why don't conservatives understand the concept of progressive taxation?

Question

Many people advocate a flat tax which seems fair on the face of it, but ignores a crucial fact: the poorer you are, the greater the percentage of your income that goes to survival needs like food, shelter, clothing, transportation, utilities, etc, and the less income you have available for play, investment, savings, or taxes.

This is why there is an earned income tax credit--some people make so little that it doesn't cover the essentials.

I don't think people should be penalized for being successful. If your income rises, your take home pay should rise too. But that can still happen with a system based on ability to pay.

For the wealthiest, changes in tax rate don't crimp their standard of living but rather how many generations of their descendants can survive without working or even making investment decisions for themselves.

I'm not sure why anyone should be outraged that the children of the children of the children of Paris Hilton might have to get a job.

dead marxist, crybaby CEO, & others:

what you fail to take into account with the flat tax is that 10 or whatever percent you want to set it at will be a greater hardship for the poor, less so for the middle class, and be barely perceptible to the wealthy.

ret cop,

How would you be subsidizing someone's else's savings, investment and play?

In effect, by having a low minimum wage and weak labor laws, that earned income tax credit for the poor is really subsidizing the profits of corporations like Walmart because we are paying part of their labor cost.

I've seen the Rush page on who pays what percentage of the tax pot, but if the bottom half paid the same dollar amount as the top, they would have nothing.

If you think it would be fair to pay the same dollar amount as the wealthiest, go ahead and write the check.

Answer 1

I think we do. The Blue states are by far richer than the red states. And while the blue states are already taxed more then the red states, it's still not enough.

There's too much greed in these blue states. They need to pay more so their money can be redistributed to the red states.

Clearly the red states need more money to give more incentives to business to move south, and lower the state and local taxes so the poorer red states have equal income with blue states.

I think this is a great idea. How about you?

Answer 2

I disagree with your statement which seems to somewhat contridict itself, you said you don't think people should be penalized for being successful.
Why should I pay a higher tax rate on my income because I make more - well to start with I do pay a higher rate. The fact that it is a lower percentage of my needs is not an issue that can be taken into account, I still pay more in percentage and in total dollars.
A flat tax rate, which will never be approved without an allowance for certain deductions is the fairest of all. Keep in mind that the low income tax rate - often zero on the lower earning people take that into account.

Answer 3

With a flat tax, the higher the income, the more you would pay. Lets say the flat tax is 20%. 20% of a million dollars is a lot more than 20% of 30,000 dollars. But thats a rather simplistic view of taxation; my question to you is why should someone be penalized for being successful? Why is it fair to take, at the point of a gun, someones income from them? Why should it be wrong for a person to earn money, save and invest, to provide a better life for his children and grandchildren? Please keep in mind that the greatest majority of wealthy people in this country actually worked for their money, as opposed to people like Paris Hilton who just inherits theirs.

Answer 4

It has nothing to do with penalizing the great grand children of Paris Hilton. In our current tax structure, 5% of the tax paying public pay 90% of all taxes collected, why penalize someone for hard work?

A flat tax is the only way to make it fair, but it will never happen, too many bleeding hearts around.

Answer 5

part of the Fair Tax plan returns the taxes paid on food cloths and other cost of living items Monthly so thats a non issue but will make sure everyone pays Taxes including illegal Aliens as well as the rich who won't be able to use Tax shelters to avoid paying their fair share as far as Progressive taxation who decides whats fair sounds like the Robinhood plan or communism if you work hard and take chances and make a success of your efforts why should you have to give up more of your income because others who aren't willing to put in the effort and Time to succeed need it to survive this is America land of the Free if you dont want to work Fine but don't expect me to fund your life style

Answer 6

I understand it, do you? It is wrong! And by the way poor people do not pay taxes. The wealthy pay the most in taxes now. The middle class only pays 6% of the rest of the taxes. What you should be aggravated about is the gas tax, especially state gas tax on top of the federal tax.

Answer 7

Unfortunately, progressive taxation ends up functioning as if it is regressive.

As long as a complicated income tax system is used as a social engineering tool, there will be loopholes and exceptions that are only available to the ones who can afford tax lawyers, professional accountants, etc. There's no other way to explain why in our 'progressive' system it ends up that the middle class ends up paying the highest effective percentage.

The great thing about a flat tax is that its easy to make progressive. Make grocery food, housing, medical, etc tax free and suddenly the people you say can barely make it by no longer pay taxes.

..And when the tax is tied to the final price of the yacht, there's no way for Joe Billionaire to get out of his bill.

The other great benefit of a sales tax as opposed to a income tax is that it encourages investment. Our national savings rate is in the negative and why is it any surprise? You get taxed the same if you save it or spend it. Under a sales tax scheme, you can avoid the tax bill by taking some of that money that would have been used to buy gadgets or other junk and invest it for the future.

Answer 8

In response to Amos S....Your holier than thou attitude is exactly why people hate the wealthy in this country. If you can get your head out of the clouds and come down from your corporate C.E.O. office and see the rest of the world for a moment you would see many MANY people that would work you into the ground by lunch time. If you really believe that everyone except you is lazy then fire your whole staff right now...get rid of the lazy scum dirtying up your life. It's not just hard work and sacrifice that makes people like you successful. If that is all it takes then most of us would be wealthy and powerful too. You and the rest of the country club Republicans need to get it through you thick head that it's not just hard work and sacrifice that got you where you are today.
Have a Great Day Mr. C.E.O.

Answer 9

How do you figure the same percentage will be a harder hit on the poor? If I make $20,000 and I pay 10% that's 2K; if you make $2M you pay $200K. Seems like the same hit to me.

Bringing up Paris Hilton's great-grandchildren is a ruse. For all your talk, you and the guy who quoted the "great James Carville" don't seem to know much about being "fair" yourselves. "It's not FAIR!" Most of us stopped whining like that when we were kids - maybe some of us should grow up...

Answer 10

on an identical time because it could desire to be interior the financial equipment's superb pastime to hire as many human beings as achieveable on the utmost salary achieveable, that's not a recipe for government intervention to make that so. to quote the prevalent extreme occasion -- minimum salary could desire to be raised to $a million,000 according to hour -- and the in all probability effect is that the two you will all be fired or no you could actually persist with the regulation in any respect. as adventure has shown, government intervention in very almost any way has area outcomes and the customarily are not appropriate. occasion: income tax has the effect of reducing employment and subsequently output. according to probability we could all be greater suited off fi income tax replaced into abolished -- yet i see very few politicians asserting so and none taking action to make that ensue.