NYTimes: it is necessary to raise taxes on the middle class

You are naive if you think that simply working hard and wanting itenough is going to help you get what you want. Plenty of people have tried and failed and most of them not from a result of not working hard enough.

If you have rich parents then your life is set. Sure you can "work hard" but at the end of the day you're going to get a larger head start just because of your wealthy parents than you are because you have worked hard.

Tell me if that is fair. Because you are born into a poor family your chances of success are minimal compared to those that are born into a wealthy one. Tell me how fair it is to raise taxes on the poor where 30% of their income taxed is worth a lot more to them than 30% for the millionaires.

A flat tax is not a fair share. To go to the absolute hyperbolic extreme... 50% of 2 is 1; 50% of 1,000,000 is 500,000.

 

That is crap. I have wealthy parents...and all that got me was college tuition ( which is very fortunate, however that hardly qualifies me as "set")

 

In his defense, he is 18 and has yet to even know if what he's saying is true as it applies to himself. He's merely regurgitating the opinions of others without any life experiences yet to validate whether that be the truth or not.

 

You are proclaiming facts when all the recent studies as well as simple history like Clinton raised taxes and jobs increased-- or lower tax rates just overall lowers tax revenues and the magical thinking of supply side was as Bush I said just "voodoo"

It will be an unusual exercise for you, but try to provide some evidence for your proclaimed "facts".

 

Taxes and wealth are relative. As Americans pay less taxes, they will pay more of their income for services. An easy example are toll roads in Texas. We don't pay for these terrific roads with higher taxes but we still spend the same or more money on them.

Reductio ad absurdum: Taxes paid to perform social services save the costs of private riot police.

1. You can't get blood out of turnip
2. Rich people are going be rich, because they have money to spend on making and keeping money.
3. 100 years of incremental tax law will not be turned over to any radical schemes. The tiniest adjustments to current law will be like pulling political teeth.

 

I think that wealthy people should payer higher tax rates than "the middle class" income levels. However, I think we should be careful with what we income level we consider "rich". My wife and I both work and our combined income is over the threshold benchmark for tax increases. We don't have a second home, we live in a fairly modest house and drive older cars. We have a set amount that we put into savings every month to pay for our two children's college, wedding for my daughter, emergency fund, etc... We pay a $hit-ton in taxes and cannot deduct things like my wife's med school debt interest, child care costs, etc... I'm fine with that...we are fortunate that our hard work has paid off and should pay our fair share. We are not close to being millionaires. We do not have creative tax shelters. We pay what we should.

If my taxes go up, I will still want to save at the current level that we are now so that we may be able to retire in our late 50's at some point ( maybe). Because of this, there are luxuries that I will give up to make up the difference. IE I will do my own yard work (yard men lose money and have less to spend), I will not eat out every weekend and will not tip as generously (restaurants and waitstaff make less money), I will get rid of our housekeeper who comes twice a month (she now makes less and can spend less), I will drive my 6 year old car a few years longer (one less car sold, one less commission check for the salesman), I will monitor my wife's clothes shopping (she doesn't really spend much as it is)...which hurts retailers and retail workers etc...

So actually raising my taxes more will impact others. I use myself as an example as I don't feel we are "rich", but comfortable. Now raising taxes on someone who makes $1m per year may not have the same kind of impact, as they probably wouldn't change habits like that if their taxes went up.

My point is that raising taxes can impact others. I still fully support higher tax rates for higher incomes and fully support getting rid of loopholes that allow millionaires to pay way less than they should. But I don't think raising taxes at 250k is going to solve all of our problems at all.

 

How many hours do you work during tax season?

There are non-degree roles with minor accounting work in O&G that pay over 50k.

 

Sure, we can all pretend here that rich kids have no advantage over the poor kids.

 

This is a lie.

 

Even just that means that you are without $25-100k in debt for your college education, a HUGE advantage, almost as big as if they had given you your first house (or condominium if you went the JuCo/transfer route).

 

So that means "I'm set"??? I did not say it wasn't a benefit and that I wasn't fortunate for that

 

Hard to say. I'm required to have 2200 hours for the year. I don't doubt I could make more elsewhere, but I make a competitive wage for where I live, and enjoy where I work. First job after my degree, I made $30k with no health insurance (my dad's firm), 2nd was $16/hr with paid health insurance (cheapest firm in town), but no retirement plan, and then we got bought out and I was offered $42k with health, dental & 401k match, and have since received a promotion and raise. So, I'm a lot better off than where I was 2 years ago. No complaints.

 

I'm not saying he doesn't. I'm saying you don't.

In practice, would I sweat a home office where at times you play games on the computer, or your son does his homework there? No. Can an IRS agent invalidate the deduction based on that? Sadly yes, as ridiculous as it sounds (They'd have to really dislike you).

The IRS Field Guide tells us that they look for appointment records, meeting space, & waiting areas when determining the acceptability of a home office, if you claim to have regular meetings with clients. Most people don't have those things, which makes claiming regular meetings take place at your home difficult. Of course most small business owners have outside offices that are open 9-5, which makes claiming a home office all the more difficult to get by the IRS if they audit you. These are the facts.

Is it easier to cheat on your taxes as a business owner? Absolutely, and a very large portion do.

 

I'm not the one who said anything about you being "set." However, as you recognize, it is a major advantage that most don't have these days as a result of tax cuts for wealthy people. These days, most students have to incur a significant amount of student loan debt to get through college and the amount of that debt is rising dramatically as legislators slash education funding.

This means that once they get out of school, assuming they got a degree that allows them to get work immediately, their paychecks are not stimulating the economy to the extent that they could. Instead, those dollars are going to pay back student loans that used to be covered by state appropriations, but now go to wealthy people's bank accounts.

 

You think it is solely because of tax cuts to wealthy people? Try defense spending, funding wars, irresponsible gov spending and medicare medicaid and social security. Raising taxes on the wealthy is a drop in the bucket

 

The cost of the Bush tax cuts thus far is estimated to be about $1 trillion, with the current cost running around $250 billion a year.... That is a drop in the bucket? .... 20-25% of the deficit is a pretty big drop

 

Not to mention the amount of wealth that has trickled up as a result of the cuts.

Certainly a two sided coin though.

 

So you think that none of the things I quoted have any impact. The poster stated it is solely due to tax cuts to the wealthy. Do you include the impact of those cuts on spending by those households that saved money? I realize it won't come close to evening out but I think you discount that completely.

 

Yeah, but only about 1/4 (using incredibly favorable measurements) of that $250 billion comes from the rich. It's probably closer to a 1/5.

That said, we don't have a revenue problem. When you can only get 20% of the deficit (again by favorable estimates) through raising taxes on EVERYONE, then you have a spending problem.

Well, I'll be honest, it's not JUST a spending problem. It's a spending AND economic growth problem. If we could grow the overall economy, revenues would increase substantially even without raising taxes. Too bad Obama won't actually do anything to help grow the economy.

 

I don't think so. It's basically all in the top 5%.

And guess how those costs are proportioned throughout that 5%? Hint, 95 through 99.9 didn't really come out as well as some other group.