It is both simple and complex: Taxes and the very wealthy

[ABC]

Ahh, Social Darwinism again...an ugly philosophy, imo.

 

Agreed. I could have been killed multiple times in my life from doing stupid shit or just being young and not knowing any better. I don't know anyone who hasn't.

[wopphil]

Nobody forced them to get a tv.

Fixed.

[mp170.6]

Why would teenagers being getting screwed over any different than all of us get screwed over? It's called paying your fair share, something a huge portion of our population doesn't do. I have plenty of write offs, two mortgages, alimony, and kids. I'd give it up for a reasonable flat tax for everyone.

 

You missed the first part of what I said.

 

Teenagers younger than 18 get stuck paying taxes they have no say in.  They can't vote and our lawmakers don't care what they think anyway.  Hence, the "taxation without representation" reference. 

 

The same argument could be applied to people who are mentally incompetent due to age or disability.  The state sales sax is punitive enough; adding a Federal sales tax on top of that would be awful. 

[mtangelsfan]

You missed the first part of what I said.

 

Teenagers younger than 18 get stuck paying taxes they have no say in.  They can't vote and our lawmakers don't care what they think anyway.  Hence, the "taxation without representation" reference. 

 

The same argument could be applied to people who are mentally incompetent due to age or disability.  The state sales sax is punitive enough; adding a Federal sales tax on top of that would be awful. 

 

They are already getting taxed on their payroll.  They already pay sales tax on whatever they buy.  There may be some good arguments against a national sales tax but I don't think teenagers spending their parents money at the 7-11 is one of them.

[Stradling]

Yea I missed that part MP and I see your point. However if they are taxed like the rest of us then maybe when they can vote they will be more inclined or motivated to do so.

[mp170.6]

mp170.6, I do have a very limited grasp of economics, no doubt. And I was merely showing that there's a correlation between the lessening of taxes to the wealthy and the stagnation of the minimum wage. I wasn't saying one causes the other. But plenty of people who understand economics much better than I do, support the minimum wage, so just because you say almost all otherwise liberal PHDs hate it doesn't make it so. That's a baseless assertion.

 

My suggestion: Stop trying to find correlations between unrelated things. 

 

I would never cast myself as an expert in Economics but I spent years getting a degree in this subject.  I encountered dozens of Economics Ph.D.'s and read many scholarly papers written by the same.  A very small number of these people support the minimum wage, and it's not always for the benefit of the worker. 

 

The biggest mistake people make is using their political biases (we all have them) to construct the ideal Economic framework.  That just doesn't work.  It needs to be the other way around and based on real data, not emotion.

[Angelsjunky]

Fair enough. But you do realize that correlation wasn't the main point of my original post. The main point is that taxes have gone down for the wealthy while the cost of living has gone up and the middle class has suffered. I do think there is a correlation there.

[mtangelsfan]

But your tax policy would do nothing to help the middle class.  they won't receive any of the redistributed wealth.

[Angelsjunky]

I don't have a "tax policy," mt - except that the wealthy should be taxed more, in some cases much more, and this wealth re-distributed downwards. But I wouldn't stop there. I would also scrap Obamacare (which sucks, imo) and replace it with a single-payer system, paid for the wealthy. Free health care would help the middle class immensely. As would improved infrastructures, and other domestic improvements that could be made with all the billions I'd be Robin Hooding from the wealthy.

 

I have no idea about specific tax plans or policies. I'm speaking in general principles. If there is a way we could reduce taxes for the middle class and not take away from social programs, then of course. But I also see nothing wrong with all of us pitching in on public and social services, and I have no problem with paying money that helps those in need.

[Stradling]

So are we saying taxing EVERYONE the same percentage doesn't create enough revenue?

[mp170.6]

They are already getting taxed on their payroll.  They already pay sales tax on whatever they buy.  There may be some good arguments against a national sales tax but I don't think teenagers spending their parents money at the 7-11 is one of them.

 

Not that teenagers are already unmotivated for other reasons, but further taxing them reduces any incentive to find jobs.  We should be encouraging 16 and 17 year olds to work hard, not finding new ways to tax them. 

 

As it is, youth unemployment is currently around 11 percent.  Five years ago, it peaked at 19.5 percent. 

[mp170.6]

I don't have a "tax policy," mt - except that the wealthy should be taxed more, in some cases much more, and this wealth re-distributed downwards. But I wouldn't stop there. I would also scrap Obamacare (which sucks, imo) and replace it with a single-payer system, paid for the wealthy. Free health care would help the middle class immensely. As would improved infrastructures, and other domestic improvements that could be made with all the billions I'd be Robin Hooding from the wealthy.

