- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Liberal Folks, Should We Tax the Rich?
Posted on 9/17/21 at 8:37 am to LSU alum wannabe
Posted on 9/17/21 at 8:37 am to LSU alum wannabe
quote:In rough terms,
I do not pretend to know what that number is.
US budget is $4.79T
FICA pays about $1.39T towards the $4.79T, and would presumably remain intact.
Which would leave $3.4T to cover.
US GDP is $22T (less FICA = $20.6T)
3.4/20.6 = 16.5% Tax Rate
1
Posted on 9/17/21 at 8:42 am to David_DJS
quote:
I don’t monitor this board that closely, but my guess is there are more threads/posts about how Bezos is taxed than there are about the hundreds of thousands losing their livelihoods to the Left’s bullshite.
You would be wrong. Bezos and Amazon pay taxes but they also take advantage of legal vehicles to pay as little as possible (just like we all try to do). Beyond that though, Jeff Bezos and Amazon's tax issues have been a blip compared to the discussions on the impact of things like Minimum Wage hikes (a gem of the Left), welfare changes, the ACA, etc. on Unemployment.
quote:
The CEO of a major bank or tech titan that personally isn’t down with the politics being crammed down this country’s throat but benefits financially by playing along - being taxed in the same scheme bringing them all the new wealth is just part of the give a little, take a lot. It’s not like anybody here is arguing that any of these guys are dumb enough to not act in his own best interests, right? We’d hear from them it if they weren’t coming out winners in Biden’s America.
It's an interesting conundrum... we didn't hear from them during the economic boom and lowered taxes under Trump either. The entire country as a whole did better economically under Trump yet the country voted (allegedly) for a President with a completely different (and more detrimental) view of economics.
quote:
Just like we need a smarter, stronger, braver and far more active middle class/upper-middle class if we have hopes of turning this clusterfrick of a country around, we also need far more from the conservative “1%” - and until then it’s not supposed to be comfortable.
I cannot disagree and I think that lack of action (or, at least, vocals) from the wealthy who do not believe in the Democrat philosophy of economics is a large part of why we're having these issues (especially now with companies enforcing mandates which do not yet even exist).
Posted on 9/17/21 at 8:53 am to SportTiger1
quote:
B) those wealthy individuals say they support more taxes in passing so they don't get ridiculed. Yet, none of them donate money directly to the fedgov, do they?
They don’t donate directly to the fedgov. But that’s because they’re smart and know it’s more efficient and productive to donate directly to the Dem party and myriad organizations they prop up to support the progressive agenda.
quote:
The majority of voices (and votes) to tax the rich are from people in much lower brackets.
Sure. Biden, Nancy, Chuck, the media, big tech, big medicine, the military industrial complex, etc., they’re all in it for the little guy.
The whole “tax the rich” thing is bullshite designed to distract conservatives while the Left remakes the country. It’s just like racism, the tranny BS, climate change, etc. Do you seriously believe Dems are going to enact tax law their benefactors object to?
Moreover, has it ever occurred to you that Dems are playing the Right as useful idiots? The Right bows its neck - not about being kicked out of their businesses, schools and churches on a whim, but to stand up for Mark Zuckerberg on tax policy that he’s okay with, making Reagan-era arguments that cast Republicans as “against the little guy” and Democrats as “for the little guy” when reality is very different. And then we sit around after Election Day wondering why blacks and Hispanics vote against their own interests and in support of things like an open border, which cripples most of their community economically.
Posted on 9/17/21 at 8:54 am to LSU alum wannabe
quote:
Flat. Tax. Rate.
This would be a huge boon if done correctly. What I mean by "correctly" is it would need to be written as an Amendment with rates locked into the wording so Congress couldn't play games with it every election cycle.
This Amendment would have to do a few things:
1. It would have to state that this flat tax is the only tax the federal government shall levy.
2. It would have to lock in the tax rate.
3. It would have to see all income channels as equal (taxing gross income).
**4. It would be nice if it had a portion which allowed for a tax cut of x% to businesses whose highest compensated employee does not make more than n% over the lowest compensated employee.
Posted on 9/17/21 at 8:57 am to Bard
quote:If the reference is to überwealthy, many/most are beneficiaries of Democrat spending and policy. Democrat politicians are in turn beneficiaries of gratuities from those überwealthy. It's a vicious money cycle.
from the wealthy who do not believe in the Democrat philosophy of economics
Posted on 9/17/21 at 9:05 am to Bard
quote:
You would be wrong. Bezos and Amazon pay taxes but they also take advantage of legal vehicles to pay as little as possible (just like we all try to do).
I’m not sure what this has to do with anything I posted.
quote:
Jeff Bezos and Amazon's tax issues have been a blip compared to the discussions on the impact of things like Minimum Wage hikes (a gem of the Left), welfare changes, the ACA, etc. on Unemployment.
