So they will be forced to keep working and being productive of course while less productive people flood the world with their also-essentially worthless offspring. LIBERALS love this, of course. Except the rich ones like Teddy Kennedy, of course.
2006-07-22 03:05:47
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋
Of course it makes sense!
You can't collect taxes from people who have no money. That's just simple logic. The more you have then the more tax you pay.
However it has nothing to do with productivity. A 19-year-old boy who inherits 100 million dollars and lives on the interest income (about 5 million per year) would have to pay over a million a year in taxes. But let's not make the mistake of thinking that he is "productive"... LOL!
2006-07-22 09:15:01
·
answer #2
·
answered by Doctor Hand 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Only a Republican would equate productivity and income. Even conservative economists will admit that rich people who day trade aren't producing anything for the economy, even if they make a lot of money at it. People buying stock and collecting dividends are providing a service for the economy because they fund the capital markets but that's not the same kind of productivity as providing health care or food. At the other extreme exploited workers can be extremely productive but their circumstances prevent them from converting their productivity into much income.
You also have a convenient blind spot for Social Security and Medicare taxes. No low-wage or middle-class workers (the ones you dismiss as "unproductive") can escape these taxes, which are 7.65% off the top unless they operate in the underground economy.
Finally, your whiny sense of entitlement and being picked on (which Republicans always condemn in non-Republicans) prevents you from seeing or admitting that richer people get more valuable services from the government. At the most basic level, if you have a lot of property, government protecting you from invasion and crime is worth more than if you have little property. Rich people also benefit from the amenities of government. There aren't a lot of poor people visiting national parks, for example. And I doubt there is a city or county in the country where public schools for the children of the poor are better than public schools for the children of the rich.
So quit whining about how unfair life is and be grateful for whatever advantages you have. You'll save yourself from an ulcer and live a more fulfilled life.
2006-07-22 14:54:13
·
answer #3
·
answered by Houyhnhnm 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Oh come on, do you think that Bill Gates really works that hard for his money? Before being so judgemental on who is or isn't being productive, try doing the figures on what people really make and take home from each job. Im sure that taxes really kill people like Peyton Manning. In my opinion they are not taxed enough. Thats why the rich keeps getting richer, and the poor stay where they are at, and the middle class is disappearing. But, I can just bet that a question like that could only come from a Republican.
2006-07-22 09:21:06
·
answer #4
·
answered by jack_black_91 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
No and it never did. I guess it's been like this for a long time but NOW that Bush is in office, it only gets worse. Go figure. The lowest paid workers work the hardest. Yes, and use their brains too regardless of college education. The higher paid, who sit behind nice desks and tell everyone else what to do get to live like kings/queens and not have a care in the world while the rest of us just struggle to keep a roof over our head --- forget getting medical care too. See, because we aren't minimum wage - we are average wage. Average wage doesn't get help from the government - we just work and pay taxes and stress out.
2006-07-22 09:14:28
·
answer #5
·
answered by butterfliesRfree 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
It goes along with the ability to pay concept. Congress has made certain exemptions and deductions to go along with this concept. The more money you have, the more money you are able to pay in taxes. It would not be fair to impose a flat tax on everybody, because it would disadvantage the poor to lower middle class. A progressive tax is fairer in the sense that lower income individuals do not get taxes as much as upper income individuals. It gives the poor more to live on.
2006-07-22 15:15:16
·
answer #6
·
answered by Josh 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
As others have noted, your question is based on the false assumption that the the most productive people are taxed the most. A valid question that resembles yours is why Congress taxes people with higher taxable income, as that phrase is defined in the IRC, at higher rates. The answer is that, in general, they have more money to spare than those with lower taxable incomes. There is a minimum amount of income required by the average American to feed, clothe and house himself and his family. Arguably, everything above that is gravy. High income recipients have more gravy.
2006-07-22 13:11:51
·
answer #7
·
answered by Steve B 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Productive people have money to pay and the least productive people have little money to pay for taxes. It is called progressive taxation, the higher the income, the higher the tax. This is somewhat unfair for the industrious people but it is the law.
2006-07-22 09:13:19
·
answer #8
·
answered by FRAGINAL, JTM 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Well last week i did a lot of over time and i could not believe that i have payed £175 in tax and National Insurance it's scandalous,I think that over time should be taxed at a lower rate,after all its people who work over time that keep Industry and our countries finance going.
2006-07-22 09:20:14
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
It's called "equitable distribution of wealth."
You can't bleed dry someone who has nothing - whether by circumstances or by choice. So they go after those who make the most -- e.g. the most productive people.
Not fair. But who said taxes are fair? That's why you have tax advisors to help you circumvent the system.
2006-07-22 09:13:11
·
answer #10
·
answered by imisidro 7
·
0⤊
0⤋