Thread: What do you think of Obama's proposed Buffett Rule?

Originally Posted by savage-republican

Taxes in America are unduly put on the middle class. The rich make the rules, the poor have no money. Make it a flat tax, or a flat national sales tax like the fair tax. No special deductions for anyone. No tax breaks for buying this item or using this other item, or for being in the chosen business. Get rid of loop holes.

But again we see that the democrats like to play with the tax code as much as anyone. Special favor for you, tax break for them. When will it stop?

The buffet rule is a joke!

About 40% of all households don't pay any personal income taxes.

Originally Posted by Shiva_TD

About 40% of all households don't pay any personal income taxes.

Which only make up 43% of all Federal taxes paid.

Question: What makes YOU think YOU deserve my money? After all, if I worked hard, studied hard, played by all the rules, saved, invested....and YOU didn't.....then why should I be forced to give you some of my money?

How many millions in our country don't pay any federal income taxes? How many actually not only do NOT pay anything in, but get a credit paid to them? I can tell you that it's far more than the number at the top who aren't paying any. So, how 'fair' is that? Obama has said everyone must pay their fair share. "Everyone." He said everyone. But not everyone does. And this wasn't always the way it was and just proves how far our country has moved towards socialist policies. Back in the old days, you didn't have to make much, but you paid Uncle Sam something in taxes. I think it actually made people feel like they were part of it all....that they were also helping to support the country. And the income levels who pay ZERO in federal income taxes is rising fast, thanks to liberals. Click on chart below to see the breakdown on income levels...and how much they pay in federal income taxes:

Originally Posted by JP5

Question: What makes YOU think YOU deserve my money? After all, if I worked hard, studied hard, played by all the rules, saved, invested....and YOU didn't.....then why should I be forced to give you some of my money?

Who are you talking to? Who asked you to give them your money?

How many millions in our country don't pay any federal income taxes? How many actually not only do NOT pay anything in, but get a credit paid to them? I can tell you that it's far more than the number at the top who aren't paying any. So, how 'fair' is that? Obama has said everyone must pay their fair share. "Everyone." He said everyone. But not everyone does. And this wasn't always the way it was and just proves how far our country has moved towards socialist policies. Back in the old days, you didn't have to make much, but you paid Uncle Sam something in taxes. I think it actually made people feel like they were part of it all....that they were also helping to support the country. And the income levels who pay ZERO in federal income taxes is rising fast, thanks to liberals. Click on chart below to see the breakdown on income levels...and how much they pay in federal income taxes:

You're totally wrong. It was Bush who cut millions off the tax rolls. You don't remember him braggin about it?

Originally Posted by JP5

Question: What makes YOU think YOU deserve my money? After all, if I worked hard, studied hard, played by all the rules, saved, invested....and YOU didn't.....then why should I be forced to give you some of my money?

How many millions in our country don't pay any federal income taxes? How many actually not only do NOT pay anything in, but get a credit paid to them? I can tell you that it's far more than the number at the top who aren't paying any. So, how 'fair' is that? Obama has said everyone must pay their fair share. "Everyone." He said everyone. But not everyone does. And this wasn't always the way it was and just proves how far our country has moved towards socialist policies. Back in the old days, you didn't have to make much, but you paid Uncle Sam something in taxes. I think it actually made people feel like they were part of it all....that they were also helping to support the country. And the income levels who pay ZERO in federal income taxes is rising fast, thanks to liberals. Click on chart below to see the breakdown on income levels...and how much they pay in federal income taxes:

This is a bit distorted as anyone can point out. The chart refers to "personal income taxes" and not all income taxes paid by working individuals. FICA taxes, specifically the Social Security portion, are only paid for by those earning less than about $107K (this year) with Medicare taxes only being collected on earn income without a cap. The total typically FICA tax rate a 7.65% but has been reduced for the last two years with the money being replaced by general revenues but normally that is a huge burden for low income individuals. The "Return" they get above what they paid in personal income taxes is a "rebate" for FICA taxes to lower their overall tax burden. The Social Security Trust Fund gets all of the FICA/Payroll taxes but a refund is provided from "general expendatures" to these low income workers.

Is 40% not paying personal income taxes fair? Of course not which is a primary argument for letting the Bush era tax cuts expire at the end of 2012. Republicans as well as Democrats should support allowing the Bush era tax cuts to expire. They were only temporary to begin with.

