Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 31 to 60 of 88

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

  1. #31

    Default

    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.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ron Paul
    The government is incapable of doing what it's supposed to do. A job like the provision of security is something best left to private institutions.
    My music/art page is here"government is the enemy of liberty"-RP
    That which doesn't kill me has made a grave tactical error
    Quote Originally Posted by Anti Federalist View Post
    This whole board is a thoughtcrime in progress.
    Quote Originally Posted by danke View Post
    I carry my man purse for fashion, not function.



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #32
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Washtenaw Co., MI
    Posts
    3,896

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by alongee View Post
    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?)
    "You cannot solve these problems with war." - Ron Paul

  4. #33

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by alongee View Post
    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.
    Last edited by brandon; 04-30-2012 at 10:45 PM.
    "christians, take your children out of the synagogues of satan. " - 19/M/Neckbeard

  5. #34

    Default

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

  6. #35

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jovan Galtic View Post
    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
    If you wanted some sort of Ideological purity, you'll get none of that from me.

  7. #36

    Default

    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
    Drain the swamp - BIG DOG
    http://mindreleaselabs.com/
    Seeking work on Apps, Games, Art based projects

  8. #37

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by alongee View Post
    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?

  9. #38

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jovan Galtic View Post
    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.

  10. #39

    Default

    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.

  11. #40

    Default

    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...
    Last edited by Rudeman; 05-01-2012 at 02:02 AM.

  12. #41
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Wallingford, CT & Eastern Shore, VA
    Posts
    1,625

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by alongee View Post
    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.
    Nope.

    Last edited by enoch150; 05-01-2012 at 07:45 AM.

  13. #42

    Default

    what a stupid idea.Taxes are high...we need them nearly abolished at the federal level.
    It was too weird to live, and too rare to die - hunter s. thompson .
    ..this is the darkest timeline..

  14. #43

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by alongee View Post
    They're citizens, and are part of this country. If they don't like it, leave.
    you can leave our money alone and leave .
    It was too weird to live, and too rare to die - hunter s. thompson .
    ..this is the darkest timeline..

  15. #44

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainAmerica View Post
    you can leave our money alone and leave .
    +1
    Last edited by psi2941; 05-01-2012 at 05:19 AM.
    Rand Benedict Paul.
    Not only did he sell us out, this douche bag did it to his own father! I'm more upset him selling his father out. I don't care who i think is going to win i would never sell my father out. If his willing to sell his father out what else is for sale?

  16. #45

    Default

    You are a brainwashed, indoctrinated idiot. You confuse tax rates with tax revenue. They don't go hand in hand. Your classwarfarism is disgusting too.

    European countries have far higher tax rates than the U.S. Are they running balanced budgets or surpluses? No!!! They are experiencing massive debt ratios to GDP compared to us. That's why they are on the verge of collapsing. Are higher taxes states like NY, CA, IL etc running surpluses. No!!! They all have huge, massive deficits. People are also leaving those states because of the high tax burden.

    It's does NOT cost $3.5 trillion a year in federal spending to build roads. Never has and never will. Combined govt spending was 10% of GDP in 1910. Today it is 45% or about $6 trillion. With all that spending you would think at least one person on the stupid Left would be happy. But the thieves never are.

    And it doesn't matter what the tax rates are, the fed govt has always collected about 15-17% of GDP. And just because tax rates were higher back in the day does NOT mean spending as per GDP was higher because spending was much smaller. Again, they don't go hand in hand. Military spending per GDP has decreased two fold over the last 50 years while discrentionary spending like Medicare and SS has gone up three fold.

    Again, the OP is an brainwashed idiot. Oh and the federal govt only spends about $70 billion on roads. So according to you we don't need 66% tax rates. That could be accomished with a 1% rate.
    Last edited by Liberty74; 05-01-2012 at 06:29 AM.
    Be responsible. Take care of yourself. Don't tread on other people. Slow down. Question everything. Start now.

    We are all born libertarians then something goes really wrong. Despite this truth, most people are still libertarians yet not know it.

  17. #46

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by alongee
    They're citizens, and are part of this country. If they don't like it, leave.
    Quote Originally Posted by bluesc View Post
    But then what happens when you lose revenue? If you scare all the rich people away, that won't fix your budget, it will make it worse.
    Yep, to build on what bluesc said:

    The top bracket people will leave the country, and take their wealth with them. Then what happens? Eventually each next-highest tier in the tax bracket 'moves up' (but not really, since they aren't any better off) as the wealthiest leave the country. So again, then what happens? Eventually alongee becomes the highest earner, and it doesn't necessarily mean he/she is actually any wealthier, he/she is just the wealthiest of the remaining poor. And everyone poorer than him/her is saying, "We need to raise taxes on alongee, because she has the most money." F'ing karma, right?

    That's why taxing the richest people [more] doesn't work in the long run. Eventually, you become the "richest." Remember that the income tax was supposed to only apply to the top 2%. Now how many people pay income taxes?

    But if you only think that Ron Paul is wrong about one thing, then it shouldn't take you too long to come around. Welcome to the forums, just remember to keep your mind open.
    Last edited by nobody's_hero; 05-01-2012 at 06:36 AM.
    If something bad happens, we will be blamed. If something good happens, we will get no credit. If nothing happens, we will be forgotten.

    The Principles that Govern Social Interaction

  18. #47

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Havax View Post
    How about for every dollar of tax increases you want, we stop bombing brown people and cut back here?

    While its true the U.S. spends more dollars than every other country on defense and military, but when you compare those spending numbers to each countries GDP, we technically don't spend all the much more. There are 12 countries, most in Africa, that spend far more more as a percentage of their GDP on the military than us. That is how you compare apples to apples. The chart above is misleading. We spend about 6% give or take on the militay per GDP yet countries like China and many others spend around 4%. There is a world wide map of this online for those that want to do a search. I think wiki has it.

    If you include wars and HSD we are probably spending a little more which we could cut back on but it's not the root cause of our deficits, it is discrentionary spending which has gone up 3 fold in the last 50 years while military spending has gone down 2 fold. During WWII fed spending on military was about 50% of the budget. Today it's about 22%.
    Last edited by Liberty74; 05-01-2012 at 07:03 AM.
    Be responsible. Take care of yourself. Don't tread on other people. Slow down. Question everything. Start now.

    We are all born libertarians then something goes really wrong. Despite this truth, most people are still libertarians yet not know it.

  19. #48

    Default

    Yeah that's what we need...more extortion of our successful neighbors. LOL.

    How about we quit advocating extortion of our neighbors and start advocating less spending and less extortion of everyone.

    There is a "fair" tax rate..it's 0%.
    Quote Originally Posted by Xerographica View Post

    Yes, I want to force consumers to buy trampolines, popcorn, environmental protection and national defense whether or not they really demand them. And I definitely want to outlaw all alternatives. Nobody should be allowed to compete with the state. Private security companies, private healthcare, private package delivery, private education, private disaster relief, private militias...should all be outlawed.
    ^Minimalist state socialism (minarchy) taken to its logical conclusions; communism.

  20. #49

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by alongee View Post
    They're citizens, and are part of this country. If they don't like it, leave.
    Those citizens also have property rights. If you don't like how they DON'T like being told how to use their property, you can leave too.

  21. #50
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Wallingford, CT & Eastern Shore, VA
    Posts
    1,625

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Liberty74 View Post
    While its true the U.S. spends more dollars than every other country on defense and military, but when you compare those spending numbers to each countries GDP, we technically don't spend all the much more. There are 12 countries, most in Africa, that spend far more more as a percentage of their GDP on the military than us. That is how you compare apples to apples. The chart above is misleading. We spend about 6% give or take on the militay per GDP yet countries like China and many others spend around 4%.
    Military spending as a percentage of GDP is meaningless. If the US GDP tripled this year, should we triple defense spending, just to keep it proportional?

  22. #51

    Default

    100% tax FTW.

    Just imagine what our politicians could if they just had enough money!

