Topic: Something to Ponder | |
---|---|
Many states will collect much less revenue this year than they did last year, yet most are basing this year expenditures on last years budget. Are you in favor of increasing taxes to make up for the shortfall or should states start scaling back programs that they have increased year after year???
|
|
|
|
Colorado found an out for that. They can't increase taxes here by much because of a law we voted in so they are now increasing fees on everything associated with the government.
I do understand why we need the increases with population growth so I believe we should increase taxes and cover the programs we have. |
|
|
|
Colorado found an out for that. They can't increase taxes here by much because of a law we voted in so they are now increasing fees on everything associated with the government. I do understand why we need the increases with population growth so I believe we should increase taxes and cover the programs we have. increased population is an increase in the tax payer base thus more tax payers thus more tax collected so maybe tax should go down insert shrugging shoulder emoticon here |
|
|
|
Colorado found an out for that. They can't increase taxes here by much because of a law we voted in so they are now increasing fees on everything associated with the government. I do understand why we need the increases with population growth so I believe we should increase taxes and cover the programs we have. increased population is an increase in the tax payer base thus more tax payers thus more tax collected so maybe tax should go down insert shrugging shoulder emoticon here Only if thtey are of age to pay taxes does that apply. It is still an increase of costs. |
|
|
|
but cost to who and for what?
|
|
|
|
Colorado found an out for that. They can't increase taxes here by much because of a law we voted in so they are now increasing fees on everything associated with the government. I do understand why we need the increases with population growth so I believe we should increase taxes and cover the programs we have. increased population is an increase in the tax payer base thus more tax payers thus more tax collected so maybe tax should go down insert shrugging shoulder emoticon here You have a point, hmmm, if that is the case then it would seem in this situation they would keep taxes the same and not burden anyone. At least until we are out of this mess. But I don't pretend to understand how local government works either. funny though when we as citizens have to cut corner, cut back and do with out, our government folks seem to always get the money they want for special projects that aren't absolutely nessessary. Guess it's always easiest to spend someone elses money, than to spend your own. |
|
|
|
Colorado found an out for that. They can't increase taxes here by much because of a law we voted in so they are now increasing fees on everything associated with the government. I do understand why we need the increases with population growth so I believe we should increase taxes and cover the programs we have. Taxes or fees, is there a difference when it is associated with the Government? They are killing us here in Wisconsin. |
|
|
|
Colorado found an out for that. They can't increase taxes here by much because of a law we voted in so they are now increasing fees on everything associated with the government. I do understand why we need the increases with population growth so I believe we should increase taxes and cover the programs we have. The problem with that is that, historically, lowering taxes has proven to increase revenues substantially, due to people being more willing to take risks like opening new businesses or hiring more employees for an existing business. When taxes are raised, or if there is the fear that they will be raised, people will be much tighter-fisted with their money and the economy will be, at best, stagnant. |
|
|
|
Colorado found an out for that. They can't increase taxes here by much because of a law we voted in so they are now increasing fees on everything associated with the government. I do understand why we need the increases with population growth so I believe we should increase taxes and cover the programs we have. Problem with this is it ain't an out... Its taxing people with out representation... Enough people wake up to that and it WILL GO AWAY. |
|
|
|
http://mingle2.com/topic/show/233357
Freezing current government spending levels for ten years could be the answer. If we did that, the US would have the same national debt in 2019 as in 2009. |
|
|
|
Poll: 74 Percent Support Higher Taxes On The Rich
Almost three-quarters of Americans think it is a good idea to raise taxes on people making more than $250,000 per year, according to the latest CBS News/New York Times poll. In fact, two-thirds of Americans think the tax code should be changed so that middle-class Americans pay less than they do now, while "upper income" people pay more. http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/04/06/business/econwatch/entry4923732.shtml |
|
|
|
"The very rich in America pay taxes at a lower rate than most working people, and, due to a wrinkle in the tax code, private-equity partners enjoy some of the lowest tax rates of all. At a Hillary Clinton fund-raiser in New York last month, Warren Buffett, no stranger to wealth, told an audience filled with bankers and real-estate developers the system was, in effect, rigged. "This is what Congress in its wisdom did: the 400 of us [here] pay a lower part of our income in taxes than our receptionists do, or our cleaning ladies, for that matter." Buffett (who is a director of NEWSWEEK's parent, The Washington Post Company) offered a million dollars to any fellow magnate who could prove he had higher tax rates than his secretary."
