View Thread

Atheists Today » Power and Control » Election 2008 (US)
 Print Thread
Great they think
I didn't know where else to post this so I picked the political forum. I received this in an e-mail. Seems to me the Republicans are really pissed about Obama's slicing of the taxes according to income. The higher income the higher the taxes paid....well tough shit. They just don't get it that that is more fair. Also they don't like people getting assistance when they truly need it. I'm all for welfare and assistance when people truly need it and don't rely on it for their lifetime. The Republicans like to distort the truth and ignore the fact that sometimes people need help and it's not a con it's truly help that they need. At least for a little while until they can find a job, training, education. Shit I wouldn't mind paying more taxes if I made $100,000.00 and dropped down to $80,000.00 or $90,000.00 it's a lot more than I'm making now and I cannot afford to pay as much as in percentage of taxes as they can much less what the millionaires have.

Here's the e-mail.

You cannot legislate the poor into freedom by legislating the wealthy out of
freedom. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else.

When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that, my dear friend, is about the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it."

~~ The late Dr. Adrian Rogers
We have the eprcentage based tax over here and it's very fair. I'f you are on income support you don't pay tax, if you earn minimum wage you pay a smaller percentage of tax, once you go over
Although I have mixed feelings about taxes and the welfare system, this email reeks of arrogance. It's obvious that the people who agree with the email's contents think that money makes you a better person and that the lower lifeforms (aka, the non-wealthy) are just a bunch of losers trying to steal their hard earned money.

Funny thing is, a large percentage of the wealthy were born into their money and have no idea what hard work is. It's easy to make money when you all ready have plenty of it.

I do think there are a lot of people playing the system to get a free ride and that something needs to be done about this, but that is a separate issue and that problem should not be used to justify the wealthy getting more tax breaks than the working class. The tax system should be fair. I do not think the wealthy should be gouged though, that too is unfair.

I think we should stop with all the tax breaks, write-offs, and confusing crap and just make a flat percentage that ALL people have to pay. There shouldn't be so many creative ways people can get out of paying taxes. (many wealthy people pay no taxes). Just make it simple, 1% of your income, period, no matter what that income is.
I agree for the most part Rayven.

Thing is 1% of a crappy salary is huge to that person, especially the middle class/lower income's, barely surviving paycheck to paycheck, but 1% to a millionaire is peanuts to that person...that is assuming anyone could squeeze that much out of one. They consider any taxes they have to pay as being unfair and way too much for them to have to pay. I like they way you put it "gouged" that's how they act thought. Not only do they not want to pay more taxes than the middle class and lower class but they behave like they are being gouged when they aren't. Nobody is steeling money from them or gouging them. Maybe they see no reason for the disabled, hungry, homeless, middle class, lower class and lower paid to have help surviving.

Without write offs for rental properties the rents would skyrocket and you'd see more slumlords out of sheer survival.
Edited by Sinny on 02/06/2009 17:46
I like Rayven's idea of a 1% tax. that way I would only pay about 800.00 instead of 17,500 this year. Run for president Rayven, you've got my vote!Smile
Not me, sorry Rayven, but you take 1% of someone's salary who's making minimun wage and it would financially cripple them. 1% of a 1,000.000 salary doesn't equal the percentage of paying as someone who makes 30,000 salary. It may seem that way as far as taking 1% from both but you have to consider the hardship of the people who make less. It's not the same as when we all pay the same sales tax on retail. When we all pay the same with sales tax we don't all walk out of the store with the same amount of products we buy. but when you do this with our income tax you can really cripple people who just can't afford it. that would only hurt the economy more by putting them in the position of having to go on welfare, rental assistance and some even becoming homeless. Now you have a worse problem then.
I wrote a long winded post on the flat tax but somehow caused it to magically disappear. I will make my main points in a condensed fashion.

I think 1% is far to small. I made a search to determine what percentage of the annual US budget it would be but did not get enough data. This is probably a quibble. I think the idea may have some merit but care should be taken. Oddly, if I remember correctly, this was a liberal position some 10-15 years ago that has now been taken up by the conservatives.

The basic problem with taxes in the US is that the wealthy have too many resources and too much influence.

The wealthy have a far greater amount of money to spend to reduce or eliminate their taxes in relationship to their potential tax burden. How much can you pay for the kind of help you may need to reduce your taxes and still make it cost effective. Someone making $1,000,000 could spend a lot, someone making $50,000 could not spend very much.

The wealthy have far greater access to their congressperson or their senator. In fact in some cases they are the congressperson or senator. To what extent would someone on a first name basis with a congressperson be harmed by that congressperson.

All should remember when someone quotes statistics that show that the wealthiest pay a significant tax burden in relationship to their percentage of the population, the person quoting those statistics generally neglects the percentage of income and the amount of wealth the wealthiest have.

As long as the wealthy rule ordinary working people will pay an unfair percentage of taxes.

An aside to CD look into incorporation, if you are generally a contract employee, it may have significant tax advantages for you. It did for some of my in-laws.
We could raise the minimum wage. It would be more logical to raise their pay to cover the 1% tax, (and then take it back), than to have such complicated, easily to thwart tax laws. The system as it stands now is ridiculous , and in my opinion, designed so sneaky accountants can play with numbers and allow wealthy people and companies to not pay taxes.

I'm not an economist and I don't claim to know how to fix the tax system but I can at least see that the current system is broken and something drastic needs to be done.
Two separate posts because there are two separate topics.

I did some research but could not find the appropriate statistics. Try looking at the US, HSS website yourself some time.

It is my understanding (again not confirmed with hard data) that the actual amount of welfare fraud in the US is relatively small, not necessarily insignificant but not great either. I think this is an issue exploited by politicians because it can piss of people of most political beliefs. It is also arguable that in many cases the fraud is perpetrated by people who simply need more money to live. I knew two welfare case workers, many years ago, who had worked in Chicago. They told me that they would do anything they could to get more money for their cases because the basic benefits were so meager that it was difficult to live on them. Again I think this is a issue that is used by politicians for their own gain not because it is truly a significant issue.

One of my greatest complaints against the Democratic party over the last 30 years is that in the face of important questions about welfare they simply defended it as it was and did not look into reforms that might improve it. In the end under the Clinton administration we got a basic gutting of the system.

We treat poverty in this country as acceptable. We make no effort to reduce or even alleviate it. In fact the welfare system as it did and does exist is a form of peonage intended to maintain a source of low payed workers. Now, we don't even need that, we can go offshore for our low payed workers and let the poor simply freeze on the streets, starve, or kill themselves over drug rights at the corner. Wonderful.
Jump to Forum: