"Tax Me More", says 2/3rds of the rich. - Polidicks

Talking about the government. Video games aren't a waste of money.

I can't speak yet as I don't contribute to my families income, but I'd like to think if I'm ever in the percent of people you would call rich, that I would donate to things thus bringing my taxes to "decent" levels. I think as wealthy people, that we should be humble with our money. I'm not saying you have to give till you're poor, but do you really need that 4th car? I mean, you can be in the upper profit margins and still not be "rich" to the point where you have a lot to give. But, if you do have enough money to enjoy life, why not willingly share it with others? You can still be rich even after giving. Look at bill gates. [editline]01:28AM[/editline] You don't have to be a greedy fuck with your money is what I'm trying to say.

[QUOTE=Mr.Dounut;24951231]Work hard, pay more money. Don't work hard, pay less money. this logic is flawed[/QUOTE] You act as though they work their asses off in the fields or something to get up to the money they had. You can get rich just by setting at your computer all day being a total shut in and trading stocks Damn didn't realize how old this was..

I really don't believe in taking money with the argument "you have it". A flat tax rate, with maybe some tax cuts for the really poor as a form of aid, is the most fair.

[QUOTE=Neolithic v7;24955542]I really don't believe in taking money with the argument "you have it". A flat tax rate, with maybe some tax cuts for the really poor as a form of aid, is the most fair.[/QUOTE] If you really believe that, wouldn't you support everyone paying the same amount in taxes? A flat tax still requires the rich to pay more.

Not only that, but the poor pay more of their income with a flat tax. A 10% tax rate won't hurt a millionaire, but that same 10% can seriously impact the life of someone barely making ends meet. Unless I've got it wrong.

Maybe something along the lines of 1% per $10,000 a person makes up to something like 25% maximum would be a good solution. (Don't take those numbers as exact though cause I'm not sure exactly how 1% might affect someone making $10,000 or how 25% might affect someone making $250,000.)

That's nice :keke:

I feel that until most Facepunchers have lived poor or saw their parents break their asses. They will not understand this correctly.

Didn't Jon steward said this?

[QUOTE=Onyx3173;24955929]Maybe something along the lines of 1% per $10,000 a person makes up to something like 25% maximum would be a good solution. (Don't take those numbers as exact though cause I'm not sure exactly how 1% might affect someone making $10,000 or how 25% might affect someone making $250,000.)[/QUOTE] With those numbers the government won't make any money. Roads will fall apart and education will go unfunded. It'll be pretty shitty.

[QUOTE=TH89;24956113]With those numbers the government won't make any money. Roads will fall apart and education will go unfunded. It'll be pretty shitty.[/QUOTE] Yeah but I did say not to use my numbers because I wasn't sure what numbers would fit there best. Maybe I should reword it some. I think it should be a flat rate per a given amount of income but balanced in a way that poorer people don't pay too little and the rich don't pay too much.

[QUOTE=evilweazel;24949896]I don't see whats wrong with wanting people to keep what they earned, there's also no reason they should have to give it away either.[/QUOTE] How about contributing to something that's greater than yourself for the betterment of mankind?

[QUOTE=Onyx3173;24956130]Yeah but I did say not to use my numbers because I wasn't sure what numbers would fit there best. Maybe I should reword it some. I think it should be a flat rate per a given amount of income but balanced in a way that poorer people don't pay too little and the rich don't pay too much.[/QUOTE] That's the system we have now.

[QUOTE=TH89;24956143]That's the system we have now.[/QUOTE] I mean without tax breaks and such. Shit, I'm terrible at explaining things!

[QUOTE=Onyx3173;24956149]I mean without tax breaks and such. Shit, I'm terrible at explaining things![/QUOTE] You're not terrible at explaining things, you just don't understand taxation well enough to form a coherent opinion on it. It's not your fault or anything, around here they don't even begin to teach it in high school.

I think this is a very good idea, the rich people should have a special tax once they reach a certain amount of income.

