HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » We need tax RATES to go u...

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 11:49 AM

We need tax RATES to go up on the wealthy, as a matter of principle. (Take that Grover!)


There's a lot of talk about raising taxes on the wealthy by "closing loopholes" - mostly from Repugs - but we all know that is a backdoor way of increasing taxes on anyone who pays income taxes.

We shouldn't fall for it. We need to demand the original plan: extend the tax cuts for the lower & middle classes, and increase the tax RATES on the wealthy.

23 replies, 1479 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 23 replies Author Time Post
Reply We need tax RATES to go up on the wealthy, as a matter of principle. (Take that Grover!) (Original post)
reformist2 Nov 2012 OP
SickOfTheOnePct Nov 2012 #1
AnnaLee Nov 2012 #5
SickOfTheOnePct Nov 2012 #7
AnnaLee Nov 2012 #10
SickOfTheOnePct Nov 2012 #11
AnnaLee Nov 2012 #13
SickOfTheOnePct Nov 2012 #15
AnnaLee Nov 2012 #17
reformist2 Nov 2012 #12
leftyohiolib Nov 2012 #2
Iggy Nov 2012 #3
Progressive dog Nov 2012 #4
ProgressiveProfessor Nov 2012 #6
SickOfTheOnePct Nov 2012 #8
PETRUS Nov 2012 #18
ProgressiveProfessor Nov 2012 #19
PETRUS Nov 2012 #22
quinnox Nov 2012 #9
byeya Nov 2012 #14
byeya Nov 2012 #16
meow2u3 Nov 2012 #20
SickOfTheOnePct Nov 2012 #23
Dark n Stormy Knight Nov 2012 #21

Response to reformist2 (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 11:58 AM

1. I'm not a purist on this so long as there are NO tax increases for lower & middle class

If the goal is to increase revenue from the wealthy, I don't care how they do it, so long as it doesn't increase taxes on anyone except the wealthy.

For example (using completely made up numbers for the sake of example), if the goal is to increase annual revenue from the wealthy by $100 billion, it makes no difference to me whether they do it by raising the top marginal rate or by eliminating deductions and loopholes just for the target group to meet the goal.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SickOfTheOnePct (Reply #1)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 12:12 PM

5. It's tricky isn't it?

So, if they use Social Security you won't feel it in your taxes (probably), you'll feel it in the erosion of the benefits. But it is still a tax even if a bit trickier.

I don't know what will happen but I figure that if they agree to put something on the table they intend to end up bargaining some of it away. If they need to generate a lot of revenue, they may need to dig down further into the middle class than people expect. That is why new revenues has to be on the table to meet the goals.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AnnaLee (Reply #5)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 12:21 PM

7. My bad, I wasn't clear

I'm not talking about the spending cut part, I'm talking solely about the revenue enhancement part.

The spending cut part is a whole other animal, and I'm not in favor of SS and Medicare being touched at all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SickOfTheOnePct (Reply #7)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 12:29 PM

10. Picky point.

But one person's spending cut is another person's increased tax.

Social Security has nothing to do with government spending.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AnnaLee (Reply #10)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 12:31 PM

11. Agreed

But when the discussion is solely about raising marginal tax rates, then spending isn't part of the equation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SickOfTheOnePct (Reply #11)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 12:33 PM

13. See the edit of my previous message to you.

Social Security is not part of the deficit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AnnaLee (Reply #13)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 12:36 PM

15. I agree, but there have been indications that it is on the table n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SickOfTheOnePct (Reply #15)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 12:41 PM

17. Oh yes but that doesn't mean it should be.

The reason it is on the table is that the Republicans need to be able to destroy the safety-nets in such a way that any changes can be blamed on the Democratic party. So they tie it to their willingness to come to the table. Well, it seems that some in the Democratic party are willing to provide that cover for them. Don't know why but there is probably a reason that won't make a bit of sense in the long run.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SickOfTheOnePct (Reply #1)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 12:33 PM

12. My main point is that we need to break the chokehold Grover Norquist has on them.


If we go with only Norquist-approved tax-loophole closures, the Repugs will see this as a victory. Also, if tax rates don't go up on the wealthy now, when will they???

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to reformist2 (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 11:59 AM

2. how about the loop hole that allows ge to get a refund how anout the loophole that allows

 

the rich to pay only 15% TAX rate on their capitol gains. im all for cutting those

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to reformist2 (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 12:02 PM

3. Principles??

 

Hha hahhh!!

