Is it Envious or from Jealousy to ask the Rich to pay more taxes?

Absolutely Libhater! I agree 100%! Many people, on both sides, are not really interested in hearing an opposing view, supporting their positions with actual evidence, or even engaging in debate at all. They simply want to stand on a box, blurt out their opinions, and insult anyone who disagrees with them. And that is fine for a blog, or a forum whose purpose is just that. That is not the intended purpose of politicalforum.com, as per their mission statement:

PoliticalForum.com functions as a public forum website open to all individuals of all political persuasions that is centered on the discussion of politics in general. All walks of life are welcome to join the discussions in the tradition of vigorous respectful debate.

I personally commend the creators/owners of this site for providing such a website, and the members of this website who adhere to the guidelines set forth, and engage in respectful, intelligent, and engaging debate!



One last suggestion though, if I may be so bold. Is the name "Libhater" really the best way to introduce yourself when trying to convince people that your way of thinking is the better way? GENERALLY SPEAKING.... "HATE" is not associated with something that is positive or good. Just saying....

 

The vast majority of rich people inherited their money.

 

Your perception and obvious intelligence concerning the basic format as laid out by the owners of this site are going to make you a rising star here. Kudos!

 

You're going to have to source that if you want anyone to believe it.

 

My reference to Jesus in my reply to
Undertheice was sarcasm, sparked by anger, at him/her not at Jesus.
Her post seemed completely devoid of any understanding and more
importantly compassion – Jesus' message. I think that Jesus had a
great message. For instance in the context of Undertheice's post,
Jesus said 'whatever you do for the least of my brothers you do for
me'.
When you came back at me with 'Why
don't you...', I see those as fightin' words pardner. When a
sentence starts out with those words there is am implied ending of
'or I will kick your ass'. So I attacked back. In the case of
attacks rudeness is not an issue.

As for the 'point at hand', my point
was exactly as stated. I don't think it is right. And by 'right' I
mean what I judge to be morally right. Yes, I judge morals for
myself.
And for just a touch of sarcasm –
Thanks for telling me that Jesus is not the federal government. I
thought he was.

 

What about loans? Its sort of virtual money.

 

You start a thread basically wondering why people think the rich should pay more in taxes then go off on a tangent about what you think is wrong with poor people.

Two totally different topics smashed into a convenient hatred rant about the unworthy peasants. Are you envious or jealous of poor people?

 

Oh..I'll just pick one example for the heck of it. Unlimited, untraceable political contributions from corporations. How do the not so "wealthy" folks get represented in our representative democracy (supposedly)? They don't because money rules.

As to the "higher standard of living", well, even sheet floats sometimes. That's like saying when somebody cooks an egg in proximity of a cold poor person, the poor persons benefits because of the heat generated in close proximity of the poor person, and somehow they benefit from the heat while the fat cat cooks his egg. That's ridiculous. Somehow, poor people are supposed to worship the fat corporate cat because he might spill a couple of pennies out of his pocket on his way to the bank. Totally asinine.

What do we do correctly? We still have the freedom to discuss, in a relatively free and open manner, the ramifications that are a direct result of the corporate fat cat, and being able to shine the light on the (*)(*)(*)(*) roaches that hide in the cracks. In the past, we've done many other good things. Currently, with the corporate stranglehold on every living, breathing thing, there isn't too much that is "right" with our modern day version of Rome.

 

Wow. So much hatred. Well, when you present facts for me to refute, perhaps I will respond. What I've just read is nothing but a rant filled with conjecture, opinion, and vitriol.

 

The rich are demanded by the government to pay more taxes because the poor don't work for things they want or need like healthcare, food, housing etc... and these things run up the expenses for the national budget.

If you want nice things you should work for it, and not ask for handouts.

This to me could only be from envy, and that is expressly forbidden in the 10 commandments.

 

Religion does play a part, the 10th Commandment states Thou Shalt Not Covet what your neighbor has.

If you're not a Christian or Jew, then you would support taxing the wealthy against that moral rule.

 

This is such a dynamic subject that should not be categorized as wanting the "rich" to pay more. A lot of this extreme hatred for the rich is misguided and a lot of it comes from the recent economic crises where people saw 8 million jobs disappear, $20 trillion in wealth evaporate, and then to their disgust they saw the very companies that were responsible that also received tax payer bailouts, getting $100 million golden parachutes, billions of dollars in compensation to their employees, etc. One guy even testified in front of Congress saying he was hurt by the recession also and only came out with $300 million.

I think this rich versus poor thing is more guided at Wall Street, banks, and executives of large corporations rather than your hard working business man who's built up their own business and makes millions of dollars. I personally think taxes are completely skewed and capital gains and income should be flipped. Why is someone who sits in a room clicking buttons "speculating" all day paying less taxes on his income than someone who actually produces and creates real wealth. Why is Mitt Romney making $20 million and paying 14% taxes while running for President when people who are working 9 to 5s or multiple jobs are paying 28-30%.

This has nothing to do with envy, it's fairness. And if you can't see that the wealthy have an unfair advantage over the poor than you are just blind. Why do have such a hatred for the poor? The people that are hurt most by our current tax system are the middle class hard working Americans.

 

Smart people can do the math and recognize it as true. I have worked with the super-rich and their estates. They tend to have a wife, an ex-wife or two, three or four kids, and twelve grandchildren, each of whom becomes rich. DO THE MATH!

