At tax time, lots of money under table (Article)

[GrannyMae]

The idea of writing another check to the IRS just boils my blood.


look at all the stress you have caused with this thread cubswin! my angst is swollen as well.



now please find me a nice foo-foo poker-news story about a B&M adding a taco bar or sundae stand? and it better be FREE tacos.

tyvm

[Jim T]

One more point. You wrote:

"The poor benefit from the government, and the rich benefit much more."

I don't know that I agree with your assertion that the rich benefit "much more" from the government, at least not in the way that I think you intend. It seems that the rich do pretty well no matter what the government (with obvious exceptions such as rich Jews in Nazi Germany, rich aristocrats in revolutionary France, etc.)

I would say rather that having good government (vs poor government) enables more people to become rich.

[LinusKS]

[ QUOTE ]


Yes, everyone benefits from good government.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes. And the rich more than everyone else.

Right?

[tytygoodnuts]

[ QUOTE ]

Umm, so you think it's FAIR to tax someone at 30+% while taxing someone else at 25% while taxing someone else at 15%, while not taxing other people?



Do you also think it would be fair for the government to give $10,000 a year to white men, $5,000 a year to black men, $1,000 a year to black women, and charge Asian women $2,000 a year?

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a horrible analogy which has absolutely nothing to do with what we are debating over. Yes I do think a progressive tax is fair.

[ QUOTE ]

Who makes the crap that rich person bought? The middle class people (and the lower classes). This is basic economics, those with money for discrectional spending push the economy. When their spending on "extras" is curtailed (taxes rise) the economy will lag (less crap bought == fewer manuf jobs == the middle class and poor take a beating). When they have more "extra" spending money they buy more cars, boats, planes, houses, clothes, toys; thus, producing MORE JOBS for the poor/middle class. These extra jobs produce even more $$ via income taxes, BTW.

[/ QUOTE ]

It is simple economics ASSUMING every rich person spends the extra money which they get from tax breaks on material goods MADE IN THE US. Assuming this will always happens is poor economics. Most of the material goods sold in the US are made in other countries. Just because rich people have extra money doesn't mean they are going to spend it. They might invest it one way or another to make even more money. This may or may not have an affect on our economy.

[ QUOTE ]
FWIW, governement redistribution of wealth (what you advocate) has NEVER worked long term.

[/ QUOTE ]

What do you mean by long term and can you provide some examples where redistribution doesn't work?
[ QUOTE ]
Even my 19yr old daughter understood this example enough to question why people b!tch about lowering taxes.


[/ QUOTE ] WHO CARES

[Corey]

I haate coming into the arguments late. I saw the title and just assumed it was someone asking about circumventing tax laws again.

I don't have much to add other than the fact that people are overlooking the massive reduction of federal revenues the national sales tax would imply. Lawmakers continue to push for spending increases regardless of what side of the aisle they are from. I fully support a leaner, slimmer government, but if this sales tax system being promoted here actually would lower the burden on the poor (which I doubt), where will the burden be pushed? For all intents and purposes, taxation in the United States is a zero-sum game and if this plan lowers the burden on the poor and the rich, I'm sure you can see where the burden will shift.

[LinusKS]

[ QUOTE ]
What do high taxes, anti-trust law suits, anti-monopoly laws, and other trade/free market restrictions have in common?

Correct, ways the government keeps rich people and corporations from getting bigger. That of course discounts those rich via realestate who like times of monster government interferring with production of wealth. The people needing to sell real property to make up for the wonderful government aid (see Jimmy Carter era) makes a mint for those with sufficient cash reserves when the goverment come into some degree of check and the producers get back to producing (see Regan era).

[/ QUOTE ]

You're not making much sense, here, but you seem to be saying that if the rich could do everything they wanted, they'd be even better off than they are.

That's only true in the short-run.

Yes, it's cheaper to dump toxins straight into the river, but in the long run - even if you drink nothing but bottled water - you wind up with mercury in your salmon, and PCBs in your shark-fin soup.

Even the rich benefit from a clean environment.

In the short-run, monopolies are profitable for their owners. In the long-run, they stifle productivity, leading to stagnation and recession. In the long-run, even the rich benefit from competition.

In the short-run, it's great if you can hire 10-year olds for 10 cents an hour. In the long run, workers who can't afford your product make for a poor market.

In the long run, restrictions on poisoning the environment, exploiting workers, and monopolizing industries help the rich too, not just the poor.

[Jim T]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


Yes, everyone benefits from good government.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes. And the rich more than everyone else.

Right?

[/ QUOTE ]

In a way, that was answered in the post right above yours.

However, the definitive answer is very obviously 'no'. Rich people can generally do well anywhere. Poor people are far more at the mercy of governments. Compare how rich people live in various countries under various governments. Then compare how poor people live in these same countries. Is the contrast larger between the rich or the poor?

Poor governments have a disproportionate (baneful) effect on poor and destitute individuals. Conversely, good governments are more beneficial for poor people.

A rising tide really does lift all boats.

[Zetack]

[ QUOTE ]


You do realize someone being poor is not even relevent to me paying income tax while they get "back" what they didn't pay?

[/ QUOTE ]

Then why do you keep bringing it up? Or is it Reardon who keeps bringing it up, I'm getting y'all confused. In any case its relevant because its part of one or both of your rants against the tax system.

[ QUOTE ]

You do realize, those at the poverty level are a fluid group?

[/ QUOTE ]

Sure. So?

[ QUOTE ]

You do realize it is still possible in this country to go from rags to riches in 1 generation (see your favorite minority immigrant group).

[/ QUOTE ]

Sure. So?


[ QUOTE ]

You do realize once upon a time not that long ago, people who had poor paying jobs worked 2 jobs, sometimes 3 jobs?

[/ QUOTE ]

All of them? *shrug* Some still do. Same as before. You do realize thatt once upon a time not that long ago people who were poor were also unable to work, unable to find jobs, unable to make enough to support themselves?

[ QUOTE ]

You do realize those who had no education and worked 2 full time jobs watched their $$ are now retired laughing all the way to the bank having lived through the Great Depression, the 50's, 60's, 70's, 80's, etc buying what they want when they want?

[/ QUOTE ]

Um...all of them? Most of them? Some of them? I don't realize any such thing. Do you have some documentation of this?
[ QUOTE ]

You do realize staying poor is a choice.

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh, I'm sure that must be true, I mean being poor is really hip ya know.

[ QUOTE ]

In TWO generations my family went from sharecroppers to middle class. The third generation (mine) is mostly middle/upper middle class. Only TWO have a college education (both paid for it themselves by working FT through school and 2 jobs in the summers/breaks). Only half the 2nd generation finished high school.

[/ QUOTE ]

Congratulations to you for having missed the hardship. I'm sure that those who missed out on education were enobled by the experience, enriched. Personally I think education is important and I think the government should enable everybody to get a good one...but I'm sure the first and second generations in your family would have turned down the assistance if it had been available to them...

[ QUOTE ]
Yet, NONE of that matters regarding taxes.

[/ QUOTE ]

Then your point at harping on the poor and their choices completely escapes me.

--Zetack

[Zetack]

[ QUOTE ]
There is NO justification for someone making $1,000,000.00 to pay a higher tax rate than someone making $1,000.00.



[/ QUOTE ]

Of course there is. I can't imagine that you don't know it--that would make you incredibly uneducated. You may not agree with it, that's fine. I happen to like a flat tax myself. But to not understand the justification for a graduated tax rate?

Ok, I'll give you a hint, think marginal utility of money...

--Zetack

[grimel]

because the crap reason "it shifts tax burden to the poor". Yeah, so?

1) it ain't the governments job to provide an education (local, maybe the state, but not the fed).

2) why bring up the government using income tax and returns as a matter of wealth redistribution? Oh, maybe because that alone is enough justification to stop the insanity of the current system. People should NOT be punished for producing and rewarded (getting something for nothin IS a reward) for not producing.