More Taxes to Come

Our current laws encourage investors to invest in offshore. Now if the laws were changed....
Tax offshore and onshore income the same. Many states do it.
Ie if we expect a 20% tax and they paid 10% offshore then when it comes back in we put another 10% tax on it. If all countries in the global economy did this....
Then investment would actually be investment in growth of an industry, not just growth of money.

My Salary is paid out of GA, but I live in KY and pay KY tax on it. And I work all over the country and world.

Pay tax where you live.
why should we avoid investing in our country ?
 
Watermark said:
The average amount of total money a person has taxed in the US is 30%. The lowest in the developed world. Maybe the investors will all move to Zimbabwe, I doubt it.
Click to expand...
Link?

Counting all areas of taxation, including sales tax, we pay about 50% of our earnings in taxes.
 
Onceler said:
Get rid of loopholes. There are ways to make sure that everyone pays their fair share.

"Fair share" is not 40%, though. When talking about universal healthcare, I hear a lot of calls to raise taxes on "the rich" to pay for it; to me, that's immoral. It's also a weird, kind of pathetic attitude to have to just say, "we'll come up w/ the ideas, and you wealthy folks can pay for 'em."

Also, investment is something that needs to be encouraged; I definitely put it on a different scale than regular earned income. People with that kind of money can easily go offshore w/ it, or invest abroad. It's important to encourage investment domestically; it's precisely that kind of investment that built America, and creates booms which help everyone, at every income scale.

I've never been comfortable with the "soak the rich" mentality that some on the left have. A top rate of 33% should be the goal. No more than one-third of anyone's income. If the government can't find a way to operate efficiently without that kind of revenue, than we need to re-think they way it does things, and make it happen.
Click to expand...


Bush and the repubublicans cut all kinds of taxes on the wealthy investment class, and on corporations for the past seven years.

If this is such a magic bullet for creating jobs and a healthy economy, how come it didn't work out that way? We've had the weakest and most sluggish wage and job growth, since world war two.
 
Cypress said:
Bush and the repubublicans cut all kinds of taxes on the wealthy investment class, and on corporations for the past seven years.

If this is such a magic bullet for creating jobs and a healthy economy, how come it didn't work out that way? We've had the weakest and most sluggish wage and job growth, since world war two.
Click to expand...
So. Your point is that we should incentivize it by taxing them even higher? You are a genius.
 
Superfreak said:
Avoid the insanity....

30k standard deduction for every adult. (adjusted annually for inflation)

Tax everything above that at 20%.

That is both fair and progressive.

No other deductions or loopholes to avoid taxes.

All sources of income taxed in this manner.

Special additional 10% tax on every dollar of income over $1mm (adjusted annually for inflation). This 10% will be dedicated exclusively to paying down the debt.

No more lobbyists bribing politicians to give them special tax breaks. No more bitching about hedge fund managers getting taxed at 15%. No more Buffetts getting their effective tax rates below that of their secretary's.

But best of all.... NO MORE IRS. (for the most part) :D
Click to expand...



I could live fine with that.
 
Damocles said:
So. Your point is that we should incentivize it by taxing them even higher? You are a genius.
Click to expand...

Your and Bush's way didn't work they way you promised it would. In fact, Bush scheme has been a dismal failure.

When someone drives the car in the ditch, you take the keys away from them. You don't just keep doing the same thing over and over.

Bush's tax schemes have not helped job growth or wage growth. FACT.

There are other ways to incentivize economic growth, besides cutting the inheritance tax, and the dividend tax, and taxes on wealth.
 
uscitizen said:
We need to get back to investing in investments that produce things except just money.
Click to expand...

Invest in infrastructure, green energy, research and science, healthcare, and eduction.

That's an economic incentivizer.