Warren Buffett: Income tax rigged to benefit rich http://clipmarks.com/clipmark/DED0E29F-48C8-4E8E-ABE6-86B393D64300/ |
|
|
|
"The very rich in America pay taxes at a lower rate than most working people, and, due to a wrinkle in the tax code, private-equity partners enjoy some of the lowest tax rates of all. At a Hillary Clinton fund-raiser in New York last month, Warren Buffett, no stranger to wealth, told an audience filled with bankers and real-estate developers the system was, in effect, rigged. "This is what Congress in its wisdom did: the 400 of us [here] pay a lower part of our income in taxes than our receptionists do, or our cleaning ladies, for that matter." Buffett (who is a director of NEWSWEEK's parent, The Washington Post Company) offered a million dollars to any fellow magnate who could prove he had higher tax rates than his secretary." Warren Buffett: Income tax rigged to benefit rich http://clipmarks.com/clipmark/DED0E29F-48C8-4E8E-ABE6-86B393D64300/ HA HA HA. Most of Warren Buffet's income comes from corporate dividends and capital gains that are taxed at only 15 percent. But the corporate income that funded those dividends was already taxed at the corporate level, where the tax rate is 35 percent. Ever heard of the double taxation of corporate dividends. Mr Buffett seems to be ignoring the first round of taxation. That's a 50% rate on his capital gains and dividends. |
|
|
|
"The very rich in America pay taxes at a lower rate than most working people, and, due to a wrinkle in the tax code, private-equity partners enjoy some of the lowest tax rates of all. At a Hillary Clinton fund-raiser in New York last month, Warren Buffett, no stranger to wealth, told an audience filled with bankers and real-estate developers the system was, in effect, rigged. "This is what Congress in its wisdom did: the 400 of us [here] pay a lower part of our income in taxes than our receptionists do, or our cleaning ladies, for that matter." Buffett (who is a director of NEWSWEEK's parent, The Washington Post Company) offered a million dollars to any fellow magnate who could prove he had higher tax rates than his secretary." Warren Buffett: Income tax rigged to benefit rich http://clipmarks.com/clipmark/DED0E29F-48C8-4E8E-ABE6-86B393D64300/ Funny how the top 5% of Americans pay the majority of the total of our taxes... |
|
|
|
Hell, i don't really see where income taxes benefit anyone but the poor...
Taxes seem to bring about the heaviest burden on middle income households, and anyone trying to get ahead financially... |
|
|
|
"The very rich in America pay taxes at a lower rate than most working people, and, due to a wrinkle in the tax code, private-equity partners enjoy some of the lowest tax rates of all. At a Hillary Clinton fund-raiser in New York last month, Warren Buffett, no stranger to wealth, told an audience filled with bankers and real-estate developers the system was, in effect, rigged. "This is what Congress in its wisdom did: the 400 of us [here] pay a lower part of our income in taxes than our receptionists do, or our cleaning ladies, for that matter." Buffett (who is a director of NEWSWEEK's parent, The Washington Post Company) offered a million dollars to any fellow magnate who could prove he had higher tax rates than his secretary." Warren Buffett: Income tax rigged to benefit rich http://clipmarks.com/clipmark/DED0E29F-48C8-4E8E-ABE6-86B393D64300/ Funny how the top 5% of Americans pay the majority of the total of our taxes... |
|
|
|
Edited by
Drivinmenutz
on
Wed 07/08/09 08:58 AM
|
|
The tax poem;