 

The reason for the difference in tax rates is mostly because of the different rate of income tax assessed on capital gains. The rich pay far more on regular income than any working class family. If you want things to balance, stop trying to increase the marginal income tax rate and start changing the capital gains tax rate.

Now there are a few problems with doing this - which may be why the Dems use the tax propaganda, but don't actually try making such changes. One problem is that we already have a fairly high capital gains rate when compared with much of the rest of the world. If it gets too high, moving may become an appealing option to those people and we would lose all of their tax income. Another problem is that many retirees are living on their investments and count on that lower tax rate to make ends meet. This would cause a huge drop in income for many of them, so you'd see the AARP banding together to keep it low. Still, I'm betting the main reason that you don't see anyone changing that rate is because the politicians you elect probably get most of their multi-million dollar incomes from capital gains. They aren't going to bite the hand that feeds them, so they will use their power to keep the rate low, while milking the propaganda about tax rates and raising the marginal taxes that only hit the working-class individuals.

 

Either way, the only truly fair tax system is a stupidly simple one: flat rate for everyone, and no special tax breaks for anybody, any group, any corporation, anything.

 

I have heard that argument for capital gains, but if income taxes dropped too, wouldn't they move more money into regular income producing avenues? Those are the real job and economic activity growing area is the economy I think. Capital gains is easier to move then labor though, I grant you that. Removing corporate tax would balance things out.

 

Peoples taxes should be equal to the share of the wealth that they possess. More wealth they have, as a percentage, the more in taxes they should pay, as a percentage of their income. If you posses 0 wealth you should pay 0 taxes.

 

Actually the best government corporate money can buy created a populous of dependency to eliminate a population of self reliant and competitive. Now that it is out of control they don't want to pay for government manipulation/intervention to provide maximized profits for the chosen few, at the top of the financial food chain. Since they have cornered the market so to speak, the only way to bring in more profits is to eliminate their tax burden. A tax burden they created by the way, and was happy to pay as long as they reshaped the country into exclusively benefiting them.

Break the convoluted union of the two party scam (AKA the best government corporate money can buy), and the rich/elites who own them, rewrite a tax code that is consistently fair to both the working class, small businesses, and the elites, stop government manipulation/interference that only benefits a small minority of rich/elites, untie the bureaucratic tourniquet that is clinched tightly around the neck of entrepreneurship and small businesses, and allow competition to thrive once again, and we will be on our way of breaking the dependency era. Yea the rich/elites will not be sooooo rich, but the country/economy will be more stable, the cost of living will become more realistic to the market that supports it, and less people will be on the government dole, including some of the richest people on the planet.

The bold I agree with and can only become a reality again by crippling the choke hold of plutocracy.

As for the last part, sin comes in all flavors greed, taking advantage of people, playing favorites, and in Deuteronomy 15, we see that God’s intention (if you actually believe in God) will be that HIS people will have all debts canceled every seven years. This was appropriately called “The Year for Canceling Debts”. It also says that the poor are at the mercy of God and powerful people, and even if you do not believe in God, no truer words have ever been spoken or written.

 

IMO, it is delusion. It is the 'something for nothing' scam that our politicians have been pitching for a few decades. The unthinking media & academia nod in agreement like bobbleheads, & the system perpetuates itself.

It is the idea that you can somehow get more out of govt than you put in, or that taxes paid will equal services rendered.

"Citizens! In all times, two political systems have been in existence, and each may be maintained by good reasons. According to one of them, Government ought to do much, but then it ought to take much. According to the other, this two-fold activity ought to be little felt. We have to choose between these two systems. But as regards the third system, which partakes of both the others, and which consists in exacting everything from Government, without giving it anything, it is chimerical, absurd, childish, contradictory, and dangerous. Those who parade it, for the sake of the pleasure of accusing all governments of weakness, and thus exposing them to your attacks, are only flattering and deceiving you, while they are deceiving themselves.
For ourselves, we consider that Government is and ought to be nothing whatever but the united power of the people, organized, not to be an instrument of oppression and mutual plunder among citizens; but, on the the contrary, to secure to every one his own, and to cause justice and security to reign." Frédéric Bastiat

 

So I mortgage everything I own and put the money in a foreign bank account. Now I have a net worth of zero, or even a negative net worth. So my income tax rate would be zero, or I'd get money back.

 

Then you would be guilty of tax evasion and should go to prison for it.

 

If you could prove it. I could also dump it all into ownership of a company - buying non-public stock that officially trades at book value. I may be paying a fortune for shares, but their official value is 1/100 of a cent, so my fortune is worth zero. Then when I need cash, I sell the shares back for whatever I paid for them. There are hundreds of ways to dodge a wealth tax. Even so, that isn't the best reason to avoid putting one in practice. A wealth tax discourages people from saving and investing. This means they are likely to become wards of the state instead of saving for their own retirement. This tax would hit people who need their money most the hardest - the retirees. People who were responsible enough to save up for their own retirement shouldn't be taxed or penalized by greedy bureaucrats.

 

So you want to live in this country, benefit from everything it has to offer, but contribute nothing?

Why that's no better than the layabouts who refuse to work.

 

As in The Picture of Dorian Gray, if the rich looked like their rotten hollow predatory character that they are on the inside, they would look like Jabba the Hutt. Even the word "jealous!" that their bootlickers use to defend them oozes off the tongue, slithering and splattering until it becomes a gusher of slime.

 

Dodge noted.