Slashdot Mirror
Millionaires: Raise Our Taxes To Address Poverty, Fix Roads (go.com)
jones_supa writes from an article on ABCNews: More than 40 millionaires, including members of the Rockefeller and Disney families, are asking to have their taxes raised to help address poverty and rebuild failing infrastructure. The millionaires wrote a letter to Democratic Gov. Andrew Cuomo and top New York lawmakers proposing new, higher tax rates for the top 1% of earners in the state. The letter says that additional revenue would help addressing child poverty, homelessness and aging bridges, tunnels, water pipes and roads. "As New Yorkers who have contributed to and benefited from the economic vibrancy of our state, we have both the ability and the responsibility to pay our fair share," the letter states. "We can well afford to pay our current taxes, and we can afford to pay even more." The tax plan, known as the one-percent tax plan, was worked out in conjunction with the Fiscal Policy Institute, a left-leaning economic think tank.
Easy, simply raise the wage of your employees.
Its snowing out today, and this story just confirms it: Hell froze solid today.
ala the Clinton Foundation. See what I did there?
So open your checkbook and voluntarily pay more taxes. Don't take the tax deductions and credits you're taking.
Or maybe they were but their competitors were not.
Given they're trying to speak on behalf of many others that like as not don't feel as they do, it seems disingenuous. Besides, nothing is stopping them from giving more if they really feel that strongly about it.
I was raised on the command line, bitch
"Nemo me impune lacesset"
You know they know it will never happen.
Translation: "Please, we're sorry we were so stingy! Raise our taxes a little before the people vote in somebody who will raise them to where they should be!"
Captcha: unrest
40 out of the 40k or so actual millionaires or the 500k or so asset millionaires?
What's preventing them from sending more money to the government now? A trivial Internet-search immediately returns a link to the government site, which explains, how donations of cash or securities can be made to any Federal government agency...
Anybody, actually wishing to pay more taxes himself, can already do that. The only reason to make noise about it is to force someone else to pay more.
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
Nothing is stopping them now. They are free to write a larger check every quarter.
They could just give more money but participating in this publicity is better for them.
Just treat all income the same. Wages, dividends and capital gains should all be taxed as regular income. Where do you think the 1% make most of their money? Hint: it's not from their paycheck.
What's stopping them from donating more of their wealth to address child poverty, and homelessness right now? The government already encourages that type of behavior. Why wait for tax legislation? Maybe these 40 millionaires and the left-leaning Fiscal Policy Institute want to force their morals on the rest of the 1%.
After all, the government is just a corporation with a proprietary interest in all land in its jurisdiction, except that the landlord is democratically elected. And tenants are free to leave if they don't like their landlord's terms. And Libertarians are man-children who can't accept property rights, and they NEED to be catered for lest they all SHRUG. Look at how successful Somalia is, you fascist cunts!
...stops any of them sending a donation to the Treasury to any amount necessary to signal virtue or cancel guilt to any level that might suit them. Leading means going first. I say let them demonstrate their Civic Virtue for a few years (or maybe decades) before obliging anyone else to do it.
Here you go:
https://www.fms.treas.gov/faq/...
Uhh... Checking.
- Abril Fool's Day? No, too soon;
- Apocalipse? (go to the window, checks the telescope) No, no asteroids coming;
- Hell frozen? (as my nickname implies I can check this possibility)... DAMMIT, Hell has frozen.
Religion: The greatest weapon of mass destruction of all time
This story is nonsense. Anyone can voluntarily pay more taxes than owed. Most of these people pay less than others because most of their income is taxed at the lower (capital gains) rates. It's interesting that they don't seem to be lobbying for a change in THOSE rates.
"Why don't they don't just donate it then" because someone doesn't know what a prisoner's dilemma is.
"But the rich are OK with it" in reference to people who already made their money supporting a tax on income.
There's already a spot on tax forms to contribute more if you like. The Rockefeller's in particular, and the Disney family is in bed with them don't actually want their taxes raised, because they can silently raise them all by themselves with that one little blank on the tax form and send in all they want. (we'll ignore the fact many of them have bought personal loopholes that eliminate or greatly reduce their taxes for now) They want to hinder the nouveau riche from reaching their level and to install multiple levels of glass ceilings to keep people from breaking into the next bracket and becoming competition.
If you've got someone else who's got a lot of money - even if it's not as much as you have - the price of bribing your favorite politician goes up.
The motive here isn't to help those of use struggling to make it, it's to make sure more people are struggling.
The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
Every government body I've ever seen thinks having more income will solve all their problems. It doesn't and it won't ever. The average person in this country is being taxes at one of the highest rates in our history, and government revenues are at all-time highs, but we're still having problems. Why?
Because every single one of these governments naturally fills out their expenses to match or exceed their revenues. Always. Giving more money only makes the problem a larger one.
We ought to be able to afford what we need to do with less than we give them now. It shouldn't take millionaires or billionaires or you or me giving them more and more of our income. We need government that shows responsibility and restraint with what they have.
By the way, I am not making a partisan argument here. Republicans and Democrats contribute to the brokenness.
Giving my money to charity means I have freely let go of my funds in order to try and make the world a better place. Crying for more taxes is essentially saying "You! Over there, with the guns! Point them at us and make us turn over our goods to you!"
And tenants are free to leave if they don't like their landlord's terms.
Something tells me you've never tried immigrating to another country or renounce your US citizenship. It's a huge ordeal and costs a shitload of time and money.
That has worked out so well for France.
In the city I live in the median detached house sells for over $1 miilion.
I remember when penny candies were a thing, and cost 1 penny, and when millionaire meant something beyond the ability to imagine.
Penny candies now cost 25 cents each minimum, and millionaire just means homeowner with mortgage paid off.
Where are we going and why are we in a handbasket?
Whatever. Are they trying to fend off higher taxes by proposing a tax plan in advance that has a lower tax rate? If they were really feeling guilty about all of that money, they could have donated it somewhere or helped a government somewhere pay off its debt. There seems to be a nice form here where these folks can donate trillions if they so wish, get that guilt off of their backs.
Companies and the rich use a ton of different benefits to get their taxable income down as far as they can. If you rank things by taxable income, these guys likely aren't near the top 1%. Instead it's the highly paid, working professionals.
Disney can pay for it with a H1B tax!
Baby boomers are retiring and the workforce is shrinking in the next 20+ years. Social Security and Medicare will consume two-thirds of the federal budget. Taxes will have to go way up to pay for everything else.
