Does Paris Hilton create jobs? The wealthy carry the tax burden, but they carry it a lot easier than the rest of us. I hate this argument. People say oh we can afford a tax on this or that if we just stopped wasting money in other places we'd have the money. It doesn't work like that, unfortunately. If you were in the military then you should recognize that all Americans use the service of the American government everyday, whether we can see it or not. And that public education, the roads you drive on every day - all paid for by the government. The success you've had in your life you worked hard for, but you couldn't have had without our government. We all must chip in. In fact, if anything, you probably owe the government more than the super-rich or the poor because you've benefited the most from it.
That's the number being tossed around if we are to replace the income tax. Scary ain't it? The "underclass" you speak of is overwhelmingly composed of hard-working people in low-paying jobs that our economy absolutely requires, not lazy good-for-nothings. Non-working homeless bums are a tiny part of our population and don't get any government benefits anyway unless they earned them earlier. Unemployment is low in the US. Much of the poor in America are elderly people, who worked hard all their lives, but are struggling to make ends meet in retirement. Inflation has eaten up what might have been a good nest egg when they retired 25 years ago. Income is not directly related to how hard you work. Professional success usually is, but income from the truly rich in America quite often comes from inheritances, property, and investment income, not hard work and personal success. I understand, but I think you misuderstand who I'm talking about. You seem to think the income/tax gap is between you and the "underclass" that you dislike so intensely. That ain't where the gap lies, amigo. The widening gap is between the middle class and the extremely rich. The middle class has far more in common with the working poor than with the truly wealthy as far as tax laws are concerned.
that's cool. your life is good because you made it so. but my argument wasnt about your life. just like i try not to vote based on my life. there are many that are chewed up and spit out by life. these people would not be able to earn a scholarship (there is certainly some measure of aptitude for any scholarship) or go to the military. what do you say for a young mother with 3 kids that leaves her husband because he beats her? she didnt go to college so she has to flip burgers or maybe works as a janitor or receptionist if she's lucky. i guess she should take her 5.35/hr and be happy? or is it her fault for marrying an ahole? or just let the market determine how she can live? she has no skills, no value to capitalism---dude she needs help, and a lot of it. i want to pay taxes to give it to her.
If the system worked, maybe I would agree with you because certainly I can feel sympathy for someone in that situation. Unfortunately, with the government in charge it's a complete cluster-f***. That's why I support much better tax credits for charity/charitable donations, as well as stricter controls over the percentages that actually get to the people. Whenever possible, the free market can do it better than the government.
That makes absolute sense. Annually donations make up a pretty heave part of my income. Because I don't yet own a home I am still in standard deduction land. I really feel my charitable contributions should be an adjustment to my gross income instead of being covered via the standard deduction. Of course I'd much prefer it if the government would get rid of all adjustments, credits, and deductions and just lowered the percentage of tax we all pay.
How would a flat tax work? Everybody pays the same amount - what about people at the poverty line, people with no income?
if i remember correctly, the one proposed by forbes when he ran for Prez was like a 17% tax with no taxes on the first $30k or so. so a bit progressive, but i think the proposal also got rid of capital gains taxes to even it out.
I just finished up reading the chapter of Glenn Beck's book that addresses these very questions. Some interesting statistics for the board to ponder. The average work week for the poor (defined as making less than $9,700 per year) = 16 hours per week The 10 poorest cities in America have had a Republican mayor 8% of the time since 1965.
That doesn't seem like it would be high enough. I would have no problem with that, but I don't have a problem with increasing the percentage as income goes up either - I just think the brackets need to be adjusted from their current state.
