Top Earners in America Pay Just 16% Income Tax

[KukriKhan]

I suppose this is a bad time to propose a "everything is income; no deductions; eliminate separate taxes for SS & Medicare, and bin the IRS" national flat tax of 13%? Some 'experts' claim such funding would easily pay for SocSec, Nat'l Health Care for 50 years, and elimination of national debt in 5.

[Centurion1]

well.... Thank GOD we have the american dream... You know, working your arse off to against all odds maybe one day have a glimpse of what the rich people have...

it's not like you need things like health care or vacation, no, you have the DREAM!!!

lol id rather have my current american standard of living rather than your Scandinavian one no matter how high it is touted.

Jabarto you need to look at all the facts. Do you know that as CR the wealthy pay over a third of america's income. And dont be stupid the CEO tax income does far more for the country that some factory worker's tax incomes (if he even pays) to claim otherwise is just silly.

and if you dont like, then leave. You can go to Sweden ad have a vacation and incredibly high tax rates.

and people who make their money from investment deserve it. They took a bigger risk than you probably ever will. And so do people who form a company.

raising capital gains does absolutely nothing except stagnate business.

[jabarto]

and if you dont like, then leave. You can go to Sweden ad have a vacation and incredibly high tax rates.

Don't you think I would have given the opportunity? Sweden is a bitch to get into if you're not part of the EU.

and people who make their money from investment deserve it. They took a bigger risk than you probably ever will. And so do people who form a company.

Of course it's high risk. That's why literally more than 99% of all business founders fail, and your stupid belief in the "self-made billionaire" is full of holes. You know how those people get rich? It's not because they make brilliant management decisions. They get there by hiring the best workers from college to do all that for them. The owners literally do nothing but sit back and profit from the labor of their subordinates.

I'm not saying risk taking shouldn't be rewarded. I'm saying that pretending that people don't get to that top percentile through exploiting others' labor is foolish.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Of course it's high risk. That's why literally more than 99% of all business founders fail, and your stupid belief in the "self-made billionaire" is full of holes. You know how those people get rich? It's not because they make brilliant management decisions. They get there by hiring the best workers from college to do all that for them. The owners literally do nothing but sit back and profit from the labor of their subordinates.

I'd like to see your source on that figure. There is a high percentage of business failures (a majority in fact), particularly in the first year or two, but I do not believe it is quite that high.

As to hiring others to work for you, do you have a problem with the idea of informed consent? If they offer me X to do a particular job, it is my choice as to whether that's worth it to me or not. You make it sound as though all business owners are "buckra" getting their slavies to do everything while they polish their watch fob. I just dont' see it....

[Beskar]

As to hiring others to work for you, do you have a problem with the idea of informed consent? If they offer me X to do a particular job, it is my choice as to whether that's worth it to me or not. You make it sound as though all business owners are "buckra" getting their slavies to do everything while they polish their watch fob. I just dont' see it....

I believe there is the perfect explanation to help you understand jabarto's points.

[Lemur]

and people who make their money from investment deserve it. They took a bigger risk than you probably ever will. And so do people who form a company.

Equating investment income with entrepenurship is ... novel. I would really hesitate to say that a trust-fund brat like Paris Hilton is of the same value and economic promise as somebody who starts their own business.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

I suppose this is a bad time to propose a "everything is income; no deductions; eliminate separate taxes for SS & Medicare, and bin the IRS" national flat tax of 13%? Some 'experts' claim such funding would easily pay for SocSec, Nat'l Health Care for 50 years, and elimination of national debt in 5.

Not too shabby. I prefer a sales tax/consumption tax such as Boortz and company advocate, but this would be a notable improvement.

Jabarto is making a fair dig, and one I have alluded to in previous tax discussions. If the goal of our current tax system is funding government services, it fails -- we run huge deficits and fail to tax ourselves enough to pay for them. If the goal of our current system is to make the wealthy pay for those who have far fewer resources (wealth re-distribution), it fails -- as Rabbit rightly notes, our system does not tax wealth, only income. What we have is a system that taxes income more harshly the more you make, thereby making it harder to "move up" and preserving the extent elites -- clipping coupons and not really earning "income" per se, just distributions from the trust fund -- in their positions of economic privilege.

I would prefer an equitable system -- from each according to what they consume. If we can't get to that level, then at least flatten the tax and make it possible for someone who works hard to get ahead without penalizing anyone else.

[PanzerJaeger]

There is certainly something wrong here. These people should not have to pay more than 10% income taxes. No one should. That money would be better spent on capital investment than going to prop up our ridiculous entitlement system.

Equating investment income with entrepenurship is ... novel.

Venture capitalism, anyone?

[Centurion1]

Of course it's high risk. That's why literally more than 99% of all business founders fail, and your stupid belief in the "self-made billionaire" is full of holes. You know how those people get rich? It's not because they make brilliant management decisions. They get there by hiring the best workers from college to do all that for them. The owners literally do nothing but sit back and profit from the labor of their subordinates.

I'm not saying risk taking shouldn't be rewarded. I'm saying that pretending that people don't get to that top percentile through exploiting others' labor is foolish.

your telling me that all people who become rich are only doing so off the backs of their college graduates. That is grossly inaccurate. Let me give you a very recent example. The founder of UnderArmor, (this comes to mind becaus ei just got into his alma mater) most definetly deserves all the money he made and is making from a business venture he took a huge risk on. No hes not quite a billionaire but he mayvery well end up one.

Did Bill Gates deserve the money he made.

does Steve Jobs?

No lemur i did not mean to equate "inheritance tycoons" with hard working people, those are probably my least favorite individuals, not to say all people with inheritances are like that. i meant people who risk there money on huge investments within stocks and the like and either crash and burn or reap the benefits. Say what you will thats a risk your taking there.

[Strike For The South]

I suppose this is a bad time to propose a "everything is income; no deductions; eliminate separate taxes for SS & Medicare, and bin the IRS" national flat tax of 13%? Some 'experts' claim such funding would easily pay for SocSec, Nat'l Health Care for 50 years, and elimination of national debt in 5.

That would be to simple. There are special interests that need to be fed kukri. C'mon now.

And FTR, Sweden and the US are not comparable countries.

[Ironside]

I suppose this is a bad time to propose a "everything is income; no deductions; eliminate separate taxes for SS & Medicare, and bin the IRS" national flat tax of 13%? Some 'experts' claim such funding would easily pay for SocSec, Nat'l Health Care for 50 years, and elimination of national debt in 5.

Doesn't that end up equal to a budget of 13% of the total GDP? A 13% tax raise would surely do it, a total of 13% barely pays the defense and treasury department (not sure what they do with the money, the interest is much smaller).

And without a health care reform and current growth, that's the equal to the public part of the healthcare expenses in a decade or two.