I think you're forgetting principle went out the window a few years ago-- when the powers that be said TORTURE is OK.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to reformist2 (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 12:03 PM

4. Absolutely

The President should push for more progressive tax brackets as part of a deal.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to reformist2 (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 12:16 PM

6. Why this nickel and dime stuff, lets go for true tax reform

If Obama really wants to leave a major legacy, that would be it. A complete rewrite of the US tax code from the ground up. It is in dire need of it.

I have no doubt that Romney paid what was legally required since the people he hires to do his tax planning are more knowledgeable than the IRS and much more knowledgeable than Congress.

Everything that someone calls a loophole was once someone's good idea for the country. That is the classic result of using taxes as an instrument to enforce social policy. That is why we are where we are today. Remove the failed attempts at social incentives and return to taxes as a pure source of revenue. Then we can clean things up, stay progressive on the rates, and be fair.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProgressiveProfessor (Reply #6)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 12:21 PM

8. Stands, claps, whistles and cheers n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProgressiveProfessor (Reply #6)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 12:51 PM

18. Strong disagreement on one point.

There is no way to structure taxes so they do not affect social outcomes. I'd even say it's dangerous to pretend otherwise. That's not an argument against your suggestion of thorough revision. But whatever changes we make, we will be steering things in some direction.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PETRUS (Reply #18)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 04:38 PM

19. I agree to a point, it is intent that I was speaking to

Most of the loop holes were designed to encourage certain behaviors such as owning a home or certain kind of investments on the part of business or individuals. That over time has lead us to where we are today. A straight forward progressive system with minimal deductions and most importantly focused on generating revenue fairly is what is needed.

Yes the government tax laws will always have social impact. However, the goal is to get the government to stop using taxes to as incentives and use it for primarily, if not exclusively for revenue generation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProgressiveProfessor (Reply #19)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 06:38 PM

22. You and I have differing points of view.

Taxes are a perfectly appropriate policy tool as far as I'm concerned. I'm troubled by your position because I think the neutrality you're reaching for is illusory, and if you carry that kind of thinking too far you find yourself in the company of people like Ron Paul. Any kind of government at all - even the most bare bones libertarian variety - is social engineering, there's simply no way around it. Failing to recognize that interferes with a self-determined people's ability to create the kind of country they want.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to reformist2 (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 12:22 PM

9. way to stick it to the job creators

 

Very ungrateful I'd say. Ya know, the rich people earned every penny and they have a very expensive lifestyle to maintain - vacation homes, private jets, huge mansions with a large staff, etc. Where the hell are they going to get the money to have this lifestyle if they have to pay more in taxes??

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to reformist2 (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 12:34 PM

14. We will have a healthier society if the rich are subject to a progressive marginal tax rate and

 

steps are taken to close the wealth-gap between the obscenely rich and the ordinary wage earner.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to reformist2 (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 12:39 PM

16. In 2010 General Electric had a profit of approx $5 Billion on its American operations and not only

 

paid no paid no corporate income tax, it received a $3.2 Billion tax rebate.
This information is from Jim Hightower citing, I think, Citizens for Tax Justice.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to reformist2 (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 05:07 PM

20. The higher the tax rate on the wealthy, the more they tend to pay their employees

There's a tax deduction for wages paid out.

High tax rates provide an incentive for employers to pay their employees higher salaries, high enough for workers to pay income taxes, lowers the effective tax rate on the rich. Millionaires also benefit from higher working-class salaries and wages because workers tend to spend their money, causing the wealth to percolate back up to them.

Low tax rates on rich individuals and corporations removes the incentive to compensate their workers generously because they hoard their cash and wealth, even stashing a large portion, or even most of it, in foreign tax shelters. Put another way, the wealth from low taxes on high incomes and assets does not trickle down to the masses, but is sucked up in a giant black hole.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to meow2u3 (Reply #20)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 06:43 PM

23. I've often heard this but it makes no sense to me

Because even if they avoid taxes by paying their employees more, they still end up with less money than if they just paid the higher tax.

Not saying it isn't true, just that it doesn't make sense if the idea is for the employer to keep as much money as possible in his own pocket.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to reformist2 (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 05:37 PM

21. True. And if anyone needs some other reasons, besides plain old principle, I have a

post about it here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251243047#post17
Why should the rich pay more taxes?

Check it out, folks, and let me know what you think.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread