Three great reads for lunchtime: 1) Why bail out life insurers? 2) The rift between taxpayers...

This news story has 6 comments:

Register or Login to rate comments »

Chris S Comments (42)
 
#3 is an economics opinion article written by a press secretary. And we are supposed to value his opinion... why?
13 Apr 2009, 12:37 PM Reply Like

Niner Comments (791)
 
I take some issue with this article, What about state and local taxes. In my neck of the woods, sales tax alone is between 7 and 10%. The lower income families for the most part spend their entire income. Consequently, their sales tax rate whatever the rate is. Real/estate property taxes are also a greater percentage of their income; as is, gas tax, federal excise tax and anyother tax you can think of. Also, I for one never understood why Social Security taxes are only based on part of the over 100 thousand + income and all of the lower incomes.

OK. Now refigure this. What is the total tax burden on the upper 10% vs the lower 50%?

Prove me wrong. It's time you big dogs coughed up your share of the burden instead of whinning.
13 Apr 2009, 01:01 PM Reply Like

Niner Comments (791)
 
I didn't catch it the first time. The author worked for Geo W Bush. That alone explains the bias.
13 Apr 2009, 01:09 PM Reply Like

user344210 Comments (219)
 
Niner,

While I see your point about non-income taxes, who buys the bulk of items in this country and hence pays the highest amount of sales tax? If a rich guy buys a Bentley or a yacht, that's probably more in sales tax off one item than the average low-income earner pays in a year or more.

Part of the reason SS taxes aren't assessed on all income is because returns on contributions have already turned negative for quite a few people who make above the contribution limit but aren't near retirement, like myself. I might as well burn my money as contribute it to SS.
13 Apr 2009, 01:12 PM Reply Like

D_Virginia Comments (1676)
 
Here's an interesting article on the 400 richest Americans paying about 17% income tax.

www.forbes.com/2009/01...

Heck, /I/ paid a lot more than that.

This is an age old no-brainer: a loaf of bread costs everyone the same.

I'm in the 10% that make above Fleischer's $92,400, and hence help pay 72.4% of the income tax -- and you know what? I'm happy to do it, because that's the only way it's going to work.

And if I have to pay more, that's OK. Why? Because it just means I'll just have to buy a few less Blu-ray movies for my big-screen HDTV, and a few less video games for my Playstation 3 and Nintendo Wii, and a few less $50+ dinners for my and my girlfriend.

If someone who makes $30k has to pay more, it probably means a few less basic staples like food, gas, and utilities. Maybe a few less repairs to that old car that gets them to their crappy job every day. Maybe they could skip those online courses they were trying to take to improve their education and career potential.

And you know what else? Those $30k folks are the ones who helped /my/ Walmart stock go up, and bought lots of /my/ company's products and services so that /I/ can keep getting raises every year. Putting more burden on them just hurts me in the long run.

The approach Fleischer describes is exactly the kind of thing that makes rich people richer and poor people poorer.
13 Apr 2009, 01:29 PM Reply Like

user344210 Comments (219)
 
If you're so generous, why not support a flat tax and donate the money you save on buying fewer Blu-rays and eating fewer dinners? Why do you and Niner get to decide what I have to do with my money? I'd rather invest it and leave a legacy for my kids than give it to total strangers.

Your loaf of bread statement doesn't really make sense, either. Having consumers with different income levels making purchases in the bread market allows bread makers to differentiate their product. People who make a lower income can buy white bread and people who make a higher income can buy some fancier bread. That way, the guy who makes the fancier bread gets to monetize his skills just like the guy who makes the white bread.

Then, even though I might buy the fancier bread, as a proportion of my income, it's actually equal to the lower-income white bread buyer.


On Apr 13 01:29 PM D_Virginia wrote:

> Here's an interesting article on the 400 richest Americans paying
> about 17% income tax.
>
> www.forbes.com/2009/01...
>
>
> Heck, /I/ paid a lot more than that.
>
> This is an age old no-brainer: a loaf of bread costs everyone the
> same.
>
> I'm in the 10% that make above Fleischer's $92,400, and hence help
> pay 72.4% of the income tax -- and you know what? I'm happy to do
> it, because that's the only way it's going to work.
>
> And if I have to pay more, that's OK. Why? Because it just means
> I'll just have to buy a few less Blu-ray movies for my big-screen
> HDTV, and a few less video games for my Playstation 3 and Nintendo
> Wii, and a few less $50+ dinners for my and my girlfriend.
>
> If someone who makes $30k has to pay more, it probably means a few
> less basic staples like food, gas, and utilities. Maybe a few less
> repairs to that old car that gets them to their crappy job every
> day. Maybe they could skip those online courses they were trying
> to take to improve their education and career potential.
>
> And you know what else? Those $30k folks are the ones who helped
> /my/ Walmart stock go up, and bought lots of /my/ company's products
> and services so that /I/ can keep getting raises every year. Putting
> more burden on them just hurts me in the long run.
>
> The approach Fleischer describes is exactly the kind of thing that
> makes rich people richer and poor people poorer.
13 Apr 2009, 01:52 PM Reply Like