Tax his land, Tax his bed, Tax the table At which he's fed. Tax his tractor, Tax his mule, Teach him taxes Are the rule. Tax his work, Tax his pay, He works for peanuts Anyway! Tax his cow, Tax his goat, Tax his pants, Tax his coat. Tax his ties, Tax his shirt, Tax his work, Tax his dirt. Tax his tobacco, Tax his drink, Tax him if he Tries to think. Tax his cigars, Tax his beers, If he cries Tax his tears. Tax his car, Tax his gas, Find other ways To tax his ***. Tax all he has Then let him know That you won't be done Till he has no dough. When he screams and hollers, Then tax him some more, Tax him till He's good and sore. Then tax his coffin, Tax his grave, Tax the sod in Which he's laid. Put these words Upon his tomb, "Taxes drove me to my doom..." When he's gone, Do not relax, Its time to apply The inheritance tax. Accounts Receivable Tax Building Permit Tax CDL license Tax Cigarette Tax Corporate Income Tax Dog License Tax Excise Taxes Federal Income Tax Federal Unemployment Tax (FUTA) Fishing License Tax Food License Tax Fuel Permit Tax Gasoline Tax (44.75 cents per gallon) Gross Receipts Tax Hunting License Tax Inheritance Tax Inventory Tax IRS Interest Charges IRS Penalties (tax on top of tax) Liquor Tax Luxury Taxes Marriage License Tax Medicare Tax Personal Property Tax Property Tax Real Estate Tax Service Charge Tax Social Security Tax Road Usage Tax Sales Tax Recreational Vehicle Tax School Tax State Income Tax State Unemployment Tax (SUTA) Telephone Federal Excise Tax Telephone Federal Universal Service Fee Tax Telephone Federal, State and Local Surcharge Taxes Telephone Minimum Usage Surcharge Tax Telephone Recurring & Non-recurring Charges Tax Telephone State and Local Tax Telephone Usage Charge Tax Utility Taxes Vehicle License Registration Tax Vehicle Sales Tax Watercraft Registration Tax Well Permit Tax Workers Compensation Tax Not completely true, but you still get the message. Almost all of these taxes didn't exist 100 years ago. I theorize that the average middle class american pays over 50% (probably more like 75%) of their income on taxes. If you make more, you pay a higher percentage. |
|
|
|
Edited by
Drivinmenutz
on
Wed 07/08/09 08:59 AM
|
|
"The very rich in America pay taxes at a lower rate than most working people, and, due to a wrinkle in the tax code, private-equity partners enjoy some of the lowest tax rates of all. At a Hillary Clinton fund-raiser in New York last month, Warren Buffett, no stranger to wealth, told an audience filled with bankers and real-estate developers the system was, in effect, rigged. "This is what Congress in its wisdom did: the 400 of us [here] pay a lower part of our income in taxes than our receptionists do, or our cleaning ladies, for that matter." Buffett (who is a director of NEWSWEEK's parent, The Washington Post Company) offered a million dollars to any fellow magnate who could prove he had higher tax rates than his secretary." Warren Buffett: Income tax rigged to benefit rich http://clipmarks.com/clipmark/DED0E29F-48C8-4E8E-ABE6-86B393D64300/ Funny how the top 5% of Americans pay the majority of the total of our taxes... Every look at the tax bracket system? If you and I increase our income by 10 grand or so we will make $500 less at the end of the year when uncle sam gets his hands on it. Corporations, to avoid certain taxes, use write-offs, they will write off company spending to put themselves in a lower tax bracket so their income decreases. This is where your charities and such get donations. But nevertheless, Crickstergo brought up a valid argument, what about the double taxation on corporate dividens? I'm thinking the only fair tax is sales tax, the rest is an example of robbery. Robbing from someone just because he or she has more of something than you... |
|
|
|
Taxes – Warren Buffett & His Secretary
By kenhoma HEADLINE: “Warren Buffett’s Secretary Pays More Taxes than He Does” The story has been making the rounds for the past couple of months and seems to be the determining data point for Barack Obama’s tax plan (e.g. “Bush’s tax cuts for the wealthy who didn’t even wamt them”). Surprisingly (to me), everybody seems to just nod and to take the story at face value without interrogation. Not me. According to Buffett, he pays taxes at a lower tax rate than does his $60,000-a-year secretary, 17.7 percent and 30 percent, respectively. Let’s start with the secretary: $60,000 @ at a 30% tax rate. We’ll take her $60,000 salary at face value (but wonder why a generous guy like Buffett would only pay her that piddling amount). What about the 30% rate? To be conservative and simple, let’s assume that the secretary has no dependents and takes the standard deduction. That would give