If you collect more taxes, how much of that will go to things you want to have fixed and not for things like bombs and oil subsidies. I would think if you had money and you see a problem you could more easily direct that money to the problem yourself. I mean, the roads and bridges in and around Disney World are pretty nice.
-- Thou hast strayed far from the path of the Avatar.
It's not the landlord's problem that it's a pain for you to move house, bro.
And it's not impossible to announce citizenship. But an even easier alternative is to ignore ex-pat tax rules and just never return - don't expect a landlord who doesn't like you to let you back on their property. (And the US is particularly unusual on its tax rules for non-resident citizens!)
It would be nice, the perennial tax holiday for 1 class has to end sometime (doesn't it?). Cuomo will not do it as he would have to raise taxes on himself assuming of course if he is even paying any.
Even if you took every bit of their money and all of their wealth, it wouldn't be enough to do all the things they want done.
No, the answer is to lower government spending by cutting out the waste, fraud and abuse. It's been proposed before, but never really been done. Bureaucracies rarely die a voluntary death.
Given they're trying to speak on behalf of many others that like as not don't feel as they do, it seems disingenuous. Besides, nothing is stopping them from giving more if they really feel that strongly about it.
Nothing disingenuous with stating your own opinion that you'd be ok with higher taxes. The operating assumption of most politicians, especially in the GOP, is that "TAXES ARE EVIL!", so if you remind them that not everyone feels that way (at least if taxes are going to a good purpose), that's your right as a citizen. Feel free to disagree and write your own letter, but in the case of these millionaires, they wanted to point out that the assumption that all rich people don't want tax increases is wrong.
While you can write a check to the Treasury if you really felt like it, its a bit moot if there isn't an accompanying budget. What is preferable is that a tax rate is set that funds a certain budget with a set of priorities, so you know for sure that the law requires your extra tax money go to pay for education, roads, etc., rather than going into a US Treasury slush fund that is used for who knows what, including probably tax rebates for corporations that don't need them. The letter is not just asking for tax increases, but asking for a budget that prioritizes these services and raises taxes as a way to pay for it.
If someone holds stock for 20 years and it goes from being worth $100,000 to $20,000,000 there is nothing to tax.
Any more than you can tax someone on their home value increasing or someone holding an asset that becomes more valuable with time.
Plus rich people are smart, you don't cash in the stock --- you do things like take a loan against the stock. Or you don't sell a building --- you sell the company that owns the building --- thus no real estate transaction occurred.
Corporation account and wealthy people accounting is in an entirely different dimension.
It seems not one poster here considered that they see they are capable of paying more and not being harmed BUT they know they can't solve all of those problems unless their fellow millionaires who are equally capable of paying but not equally willing kick in their part.
They are not hypocrites.
Actually they are. For example Warren Buffet, while saying his taxes should be raised in political venues, in real life dodges taxes. He is dodging inheritance taxes by transferring money to the Gates foundation. Why? Because he thinks Bill and Melinda can more effectively use his money to address social issues than the government, that they will do more "good" per dollar.
"Hey government! Please take more of our money and blow it on wasteful spending!" ...before wanking off in public for points, how about you cut a check to the government without fanfare? Otherwise, stop pandering to it.
A second problem, though, is that most of this spending shouldn't be federal to begin with. Road infrastructure should largely be paid for by local and state taxes. And federal entitlement programs simply aren't helping people because they are badly designed and badly administered; throwing more money at them won't fix those problems; and if you fix federal entitlement programs, they won't need more money, since we are already spending a lot more than other countries.
Or maybe they were but their competitors were not.
Historically that is how rich folk addressed various social and public issues. And it continues today, look at Warren Buffet. He is dodging the inheritance tax by transferring wealth to the Gates foundation, believing that Bill and Melinda can more effectively spend his money to benefit society than the US government can. His "raise my taxes" talk is just a political stunt.
So giving our government more money to fix the things they should already be fixing with the taxes,fees, tolls they already are collecting and should be using but don't..
Jack of all trades,master of none
a lot of these people don't make money from jobs, they get it from investments and family trust funds that buy up housing for them to live in for free. and they own a lot of property. dividends and investments are taxed at lower rates than income. unless they raise the dividend tax rates or get rid of tax benefits in tax free municipal bonds these people are blowing hot air and simply taxing others to make money for themselves calling for higher taxes on income means newly successful people pay more and have a harder time buying their own property and moving up creating a class of royalty. this is how it works in NYC. they reduce income taxes by a pittance but the property taxes keep going up which means rents go up and higher rents mean higher property taxes and profits for the landowners.
There they go. Any reiteration of this idea now is just underhandedly trying to push their politics on other people.
In debates about Christianity, there are two groups: those looking for answers, and those looking to just ask questions.
The US government has a sovereign currency: it is non-convertible, the exchange rate floats, no-one else can create it without their permission.
The government can spend as much money into existence as it needs to meet its policy goals. It does not need to borrow or tax to do this, though tax is essential and useful for other reasons.
Inflation can occur if it overdoes it by spending more than the economy has the capacity to produce. So it shouldn't do that. But it is a long way from there now.
So why doesn't it? A lack of understanding and an ideological opposition to the government doing anything. For many people of power and influence high unemployment is not a problem, it is a policy.
If you give the state more money, it will help improve roads the same way giving a beggar $10 will buy a meal at Dennys and not a bottle of vodka...
Never give an addict more of what they crave.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Here's all I want: ABOLISH COPYRIGHT LAWS. To hell with those fuckers.
Circumcision is child abuse.
Hell, all they have to do is not itemize and take no deductions, exemptions, or any other tax shelter's dodges, etc.
Determine absolute Gross income and send in 39% of it.
This whole "I think I should pay more, make me do it" crap is stupid.
And if their excuse is that they won't step up until everyone does, then their concern for the poor, infrastructure, etc. rings hollow.
Try actually doing it, then shaming others into doing the same instead of trying to use the Government to be the enforcers for your altruism.
When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
If you sell a stock at a gain, you owe taxes on the difference between what you got from the sale and what you originally paid for the stock — including any purchase and selling commission costs.
https://www.fms.treas.gov/faq/...
If they want to may more, no one is stopping them.
--fatboy
This is so transparently political. Every tax form in the US comes with the ability to pay more than you are required. It's totally up to the person filing the taxes. If these rich guys want to pay more, then they should just PAY MORE and stop with the grandstanding.
Oh, and I bet each of them has an army of accountants going over their taxes every year to keep their tax burden down as low as possible.
Really makes you wonder why they're doing this publicity stunt. They're not stupid. They know they can pay higher taxes if they want. They're either doing this to make themselves look good or make someone else look bad. Or because they're expecting political favors. Hell, maybe all three.