I’ll take your word for this.
quote:
It's an interesting conundrum... we didn't hear from them during the economic boom and lowered taxes under Trump either. The entire country as a whole did better economically under Trump yet the country voted (allegedly) for a President with a completely different (and more detrimental) view of economics
I thought the wealth gap was closing under Trump? Sure, everybody did well, but didn’t real wages and wealth grow more for the middle/lower-middle class than those above them? Before Covid, that is.
And don’t forget - there was a big and growing populist streak in Trump. He had a tax increase on the wealthy teed up (44% marginal rate on income north of $5MM) when Bannon still had his attention (and we did hear from some of the wealthy then). Trump also suggested a wealth tax back in the day when he voiced concern about deficit spending.
Posted on 9/17/21 at 9:14 am to NC_Tigah
The last thing we need is more taxation.
Anyone who things revenue is our problem is absolutely retarded.
Anyone who things revenue is our problem is absolutely retarded.
Posted on 9/17/21 at 9:19 am to Bard
quote:That is an interesting concept.
allowed for a tax cut of x% to businesses whose highest compensated employee does not make more than n% over the lowest compensated employee.
Most large corporations have at least some low wage employees though.
Inevitably lower wage employees would be shed to outsourced contracts which would reduce their benefits and job stability. I'd imagine you could alternatively use median income to mitigate some of that.
The remaining challenge would be dealing with technical restructuring (companies within companies) and offshoring.
Posted on 9/17/21 at 9:27 am to RogerTheShrubber
quote:Oh I agree with that.
Anyone who things revenue is our problem is absolutely retarded.
If we did go with a VAT or flat tax, it would need an accompanying balanced budget amendment along with zero-based budgeting. No more of the "if you vote for my pet project, I'll vote for yours," or agencies engaging in "use it or lose it spending."
Posted on 9/17/21 at 9:41 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
The remaining challenge would be dealing with technical restructuring (companies within companies) and offshoring.
Yeah, it's just a concept I've tinkered with for years but have never really gotten deep into fleshing it out. Franchising, offshoring, commissions... those are all things which send me down rabbit holes when I try to solve for them (especially when trying to do so collectively).
Posted on 9/17/21 at 9:56 am to fjlee90
quote:
My point... what you want is not possible
Obviously Reagan-era corporate, personal, capital gains and estate taxes are full-fledged Marxism, no question about that. But surely they're, like possible.
Posted on 9/17/21 at 10:01 am to icheerforgeorgia
quote:
There is a lot you don't know about taxes
That’s all you got, eh?
If you don’t have the facts, attack the person. Neat.
Posted on 9/17/21 at 11:30 am to Taxing Authority
quote:
They didn't pay any taxes, because they didn't make any profits. You think that should be "fixed"? How do you propose "fixing" that? Taxing revenue?
quote:Amazon's effective tax rate the past 3 years is 4.3%
That's pretty damn clear.
But tell me more about mega corporations like this don't use creative accounting to do things like the above.
Posted on 9/17/21 at 11:39 am to shel311
quote:
But tell me more about mega corporations like this don't use creative accounting to do things like the above.
They Invest in entire legal and accounting teams for specifically these purposes to reduce their tax burden as much as possible. Remove the tax credits and complicated loop holes and they can save money by not needing s team of experts to pay s percentage of profits ....
Posted on 9/17/21 at 11:42 am to shel311
quote:They don't.
But tell me more about mega corporations like this don't use creative accounting to do things like the above.
The fact you don't understand this is doesn't make your argument suddenly useful.
If you had some idea, you'd actually articulate this "creative" accounting or at least ONE example. But, you can't, because you don't.
Posted on 9/17/21 at 11:44 am to oklahogjr
quote:
They Invest in entire legal and accounting teams for specifically these purposes to reduce their tax burden as much as possible.
yes. They hire experts at Tax law to ensure they do not miss any tax laws favorable AND unfavorable to them which is kinda wise given the size of the tax code.
quote:Give ONE example. Just ONE that you are aware of. You can't.
Remove the tax credits and complicated loop holes
quote:The team of experts is required because tax law is EXPANSIVE and large corporations have different aspects of their operations that come close to delving into basically every area of tax law.
nd they can save money by not needing s team of experts to pay s percentage of profits ....
Again, you don't know this, but your lack of knowledge isn't an argument.
Posted on 9/17/21 at 11:54 am to PizzaPie
quote:
They don't.
Posted on 9/17/21 at 11:59 am to PizzaPie
You’re arguing with a guy who lives off of unemployment and hopes to sell legal weed one day
Posted on 9/17/21 at 12:03 pm to Bard
quote:Again... is it the purpose of the tax code to modify behavior, or raise revenue? Why should the government put a cap on salaries? In some industries such a multiple would make the company unable to lure talent. Other industries wouldn't be bothered by that a bit. It's still not "fair".
**4. It would be nice if it had a portion which allowed for a tax cut of x% to businesses whose highest compensated employee does not make more than n% over the lowest compensated employee.
Posted on 9/17/21 at 12:04 pm to shel311
quote:Cute
shel311
You hit with an emoji because you literally haven't got ONE example you can think of
You just "know".
Page 13 of 14
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News