her taxable income of $50,250 ($60,000 less 1 exemption @ $3,400 and a standard deduction of $5,360) and a federal income tax liability of $8,986.25 – $4,386.25 + 25% of the excess over $31,850. So, the secretary’s effective Federal income tax rate is only 15% ($8,986.25 / $60,000). Hmmmm. Well, maybe Buffet is throwing in payroll taxes for Social Security and Medicare. OK, add on 7.65% — 6.2% for Social Security and .1.45% for Medicare. That gets the secretary up to 22.65%. Still short, so add on $2,750 for Nebraska state income taxes and the secretary is up to 27%. OK, throw in everything including the kitchen sink, give the number a hard round, and we’re up to 30%. Not the way most people think about tax rates, but let’s not quibble. Let’s see, $60,000 times 30% — the secretary pays $18,000 to the Federal and Nebraska coffers. Buffett says he earned $46 million in 2006. Even at a measly 17.7%, that’s over $8 million. Hmmm. I’d say that the usual headline “Warren Buffett Pays Less Taxes than His Secretary” is, perhaps. just a bit deceiving. What do you think? More interesting (to me) is Buffett’s 17.7% tax rate. How does he get it that low. After all, the the 35% marginal tax bracket starts around $100,000, so you’d expect that most of his $46 billion would fall into that category, right? Well, he’s probably got clever accountants and claims some pretty staggering (but legal) deductions. How many would he need to claim to get down to 17.7%? Easy math: his deductions would have to be about $23 million to get his taxable income down to (coincidentally) $23 million and give him a tax bill of $8 million at a 35% rate. That’s a lot of business dinners and cab rides — especially for self-proclaimed cheapskate. Well, maybe Buffett doesn’t pay the 35% rate. Hmmmm. Isn’t there an Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT)? How could he do it? That is, pay a rate way below his bracket’s 35%? My bet: He is a huge beneficiary of the cut in dividend and capital gains rates. It’s my recollection that Buffett takes a modest cash comp package from Berkshire Hathaway — around .$100,000. Since BH doesn’t pay material dividends, most of his income probably comes via capital gains — distributions and stock sales. Tax those at a 15% rate and maybe — just maybe — he really does pay 17.7%.. But, it’s not courtesy of Bush cutting the top marginal rate to 35%. It’s because the capital gains rate was cut to 15%. * * * * * Observations 1. $8 million in taxes paid strikes me as a statistically significant number — and certainly greater than $18,000. 2, Resetting the high bracket marginal tax rate to 39% doesn’t fix the “Buffet Problem” 3. What’s up with the AMT if it doesn’t “catch” a uber-earner like Buffett? 4. As many others have suggested, if Mr. Buffett feels so guilty why doesn’t he just write a voluntary check to the US Treasury, and keep the Feds out of our pockets. http://kenhoma.wordpress.com/2008/08/05/taxes-warren-buffett-his-secretary/ *********** |
|
|
|
tax man beatles
One, two, three, four... Hrmm! One, two, (one, two, three, four!) Let me tell you how it will be; There's one for you, nineteen for me. 'Cause I�m the taxman, Yeah, I�m the taxman. Should five per cent appear too small, Be thankful I don't take it all. 'Cause I�m the taxman, Yeah, I�m the taxman. (if you drive a car, car;) - I�ll tax the street; (if you try to sit, sit;) - I�ll tax your seat; (if you get too cold, cold;) - I�ll tax the heat; (if you take a walk, walk;) - I'll tax your feet. Taxman! 'Cause I�m the taxman, Yeah, I�m the taxman. Don't ask me what I want it for, (ah-ah, mister Wilson) If you don't want to pay some more. (ah-ah, mister heath) 'Cause I�m the taxman, Yeah, I�m the taxman. Now my advice for those who die, (taxman) Declare the pennies on your eyes. (taxman) 'Cause I�m the taxman, Yeah, I�m the taxman. And you're working for no one but me. Taxman! ------------------------------ increasing taxes always depresses the economy and corporations (businesses do not pay tax they pass the cost to the consumer) talk about multi dipping the government is the best at it (but don't you try it) |
|
|