  23. #52
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Newark, Delawhere
    Posts
    250

    Default

    I agree with Paul whole-heartedly that income-based taxes should be elimated (This includes payroll taxes, federal income taxes, taxes on businesses, and taxes on capital gains).

    I disagree with Paul that the first step in his economic plan is to decrease taxes on capital gains to zero. Taxes can't go away overnight because it will take a few years to balance the budget, so I think the benefit of lower taxes should be spread out more evenly across lower payroll taxes, federal income taxes, business taxes, and capital gains taxes. Here is what I base my logic on:

    1. FACT: Everyone has a different tax bill and sources of taxes, so everyone is paying a different tax rate.
    2. FACT: Payroll taxes are regressive because they are only taxes on the first $100K (roughly) of earned income. It's not insignificant either since the employee pays 7.65% and the employer pays another 7.65%. That's an automatic 15% tax (Ok, 13% for these past two years) on the lower and middle class starting at the first dollar of income that is practically impossible to find loopholes around. And I don't buy into the socialist argument that this prois an "investment" and provides benefits. This can be taken away at a moment's notice, and deflation of the dollar is making that retirement income worth less and less. I'd gladly give up any benefits over 10 years of paying into the social security system if I could just take all future payroll taxes (mine and my employers)and buy PM's that will actually be worth something.
    3. FACT: If you define income taxes as including payroll and capital gains (which myself, and many others do), there are many super rich who are paying a lower overall % of their income as taxes. Warren Buffett said as much, and he's right. He's paying 15% in taxes (mostly capital gains) while his secretary is likely paying 30% (because she makes around $100K, has to pay payroll taxes and federal taxes)
    4. FACT: The wealth or our nation (as measured in USD) is increasingly being concentrated in the top 1% of the country. The data on wealth distribution is easy to find on the internet. Sure, this means the rich pay more of the overall tax bill, but a guy who starts out with $1M has a much easier time making another $1M than someone who starts out with $100K and is trying to make another $100K. I believe this is mostly because of the tax imbalance.

    I know many of you will disagree on my points. Just based on wealth distribution alone, I don't see any evidence the "trickle down effect" as working. I don't think we should raise taxes on the rich, but I disagree that the path forward to getting rid of taxes involves decreases taxes on the rich before the poor.
    Turning the GOP into a party of liberty will not be a quick race, it will be a marathon.

  24. #53
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Wallingford, CT & Eastern Shore, VA
    Posts
    1,625

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Liberty74 View Post
    Oh and the federal govt only spends about $70 billion on roads. So according to you we don't need 66% tax rates. That could be accomished with a 1% rate.
    Or a gasoline tax. At least a gasoline tax mostly targets the actual users of roads.

  25. #54

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by teacherone View Post
    100% tax FTW.

    Just imagine what our politicians could if they just had enough money!
    LOL! As if lack of funds ever stopped them from doing everything they wanted!

    Why worry about taxation now, when you can just borrow the money from the purported taxation of your great-great-grandchildren?

    We all know taxation is a secondary issue. Spending is number one. I have no real interest in tackling the methods of taxation until we have tackled the problem of spending.
    "And now that the legislators and do-gooders have so futilely inflicted so many systems upon society, may they finally end where they should have begun: May they reject all systems, and try liberty; for liberty is an acknowledgment of faith in God and His works." - Bastiat

    "It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere." - Voltaire

  26. #55

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptUSA View Post
    Why worry about taxation now, when you can just borrow the money from the purported taxation of your great-great-grandchildren?
    Dead on. Talk about the ULTIMATE taxation without representation. Of generations. It's conscription - of future generations who cannot and do not vote - into slavery. Sticking the nameless and faceless who have yet to exist with debts they never had the option to incur themselves, the tiniest portion of which equates to any advantages at all to them. Most of those advantages and benefits are transient, gone by the time they begin paying them off.

    It's not even that they'll be enslaved from being forced to pay debts that aren't theirs, or else follow suit and do likewise to the same nasty to their progeny. It's that the debt is impossible to pay in the first place, and one VERY unfortunate generation will be left to suffer when the entire system implodes.

