President Obama's tax cuts/increases

I'm the elite that you are talking about and you need to know the facts. The facts are, I am right now paying 55% taxes (between state and federal income tax as well as all the other payroll taxes). Under Obama, I am going to pay 67% of what I make to the state and feds. I know that I am not going to get any sympathy from anyone, but if the shoe was on the other foot, how would YOU really feel?

I think we all know the answer to that question.

Finally, since you brought up the fallacy that 95% will be getting a tax cut, I am going to have to break your bubble and give you the facts. When the Bush tax cuts expire, EVERYONE'S taxes that pays taxes now are going up. Yes, there is a one time rearrangement of income of a whole $13 per week for certain people making a certain amount of $$$, but the expiration of the Bush tax cuts will wipe that out with no problem. Look it up yourself. It really does not make any sense at all; let's raise taxes on the business people that pay a disproportionate share of taxes in a really bad recession, and somehow this will make enough money to pay for the programs that Obama is proposing? That really does not make sense to me at all. Wishing and hoping is not much of a plan to me, and with Obama, it sure appears to be amateur hour.

I'm with Rush, I hope that every one of his socialism schemes fails miserably, they really make no sense to me. Socialism is not the answer -- it did not make this country great, nor will it in the future. I for one do not want to rely on the government for anything; they screwed up Social Security, Medicare, Medicade, and now we want them to take care of our health care in this country -- this is truly crazy.

2010 will be an interesting election year to say the least .....

quote:

I for one do not want to rely on the government for anything

National defense? Fire protection? Drinking water? Sewer service? Power and natural gas regulation/safety? Public roads? Interstate highway system? Drug, food, chemical inspection/approval? Working conditions, hospital safety,doctor licensing?

I for one would not want to live in a country where the government provided nothing for its citizens.

Larry

P.S. - Compared to my current income, if I was to earn enough money (or have others do the work to provide me with such an income) and join you in your higher tax level, I'm pretty sure I'd gladly pay 67% of what I made when I looked at what I had left over.

I think the reality is we do need basic services, but most of these "services" need an audit. We pay for services that are abused and not very well managed. Before Obama keeps funding more government programs, I think he needs to take a hard look at making the ones we already have better. He's already made it clear that the same ol washington is being appointed to managing these agencies. So much for change.

quote:

He's already made it clear that the same ol washington is being appointed

Sadly, for the most part, that is true. Not what I was hoping for, but not really a big surprise.

Only time will tell what will come of all this.

Larry

I am not going to argue that we do not need these services either as much as we need clean air and clean water -- Larry, that is not the point. The point is that whatever the government touches, it gets screwed up and very expensive. When the guy from the government says, I'm the government and I am here to help, that is when you really need to run for the hills. This guy just wants more from you, more money, more control over your life. I've got news for you, Obama is that guy.

Take a look at your 401K, mine has gone down over 50%, and at some point, people have to stop blaming Republicans for everything. At some point, those that are responsible will have to take the heat. Remember, the Republicans stopped controlling Congress in 2006 .... Here is another fact that is hard to argue with. With all the jobs and economic activity going down, you would think that the government would have to tighten its belt too -- well guess what. That is not happening -- they are doing the opposite. Did you look at your 401K? Wall Street is not happy with the way things are going either -- and this is their guy.

So again, Hope & Change and Yes We Can sounds more and more like good bumper sticker slogans and now all of us are going to pay the price for 52% of Americans that made the wrong choice. Does anyone remember the late 70's, well hold onto your wallets, because I am just wondering what inflation is going to do after the printing presses melt down from printing all of that money -- see my 401K comment again ......

Our Government...
This is the bunch that took over running the Mustang Ranch (whore house) out side Reno Nv. They couldn't make it selling A** and booze!
What makes them think they can run the Country?

quote:

Did you look at your 401K? Wall Street is not happy with the way things are going either -- and this is their guy.

I really hate to do this but Bush was one of those holier then thou ass!@#$ who wants to get rid of SS and set up private savings plans?? Unless the government is willing to insure our 401k's they will never be as stable as a defined pension.
As far as Wall Street and the banks go screw them they got us into this mess along with the lax regulation the corporate culture that said regulation was the reason they couldnt make the money they should be making. Playing the stock market is just like gambling and if you dont want to gamble then take your money out of it!
Regulation needs to be in place for the reasons they were put into play after the Great Depression.
Sorry but people sure do forget the history of this country.

Someone please explain why it is fair for any one person to pay a higher percentage for tax then another? If we would just establish a flat tax rate for everyone with no writeoffs and deductions it would be a much more fair system. Why should some get penalized a high percentage just for being smart enough to make more?
Just my 2 cents.

quote:

Why should some get penalized a high percentage just for being smart enough to make more?
Just my 2 cents.

For starters, 'smart enough' has somewhere along the way been corrupted to be allowed to include:

fraud, deception, theft, total lack of any moral code, total disregard for worker safety, total disregard for the environment, total disregard for the future of a company as long as the current management can 'get theirs', merger actions designed to negate pension plans, etc, etc.

Larry

I think the libs on this thread are really missing something important. Socialism will never make this country great (It has not anywhere else that I am aware). Capitalism has its faults, yes; but it still has made this country the envy of the world. Capitalism will always have recessions along with boom times -- if you know anything about the history then you will realize that this has occurred many times in the past. I do not think it is any reason to throw that away, so we can have an economy like what, France or Germany?

I like the flat tax idea too -- but the libs will always get out the class warfare thing as they have for the last 50 years. Maybe we should all do nothing, get socialized medicine, live off from the government with welfare, and hope that some rich b@$t@rd pays for it all. Sounds fair to me.

Larry, the other thing you said about water, sewer, fire departments etc... The only thing that is supported by my income tax is the military that you mentioned, and Obama is going to cut this so Russia and China will be emboldened to have air bases in Cuba again -- I am going to love to see how Team Obama talks their way out of this one. I pay my sewer and water to the City. I pay the gas bill to another outfit. I pay my medical insurance to someone else so my family can have this too. The Interstate highway system was paid not from income taxes, but from use taxes every time you purchase gasoline or register your car. So again, you are talking from emotion and not facts. My taxes are going up to 67%, this is the aggregate of state and federal income taxes along with all of the other payroll taxes. This will go to fund the trillions that is being spent on my behalf that I really do not agree with. So to ever get me to agree that this is a good deal, never is a long time, but I really do not think the money is being well spent on any of this pork in these spending bills.

OSOFAST, you think that Bush is the bogey man? Well, the Dems have been controlling Congress since 2006, and while they have been the majority, the market has tanked. Again, it will take a while for this to sink in, but check your investments in your 401k and tell me that somehow, magically, that this is the minority in Congress' issue.

P.S. You also say that you would be glad to have my income -- I bet you would, without the responsibility that goes along with it. But you would have to work damn hard and hope that you do not go under as there is a lot of risk in a private business, and no one will be coming to bail me out if anything goes wrong, especially now. There is a lot of responsibility in my job that you will never know -- what is that saying, grass is always greener on the other side of the fence? Certainly applies here.

Larry,

Stop believing everything you read, it's a government conspiracy! Love you to death man, but your political views border on communism.

People need to take a hard look at other countries, their government and tax structures and how well off their citizens are. Better still go experience some of that then come back and tell me the America Dream isn't alive and kickin'. And yes I've lived on 4 continents and physically worked in excess of 10 Countries.

The welfare state system ultimately fails, as a few have to work to feed and support the masses. Uneducated immigrants flock toward a better life (read: easy handouts) and before you know it your tax dollar is supporting Snr Gomez or Mr Singh and each of their 25 kids and extended family.

Part of the reason I got out of the UK was I got fed up with seeing all the surf bums living on the dole, surfing and smokin' weed all day every day on my tax dollar. If that weren't enough the Country opened the flood gates for every immigrant man, wife, extended family & dog to come and get free benefits in the name of shared wealth'. Well the UK is totally f*%$#d in my opinion and I see the same pattern evolving here.

Of course everyone who wants a free ride is going to advocate the welfare state/share the wealth policies. On the other hand those that still believe in the true American Dream will continue to see that the 'equality' this country offers is in the equal opportunity for everyone....but you gotta get off your ass and do something to make it happen....if you don't want to do that then don't come to me looking for handouts.

Ok my 2 cents ... If they continue to raise taxes on the rich ( your business owners ) for example .. there will not be any business owners .. let me burst your bubble .. it doesnt pay to be in business .. EVERY DAY we are hit with a new tax, rule, or regualtion that cost money .. this reduces profit margins and business owner start to think .. maybe I close up .. put my money in the bank and go work for someone else .. that what your seeing out there.

I believe in a fair safe work place .. but the tide has change drastically. The utility bills, safety equipment, stolen tools, stolen and wasted materials, leaving early, long coffee breaks, long lunches, and missing work days all contribute to loss in profits. Then on top businesses get taxed on Unemployment when you lay their sorry ass off because of any one of these reasons .

So if you keep hammering our business owners then tax the shit out of them .. there will not be ANY BUSINESSES left ...thats why they are closing up. All I ask is if your going to raise the Taxes, add regualations, change a saftey rule ...thats going to add to the cost of doing business ...let me know a eyar in advance so I can raise my prices ... and add it to the hourly rate to send a technician to your house ...so it dont come out of my profit of 10% which is also too low to be in business.

Ron

quote:

Originally posted by LF - TP 2511:
P.S. - Compared to my current income, if I was to earn enough money (or have others do the work to provide me with such an income) and join you in your higher tax level, I'm pretty sure I'd gladly pay 67% of what I made when I looked at what I had left over.

"Others do the work to provide me with the income"????????

Larry, if that's how it works, then what the heck are you waiting for?? Go start a business, have others "do the work " for you and watch the cash roll in. Let me know how it works out.

I'll tell you why you haven't. Because there is a lot of risk involved, and everyone knows running a business is a lot of work, stress and long hours; you work your balls off. Nobody is sitting around while others earn their money.

Will ( only 1 ball. I lost the other in a bizzare gardening accident)

quote:

you think that Bush is the bogey man? Well, the Dems have been controlling Congress since 2006, and while they have been the majority, the market has tanked

I feel that Bush is the WORST President im MY lifetime, I think Reagan was one of the best, Clinton rode the wave that Reagan started. The biggest downfall to our economy has been
1)Free Trade Ross Perot had it right, the giant sucking sound. The people in this country are laid off because the products they used to build are now made overseas. How can they afford to buy what is being sold???
2) Deregulation, the means to the end does not make sense to me, started by Nixon, expanded by Reagan, helped along by Clinton. This started the banks giving loans to people who could not afford them, and when Free Trade got into high gear after Clinton left office. They lost there jobs and well you know the rest of that story.
Also the modification of the bankruptcy laws that leave the average person paying back what they owe. But the Big Business can walk away from all of their bad decisions. This was done under the last Bush, as a side note the credit card companies were major players in the push for the new bankruptcy laws, and as soon as they got them the credit card companies were targeting the poorest of our country to start using credit cards. Of course these same people were not allowed credit prior to the change in these laws because they could use bankruptcy to let them get clear of these debts.
I can go on and on the effects of the deregulation that has us here. The main reason we are where we are is Greed and Power. Madoff, Stanford, FANNIE MAE
I hope our new president can get this country back on its feet. But like the others have said he to seems to be running the status quo.
3) A flat tax system would be so nice, no refunds everyone pays the same percentage(thats what was done in Iraq).
I have a problem with the Social Security taxes. This years limit is capped at around $104,000. So why... someone who makes say $104K pays the same amount that Bill Gates pays????
Ok my soap box is over.
Jeff

Hey guys, I don't tkink the governemet wants to go back to the (what did I see) 91% during the Eisenhower years. Those were good years for business weren't they? Personnaly as a Canuck I wouldn't live anywhere else, but there is a need for social medecine, good education and some form of 'audited' city, state, federal managed programs. I peronally can't believe US medical cost, and how about electricity. Then cutbacks on stuff like levys in New Orleans. The lobbyists are the one running the country(ies). They pushed and allowed many things that killed local, domestic busineses and industry. (WallyMart and free-er trade) And then to top it off all those f*kin mortgages that were packaged and sold on Wall Street were the main reason Wall Street crashed. ( hey I guess lobyists and COEs were just thinking about the short term payoff)

Look at all the 'stuff' we own. The average person buys it on credit and then pays the minimum payment so they can buy more next month. The Italians, Polish, Greeks... that came to NorthAmerica after the WW11 are the one who helped build the econmy we knew. They had 2-3 jobs worked 18 hours a day and often spent as little as possible so they could buy a house, or start a business. Meanwhile grandma babysat the grandkids and all the adults were working. Now it seems the Eastern Europeans are no longer the majority of immigrants. The new imigrants are taking those jobs we don't want, cabbies, gas station, restaurants, convenience stores all those businesses that handle CASH (the underground economy). Can you or I say we only made $50 today, no our boss or the accountant states exactly how much most of us earned. Now if you are the business owner you may have a few perks on the side, but if you are the CEO of a large corporation the perks are exponential.
Usually the smart person who has a larger income will have more 'deductions' (hopefully it is not the interest on your mortgage), business expenses from a (or more) business(es) is a good example. To expect to get government services without paying taxes is ridiculous. Even at 35% tax it is still a good return, now add you health benefits cost then cost of higher education ( be it yours or your kids) and you will see you tax ratio. Now I am not saying there isn't a need for better audits, but we are splitting hairs.
There is no such thing as a free lunch

First ...

Thank you everyone for keeping civil with one another. This really is a very mature group of guys here. You impress me with your ability to broach a subject that is so "close to home" and polarizing while remaining respectful of one another. Kudos.

I have my own thoughts on the subject of taxation. I am neither liberal or conservative, democrat or republican. These are just my observations, I am in no way trying to defend any ideology, politician or party.

I am in the highest tax bracket too, based solely upon my salary derived from my weekday job, supervising control system technicians for a large utility. Here in southern California, my income should hardly qualify for the highest tax bracket, but I am single and have no dependents, and there you have it. Almost makes me want to remarry ... well ... errrrr .... almost.

One of the unfair aspects of the US tax code, it does not recognize the regional differences in the cost of living. Somebody earning my salary in Arkansas would certainly be amongst the wealthy, but not in southern California, not in the San Francisco Bay area and not in the greater New York City area. A person in my same position in Arkansas does not make the same salary I do, because the unions and our employers recognize the regional differences in the cost of living; but the federal government does not.

Something to realize about Larry's chart, it only shows one variable, the highest tax rate. What it doesn't show is at what income the highest tax rate cuts in. I guarantee you the government does not ever lower its income. For every time they lower the tax rate, they also lower the level of income (tax brackets) at which the various tax rates apply. The government collects statistics, they know exactly how many people are in each incremental tax bracket, they know exactly how much those tax brackets must be juggled in order maintain their income when the tax rates are lowered. And they do exactly that.

Another variable are the tax deductions. When Regan lowered the tax rates, the tax code also changed and I no longer qualified for several of the deductions I had previously qualified for. The net result, I paid the same amount of income tax.

The final variable in this picture is the cost of living index. The government keeps pruning the factors that contribute to that number. For instance housing & energy are not part of the cost of living index. So the tax code (and cost of living based raises for the working man) does not keep up with the true rate of inflation. Which is why I find myself in the highest tax bracket.

I don't know one working person who opposes a flat rate tax, but it is always opposed vigorously in congress by both parties, by our elected officials who are supposed to represent the desire of their constituents. Lately I have come to believe it would be better to eliminate income tax and institute a federal sales tax to replace it. Then it would be in the governments best interest to stimulate sales within our borders. I remain fully supportive of a welfare system to help those who find themselves in temporary distress. Everybody should have a roof over their head and food in their stomachs during life's most trying moments. That's just compassion, I don't think that makes me a communist or even a socialist. My mention of socialism brings me to the last thing I want to mention ... an amusing point ... there would be no Pantera, Mustang, Hot Rod Lincolns, Sunbeam Tiger, Shelby Cobra, Noble, Saleen S7 or Ford GT40 if it weren't for a fairly well known socialist, Mr Henry Ford. His idea to produce an automobile that the average man could afford, and to pay his workers a wage that would allow them to purchase the goods they produced, were inspired by the socialist ideals he believed in.

Will ( only 1 ball. I lost the other in a bizzare gardening accident) .... YOU HIT IT ON THE HEAD MAN ... YOU KNOW I WITH YOU ON THIS ONE !

So why... someone who makes say $104K pays the same amount that Bill Gates pays???? BECAUSE BILL GATES AND ANYONE WHO MAKES OVER 104K IS PROBABLY PLANNING THAT THE LIFSTYLE THEY WILL LIVE AFTER RETIREMENT IS GOING TO TAKE MORE TO LIVE THEN COLLECTING SS WHEN THEY RETIRE ?

GEORGE ... Almost makes me want to remarry ... well ... errrrr .... almost. MARRY A MEXICAN SHE WILL COOK CLEAN AND WASH YOUR CLOTHES WITH YOU STILL IN THEM ...LOL

RON

I pulled this excerpt from the following webpage: http://www.cbpp.org/10-16-03tax.htm

While the study is from 2003, the information is still valid.

* Although taxes paid by corporations, measured as a share of the economy, rose modestly during the boom years of the 1990s, they remained sharply lower even in the boom years than in previous decades. According to OMB historical data, corporate taxes averaged 2 percent of GDP in the 1990s. That represented only about two-fifths of their share of GDP in the 1950s, half of their share in the 1960s, and three-quarters of their share in the 1970s.

* The share that corporate tax revenues comprise of total federal tax revenues also has collapsed, falling from an average of 28 percent of federal revenues in the 1950s and 21 percent in the 1960s to an average of about 10 percent since the 1980s.

* The effective corporate tax rate — that is, the percentage of corporate profits that is paid in federal corporate income taxes — has followed a similar pattern. During the 1990s, corporations as a group paid an average of 25.3 percent of their profits in federal corporate income taxes, according to new Congressional Research Service estimates. By contrast, they paid more than 49 percent in the 1950s, 38 percent in the 1960s, and 33 percent in the 1970s.

* Corporate income tax revenues are lower in the United States than in most European countries. According to data from the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, total federal and state corporate income tax revenues in the United States in 2000, measured as a share of the economy, were about one-quarter less than the average for other OECD member countries. Thirty-five years ago, the opposite was true — corporations in the United States bore a heavier burden than their European counterparts.

-----------------

Seems to me the Corporations of this nation have done a pretty good job of lowering their share of supporting this country in recent decades. Wonder where the money is coming from if not from them? Gee, think real hard and you'll figure this out.

One Nation, under the corporations and for the corporations. And yet they still scream they are being taxed to death.

And a lot of you guys seem to have fallen for their line hook, line and sinker.

Larry

quote:

Something to realize about Larry's chart, it only shows one variable, the highest tax rate.

Okay, then how about this chart?