Cutting Paris Hilton's inheritance income and dividend income to near zero, isn't working. It's not.
 
uscitizen said:
We need to get back to investing in investments that produce things except just money.
Click to expand...
I agree. However punishing them with the second highest corporate rate even with the fabled "shelters" (most of those are by going elsewhere) really doesn't incentivize any sort of activity in that direction. It may seem counterintuitive and "unfair", but it is reality.
 
Damocles said:
This doesn't include any other than Federal taxation. Your count is low. Also note the nations we are at par with, Germany, Switzerland...
Click to expand...

How are you sure it doesn't include state taxation? I did mention that Germany and Switzerland were right next to us. I just knew that your rate of 50% was ridiculously exagerated.

The average rate is different than this, BTW, because this includes people who aren't taxed like children and non-workers, but it does give a good picture of where we're at.
 
Cypress said:
Invest in infrastructure, green energy, research and science, healthcare, and eduction.

That's an economic incentivizer.

Cutting Paris Hilton's inheritance income and dividend income to near zero, isn't working. It's not.
Click to expand...
Paris Hilton's inheritance won't be much. Grandpa made that clear.
 
Cypress said:
Bush and the repubublicans cut all kinds of taxes on the wealthy investment class, and on corporations for the past seven years.

If this is such a magic bullet for creating jobs and a healthy economy, how come it didn't work out that way? We've had the weakest and most sluggish wage and job growth, since world war two.
Click to expand...

9/11!

Just kidding. Bush did all that, but he didn't get rid of loopholes, and otherwise pursued a variety of policies that were economically boneheaded. I don't think "cut taxes" is a magic bullet, but I also think that 33% is a reasonable top tax rate & a noble goal for America. Of all the talk right now about new programs (mainly, healthcare), and the need to bring taxes UP, I haven't heard ONE WORD about making gov't more efficient, eliminating wasteful bureacracy & trying to trim costs. Not a peep.

That is a major, major problem. To me, it is lacking in creativity, and shows contempt for the American taxpayer. You want a new program? Show us how you're going to pay for it without putting it on the backs of the so-called "rich," and tell us where you might be able to cut our current spending to make room for it.

We're far too accepting of the fact that our government is incredibly wasteful.
 
uscitizen said:
I could live fine with that.
Click to expand...

I believe most people would be able to do so as well. It accomplishes everything the Dems claim they want....

1) Protects the poor and lower middle income families from paying federal taxes

2) With the standard deduction, the effective tax rate paid is progressive (unlike our current system)

3) Those making over a million get taxed more

4) It is simple enough that everyone can understand it and thus no one would get "tricked"

As a side benefit, we end up with a plan to pay down the national debt... and we make the evil evil rich pay for it..... muh ha ha
 
I read that our tax paid day was about mid may last year or was it early June for wage earners ?
That would put it under 50%.
 
Shouldn't those who enjoy a bigger slice of the pie pay more ?
Or would you be happy getting 2 0z slice of pie for a dollar and the next guy gets 4 oz of pie for a dollar ?
 
Watermark said:
How are you sure it doesn't include state taxation? I did mention that Germany and Switzerland were right next to us. I just knew that your rate of 50% was ridiculously exagerated.

The average rate is different than this, BTW, because this includes people who aren't taxed like children and non-workers, but it does give a good picture of where we're at.
Click to expand...
Your is ridiculously low. GDP is not the net earnings of Americans but the worth of what we produce. We are taxed at a lower rate to the GDP not because we are unfairly undertaxed or there are magical shelters being applied, but because it isn't the same as what we earn.

I noticed it was only Federal because it is based on revenues of the National Governments as opposed to their GDP.
 
uscitizen said:
Shouldn't those who enjoy a bigger slice of the pie pay more ?
Or would you be happy getting 2 0z slice of pie for a dollar and the next guy gets 4 oz of pie for a dollar ?
Click to expand...
It doesn't work that way, it is more like pay by the pound. Why should the person paying for 15 pounds be charged more for what he buys than the guy only buying 1 pound of stuff?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top