Taxing the rich - what is the cutoff?

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

Originally Posted by SC Skins Fan

Well frankly this thread is ridiculous because it began with an article about how these people would be nailed if they had to pay an additional 3% on the $50,000 they make over $250K (i.e. the extra $1,500 they wouldn't see each year and that would sink them apparently). I think the whole idea of a progressive tax structure has really flown over a lot of people's heads here. Those tax cuts were bad financial policy to begin with, but if we are so intent on keeping helping those who make significantly more than $250K then let's do some serious cost cutting. Stop paying for the Iraq War with supplementals that hide the true cost, have massive cuts to social programs, cut government spending across the board. I'm sure that will not increase economic inequality and a healthy society is all that important anyway. Get yours if you can get it, if you can't then clearly you were not cut out for the great race of life. Survival of the fittest as Herbert Spencer would say.

I have to wonder whether this whole debate is about what is fiscally wise or what "feels right." The former issue is up for debate as I highly doubt that anyone here is qualified to say with a very high degree of certainty that any tax scheme is what is best for our country. The latter issue is I think what is dominanting the conversation. I never would have thought that a discussion about tax schemes could become so heated.

[onlydarksets]

You're probably right. It may be time to shut it down. I've enjoyed it though - it's been an education on several issues.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by onlydarksets

I posted links in this thread in response to your initial post about people gaming the system by making $245k instead of $250k.

My point wasn't about people breaking the law but when a person is self employed they can spend the money on the business keeping their salary under the $250 mark.

[onlydarksets]

Originally Posted by firstdown

My point wasn't about people breaking the law but when a person is self employed they can spend the money on the business keeping their salary under the $250 mark.

"Gaming" doesn't mean illegal - it means "using the rules, policies and procedures of a system against itself for purposes outside what these rules were intended for." The Wikipedia article I posted just describes how the US has a progressive tax.

[saden1]

Originally Posted by Sheriff Gonna Getcha

Perhaps, but it's not like they are driving around in BMWs with gold-plated 22s and sippin' on $500 bottles of champagne. Households earning more than $250K live very comfortably in any market with any reasonable number of kids, but they are by no means "rich" (which is what this thread is about).

It strikes me as somewhat unfair to say to upper-middle class families, "You make more money than the rest of us, so hand over your money to the rest of us by allowing the government to tax you at a rate that is four times higher than mine." True, those upper-middle class families benefitted from our current government and infrastructure. But let's not act like families earning $250K are just sitting on trust funds their parents set up or merely have to breathe in order to make the cash; that is by far the exception to the rule. Most households earning $250K+ have breadwinners who have to bust their asses to make that kind of money and took enormous risks to get there (see, e.g., school debts incurred without any promise of a good ROI). Many people earning $40-$50K per year work 9-5 jobs. Most people earning $250K work 11 hour days, don't leave work at the workplace, etc. Moreover, even under a flat tax system, their per capita tax burden is far and away more onerous than that which others have to carry.

Don't get me wrong, the lives of those earning $250K or more is not a sob story. But, these people are NOT rich IMO.

You're preaching to the choir in regards to people making 250K not being rich, these people have to work day in day out after all. I do however find it odd some feel that 250K is not enough.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by saden1

You're preaching to the choir in regards to people making 250K not being rich, these people have to work day in day out after all. I do however find it odd some feel that 250K is not enough.

I agree the debate over if 250k is enough to live on has really moved this thread in a different direction. As I said earlier its more about "Is It Fair" to push more tax burden onto them?

[onlydarksets]

I think it's interesting that "$250k is comfortable, not rich" has been mischaracterized as an argument for $250k not being enough to live on.

Anyway, I agree it's time to move on. Where's SS with one of his "Understanding the issues" threads?

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by onlydarksets

I think it's interesting that "$250k is comfortable, not rich" has been mischaracterized as an argument for $250k not being enough to live on.

Anyway, I agree it's time to move on. Where's SS with one of his "Understanding the issues" threads?

Yeah it's important not to get it misconstrued.

I think the budgeting exercise we went through, in consideration with your input on childcare and student loans, shows that $250K is a good cutoff for a 3% increase in the tax rate.

Those making $250K, even in a worst case where student loans and daycare were through the roof, would pay 0 in new taxes. Those making $300K would pay an additional $1500 per year, and it's been shown here that if you make $300K, you can afford a very nice lifestyle and big daycare costs and massive student loans.

But no, $250K per year is not "rich."

[firstdown]

While I make pretty good money I'd feel just fine making 250k. All I need to do is fire all employee's, do away with all other overhead and cost and I could be there.

[saden1]

Originally Posted by firstdown

I agree the debate over if 250k is enough to live on has really moved this thread in a different direction. As I said earlier its more about "Is It Fair" to push more tax burden onto them?

As a single guy that makes roughly half of that I think it's fair. Would I like to get more of my money back? Sure would. Do I feel burdened by taxes? No. Why is roughly half of my property taxes going towords local school districts when I don't have any kids? I don't know, but I do know that I went to public schools and it's the right thing to do....etc...etc...etc.

We've beat this subject to death. Time to explore a new subject. Take it aways SmootSmack.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

Yeah it's important not to get it misconstrued.

I think the budgeting exercise we went through, in consideration with your input on childcare and student loans, shows that $250K is a good cutoff for a 3% increase in the tax rate.

Those making $250K, even in a worst case where student loans and daycare were through the roof, would pay 0 in new taxes. Those making $300K would pay an additional $1500 per year, and it's been shown here that if you make $300K, you can afford a very nice lifestyle and big daycare costs and massive student loans.

But no, $250K per year is not "rich."

Or maybe people could do with less have one parent at home and do away with daycare cost. I guess thats a whole nother thread for another day when things are slow.

[onlydarksets]

I agree with Schneed and saden1. firstdown - that's definitely a new thread. I nominate you to start that one

[SC Skins Fan]

Originally Posted by onlydarksets

I agree with Schneed and saden1. firstdown - that's definitely a new thread. I nominate you to start that one

Maybe the Redskins will do something worth talking about ... imagine that! Six weeks to the HOF game ...

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by saden1

As a single guy that makes roughly half of that I think it's fair. Would I like to get more of my money back? Sure would. Do I feel burdened by taxes? No. Why is roughly half of my property taxes going towords local school districts when I don't have any kids? I don't know, but I do know that I went to public schools and it's the right thing to do....etc...etc...etc.

We've beat this subject to death. Time to explore a new subject. Take it aways SmootSmack.

Not to keep this going but where you say you do not feel burdened by the taxes you pay I do with a family of four. I'm self employed so each month I have to wright a big check to the Fed. and one to the state. Then at the end of the year they say my business grew but I did not take home any more pay and have to pay taxes on this so called growth. I think eveyone should have to pay their own taxes as it would cause allot more people to start thinking about whats happening to all their money. Heck, ask a person what they pay in fed and state taxes and most have no clue at all just what they bring home.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by SC Skins Fan

Six weeks to the HOF game ...

Wow. When did that happen?!

I was still thinking it was baseball season.