  27. #56

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Steven Douglas View Post
    Dead on. Talk about the ULTIMATE taxation without representation. Of generations. It's conscription - of future generations who cannot and do not vote - into slavery. Sticking the nameless and faceless who have yet to exist with debts they never had the option to incur themselves, the tiniest portion of which equates to any advantages at all to them. Most of those advantages and benefits are transient, gone by the time they begin paying them off.

    It's not even that they'll be enslaved from being forced to pay debts that aren't theirs, or else follow suit and do likewise to the same nasty to their progeny. It's that the debt is impossible to pay in the first place, and one VERY unfortunate generation will be left to suffer when the entire system implodes.

    Quote Originally Posted by cheapseats View Post
    QUESTION:

    Why is it reprehensible to saddle future Others with our self-assumed Debt, which can NEVER can be repaid, if it is NOT reprehensible to saddle them with our self-imposed Broken System, which prevents EVER putting a stop to saddling future Others with accumulated unpayable Debt = Bondage?
    http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...+Party+Options

  28. #57

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Steven Douglas View Post
    Dead on. Talk about the ULTIMATE taxation without representation. Of generations. It's conscription - of future generations who cannot and do not vote - into slavery. Sticking the nameless and faceless who have yet to exist with debts they never had the option to incur themselves, the tiniest portion of which equates to any advantages at all to them. Most of those advantages and benefits are transient, gone by the time they begin paying them off.

    It's not even that they'll be enslaved from being forced to pay debts that aren't theirs, or else follow suit and do likewise to the same nasty to their progeny. It's that the debt is impossible to pay in the first place, and one VERY unfortunate generation will be left to suffer when the entire system implodes.
    Yep. You get it.

    The spending is their method of consripting the next couple of generations. How sad is it that our generation (and the ones before us) is so quick to sell our posterity into slavery just so we can go to war with other nations and so we can live off the government's teat.

    Another thread I created on the subject: http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...-From-Slavery!
    "And now that the legislators and do-gooders have so futilely inflicted so many systems upon society, may they finally end where they should have begun: May they reject all systems, and try liberty; for liberty is an acknowledgment of faith in God and His works." - Bastiat

    "It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere." - Voltaire

  29. #58

    Default

    HAHAHA

    where did the OP go?
    "I am, therefore I'll think" - Ayn Rand

  30. #59

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Melissa View Post
    Or decrease spending..why is that so hard to understand
    this
    "Integrity means having to say things that people don't want to hear & especially to say things that the regime doesn't want to hear. -Ron Paul

    "Bathtub falls and police officers kill more Americans than terrorism, yet we've been asked to sacrifice our most sacred rights for fear of falling victim to it." -Edward Snowden

  31. #60

    Default

    exc post--tough problem

    in the 50's with 91% top tax it was 91% of earnings over $300,000 ( which would be like > $5 million today ) .

    no one likes any kind of tax , but the goverment does need revenue to operate.

    my ideas :

    1) flat tax , everyone drawing a paycheck gets to deduct $25,000 , then pay 20% on anything over 25k , no deductions for anything. no one can bitch about it as everyone gets the 25k deduction.

    2) all companies will pay 20% on the profits they tell the stock holders they made , to many companies tell their stockholders they made ( lets say ) $500 million , but when it comes time to pay taxes they get back hundards of millions of dollars. also no-- handouts--subs to any business.

    3) any military actions that cost over $100 million will have a tax increase to fund it.all wars costs
    will be on the books . make all defence contracts fixed fee , no more cost plus.

    4) as far as goverment spending goes , i do not believe what anyone in washington says about cutting goverment spending , i will believe them when they refuse their pay raises , their staffs pay raises , their staffs bonuses ,cut their travel and junkets, refuse their goverment insurance , pay for all the bennies they get , reduce office staff. then i may believe them.

    5) like dr paul says , close at least 90% of all overseas mil bases , get everyone out of the middle east . close energy--com --edu -- pat act -homeland secur--

    6) shut down the fed res
    Last edited by ILUVRP; 05-01-2012 at 09:21 AM.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast





« Previous Thread | Next Thread »


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •