My taxes went up today thanks to Obama's turd of a healthcare plan

No, but the taxes "illegals" pay are a net benefit, since most illegals are so terrified of well, everything, that yes they do end in emergency rooms because that's the only point of contact left to them in terms of government services.

(of course, a good pro-lifer will still regard Mexicans as humans, assumably, so to coach this in economic terms is a bit strange.)

http://reason.org/news/show/122411.html

 

Here are my thoughts: people who took extra effort, preservered through difficut life situations in order to make higher income should not be taxed unfairly. For example, doctors, dentists typically have to endure years of dreadful student life with none to little income. In the process most of them take out a lot of debts. Even after they get there, they have to work extremely long hours to earn their incomes. They are the professionals whose incomes reflect just compensation to their efforts and knowledge. Why tax them unfairly for the the fruits they finally deserve? OTOH, a property owner living on rental income less than 200K probably does very little to earn that income and somehow he/she is not taxed for the exploitation of his property and/or the people he/she employed. How is an arbitrary number for differnt tax rate fair and just?

 

I am glad we're ending handouts to bigtexxx

 

What makes a particular tax rate fair or unfair, and why? For example, is 25% fair? 15%? 35%?

 

By unfair, I mean an increase in tax rate only for a group of people based on their income. I am not against different tax rate for different income bracket. But I am not convinced that people above certain income threshold are required to be responsible for EXTRA taxes only because of their incomes.

 

But that assumes that the previous rates were "fair". What if the previous rates were unfair and this just fixes them?

 

The message has been the wealthy needs to help a little more on the fiscal crisis than the rest of country. To me, this is flat out saying because you make more you are responsible for covering the debt for the rest of America. Since the previous tax rates werent enough to cover the Nation's spending, an increase of tax revenues should require everybody to take on the responsibility. Again, my point is fairness in this situation should not be based on income.

 

Couldn't have happened to a nicer guy!

I'm truly happy for you....Happy New Year! :grin:

 

So do I and a poster here is also an ER dr for the same hospital we have an influx of illegal immigrants filling up our waiting rooms. And no I dont work for the county hospital.

 

Good point, so how do we lower health care costs, so our premiums can lower instead of increasing every year.

 

single payer

 

Single payer.

 

jinx

all statists think alike

 

bigtaxxx - please remember to use a money order or a cashier's check so that my purchases of obamacare using your funds don't bounce.

TIA

 

Actually rate based on wealth would be better, but impractical. We know for a fact that over the last decade the wealthy have amassed larger and larger portion of this nations wealth, isn't it fair to tax the higher income more (pretty much the more wealthy people in this country)?

I am not against taxing the middle class a little more as well if the congress is really serious about the debt, which I don't believe they are at this point. All they do is pay it lip service.

 

Or, it's saying that wealthy were paying less than their fair share and they should now be asked to pay their fair share. Again, you're starting from the point of view that the old rates were fair - but what if they weren't, and this simply fixes that?

You've already stated that different rates for different incomes are OK. But for the new rates to be unfair, we have be able to determine what is "fair".

 

Additionally, please be sure to check both boxes:



It won't change your tax burden.

Edit: sorry, you probably won't be getting a refund.

 

May be slightly off topic, but you did touch upon it in your original post OP.. While I believe that taxes have to rise (coupled with much stronger spending cuts than we have seen) to put us on a solid fiscal footing, I think that the end of the payroll tax holiday (with the FICA returning to 6.2%) is an absolutely horrible move.

That 2% cut from a couple of years ago was very important, and should have continued. As most consumers treat it as "found money", nearly all of it gets spent (resulting in added economic growth). As far as tax cuts go, we really got the most bang for our buck for this reason.

It is my understanding that Obama was in favor of extending the payroll tax cut but Republicans were opposed, and Obama did not make it a point to press for it, preferering to sacrifice it for the sake of getting his income tax increase through.

If Republicans truly did care about the poor and middle class, they would not have opposed an extension of that 2% payroll tax cut.