In the end they will lay their freedom at our feet and say to us, Make us your slaves, but feed us. - Fyodor Dostoyevsky
that's because these people make money from tax free government bonds, not wages. higher taxes mean governments can buy more bonds to fix stuff which means the rich people who support this will give them the bond money in return for tax free income for themselves and make money.
If these millionaires are so smart, then why ain't they rich?
You are welcome on my lawn.
A lion, the king of the beasts, was confronted in his court by a pack of wolves leading a flock of sheep. The alpha-wolf said that the wolves spoke for the sheep and that it wasn't right that the lion took so much from the flock.
"One so powerful as the king should also give back to his subjects," he said.
The lion, seeing that he might loose everything, agreed to give back some of his food to the wolves, and the wolves turned to the sheep and declared they had won a great victory for democracy.
Why do we still think the Rich giving back our money makes any difference at all for the working class?
There is a fundamental difference between someone who has a lot of money, and someone who is making a lot of money. Someone with $10B in assets is a billionaire, and fits this "1% club", but they may only be in the upper 20% in annual TAXABLE INCOME.
And yet they're perfectly willing to tell the state to tax people whose incomes are higher than theirs. Heck, it protects them from people getting into that top 1% assets club too fast..
They're willing to pay a bit more to the state they help create in order to grow its size and foster an attitude among the proles like us where the individual matters less than he already does.
Expectation: Take my money and use it to build schools and roads!
Reality: Thanks for your money. Will drop moar bombs to the sandniggers!
Mastering the English language is fucking easy: all you have to do is to put an f* word in every fucking sentence.
It is the usual saw....I want YOU to pay more taxes. I want YOUR money for the pot. Okay, I toss in mine but I don't want to do it alone. In reality, my I want to pay more taxes because I'm a wonderful person is not really as virtuous as it sounds!
Disney owns ABCNews?
In debates about Christianity, there are two groups: those looking for answers, and those looking to just ask questions.
Barely anybody in this country ends up paying the inheritance tax, it doesn't exist as a revenue stream.
That it is easy to dodge does not change the fact that his actions are hypocritical.
The whole point of it is to prevent landed gentry, the government doesn't care if you pay it to them or give it out to foundations, the end result is the exact same thing.
Wrong, the end result is not the same. Warren Buffet correctly believes that the Gates foundation will more effectively spend his money. More good per dollar via the foundation.
Plus this whole "a special tax" for a "targeted purpose" is a scam. It is a legislative trick to get additional revenue to pay for "popular" or necessary things rather than have these things paid for out of the general budget where these things should be funded. This frees up, diverts, these general budget funds for pork projects that the public would not be supportive of. Its like the various state lotteries that "fund" education. As soon as the state sees how much education gets from the lottery it reduces accordingly the general budget education funding to free up those funds for pork.
I think you hit on the purpose of this "news". Those people claiming they want to give money, do not actually want the tax system fixed. Short term they look altruistic. Long term, back to not paying and laughing about the stupid peons who can't afford tax attorneys.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
After nearly 240 years, someone has finally figured out how to solve poverty, higher taxes! I'm surprised nobody has thought of that before. The (Federal, not NY State) income tax rate has varied from 70% under Carter to 28% under Reagan. Was poverty solved in either case?
Here's a conservative perspective.
Here's a progressive perspective.
Have lower/higher taxes been tried before? Did it succeed? If not, how is this time different? What is your metric; how will you measure the impact of your implemented policy position on poverty?
Now, this is key: find the best counterargument to your position, and thoughtfully address the most difficult questions posed by that counterargument. Simply dismissing an opponent's view is an indication that you are uninformed.
Few of us are policy wonks who have the time to delve deeply into the details of a particular policy, so often we rely instead on analyses of think tanks, and opinion pieces. This is fine, but are you also sincerely coming to understand the counterargument? Fox News vs. The Huffington Post, National Review vs The New Republic. Can you make the counterargument? Can you go to a cocktail party and fool people that you are conservative/liberal when you are actually liberal/conservative? If not then you aren't doing it right.
Are you a millionaire who feels you're undertaxed? You'll be happy to know that since 1843, the US Treasury Department has had a program that allows you to send them money to your heart's content!
https://www.fms.treas.gov/faq/...
Simply make out your check or money order to "United States Treasury" and mail it to:
Gifts to the United States
U.S. Department of the Treasury
Credit Accounting Branch
3700 East-West Highway, Room 622D
Hyattsville, MD 20782
Use it
You would think things are as simple as that?
If those 'millionaires' (more like BILLIONAIRES) would do that on their own then a lot of things get to be solved without all the rest of the hullabaloos
Of course they won't tick that box --- ticking that box wouldn't give them the satisfaction they are seeking, the satisfaction of ...
1. Making a lot of goodwill to themselves
2. Making sure everyone else (even those who are just on their way to become millionaires) suffer the same fate as them (and in the proceed, the newly minted 'millionaires' would have been taxed to death while the 'old money' could still living very well off, thanks to their entrenched Elite status)
3. Their mission is not to help the country, if they had that in mind in the first place, they wouldn't have moved out all the jobs to China or India or Mexico
I wonder how much they spend/gain on tax optimization.
It's plainly obvious if you look at the IRS individual tax stats. Click on 2013 since it's the latest and load it into a spreadsheet program.
The column of interest is T. This is the amount of income tax each bracket pays as a percent of their adjusted gross income (i.e. before deductions and exemptions) (T). As income increases, so does the percent paid as taxes up til about $1.5 million. There it starts to stall, and by the time you get to $5+ million, it's actually decreasing. As a fiscal conservative, I say this needs to be fixed so it continues to go up through each income bracket.
Also, note that contrary to what most people think, the 15% capital gains tax rate is not low. Due to income tax brackets being graduated and the wide availability of deductions, taxpayers don't exceed a real 15% income tax rate until they're making on average around $150,000/yr (T22-T23). In other words, when Warren Buffet said he paid less in taxes than his secretary, it was because his secretary made a lot more money than the typical secretary or even executive. However, this still points to another problem. Because the capital gains tax does not scale with income, it effectively discourages "regular" people from investing, thus relegating them to low-interest bank savings accounts. People complain that the wealthy make most of their money from investments, yet we have a tax mechanism in place which discourages the poor and middle class from investing. This needs to be fixed as well.