 

I have no idea about specific tax plans or policies. I'm speaking in general principles. If there is a way we could reduce taxes for the middle class and not take away from social programs, then of course. But I also see nothing wrong with all of us pitching in on public and social services, and I have no problem with paying money that helps those in need.

 

What makes you think "free" healthcare would be equal in quality and accessibility? 

 

This country has a shortage of M.D.'s that's expected to hit 90,000 in the next ten years.  Single payer healthcare would limit the earnings potential of physicians because the reimbursements from the government would be fixed. 

 

Why bother busting your ass in medical school if other career paths are equally rewarding with less education?  I'm sorry but single-payer healthcare is a terrible idea. 

[ABC]

What makes you think "free" healthcare would be equal in quality and accessibility? 

 

This country has a shortage of M.D.'s that's expected to hit 90,000 in the next ten years.  Single payer healthcare would limit the earnings potential of physicians because the reimbursements from the government would be fixed. 

 

Why bother busting your ass in medical school if other career paths are equally rewarding with less education?  I'm sorry but single-payer healthcare is a terrible idea. 

 

The same reason why people become teachers. It's what they want to do.

 

Salaries of doctors can remain robust in a single payer system if the system was improved. I don't have all of the answers but I believe that we can have single payer, improve health care quality, recruit enough docs and still have a private system for people who can afford it and for docs who want to hang their own shingle. The current system is significantly flawed.

 

At the same time, individuals should be held accountable for not taking pride in good health. My wish for the single payer system cannot be accomplished with a population that does not have good health practices. 

[mtangelsfan]

The cost and time for the schooling needed to become a doctor would never be worth it.  

[Adam]

I would assume a lot of people become doctors because they want to be doctors. Money is secondary. 

[mp170.6]

I would assume a lot of people become doctors because they want to be doctors. Money is secondary. 

 

Nobody is going to pull the trigger and take on $250,000 of student loans without the assurance of income high-enough to pay off loans and employ nurses, receptionists, pay the lease, and all kinds of other costs.

 

I don't think money is as secondary as it seems. 

[Adam]

Fair enough. 

[nate]

Our government has done a great job with Obamacare so I totally trust them to create a single payer system.

 

Not to mention AJ ignores the fact that it would put half a million Americans out of the job.

 

Anyway, once again, AJ wants to give money to people who don't deserve it by taking it from the people who worked hard for it.

Edited December 21, 2015 by nate

[halobob]

You know what would really help the middle class?  Elimination of the payroll tax.  It would also be a great boost to small business as the payroll tax kills small business owners. 

 

AJ, how would you set up the income tax brackets?  There is a big difference between a 1%er who makes 500K and a 1%er who makes 5M.

[nate]

I suspect his bracket looks like this.

 

Household:

0-25k 0%

25k-40k 10%

40-75k 15%

75-125k 30%

125k-250k 35%

250k-1m 40%

1m+ 45%

 

You know, cause poor lazy people need handouts.

[mp170.6]

I suspect his bracket looks like this.

 

Household:

0-25k 0%

25k-40k 10%

40-75k 15%

75-125k 30%

125k-250k 35%

250k-1m 40%

1m+ 45%

 

You know, cause poor lazy people need handouts.

 

I figured Angelsjunky would propose 1m+ 95%

[nate]

Yeah or at least over 50%.  I was being conservative.

[ABC]

Nobody is going to pull the trigger and take on $250,000 of student loans without the assurance of income high-enough to pay off loans and employ nurses, receptionists, pay the lease, and all kinds of other costs.

 

I don't think money is as secondary as it seems. 

 

The problem is insurance cost. Not the cost of education. However that should be addressed as well. I think single payer can still provide high salaries for doctors. 

[nate]

Considering how much doctors and hospitals take advantage of the system now, they would do it 10 fold once the government is paying for it.

 

Right now the only way prices are kept down is that insurance companies negotiate set prices for every procedure.  They have already lost a ton of negotiating leverage with all of the mandates.

 

Insurance companies only work on a 5% margin.  More than 80% of operating costs are claims.  It is not like that is what is costing Americans so much money.

Edited December 21, 2015 by nate

[ABC]

Considering how much doctors and hospitals take advantage of the system now, they would do it 10 fold once the government is paying for it.

 

Right now the only way prices are kept down is that insurance companies negotiate set prices for every procedure.  They have already lost a ton of negotiating leverage with all of the mandates.

 

I strongly disagree that insurance companies are keeping costs down. I think it is the opposite plus I think they are keeping health care away from many people.