[QUOTE=TH89;24956159]You're not terrible at explaining things, you just don't understand taxation well enough to form a coherent opinion on it. It's not your fault or anything, around here they don't even begin to teach it in high school.[/QUOTE] Yeah, I do have very little experience with taxes. I'm still not quite getting my point across though... I mean something more simple than what we have. I just can't quite think of a good way to word what I mean clearly and concisely. (Doesn't help that it's 2AM here either, lol.)

im still up for changing our economic philosophy into baby laughter and kitty farts.

[QUOTE=Onyx3173;24956181]Yeah, I do have very little experience with taxes. I'm still not quite getting my point across though... I mean something more simple than what we have. I just can't quite think of a good way to word what I mean clearly and concisely. (Doesn't help that it's 2AM here either, lol.)[/QUOTE] The reason the system is complicated is to prevent people cheating or getting cheated by it, and to keep the economy in decent shape at the same time. It's not just complicated for no reason, despite what whiny rich people would have you believe.

[QUOTE=TH89;24956219]The reason the system is complicated is to prevent people cheating or getting cheated by it, and to keep the economy in decent shape at the same time. It's not just complicated for no reason, despite what whiny rich people would have you believe.[/QUOTE] Hm... Hadn't thought about it that way. I can understand it having fail-safes to prevent cheating the system but I think it should still be simpler. Both times I've filed taxes I wasn't even sure I had done it correctly since it's not always perfectly clear on what you should be doing.

Lucky for me I don't make enough to have to file long-form :riker:

[QUOTE=TH89;24955662]If you really believe that, wouldn't you support everyone paying the same amount in taxes? A flat tax still requires the rich to pay more.[/QUOTE] Sorry, english is not my native language. I'm not very good at these terms. What is a flat tax rate?

[QUOTE=Neolithic v7;24958879]Sorry, english is not my native language. I'm not very good at these terms. What is a flat tax rate?[/QUOTE] it's when everyone is taxed the same % regardless of income i think.

[QUOTE=Neolithic v7;24958879]Sorry, english is not my native language. I'm not very good at these terms. What is a flat tax rate?[/QUOTE] Right now, higher incomes get taxed at higher rates (we call it the disc system in holland). Basically, you pay a certain amount of tax over the first so-thousand of your income. If you earn more than that, you pay a bigger amount of taxes over your extra income (not your total income), and so forth. Flat tax rates effectively remove this system and sets a fixed percentage for everyone to pay over their income. This either completely fucks over the poorer people (with a high tax rate) or the rich barely contribute anything (with a low percentage). Either way, it's a horrible idea.

[QUOTE=Neolithic v7;24958879]Sorry, english is not my native language. I'm not very good at these terms. What is a flat tax rate?[/QUOTE] A terrible idea.

The rich man's job is to keep his money. If he can overcome that, I salute him.

[QUOTE=Neolithic v7;24958879]Sorry, english is not my native language. I'm not very good at these terms. What is a flat tax rate?[/QUOTE] The precursor to a country flat lining.

To be honest, the system we got isn't going to work much longer. Regardless of whatever we do, government funds are always going to experience a little bit of corruption. We can tax the rich, and have such money be absorbed into the government, where the public has more of a say in the manner that it's being spent, or let the rich keep their tax money that they don't want, and end up having the money in the one percentage of wealthy landowners, buisnessmen, executives, and those who work hard enough and care enough to spend it wisely in the manner that only they will see fit. On the other hand, if we set up more restrictions and boundaries on the usage of public money, and got the morons that are currently wasting our government and nation to shreds out of office, perhaps we could make this thing work better than it is right now. Look what happened with the bank bailouts. Tons of money were funneled into the executive accounts, friends and connections of the people managing it, most went into the companies that our nation does depend on however, and a good portion of the money being spent in the stimulus ended up going everywhere despite being completely corrupt in it's execution, regardless of how much you don't like to hear it. But this isn't exactly a perfect world, and people aren't going to do the correct course of action half the time.

The more money you have, the less you'll be taxed :colbert: