That may be true for some people, but I think that it is a generalization that is largely inaccurate. How do you think many entreprenuers who start companies here in the US make it?

On the flip side, I don't care how much I make, the government should never penalize the wealthy for being wealthy. That would be wealth re-distribution and as we all know communism does not work.

The people who seem to get hurt the most by tax increases are actually making combined incomes of between $75,000 and $300,000 per year. They generally pay high taxes to begin with.

Cut spending and waster before looking at taxing anyone. Then and only then tax increases might be accepted if they are needed.

__________________
Steve Johnston
==========

Do you like the forums? Have a topic of specific interest? Ask about becoming a moderator!

Email me at Steve@phillyblog.com for more info.

okay brooke, a couple of problems with what you are saying in my eyes.
people who are deemed rich do not always own companies. $100k a year is pretty well-to-do but certainly doesn't mean you own a company.
2) investing here vs. overseas is decided for rich people byt the same factors that influence your investment decisions...ROI and risk. If they are investing overseas, it means that thereis a real dearth of investment opportunities here. so what needs to happen is not raising taxes, as this would only exacerbate teh problem, but address the reasons for the dearth of
domestic investment opportunities (with reasonable risk/return).
3) the use of tax shelters increases with the level of taxation on the wealthy. FDR tried to basically steal rich people's money approving a top tax bracket of seventy some percent (at one point tried a 100% tax bracket by presidential decree but it was overturned by congress) but what happened was that people in those brackets showed no income so he was fored to tax everyone else by introducing excise taxes on everything from tires to cigarettes.
4)my main problem with with the rich versus poor argument is that it is besides the facts. tax reform will always benefit the rich more b/c they ahve more money. however, on the flip side, tax reform or cuts should never be targeted specifically to the rich. for example, elimintating taxes on all income up to $20k benefits both rich and poor. it saves anyone with income up to $20k any liability on taxes reducing their effective tax rate. I did beenfit from Bush's tax cut and I'm not rich. mot of my return this year is taking advantage of the HOPE credit he doubled. In two years I will use his increased deduction for edu expenses. many people have benefitted from the child tax credit. while small, I have benefitted from the tax cuts on marginal rates. however, he may have been mroe politically popular amongst the masses if he had just eliminated the bottom bracket.

People who earn between $75K and $300K also have more shelters than people in the middle class.

There's not a one-to-one correlation between wealth distribution and communism not working. It's not that simple. I love that whenever anyone talks about taxation, people cry red. Tax shelters work so that rich people can hold onto their money. If you are a business owner, you get to write off tons of your personal expenses such that the $75K you're paying taxes on represents a small fraction of what you actually gain in. The fact is that I recognize that every time I eat a nice dinner and it's written off by someone as a business expense (which rich people do ALL the time no matter what business they're in...) it's not being taxed.

Cut spending and waste? Sure, tax revenue should come from everyone else's pockets but mine--that's how we all feel. Fact is that we have a president who gave a tax cut when our country could not afford it, and people were saying that all along. I'd be happy as all get-out if we didn't involve ourselves in spending, spending, spending to be involved in Iraq right now. So rich people complaining about taxation should consider not supporting every war at any point...

Argh... :twisted:

__________________
Resident of Fishtown, Moderator of Fish/No. Libs/Kenzo forum, Real Estate Agent-Prudential Fox & Roach

:clapping:

that's not a fact, it's an opinion. we certainly could "afford" a tax cut. what we couldn't afford was the reckless spending. it pisses me off when someone says they can't afford to give me my money back.
forcing peopel to use more tax shelters by raising taxes is counter productive. moreover, if you get rid of the rules that allow people to do this, you wil hurt legitimate business expenses. it's not like the money isn't taxed. when yuo deduct money on ameal, you are using money that was gotten through a taxed transaction (sales) for another taxed transaction (restaurant bill.) fact is, government taxes you coming and going.

First and foremost, let me assure you that I am in now way a rich person. My wife and I both work and live comfortably, but not luxuriously. We also work very hard and earn what we have.

Strange but true fact, the more you make, the more other related expenses you seem to have in order to maintain that. I.E. dry cleaning, clothing, commuting expenses, etc. So while you can write off some things, you are also forced to pay for other things that are necessary that you cannot write off.

And in the end, as a business owner, you are producing more taxable revenue than someone who is working at a low-paying job and doing it by choice. If I simply look at someone and who makes a certain amount of money and instantly say that they should be paying more taxes it is not only unfair, but shortsighted. If I take the risk to start a business and it succeeds and I make money, there is no reason to penalize me for that success.

Look at the government and tell me that there is not waste. When you can tell me that then and only then should raising taxesbe considered. I would be happy if we could get Congress to stop spending money too. I agree with that.

As for the tax cuts....well the economy seems to have responded well to that so I can't criticize that move. I am not sure it was completely the right move, but it seems to have worked.

I would like to see a flat tax, which would be more fair than our current system. I just can't stand when people simply say tax the rich. If you were rich, you wouldn't like it. Neither would I. Just because someone worked hard and made a good living for themselves doen't mean that they owe any more than you or I do.

__________________
Steve Johnston
==========

Do you like the forums? Have a topic of specific interest? Ask about becoming a moderator!

Email me at Steve@phillyblog.com for more info.

do people who earn more actually have more tax shelters or are they just aware of more ways to reduce their taxes? also, when you eat that nice "business" dinner it's already been taxed about 30 times before it hits your plate. and i know some rich people who don't do it all the time so that's just as untrue as saying all people on welfare are lazy.

One interesting thing that I have observed is that many of politicians who support more taxes on the rich are wealthy people who neve had to actually work for their money. They inherited it or obtained it as a politician, which is essentially the same thing.

__________________
Steve Johnston
==========

Do you like the forums? Have a topic of specific interest? Ask about becoming a moderator!

Email me at Steve@phillyblog.com for more info.

It's like estate tax, El. Or any money you spend at the store. You're being taxed twice. I realize that. If less spending and less waste went on, sure, we'd all be able to get more of our money back. But we don't demand that. Instead, we're piss happy when a president drops our bracket 2%. Am I happy? Sure I am! I like my money just as much as anyone else. But if it's going to cost me more in the long run, or if you're going to just tax me differently, then what's the point?

Furthermore, you don't "force" people to use tax shelters. Reference the hummer deduction. Even if that isn't true, there are plenty of those. What is a "legitimate business expense"? It's what the government says it is. Do I think just because someone owns a Mercedes and they own their own business then they should be able to write off that car and insurance in a portion because they own a business? No. Is that a legitimate business expense? To the IRS, yes it is.

I agree with you on a straight $20K 0% tax bracket--people who make that much shouldn't be paying taxes because it just ends up getting dumped back out to them in other subsidies, and then there's less of governmental red tape and funding to agencies that need to go along with that. Same with people who are full-time students...always struck me as funny that I should be taxed when the government turns around and gives me loan money and they pay the interest. How about exempting me from tax and reducing the amount I can borrow, thus obviating the need for it to pay the interest on it?

__________________
Resident of Fishtown, Moderator of Fish/No. Libs/Kenzo forum, Real Estate Agent-Prudential Fox & Roach

That last part is a ridiculous argument because are you saying you or anyone else would voluntarily leave your well-paying job (in theory) to work at a job in a tax bracket beneath you?

My father recently confided in me that he paid over my salary in taxes last year...and he was upset about it, saying there is no incentive to work. How much would a gd person have to make in order to pay my salary in f-ing taxes? I have zero sympathy. And I hardly expect him to leave his job and clerk at WaWa.

__________________
Resident of Fishtown, Moderator of Fish/No. Libs/Kenzo forum, Real Estate Agent-Prudential Fox & Roach