As for the "paying for welfare" we must realize that this only relates to roughly $550 billion of which only $330 billion is paid for by taxation. The rest is borrowed. The largest share of this goes to food assistance programs (i.e. "food stamps") where predominately it's white divorced women with children receiving this assistance. I don't support how the Federal government provides assistance for food but at the same time I don't endorse allowing Americans to literally starve to death. There are better ways to provide food for the needy for about 1/4th of the cost but it needs to be done regardless.

Based upon average income statistics I'm very well off, albeit not wealthy, and I pay a huge amount in both FICA and personal income taxes. I don't mind doing that but certainly argue that our government is wasting at least 1/2 of the entire federal budget. My bigger concern is that the federal government is borrowing money to fund it's expendatures. Yes, we need to reduce spending (something the Republicans aren't really advocating except "down the road" when they won't be in office), freeze the national debt limit, and increase taxes to the point that we have a balanced budget.

If we go by Obama's budget proposal that reflects almost $1 trillion in deficits I would propose cutting that budget by $400 billion at least. Allow the Bush era tax cuts to expire raising revenue by about $370 billion and then increase taxes across the board or further reduce expendatures by cutting military expendatures (the elephant in the living room) by until the $230 billion gap is closed and we have a balanced budget.

I'll pay more in taxes but the deficit spending must stop and it must stop right now. I will not agree to pay more in taxes if the government continues to borrow. We have no Right to impose debt upon future taxpayers, ever.

Originally Posted by Iriemon

It was Bush who cut millions off the tax rolls. You don't remember him braggin about it?

Which is why I support allowing all of the Bush era tax cuts to expire. None of us were "hurting" under the Clinton era tax rates. That would still leave about $630 billion more in spending cuts and tax increase that are required and 2013 needs to be a balanced budget year just like the 2000 Clinton budget. If we could balance the budget under a Democratic president before then we should be able to do it again and it needs to be done in 2013 after all of the outrageous deficit spending over the last 11 years under Bush and Obama.

Originally Posted by Iriemon

You're argument is that since the tax applies to everyone who owns investment it applies equally to all.

Your argument is fallacious because it is the very wealthy who own the vast bulk of the investments. Thus, special low privileged tax rate of 15% benefits thems *far* more than it benefits, to the extent it benefits thems at all, a middle class family.

You're also wrong as to investments. We have more than enough capital for investments, witnessed by the two recent asset bubbles we've had.

You and others will forever politicize this issue and will remain jealous of the wealthy!

What you don't understand is a tax IS NOT LEVIED ON THE PERSON! Taxes are levied on a transaction. The capital gains tax rate is the same for all capital gains, no matter if the amount is $50K or $50 trillion. It makes NO difference who the person might be!

Focus on the transaction and stop politicizing and personalizing this stuff and you will find eternal happiness...

Originally Posted by OldManOnFire

You and others will forever politicize this issue and will remain jealous of the wealthy!

What you don't understand is a tax IS NOT LEVIED ON THE PERSON! Taxes are levied on a transaction. The capital gains tax rate is the same for all capital gains, no matter if the amount is $50K or $50 trillion. It makes NO difference who the person might be!

Focus on the transaction and stop politicizing and personalizing this stuff and you will find eternal happiness...

I understand it perfectly.

A middle class family that earns its income has very little investment income. They pay a marginal rate of 28% plus FICA taxes of 7.5%.

A trust fund babie or Mitt Romney who has unearned income based on their wealth pays the special low privileged tax rate of 15%.

Which is why Romney who is worth a quarter billion pays a much lower marginal rate of tax than a typical middle income family.

Which is total horse(*)(*)(*)(*).

Wow, all the billionaire and millionaire apologists. The only trickle down y'all going to get is what's left over after a whiz.

Originally Posted by Shiva_TD

That is true today but in the past there was a capital gains tax on 401K plans. The IRS removed that tax so that now it is taxed as income. The "rational" behind this is that a 401K plan is a qualified retirement account and that the income tax rate for a retiree is typically less than the 15% capital gains tax. It also simplified it for those making tax-deferred contibutions which are all subject to the income tax at withdrawal.

On deferred income investments at withdrawal the person pays ordinary income taxes...which is really a rip if their tax rate is above the capital gains tax rate.

On non-deferred income investments, or after-tax investments, these are taxed at the current capital gains tax rate.

How many millions of Americans have 401K or similar plans that have after-tax investments? My point is simple; the capital gains tax rate applies to millions of Americans...not just the wealthy. Every property owner is subject to capital gains taxes.

Unless someone is encouraging a 'progressive' capital gains tax rate, if it remains a flat rate, raising this rate will negatively effect tens of millions of Americans...