule
Sunday, Sep 10 @ 3:25 PM
Bears
Sunday, Sep 17 @ 12:00 PM
Falcons
Sunday, Sep 24 @ 12:00 PM
SAINTS
Thursday, Sep 28 @ 7:15 PM
LIONS
Monday, Oct 9 @ 7:15 PM
Raiders
Sunday, Oct 22 @ 3:25 PM
Broncos
Sunday, Oct 29 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Nov 5 @ 12:00 PM
RAMS
Sunday, Nov 12 @ 12:00 PM
Steelers
Sunday, Nov 19 @ 12:00 PM
CHARGERS
Thursday, Nov 23 @ 11:30 AM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 3 @ 7:20 PM
CHIEFS
Monday, Dec 11 @ 7:15 PM
Giants
Sunday, Dec 17 @ 12:00 PM
BUCCANEERS
Sunday, Dec 24 @ 12:00 PM
Panthers
Sunday, Dec 31 @ 7:20 PM
Vikings
Sunday, Jan 7 @ 3:25 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Jan 14 @ 3:30 PM
Cowboys
Saturday, Jan 20 @ 7:15 PM
49ers
Recent Topics
7h / Around The NFL / beast

12h / Green Bay Packers Talk / buckeyepackfan

28-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

28-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

27-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

27-Mar / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

27-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

26-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

26-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

26-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

25-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

25-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

24-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

24-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

22-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

Headlines
Copyright © 2006 - 2024 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.