Are you ready for your taxes to go up?

[cobright]

And what is the tax heavily rate that we should be fighting for?

In 1944 and 1945 all income above $200k (maybe about $3M in today's money) was taxed at 94%.

That seems a bit steep. I think a 50% top marginal income bracket applied to ALL forms of income would be fair.

Make it 55% and rich people get to yell at the rest of us without being shamed on social media.

 

[Hikergirl]

In 1944 and 1945 all income above $200k (maybe about $3M in today's money) was taxed at 94%.

That seems a bit steep. I think a 50% top marginal income bracket applied to ALL forms of income would be fair.

Make it 55% and rich people get to yell at the rest of us without being shamed on social media.

That's not a fight I'd be joining.
We all know the rich would never pay that but the government will still spend it. And once again the middle class will get stuck with the bill.
I'm more about responsible spending, but I know that won't happen either.

 

[Notrealname]

I don’t make enough to buy the votes to not be taxed and I make too much to be easily bought.

Maybe we can get taxes up past 100%.

Or a one time 75% tax on retirement accounts.

Oh, I don’t know. What about a one time 10% wealth tax on the top one percent of the wealthiest Americans. That would bring in about $3.5 trillion, enough to pay off what the $2.5 or so that will be spent on this bailout (if the House agrees with the Senate’s action earlier today) and cut the deficit some. Spread the burden to include the top 10% and you could cut the tax rate in half, down to a 5% tax rate.

Luke 12:48

 

[MillauFr]

As a former co-worker of mine put it, EVERYTHING is Political. Even which ice cream flavor you chose at Baskin Robbins.

Wasn't broccoli political? George H. W. Bush hated the stuff. I'm sure the broccoli farmers didn't contribute to his campaign. LOL.

 

[MillauFr]

My pet peeve about America is that capitalism favors the rich, and our government follows the trail of money, and the peons fight over the scraps.

And no state does that more than Washington State. We roll out the carpet for the 1% crowd and decimate lower income residents. No wonder that Seattle is the #1 city for economic inequality in the country. Most of the lower income residents have been forced to move to the suburbs in order to survive. No wonder all of the big high tech companies are tripping over each other to open new offices here.

 

[Starwarsfan2]

Yes, we should raise taxes on the wealthy to pay for this deficit, then implement the Green New Deal and Medicare for All. Then and only then will things get better.
(Oh, and also if Bloomberg will just write a check for 360 million dollars, we all get 1 million each. Right?)

 

[Starwarsfan2]

China may be paying for some of this damage to the world.

 

[tarheelmjfan]

And what is the tax heavily rate that we should be fighting for?

It's not so much the tax rate, but the many tax breaks/deductions they receive that people should question.

Anyone who wants to sign up for the "easy" life of the poor, should feel free to do that. My guess is no one who is middle class or wealthier would choose to be in their situation, yet they choose to judge & resent them. The phrase "there but for the grace of God go I" comes to mind in situations like this.

 

[Hikergirl]

It's not so much the tax rate, but the many tax breaks/deductions they receive that people should question.

Anyone who wants to sign up for the "easy" life of the poor, should feel free to do that. My guess is no one who is middle class or wealthier would choose to be in their situation, yet they choose to judge & resent them. The phrase "there but for the grace of God go I" comes to mind in situations like this.

I agree with the first sentence.

Not sure where your second statement is coming from so I'll just leave it.

 

[mom2rtk]

I wonder what we'll do when we run out of "other people's money"?

 

[xipotec]

Unfortunatly , capitalism is a failure in the US. We all talk about how a person must make their own way in the world, succeed or fail based on their own merits. Some even say we should not help out individuals whom are struggling.

Yet every time we have a crisis, the first thing the governments does is bail out business. Often the business that have been fleecing their public for a long time.

When we try to help out the citizens , you often hear nothing but blowback.

oh , and the notion that helping business helps the people by saving jobs is bunk....

 

[BuckeyeBama]

I wonder what we'll do when we run out of "other people's money"?

We can cross that bridge when we get there. (Note - we won't).

 

[Hikergirl]

Unfortunatly , capitalism is a failure in the US. We all talk about how a person must make their own way in the world, succeed or fail based on their own merits. Some even say we should not help out individuals whom are struggling.

Yet every time we have a crisis, the first thing the governments does is bail out business. Often the business that have been fleecing their public for a long time.

When we try to help out the citizens , you often hear nothing but blowback.

oh , and the notion that helping business helps the people by saving jobs is bunk....

So in your opinion what would make capitalism a success?

 

[BuckeyeBama]

So in your opinion what would make capitalism a success?

It has to reward the laborers proportionally to the owners and executive management. Right now wealth is being built on the backs of laborers who see none of the benefits. Laborers live hand to mouth their entire lives while owners and executive management grow wealthy.

 

[rkstocke5609]

Yes, we should raise taxes on the wealthy to pay for this deficit, then implement the Green New Deal and Medicare for All. Then and only then will things get better.
(Oh, and also if Bloomberg will just write a check for 360 million dollars, we all get 1 million each. Right?)

Um, no. Check your math. If there are 360 million people and he writes a 360 million dollar check we all get $1. Lefties and math....

 

[Hikergirl]

It has to reward the laborers proportionally to the owners and executive management. Right now wealth is being built on the backs of laborers who see none of the benefits. Laborers live hand to mouth their entire lives while owners and executive management grow wealthy.

So capitalism fails if some are compensated far more than others?

Being that capitalism is the private ownership I'd say it gives every individual a chance to go from laborer to owner or executive management. We all have the chance to go and find work where we are paid fairly for our work. That is what capitalism allows, it doesn't guarantee us anything, it gives us the opportunity though.
I suppose there are some that believe that nobody should be "that" successful while there are others who will never be though.
I don't believe it's capitalism itself that is a failure, and I can't really get in to what I think is due to board rules. I think it is interesting to see what other's perspective is and do think it's a shame it can't really be discussed in depth here. I do wonder though for those who are against it or think it's failed, especially here on a message board that is dedicated to an almost luxury vacation destination, how they can reconcile how it's a failure yet reap the benefits of such a failed system.

 

[wvjules]

Um, no. Check your math. If there are 360 million people and he writes a 360 million dollar check we all get $1. Lefties and math....

I think that was a joke. Some news guy said it a while ago.

Also, smaller economy may be a poor choice of words. I have actually seen Open up the economy or Open up America. My point was neither the economy nor America are closed. Most are still working. Some businesses are closed. Yes, they need to reopen eventually but the economy (and America) are still open. We didn't close.

 

[NYCgrrl]

I'm as ready as I know how to be. Anticipated higher taxes (municipal, state, and Fed) and adjusted some of my portfolio accordingly.
Speaking with generations younger than my own I keep stressing the need to pursue long term goals that add to their savings and ability to maintain and/or exceed current careers/job requirements. I believe there are many positions that will disappear in the new era and that is what is in part driving my thinking.

 

[tinkerdorabelle]

There aren’t enough billionaires to pay the debts of the country. What we need to do is cut the the “members” of society that only take.

Tax the billionaires don't be party to protecting them.

 

[tinkerdorabelle]

So capitalism fails if some are compensated far more than others?

Being that capitalism is the private ownership I'd say it gives every individual a chance to go from laborer to owner or executive management. We all have the chance to go and find work where we are paid fairly for our work. That is what capitalism allows, it doesn't guarantee us anything, it gives us the opportunity though.
I suppose there are some that believe that nobody should be "that" successful while there are others who will never be though.
I don't believe it's capitalism itself that is a failure, and I can't really get in to what I think is due to board rules. I think it is interesting to see what other's perspective is and do think it's a shame it can't really be discussed in depth here. I do wonder though for those who are against it or think it's failed, especially here on a message board that is dedicated to an almost luxury vacation destination, how they can reconcile how it's a failure yet reap the benefits of such a failed system.

No rules laissez faire capitalism is what is a failure, which allows the wealthy to have power and make the rules that benefit them and have protections that others don't. We see that happening right now. Regulations are bad etc etc. Now some regulations may be bad, no one wants over regulations but you need rules and smart regulations because capitalism doesn't factor into greed or the fact that some things don't regulate themselves by the market.