It is patently absurd not to tax the rich

[ThomWV]

If the poor are indeed destitute and the middle class in deep trouble financially and if the Government requires to raise funds to inject into the economy, then who better to tax than the rich? I'm not talking about the $100,000 family here - that's not rich. Here's what I mean; if a guy got a $150 million bonus why are we not taxing away $100 million of it? That would still be taxing at a marginal rate that was a third lower than in 1960 when Republican Dwight David Eisenhower left office.

[MercutioATC]

1. We don't tax bonuses now?

I was under the impression that they were taxed as income...at a lot higher rate than 10%...

[ThomWV]

4. Warren Buffett, by his own admission, paid a lower tax rate than his secretary.

And as I recall when he said it he also mentioned that she had paid roughly 15% of her income in taxes - must be a well paid secretary. So if one of the richest men in the world pays less than 15% - well, it sort of makes my point.

[MercutioATC]

8. That's not because of low tax rates, it's because he has his income sheltered.

Hell, I shelter over $16k per year by contributing to my 401k. That lowers my overall tax rate somewhat, but I'm still in a higher tax bracket than somebody making less than me.

[Romulox]

9. Those two things are logically equivalent. nt

[MercutioATC]

11. No, they're not.

Qualifying for exemptions is voluntary and exemptions exist to encourage certain things (home ownership, retirement investing, charitable donations, etc).

[Romulox]

14. Yes they are.

Whether you lower your tax burden via lower absolute tax rates, or via so-called "tax shelters", your overall tax burden may still be calculated as the percentage of your gross income that is devoted to taxes.

[MercutioATC]

20. I imagine the 30 BILLION DOLLARS that Buffet donated to charity had something to do with it.

...and I don't know what Buffet's secretary makes, but his annual salary is $100k.

[Deep13]

2. Seems pretty obvious to me.

There doesn't seem to be much point in taxing people who have no money.

[jmg257]

3. 35% is current highest rate, so the fed govt is getting $52.5 million on your $150 mil. bonus.

[Winterblues]

15. And we all know how that seriously effects their livlihood.

I wonder if they could possibly get by without destroying the world economy if their "Bonus" were to be only five million dollars Net? Remember this is Bonus and not their normal salary. I am sure most people could get by just fine on just their normal salary but I wonder if these people could do that. They are very special people you know..

[jmg257]

19. Could you even imagine that much money? $5 million? Shit, even $1 million?

I think ALOT of people could get by just fine on that all at the same time!

[serrano2008]

5. Taxing the rich isn't the problem...enforcing it seems to be where the Govt has the problem.

I was just reading this in a Readers Digest from 2007 (yes I'm a few years behind in my reading):

"Secret offshore accounts may cost the Treasury up to $70 billion in unpaid taxes ever year."

You can raise the tax rate on the rich to 99% but that doesn't mean you're going to see increased revenue from it, unless Congress passes some better laws and stops looking out for and protecting their rich friends.

[Johonny]

17. Part of Cheney's plan

He moved the IRS to stop Auditing the rich and start auditing more heavily the middle class. Even though economically these audits have little chance of returning large tax mistakes back to the government.

[peace13]

6. Here is what I tell my uber rich friend.

Taxes are your friend. They keep the destitute from mugging you and breaking into your home to feed their families. She is not able to understand compassion and this is the only way to get through to her. I tell her that if I become destitute and my grand baby needs food...eventually I will hit someone over the head for it.

[zbdent]

7. but ... but ... but ... being a billionaire is rich in only some parts of the country ...

it may not mean that it's rich in other parts of the country!

:silly:

[Romulox]

10. There are those who argue that Progressive Taxation will upset the rich

(the poor dears.)

You see this argument with regard to Social Security all the time.

[snappyturtle]

12. It seems to me that the rich have had a nice eight years under the bush administration.

Time to tax them. They ought to have the moral dignity to repay some of that they 'saved'....of course, it's probably off-shore.

Anyone know how much $$$$$$$$$$$$ was lost to the tax cuts for the rich?

[Brewman_Jax]

13. Not to mention the corporations that don't pay taxes

if the corporations paid their taxes, there probably wouldn't be a deficit.

[GiveMeFreedom]

16. Yea, and not only that

some actually get tax payer dollar refunds in the 100k dollar range and pay no taxes whatsoever. They claim that they do this to stay in business, well guess what? Now that we can't pay taxes, because we don't have jobs and can't spend money on their products, because we don't have jobs, they are losing their jobs and companies. Have you kicked your local corporate executive in the nuts today? I bet that would make us both feel better!

[specimenfred1984]

18. Tackling the intellectually deep questions of our day huh?

Sounds like a repuke talking point.