Ron Paul is wrong on one major thing...tax rates for the top bracket must be increased.

[heavenlyboy34]

lol@ OP "The Rich" don't pay income taxes-they pay taxes on dividends. The whole premise of the OP is false and frankly a daydream. BTW, do you even realize that the national debt exceeds GDP by many times? You could steal all "The Rich"'s money and still not get anywhere. Plus, when the OP's idea is even floated publicly there will be an "Atlas Shrugged" moment.

[mczerone]

They're citizens, and are part of this country. If they don't like it, leave.

So you'd rather people take 100% of their wealth, philanthropy, and job creation out of the country than admit that they shouldn't be taxed at a rate higher than anyone else?

Sounds like a recipe for economic disaster to me...

(and please take your "if you don't like it, leave" talk elsewhere, It's my property and I'd like to keep it and keep close range to my family, friends, and career. You don't own that stuff, I do. So If I don't like your rules, how I about I just keep my property and tell you to get your rules off my land?)

[brandon]

That top rate should be in the 66% range at all times. Why do you think the United States was able to build the interstate highway system in the 1950's? Maybe the higher marginal tax rates led to higher revenue? What a concept. The nerve of conservatives crying about deficits when the deficit exploded under Reagan & Bush 2 because of their tax cuts. You hate deficits? Quit bitchin about taxes. Tax revenue closes deficits.

The figures are here: http://ntu.org/tax-basics/history-of...ividual-1.html

We need to increase the tax rate on the top bracket in order to end deficits.

Increasing tax rates does not always lead to an increase in total tax revenues. As taxes go up productivity goes down. I believe we are already so overtaxed that raising rates any higher will likely lead to a decrease in total tax revenues. At this point if the government wants to extract more taxes from the people they need to grow the tax base, not raise rates.

[matt0611]

No, Ron Paul is right, get rid of the income tax.

[Sam I am]

Taxing the rich is not the solution. If you take everything from Bill Gates and distribute to each citizen, everyone would get around $100. And he would have to close his companies, thousands of jobs etc. If you want real money, tax the middle class.

But the best solution is to just let people decide what they want to do with their money.

Just a note, when your example only deals with 1 rich guy, it ceases to be compelling

[Revolution9]

Howzabout I just cancel the debt. If they don't like it they can leave back to the gates of hell from whence they were belched in a fury of indigestion.

HTH
Rev9

[tttppp]

That won't fix everything. You still have to increase taxes on the rich, or else the deficits won't go away.

Or you could eliminate wasteful spending. Have you even considered that?

[Roy L]

Taxing the rich is not the solution.

But it's closer to being the solution than either not taxing the rich, or taxing the poor and middle class. And you should be aware that a steeply progressive INCOME tax is not a way of taxing the rich. It is a way of taxing the productive.

If you take everything from Bill Gates and distribute to each citizen, everyone would get around $100.

Well, there is a certain attractive symmetry in that plan, as it was only with government's help that he took it from them in the first place.

And he would have to close his companies, thousands of jobs etc.

No more Micro$oft crap?? Where do I sign up?

If you want real money, tax the middle class.

He probably wants real justice and real economic growth. Those you get by taxing the rich, not the middle class.

But the best solution is to just let people decide what they want to do with their money.

The best solution is to understand that "their" money is not necessarily rightly theirs.

[pauljmccain]

Let's pretend I'm rich. I currently pay 15% capital gains tax on my 10 million in stocks. I make around 5% in dividends (so $500,000). The government gets $75,000, I get $425,000.

Now say you jack up that "rich person tax" (capital gains) to 40%. Not quite your 66% number, but something more "reasonable."

Aside from avoiding tax through forign activity, I would just take my $10 million out of the stock market. This lowers capital available to businesses, as I'm no longer investing in them. It hurts the economy overall. Instead, I just plunk it all into municipal bonds, which are federal-tax free, and just go to help city governments pay for needless government waste. I settle for the lower average rate of 4% because I'm getting all of that, $400,000. With your "new and improved" scheme, I would have only ended up with $300,000 in income after tax.

Again, this is aside from trusts and sheltering activities I'd probably look into as well. It's so simple, it's stupid. Rich people are never going to pay anywhere near the tax rate that's being suggested here.

[Rudeman]

The reduction of spending also closes deficits, but hey maybe you're right so lets take a look at the receipts and outlays of the 1950s as a % of GDP.

The average receipts as a % of GDP for the 1950s was about 17.2% the highest being in 1952 when it reached 19.0%.

The average outlays as a % of GDP for the 1950s was about 17.6% the highest being in 1953 when it reached 20.4%.

Now it seems like the complaint is targeted at Republicans particularly both Reagan and Bush 2 so lets take a look at receipts and outlays as a % of GDP during their presidency.

The average receipts as a % of GDP during Reagan's presidency was 18.18% the highest being in 1981 at 19.6%.

The average outlays as a % of GDP during Reagan's presidency was 22.8% the highest being in 1983 at 23.5%.

The average receipts as a % of GDP during Bush's presidency was 17.63% the highest being in 2001 at 19.5% (after the Bush tax cuts it reached 18.5% in 2007).

The average outlays as a % of GDP during Bush's presidency was 19.63% the highest being in 2008 when it reached 20.8%.

So during the Reagan and Bush years revenue was actually greater than the 1950's, but yea lets continue to pretend that taxes are too low and that spending isn't the biggest issue...