Also if you add up columns e24-e29, you find that people making $500,000+/yr (the top 0.72%) only account for 17.4% of all income. They make $1.2 trillion/yr, and already pay $333 billion of that in taxes. To cover the $483b deficit last year, you'd have to raise their effective income tax rate from ~28% to 68%. You're not realistically gonna be able to balance the budget by raising taxes on only them, at least not without a huge fight. The meat of the income base is between $50,000/yr to $500,000/yr (63% of all income). That's where you have to raise taxes if you want it to make an appreciable increase in tax revenue for relatively small increases in tax rate.
Since you are americans, you see things from the inside and comment from there, i.e. the wolf's stomach. That gives you a rather limited perspective of view.
The USA is going to be latin-americanized if things continue the current way! That is bad news even for the mega rich. Deteriorated infrastructure, environmental degradation and the lack of any security in public, due to excessive contrast of poverty and luxury, will force the higher middle class and up to live in walled-up compounds, more like fortresses. Quality of life suffers and you won't fear car kidnappers, but your own private security squad that one day decides to kill you and absconds with your money.
In contrast, the queen of Denmark can ride a bicycle in public any time and the subjects wave at her. Their rich (e.g. LEGO) are slightly less rich, but they are free to live and the plebs has significantly better life, essentially everyone is middle class at least, thus all have enough to loose so as not to become habitual criminals. Infrastructure is kept pristine. Taxes are, however, more like 40% and up in Scandinavia, to finance all that fairy garden.
The USA needs cleaner energy, bridges which don't collapse, electrified railroads, 21st century potable water supply, a CONUS-national fully connected electric grid (Hello Taxas!), healthcare where gov't tramples upon vulture profit, education which puts a little more emphasis on a broad fact-based curriculum, because sole focus on creativity produces creative but narrow specialists who are easily manipulated due to not knowing history, etc. Better teachers, engineers, workekers for public projects require funding that comes from taxes or wars that ransack far away countries. The latter idea failed miserably with the two W. Bushes. Thus, only taxes remain.
Excess money that is left with people is likely to be spent on silly vanities, like 1" wider flat TV or SUV with 1" larger wheels, rather than filling in the potholes 1" shallower for all. Grand projects that even your grandkids will be grateful for can only be realized if the govt takes from the people and that's called taxes. The rich are those who can pay higher taxes that makes up a large total. That's why most of Europe has gradually (sharply) increasing tax system. Where it has been eliminated, latin-americanization is happening very quickly, e.g. Hungary.
If they really cared, they would just donate to charities helping the poor. Admittedly it does less in regards to roads, which I suspect is their main concern. In America, rich and poor still have to drive on the same public highway- no Potemkin villages here. And second, forty millionaires isn't that much. Most millionaires are economically frugal, good investors and want to be economically safe with family, pay for kids college, and that sort of thing. What you really should do is increase the tax bracket on pop star celebrities who waste their money and don't earn it by actually being productive to our society. Then again, celebrities being a key donor group for party who tends to enact higher taxes, it might not happen.
After all, there's only over 10 million millionaires in the USA alone. No chance at all that the majority might disagree.
Are they aware that they are allowed to send in extra money to the IRS each year, each month? The IRS will not refuse the money nor will the IRS automatically refund the money. The IRS will graciously accept donations. If these 40 people want to pay more then all they have to do is write a check. Or better yet, do an electronic funds transfer each month to the government. It's easy to pay extra in taxes if you want to do so.
All taxation is theft. At the end of the day, it's the government pointing a gun at you, threatening to throw you in a cage, if you don't pay a tribute.
Yet the Billionaires want us all to go fuck ourselves...
Billionaires : silence, peons!
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
The multiple comments of 'they could donate if they wanted to' demonstrates a fundamental ignorance of how important it is for society to work together to achieve goals. No wonder America is so messed up.
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
I don't get these people. If you have more than ~$50 Million, you're all set. I don't care where you live, you're set you have all you'd ever need. You don't need 10 houses, 1-2 is fine. You don't need 20 cars, 2-3 are fine. I'm a capitalist. I'm not saying they don't deserve else things, but SOCIETY should not "take it away from you." Give the money where you see fit, if you don't see fit, start your own. Again, I'm talking about people with $50 million+. Even at 1%, you'd never run out. Don't tell me I'm wrong, cause I'm not, you are.
There are 368,388 millionaires in New York State (http://www.netstate.com/states/tables/state_millionaires.htm). So the 40 writing the letter are a miniscule fraction of those they pretending to represent.
I am nominally in favor of such a call to arms to more fairly fund the government, but I think they also should make clear that there need to be metrics on how the money is spent. Many of these same folks would insist on certain rules with regards to a charitable donation, like administrative overhead and such. Would be nice to start getting some of that tieback into government. Right now that 'infrastructure" money might as well be sent directly to the governors friend of a friend contractor.
This isn't about making a dent. Forty super-rich paying an extra 1% of gross won't make a dent. ALL the millionaires paying an extra 1% ALSO won't make a dent. (Seizing all the assets of all the top 1% - or even all the millionaires - might make a small dent in the year it was done, after which there would be a total economic crash, reducing the US to third-world status.)
This is about a handful of super-rich throwing speed-bumps in front of anybody trying to move from the upper middle class to rich, or from rich to super-rich, and becoming competition (for money and/or power) for the existing super-rich.
They're pulling up the ladder after they (or some ancestor) climbed it. They want to keep their exclusive club exclusive. That's how elites stay elite.
Remember: The money has massively inflated. A million dollars now was about $20,000 before we went off the gold standard. A million dollars annual gross may only yield a poverty-level income, if that, once you've paid expenses an get down to the net.
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
I wouldn't mind paying more taxes if I felt like I'd see actual improvements. Where I live (Seattle) all the money goes to special interest projects. Like the arterial road between 520 and Ballard is falling apart, giant pot holes everywhere, it's like driving in an obstacle course, but it's not getting fixed from lack of funds (costs around $0.002 billion).
Meanwhile we're spending $27 billion dollars on constructing a next generation rail system between the major cities in Puget Sound that should be done in 2040 if everything stays on track, it will serve 3000 people a day, which is intended to absorb the 1,000,000 new residents we'll be getting by some crazy logic. Why not fix the roads, build more roads, and get a good bus system going? Because roads and buses are boring, and the city council wants a new shiny rail system.
If they get more taxes, there's a long list of lofty projects that will get the funds before anything I care about gets addressed. So I'd rather donate to charities with specific plans of action than the government.
"Pay their fair share"?
It's difficult to determine what is "fair" through just income taxes.
If someone makes $1,000,000/yr with a 6.85% flat income tax rate, they pay $68500/year while someone who makes $100,000/yr will pay $6650k/year. Is that fair? It could be. What's the justification for paying a higher percentage? People earning more money pay more money in taxes even without progressive rates.
The real inequality is between the mega-rich that don't need "income" anymore and the people trying to become rich. The system is stacked against people who need income. People who have money don't pay state tax. They put their money in places where their income is taxed less - long term capital gains. That money is taxed federally, and not by the state.
Rich people don't necessarily have income - they have property and assets. They invest in a business that loses just enough money to help their property (stock, land, buildings, company profits) gain value over time. The state doesn't see any of their money in the form of "income".
If rich people want to contribute, how about they propose an increase to a property tax (land, buildings, autos, trucks, boats, equipment valued over $100K) for property in the state of New York that enjoys the benefits of infrastructure and lack of civil unrest? Hard-working contributors to society that live in New York City won't see a big change because their life is mostly transitory - no real property owned while they rent their way through life. If they're successful, they'll already be paying income tax. People who take a hit from an increase in property tax are rich people and corporations, but it also applies to farmers, trucking companies, taxi medallions, cars owned by uber drivers, warehouses, slum lords, big box stores, owners of NYC office buildings, capital/leasing companies, people with a home port in NY for their boats, etc. The property tax might be passed down by corporations and businesses to their customer, especially if they are inefficient in how their utilize their property to make money. Wealthy owners of property that isn't used to make money will see more of a personal tax hit becasue they are exclusively enjoying the use of their property.
Neighboring states (NJ, VT, CT, PA) have higher effective property tax rates than NY.
Now would be a great time to raise the gas tax to try to discourage people from buying huge SUVs. Do bad it is perceived as political suicide to even suggest a tax increase...
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
And Libertarians are man-children who can't accept property rights
WTF? Property rights is the foundation of most libertarian philosophies.
I think you need to read up on both the Libertarian party and libertarianism in general. The strawman you're tilting at seems to be some weird extremist anarcho-libertarianism.
I'm a bleeding heart libertarian and believe in a minarchist government that distributes a UBI/citizen's dividend and provides single payer health care. Not feeling like going into details right now.
On dividends and capital gains, a surcharge equal to the percentage of US citizens living at or below 150% of the poverty level.
"Well if they want to pay more then why don't they just pay more of their own money?"
Fuck each and every one of you [disingenuous|idiotic] pukes who trot this out any time there is discussion of raising taxes on the wealthy.
pr0n - keeping monitor glass spotless since 1981.
Kanye West claims he is $53 million in debt. So having "more that $50 million" doesn't necessarily mean you are set for life, apparently if you are a big enough asshole, you can burn through more than $50 million in very little time! Personally, I'd be hard-pressed to spend more than about $50K per week, but I'd still blow through about $52 million before i died at that burn rate (yeah, I'm old).
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
I appreciate your response. But that's Kanye's fault. (See the houses and cars reference in my post above.)
When they could write a check directly to the U.S Treasury? If they think they should give away more money, I'm sure the government wouldn't mind a donation.
What's with all the idiots saying,
"We should have a tax on good people so we can cut taxes on the leeches -- make taxation optional!!!1!"
"Let's shame people who want to help others!!!"
Seriously, if you want to be cynical maybe instead suggest that they're just publicly saying that to gain goodwill while secretly lobbying for lower taxes, especially lower capital gains taxes where the rich make all their money.
Don't waste your vote! Vote for whoever you want, unless you live in a swing state it won't matter anyways
"...including members of the Rockefeller and Disney families" So these aren't productive rich but mostly people who are already living on the dole? The productive rich -- and I'm not counting the stock market and hedge fund folks as in the really productive class -- are generally the best stewards of their own money. I'd say Steve Jobs did a pretty good job of SIMULTANEOUSLY increasing his net worth and increasing the wealth of society. Would it have been better if Steve Jobs had given his money to the LEAST competent in the world (those who administer government) so they could build more tenement slums and bridges to nowhere or...get this...wars in foreign countries? The truth is we could have rebuilt our roads and infrastructure or we could have chosen Bush's and Obama's boondoggles and wars. And guess which "we the people" chose? Now get a brain.
According to Roy Zimmerman, at least:
http://www.royzimmerman.com/ly...
Well, that "Earth Goddess" program on Channel 3 went national
Iran and Iraq became one country called Irrational
Every commuter in greater Los Angeles learned how to ride the bus
And the rich folks said, "Please tax the shit out of us."
If these 40 millionaires feel so strongly all they need to do is write a check. They aren't lobbying to have their own taxes raised, what they really want is other people's taxes raised. Otherwise they could as I said simply write a check and pay however much more they feel they should. But that won't suffice for them because it's not their money they really want government to take, it's somebody else's.
Interestingly, if you confiscated all the reported gross income of the top 1%, it would cover about 1.8 years of the current deficit (running about $1.1 trillion per year - that's the new debt we're racking up). Take it all, and it gets you out of a hole for one budgetary year.
It won't help , because all around the world govenrments consist of corrupt,selfish,greedy individuals. These people does not value humans like lower classes do. They will find out how to fill their coffers,not pass this money to children or roads. I would advise these 1%ers put their money in restoration of feudalism. When these people will become enlightened monarchs, they could change world, something democracy (rather oligarchy) failed to achieve. Neo-feudal society under planetary God-Empreror would be ideal. I am not naive and I have learned history about abuse of indentured servants in the past. On the other hand - at least here peasant had to pay 10% to the church and 10% to the baron land owner. Compare it with >50% taken by out "democratic" government, which stomp little people into the ground even more than feudal lords did.. P.S. I have witnessed socialism personally ( I grew up in USSR ) so I do not believe in socialist StarTrek style paradise , sorry...
No, it's perfectly reasonable to act in one's self interest while believing and advocating that global unrestrained self-interest yields a less than optimal global outcome.
Wrong. Self-interest is not an exemption to hypocrisy, it is merely an excuse for hypocrisy. Being true to one's beliefs often has a cost.
Rich individuals are not the problem and they know it. Raising tax on the richest taxpayers in the US won't solve anything even if the bluff is called.
Corporations that evade proper taxes are the problem. Declining wages in all sectors is the problem. Raise minimum wage, everyone pays more taxes, individuals and businesses. Closing the massive tax loopholes that let companies freely transfer money out of the country "on paper" and then taxing that money properly would result in much more taxes paid. And yes, taxing the higher earners more would help as well.
There is no single point of failure here that will magically fix our economy when dealt with. There are several and fixing on will only make the others worse if they are left alone. Do what they ask and they start creating personal corporations to manage their money and pay themselves out of instead. Leave the tools to evade tax in place and they'll pick them up eventually.
[I first wrote this in 2012, so the "In the last year for which data is available" is wrong, and I could take the time to update the numbers, but the picture painted will not change...]
In the last year for which data is available, 2008, the highest marginal tax rate was 35%. This rate was paid on AGI above $357,700. Certainly someone with AGI over that value is in the well-to-do category, but may not be "millionaires and billionaires" (OTOH Mr. Obama seems to think income of $250,000 equates to "millionaire", but this is immaterial to my point). According to the IRS, the number of returns that were in this highest marginal rate was 971,510. So there's nearly a million households in this country that are, at least by the IRS bracket definition, "rich". Not too shabby, it seems the USA is indeed the land of opportunity.
According to the IRS, the cumulative amount of AGI subjected to this highest rate was $622,765,389,000, so let's round up to $622.8B. The taxes generated on this money is therefore $218B (the IRS reported $217,967,886,000). The overall effective rate for these returns (taxes paid / income) was 28.9%.
Let's assume for a moment (no matter how unrealistic the assumption is) that no one affected would change a lick of their income-generating behavior as a result if we raised the top marginal rate to 100%. How much revenue would that generate? Why, all of $622.8B, if no one modified their behavior in any way that affected their income and tax impact. That is, it would generate an additional $404.8B in revenue relative to the current 35% bracket.
If you added that $404B to the revenue pot, our deficit this year would still be over $1T...
And not "Earned"?
I see.
According to the IRS historical tax data for 2013, there were 41,520 returns filed in the State of New York with an Adjusted Gross Income greater than $1,000,000.
The total amount of income reported by that group was $161,908,290,000, or a round $162 billion. Taking a quick calculation of 1% of that gives $1.62 billion.
The total State of New York Education Budget for 2013 was $72.3 billion, of which that $1.62 billion is an extra 2.25%. It may not seem like much from a percentage, but the goal isn't to replace existing funding but supplement it to improve services -- and that amount can do some serious good.
http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/year_spending_2013NYbs_17bs2n_20#usgs302
https://www.irs.gov/uac/SOI-Tax-Stats-Historic-Table-2
And no, for anyone in that income bracket this isn't a speed-bump to moving up the ladder. You're already in the nose bleed section and can handle this without losing a step. There is a much greater benefit for those in the bottom 50% getting up a rung than someone of my ilk going from Top 5% to Top 4%.
Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
"They are asking fr a collective arrangement in which all rich people pay more taxes."
No.
In this country we tax based on a notion of "income". Which the truly rich can readily arrange to be $0. See how Warren Buffett's "income" was actually $100,000 for years--he never even paid himself enough "income" from his company to meet the cap on Social Security.
What they are asking for is higher taxes on people with high incomes. People with high incomes probably aren't "rich" in the same sense that Bill Gates and Warren Buffett are rich.
Healthcare spending in the U.S is already double, as a percentage of GDP, as any other industrialized country. Hard to believe, but spending more money is not the solution!
According to this website (https://billionairemailinglist.com/billionaires-list.html), there are 490 billionaires in the US in 2016. Topping the list is Bill Gates, at $78B, followed by Warren Buffett at $65.6B. At the bottom is Fred Chang, Newegg.com Founder - online retailer of computer hardware and software, with a measly $1B.
If you confiscated every penny of their collective wealth, it would not fund the US government for about 6 months. Their collective wealth is $2.273T, while the US government spends about $4T per year.
And, of course, a that point you're plumb out of billionaires until some new ones work their way above that magical line. But how many would work toward that goal if they knew that the minute they get there, their wealth will be "reset" to $0 by taxation.
More money for the government to piss away.
"The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old......They literally know nothing." - Ben Rhodes
That will do more to help end poverty than all the taxes in the world.
Word verification: winers (I don't know why it generated that)
If they think the government deserves so much more money to spend they can afford to write a check and mail it. It does no one any service to advocate raising taxes (a thing the government is all too inclined to do already for the most frivolous reasons, and then misdirect the money toward cronies rather than using it for what they promised to do with it, like the last eight times they promised to fill in the fucking potholes!). LEAVE THE REST OF US OUT OF YOUR FUCKING TAX FANTASIES YOU OVERPAID SCHLEPS! WE'RE ALREADY SUBSIDIZING YOU PEOPLE FAR MORE THAN YOU EVER DESERVED!
I'm amazed that so many millionaires are naive enough to think the government wont collect the money then just vote payrises for themselves, and/or waste the money on some other ill-conceived bureaucratic exercise instead.
If I thought for a second that those funds would be used wisely, I wouldn't care so much. But we all know it will wind up in a general slush fund to be doled out to political cronies or used to buy votes of the perpetual underclass to keep themselves in power. No thanks.
I don't get it? Why do these millionaire need government to dictate how much everyone else should pay? Why don't they just pay more? If those 40 millionaire want to pay more taxes why don't they? Why do they suggest that everyone else has to pay more? I don't get it.. If they really want to do something why don't they pay for the roads themselves? Why have government force more money out of my pocket after they already took money for the roads? People seem to forget that tax money ALREADY goes to fixing roads and poverty. The government chooses not to spend that money on roads and poverty doesn't mean they should get more of my money. This is the problem with forced taxation. I give money to have roads and fire trucks and street lights. Then the government spends all that money on some roads and some fire trucks and some street lights, leaving places without roads / fire trucks / lights. Then they ask for more money, after I gave them money to do exactly what they needed money for in the first place. And the cycle repeats itself constantly. More money for roads, money taken by government for roads, roads not fixed or built, more money needed, more money taken, etc. If you look at what the government spent on road in the last 10 years, its over 1 trillion dollars. 1 TRILLION DOLLARS! And they can't fucking fix a pothole on a major highway in Massachusetts? They need more tax money? Fuck them. If millionaire want to pay for the poor they don't need government (or my money) to do so. Just write a fucking check for eleventy billion dollars and poverty will go away.
This is just a bunch of folks trying to look good. You don't need higher taxes to pay more in taxes. The government accepts money as a gift.
From http://www.fms.treas.gov/faq/moretopics_gifts.html
Gifts to the United States Government
How do I make a contribution to the U.S. government?
Citizens who wish to make a general donation to the U.S. government may send contributions to a specific account called "Gifts to the United States." This account was established in 1843 to accept gifts, such as bequests, from individuals wishing to express their patriotism to the United States. Money deposited into this account is for general use by the federal government and can be available for budget needs. These contributions are considered an unconditional gift to the government. Financial gifts can be made by check or money order payable to the United States Treasury and mailed to the address below.
Gifts to the United States
U.S. Department of the Treasury
Credit Accounting Branch
3700 East-West Highway, Room 622D
Hyattsville, MD 20782
Any tax-related questions regarding these contributions should be directed to the Internal Revenue ServiceExit the FMS Web site at (800) 829-1040.
They will work a way, that EVERYONE will pay more taxes across the board. And somehow...there will be loopholes, put in, that by some miracle, they will escape, but it will not be reported, but, they will get the DUMB citizens to believe it. If they want their taxes raised, then just write a check to the IRS every month and leave the rest of us the hell alone. You want more revenue coming into this country than they could ever dream of? Repeal the 16th amendment, impose an across the board fair/flat tax, that cannot be changed without a DIRECT vote of the public, and watch all that offshore money come back to this nation. It would make it VERY appealing for other countries to do business in a BUSINESS friendly environment. Of course, with no IRS that would take away the POWER that congress/senate has over its citizens, so, don't look for it happening without an article 5 convention of the states.
It's really simple,
nothing needs to be changed,
pay your tax,
don't claim tax rebates,
It will even make your life easier.
Go well
"give someone an inch and they'll take a mile."
Let the 1%-ers pay more taxes, agree on their terms and watch them ask for more deregulations, favors, and permissions.
It's a trap.
The unrealized gain on the real estate if held by a company is deducted from the value of the company as a liability of future tax.
But the actual tax isn't paid. In fact, the future tax liability acts a deduction from the sales price of a company, lowering the tax on the transaction.
Again, you can't just declare yourself to be correct with no citation or knowledge of tax system.
In the real world, the tax code is massive with crafty strategies that have been developed to minimize actual tax.
companies and their rich owners believe they are not receiving enough money from taxpayers, so they have lobbied the government to give them more money so they can afford to build really expensive and shabbily made public housing and road construction projects. These projects will ensure their continued reign on the top of the social hierarchy, and ensure that their kids never have to go to the public schools that they are lobbying money for.
This is business as usual in the USA. Whenever a consortium of democrats gets together and says they are going to help the poor, you better run.
They Should Avoid Government Bureaucracy and create companies that go fix roads/bridges/etc for free. It would create jobs and get things fixed without having to worry about the money going to some politician's pet projects (or pockets).
There, I said it. You can pay for the roads you use and the thousands of miles of roads you benefit from indirectly. You can pay for clean drinking water in Flint, Mi even if you don't live there so those people don't become violent and spill over. You can pay for the college tuition of the next Albert Eisenstein or the doctor who cures your prostrate cancer. You can pay for the Civilization you benefit from every day even if you don't realizing it.
We liberals haven't figured out a nice way to say you didn't build it, but you know what? You didn't.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
This country's debt and overspending problem are too big to solve by a few rich people sacrificing themselves for public accolades.
Bill Whittle does a good job of explaining the scale of the problem here.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
If they want to pay more in taxes, they are free to do that voluntarily. They're also free to adopt roadways or donate to private charities that may align with their priorities better; if they really want to spend money to fix things, they're already capable of that without changing the tax structure.
Examine even your most deeply held beliefs. Nobody is always right.
As if buying more bombs and daisycutters to drop on brown people is going to somehow, magically, end child poverty in America. Fucking warmongering hypocrites.
offtopic post by the rotting asshole called slashdot
This is called enlightened self interests. They know full well they have pushed the limits of enriching the rich and impoverishing the poor, at the current course a French styled revolution is in the offing and they are trying to avoid a meeting with mademoiselle guillotine. Other idiots think they can still push harder because they want to feed chaos for it's own sake and think they can escape with their wealth. Angry Trump supports are a solid indication of how betrayed the ignorant right is feeling, they are waking up to the idea they have by betrayed by both Democrats and Republicans and are really, really angry and that is the public face of their anger, the private one is even worse and barely being constrained. Lots of real cracks have appeared in the social binding of the US and those cracks are leading to breakdown and this will occur unless a new course is steered. Want to see money wasted like never before, start actively fighting amongst yourselves to feed insatiable greeds and you will see trillions wasted. Want to kill an economy, look at the lessons being taught globally, quite simply bury that economy in violent civil unrest and you will kill that economy.
Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
They lobby for these loopholes. They make back room deals to get them and then they use them. They outsource their employees. They hide their wealth in financial mechanisms that cause "income" to not be classified as income. They shift the jurisdiction of the income from one country to another to bounce the money around the world so that who can say which country's tax codes should be applied to it.
And when they've done all that, they say "raise our taxes"... This isn't a plea for fixing anything. Its a taunt.
You could raise the tax rate to 100% and a lot of these people wouldn't really feel the bite. Because the tax rate hits INCOME. Not wealth. Want to wipe the smirk off their condescending faces? Suggest instead a wealth tax. Oh just 1 percent... something small. Something that they can't hide by redefining what is and is not income. Say "well you have outstanding assets of this many billions of dollars"... Done.
Do I want such a tax? Not really. But these calls for increases to the tax rate won't hit the super rich. They'll hit the people biting at their heels. They'll hit the middle class. They'll hit the lower upper class. But the super rich? They're utterly immune to this because they know the loopholes, they can buy the politicians to create them if they're not already there, and they can hire the accountants to do the dance to exploit them.
Look at the likes of Warren Buffet. The man has built his entire empire around not paying taxes.
He's a liar. And the move to jack up taxes by this group is likewise deceitful. If they want to pay more, then no one is stopping them. Cut a check to the US IRS. It will be cashed. here someone will say "but no one will do that unless they're forced to by law"... they won't do it even if the law supposedly forces them because they'll use a loophole. They don't want to pay and if they did they wouldn't need a law passed to make them pay. They'd just pay. They don't pay because they don't want to pay which means the call to have taxes increased are disingenuous by anyone that is not voluntarily paying more already.
You're all being played. Notice it.
I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
Billionaires: "Charge millionaires more taxes to fix our roads so we can expand our industries without contributing to the necessary socialist infrastructure supporting them."
It is perfectly legal for any person to pay any extra amount he/she wishes to the federal treasury at any time. Make the checkout to "U.S. Treasury" and mail it in.
The super-rich of the political left make these announcements all the time as a political tactic to trick stupid followers into allowing government to raise taxes on the middle class. These very same super-rich people pay armies of accountants, lawyers, and lobbyists to get loopholes written into the tax laws, to take advantage of those loopholes, and to hide income offshore if it cannot be protected by loopholes. Rich people do not stay rich by stupidly giving a single dollar to government if they can avoid it. They want to keep their billions and yet feel safe and admired while they go through life, so what better way for a jerk like Warren Buffet than to pretend to be "for the little guy" while actively funding the politicians who are helping him push down wages and benefits for average workers via "free trade" and cheap immigrant labor. All the super-rich guys who make a guy like Trump look poor, are liberal Democrats who are always claiming they want higher taxes, more regulations, free trade and open borders - they are nearly ALL supporters of Obama, Hillary, and Bernie.
The useful idiots are all the young morons who read/hear this crap and fall for it. Socialism only appears to work until you run out of other people's money, because the basic laws of economics can no more easily be violated than the basic laws of physics. The super rich KNOW this, which is why they never personally choose to fund socialism, and merely support propagandizing the middle and lower classes into surrendering to it. World-famous proud Hitler-collaborator and advocate for socialism, George Soros pours enormous amounts of cash into left wing political actions, but works very hard to never pay more tax dollars than he absolutely must. THINK about it. It SHOULD set off alarm bells in the conscience of any human being to be on same side in any political argument as one of the only men left on Earth who is publicly proud of the time he spent personally financially benefitting from the Holocaust.
But why do they want to force their own choice upon others?
I sort of agree.
Honestly, we already pay gasoline taxes that are supposed to go to the building and maintenance of roads.
Only, the wall street journal (paywalled) says that states are instead using that stable, guaranteed income to pay for other things like debt.
40% of federal fuel taxes [1] go to things other than roads as well.
I'm all for top earners paying more taxes, as we honestly don't need a nobility with more money than small countries, but I'm not sure that income makes sense to put into roads.
I'd rather fuel taxes actually went to road building and maintenance like it's supposed to...
Having increased high earner income tax fund social and work programs aimed at poverty does make sense though. If politicians would actually do it and not funnel it elsewhere.
This is just like many other political plans where support from the people is needed to get it passed. But once it is passed, we find out that at the 11th hour something was slipped in that makes it work totally different or even opposite of how it was supposed to.
They are only advocating for a 10 percent tax rate because they know if the people get around to changing tax code it is going to end up much worse for them.
Mod parent up: Data
I was too lazy to gather these numbers myself.
But also worth caveating, these taxes don't represent the full tax burden. There are regressive taxes (sales tax, etc.) that aren't being included in this calculus. Consequently, those with a negative income tax liability (even including payroll taxes) may or may not still have a positive overall tax liability.
Chuuch. Preach. Tabernacle.
Why raise taxes to generate revenue when the Treasury can just sell more bonds to the Federal Reserve? Everybody wins! Makes sense to me.
So, 40 millionaires wrote a letter. How many *more* live in NY? Raising taxes would get a *lot* more money than it would from 40 families.
What is it then - moronic libertarians who are *sure* they're going to be multimillionaires any minute now, and don't want to pay more taxes when they are? (Hint: no, you're not going to be rich any time soon.)
mark
What about the Walton family?
If they really meant "raise my taxes", then the solution is obvious and simple: donate to government. Problem solved, cleanly and neatly. Of course, that's not what they mean. What they mean is "force other people to pay for my pet projects". The person advocating this, of course, doesn't need to be forced. It's other people that need to be forced, and that's why they advocate raising taxes, rather than putting their money where their mouth is.
1) The Federal government has spent trillions of dollars in the last 50 years in the "war" on poverty. I'm curious as to why those millionaires think a few million dollars more will make a significant difference
2) Poverty is a relative term. People in "poverty" in the US have materially better lives than the average European, and would be legitimately considered "1 percenters" by the Third World. So "poverty" will never end - it will simply be redefined upward along with the average standard of living.
"The roads you drive... wtf?! they've all got potholes... they should fix this shit. Fine, I fly my private helicopter... screw the public roads! Wha... I'm facing delays on landing... something something about not enough funds to upgrade the control tower facilities. This is bullshit!! What, one of my houses caught on fire and fire department can't get to it because the roads are shit?!"
Yup. We are all a bunch of thieves. Okay. Well that makes you a parasite on society.
Over 5 Billion dollars was wasted on political campaigning in 2008. That is enough to run a small country, and certainly enough money to resolve many, many of the current problems in that country.
The "war on drugs" cost over $15 Billion in 2010.
The US Military budget for 2011 was $660 Billion with an adition $37 Billion dollars to supplement the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Adding to tax revenue is not going to fix anything.
It's not that there isn't enough money to solve the problems, it's a lack of political will.
the above is my personal opinion and does not necessarily reflect that of the little voices in my head
So here we have 40 liberal elites that want to volunteer and help, but only if everyone else is made to be 'generous' just like them by law and a gun to the head if they don't.
40 liberal elites trying to represent 400,000 millionaires in NY.
It is literally .01% of the "1%" asking for a 'I want to feel better about myself but only if everyone else does, too' tax.
I'm not a millionaire, and I say F the leftists even this time. These same ass hat 40 millionaires probably also think Hillary is a good person and Mexico isn't notorious for crime and ISIL is actually a teddy bear.
Oil subsidies? What pray tell would those be? The royalties and leasing bonuses paid by the oil industry to the Federal government of the US are the second largest source of income to the Federal government behind the IRS. Many states fund their entire school systems off of royalties and bonus fees paid by the oil industry on oil production in those states. Some states, like Texas, earn enough money from the oil and gas revenues from state owned lands that they can survive without state income tax and fund their university system with oil funds. Alaska earns enough that it pays a check to each resident of Alaska each year. California actually taxes oil while it is still in the ground. Many counties have a significant part of their budget coming from the oil industry and do in fact fund their road improvements with money they earn from oil and gas revenues. The "subsidies" you believe the oil industry gets are the same subsidies available to all businesses, like Microsoft, Google, Apple, etc. If you object to depreciation, depletion, section 179 deductions, fine, but please realize that EVERY business is going to lose these things you are calling "oil subsidies."
The article and many posts reference the Rockefeller and Disney families.
Those aren't millionaire families, those are billionaire families. BIG difference. It's the difference between being "rich" and being truly wealthy.
Get rid of welfare first.
...you could just send extra money to the Treasury.
The checkbox is right at the end of your Tax Form.
Ferret
Sic gorgiamus allos subjectatos nunc
Rich people are crooks!
If you want more taxes, put a tariff on imported goods, Simpletons!
Instead of the rich people telling the government to raise their taxes, why don't they just give a generous donation! dahhh!
Because they are greedy and want the poor and middle class to pay too.
whatever you raise how much tax, the things is the government was assigned how much money to poor people. we should be concerned about is that poor people really get how much money.