Jump to content



Photo

What is a fair tax rate for people on over $1m?


  • Please log in to reply
200 replies to this topic

Poll: What is a fair tax rate for people who make more than $1 Million per year in revenue? (188 member(s) have cast votes)

What is a fair tax rate for people on over $1m?

You cannot see the results of the poll until you have voted. Please login and cast your vote to see the results of this poll.
Vote Guests cannot vote

#31 BoredBozirini

BoredBozirini

    Bozrini Tringuini

  • 3,804 posts
  • Joined: 28-July 09
  • Location: Bozrini's Villa

Posted 03 July 2012 - 16:42

I see the American dream is still alive.

Don't touch the rich, because someday I might be rich and then I don't want anybody touching my money.

How about sharing? The world would be a better place


Futurama anyone? Anyone?

Who are you (or government, for that matter) to decide how much money a person should live on? If you are unhappy with the salary you earn, do something about it.


The economy decides how much money a person NEEDS to survive.


#32 Stoffel

Stoffel

    Being on the ocean is cooler then being in front of a Computer

  • 1,922 posts
  • Joined: 16-August 11
  • Location: Utila, Honduras
  • OS: Windows 8.1 Update 1
  • Phone: WP 8.1 Update

Posted 03 July 2012 - 16:44

Actually it wouldn't be. If everybody earned the same then there is no incentive to go to university and get a good education, no incentive to push yourself to work harder so you get that promotion. Infact, there would be no incentive to work at all if the government is just going to give you the money and the whole system would break down.


I'm not saying that the government should just keep giving money away to those without a job. What I am saying is that if you make +$1000000 a year you can pay a little bit more taxes. It's not going to hurt you. But they could use that extra money for schooling and health care. Everybody should have equal chances at good education and descent healthcare. With that good basis more people will have a chance at success in life.

#33 +seb5150

seb5150

    Windows Guru

  • 189 posts
  • Joined: 07-March 02
  • Location: Oregon
  • OS: Win8.1
  • Phone: Nokia Lumia Icon 8.1

Posted 03 July 2012 - 16:45

Neither ;) It's hilarious that you genuinely think that people would favor being in the lower class, just because they get less than what they deserve from the company directly plus tax benefits or other forms of governmental support to make it "more" for "nothing". :p Glassed Silver:mac


There are generations of people that have known nothing other than welfare and it's like that because the government makes it easier for them to do nothing and collect a paycheck along with free food than it is to get a job and earn their pay. When the system pays you to stay home, pays you to have more kids, pays you to do nothing for years, you will get a large percentage of people in that system that will stay in that system.

Welfare is supposed to be a temporary state, a helping hand to those who have run into hard times, not a lifestyle choice. I have no problem with my tax dollars helping those in real need. I have a big problem with my tax dollars subsidizing someones poor decisions and lifestyle choice.

Back to the original question... Flat tax. A flat tax with no loopholes is the only truly fair system but you'll never see that in the USA. A flat tax system would remove the ability of the government and politicians to pick winners and losers and bestow favors to constituents and industries.

#34 spacer

spacer

    I'm awesome

  • 6,519 posts
  • Joined: 09-November 06
  • Location: Connecticut, USA
  • OS: Windows 7
  • Phone: Nexus 4

Posted 03 July 2012 - 16:46

A flax tax only benefits the rich. A progressive tax structure benefits everyone.

The biggest problem with current tax law (and there are MANY) is that there are tons of loop holes and shelters that people can use to cheat the system. Ideally, the only tax shelter that should exist is giving money to charity.

#35 +Lovell

Lovell

    ,l,(-.-),l,

  • 1,658 posts
  • Joined: 14-November 03
  • Location: Great Britain

Posted 03 July 2012 - 16:46

Why keep working or advancing you're company if you don't make anything over a million? it's all fine saying **** the rich but then what? whether we like it or not it's this greed that has advanced our civilization so fast in the last 100 years.

#36 HSoft

HSoft

    Neowinian Senior

  • 3,929 posts
  • Joined: 09-January 08

Posted 03 July 2012 - 16:48

I'm not saying that the government should just keep giving money away to those without a job. What I am saying is that if you make +$1000000 a year you can pay a little bit more taxes. It's not going to hurt you. But they could use that extra money for schooling and health care. Everybody should have equal chances at good education and descent healthcare. With that good basis more people will have a chance at success in life.

They do pay more in taxes as it is. Even if it was a flat tax they would still pay more. Correcting someones example above of 20% flat tax, if you earned 20K then you would pay 8K in taxes but someone earning 1m would pay 200K in taxes. 25 times more than you would pay.

#37 vetJames7

James7

    Fixed tentatively

  • 7,383 posts
  • Joined: 26-June 04
  • OS: Xubuntu 14.04 & Mavericks
  • Phone: Samsung Galaxy S3

Posted 03 July 2012 - 16:50

Rich people get their money directly or indirectly through extracting it from the labour of the poor. It's a myth to think anyone's worth the salaries bankers, CEOs and their ilk pull in.

This is one reason I voted for a high tax on money earned above 1 million. Few of these modern-day robber barons are as generous with their money as Warren Buffett or Bill Gates, so it is the government's job to help them learn the value of civic duty.

#38 Stoffel

Stoffel

    Being on the ocean is cooler then being in front of a Computer

  • 1,922 posts
  • Joined: 16-August 11
  • Location: Utila, Honduras
  • OS: Windows 8.1 Update 1
  • Phone: WP 8.1 Update

Posted 03 July 2012 - 16:50

They do pay more in taxes as it is. Even if it was a flat tax they would still pay more. Correcting someones example above of 20% flat tax, if you earned 20K then you would pay 8K in taxes but someone earning 1m would pay 200K in taxes. 25 times more than you would pay.


But it's much easier to get by with $800000 then with $12000

#39 HSoft

HSoft

    Neowinian Senior

  • 3,929 posts
  • Joined: 09-January 08

Posted 03 July 2012 - 16:52

But it's much easier to get by with $800000 then with $12000

Where do you suddenly come up with 12000? Did anyone in this thread actually go to math class?

#40 M_Lyons10

M_Lyons10

    Neowinian Senior

  • 13,900 posts
  • Joined: 21-October 08
  • Location: Pennsylvania

Posted 03 July 2012 - 16:56

same rate as everyone else. Everyone should pay the same percentage. Just because you have more money, doesn't mean you should have to pay a bigger share of your money than everyone else. But, they should have to pay it, there should not be tax shelters or other loop holes that allows them to pay less.


Exactly. Same taxes and same deductions. I don't feel it fair to charge them a higher percentage just because their successful. They're already paying more than the rest of us just because the percentage amounts to a larger chunk of money. This is fair. And I also feel that everyone should pay some taxes... It's absurd to think that some people are contributing nothing to these services and programs that they take advantage of.

#41 Buttus

Buttus

    Neowinian Senior

  • 3,294 posts
  • Joined: 07-September 05

Posted 03 July 2012 - 17:01

The only way a flat tax would work without screwing the majority of workers is by only taxing those who are in the upper class. Like the example done before, if I live on $30K a year and I get taxed at flat 25% rate, and so does the person who earns $1M, I'll have to survive on $22.5K, while the millionaire has $750K to blow. A flat tax only works if you tax those who earn considerably more than the poverty line, and let everyone else be untaxed.


right, it sucks, but it's fair and it has to be done. I don't make millions, so i agree, it would be hard to do. But we can't keep spending and not pay now, because if we don't, 3 generations from now won't be able to fix things

#42 Stoffel

Stoffel

    Being on the ocean is cooler then being in front of a Computer

  • 1,922 posts
  • Joined: 16-August 11
  • Location: Utila, Honduras
  • OS: Windows 8.1 Update 1
  • Phone: WP 8.1 Update

Posted 03 July 2012 - 17:02

Where do you suddenly come up with 12000? Did anyone in this thread actually go to math class?


Your example. You compared somebody making $20000 with somebody who makes $1000000.
After 20% taxes the first one keeps $12000.

#43 thealexweb

thealexweb

    Neowinian Senior

  • 7,313 posts
  • Joined: 23-September 07
  • Location: United Kingdom

Posted 03 July 2012 - 17:06

A fixed rate of 20% for everyone would be fair.

#44 Glassed Silver

Glassed Silver

    ☆♡Neowin's portion of Crazy♡☆

  • 10,729 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 04
  • Location: MY CATFORT in Kassel, Germany
  • OS: OS X ML; W7; Elementary; Android 4
  • Phone: iPhone 5 64GB Black (6.0.2)

Posted 03 July 2012 - 17:06

Guys, I didn't even poke the "welfare" (unemployment) topic, all I meant was lower tax rates and other benefits for the less rich people.

Jesus...

Read how I talked about the govt balancing the unfairness of the company that you get a paycheck from.

Although, I definitely think there are more incentives to work than just having a roof above your head and something to eat.
Luxury?
Better items you can buy?
Pleasure to work?
etc (there is lots more)

There will always be people trying to slip through a system to suck it dry, but that can't be helped a lot. (well I know it "can", but I don't think that the "effective" approaches sound very good).
Hope I didn't open Pandora's box... (I know I did, hope this doesn't get too stretched though)

Glassed Silver:mac

#45 jerzdawg

jerzdawg

    Neowinian

  • 5,369 posts
  • Joined: 09-October 02
  • Location: new jersey

Posted 03 July 2012 - 17:09

As mentioned plenty of times, the tax rate (on salary) is not the issue here. The issue is with tax rates on other "earned income". I forget which politician recently released his tax records and it showed like 90% of his income was from investments which is taxed considerbly lower then his tax rate for an actual job. Unless the tax rate is changed on this "other" category then not much will change.