Democrats want to separate the rich, from the very rich.

[flaresignal]

the biggest argument for massive taxing of the right =if i make  80k a year and get taxed 245k a year and get taxed 40% but make 275k a year and get taxed 50% i now make less money then i did when i was making 30k less.

These are marginal tax rates. This scenario can't happen unless one of the marginal rates is higher than 100%.

[relic2279]

Yeah I don't think many people understand how taxes work (marginal)....


Say you make 100k, say there is a bracket at 10k, 50k and 100k


All the money you make till you've made 10k is not taxed (or taxed at a base level rate). Soon as you hit 10k, all the money you make afterwards till you hit 50k is taxed at the 10k rate, say you are doing well later in the year and you break 100k, and all that money, 50k worth, is taxed at the 50k rate. It's not cumulative.
(Probably bad example, I link below showing it better then I can explain it)

That's how you are taxed in the US. It's not retroactive.

Those people throwing tea-parties make me laugh. They're all complete morons. if you watch the youtube interviews. None of them know how taxes actually work or even know what they are protesting.
 
http://www.fool.com/personal-finance/taxes/2007/03/02/your-tax-rate-marginal-vs-effective.aspx

[mrjpark]

And thus, my position still stands.  TAX THOSE RICH BASTARDS AND THEIR TEA/STAMPS!

[sapiens]

You can also trace bread back to before it came packaged sliced, does that mean the slicer is useless?
I think not.

I've always stated:

legalize pot and prostitution and tax the shit out of it and watch the deficit go away

Weren't you against doing this for cigarettes? So what gives?

[vicious796]

You can also trace bread back to before it came packaged sliced, does that mean the slicer is useless?
I think not.

I've always stated:

legalize pot and prostitution and tax the shit out of it and watch the deficit go away

Weren't you against doing this for cigarettes? So what gives?

Cigarettes are taxed, have been taxed, and will continue to be taxed. I'm against the constant tax increase (they've raised cig taxes like 5 times in the last 3 years) against a minority that has no[/b] real representation in Congress. The people in this industry are required to advertise against themselves and, despite that, have been given up to the government to control. It's ridiculous.

Now, pot and prostitution are currently illegal. However, I'd guess at least 35% of the nation smokes pot illegally right now. I would like to include "medicinal" weed in there also because that's total BS. Buddy of mine in California went to his "doctor" complaining about shoulder pain from when he played sports years and years ago and is now allowed to have and maintain 6 plants in his house legally. How stupid.

Another friend of mine was in a similar situation, got arrested for DUI (alcohol), and went to pick up the plant he had in his car after his release from the drunk tank from the police officers who confiscated it.

So we have the entire state of California "legally" smoking pot but I'd still put them in the "illegal" category.

If you were to make pot legal - today - I'd like to say over half the nation would go out and buy a bag, if for no other reason than to say they did. Slap a ridiculous 10-20% luxury tax on it and people will still pay for it.

Prostitution is also something that is done illegally right now, why not tap into the market? If nothing else you can make prostitution safer for the hookers and the clients by putting in regulation to businessmen/women instead of pimps and old asian men who own "massage parlors" in Jersey. Mandatory STD tests for the hookers and safe sex practices are required. There is so much you can do to make this illegal act "safer" than it currently is.

[Abrahamrpg]

Seems I am not the only one who has read the paper on how california could increase their (currently very bad) economy by legalizing marijuana and taxing it, vicious

[sapiens]

Cigarettes are taxed, have been taxed, and will continue to be taxed. I'm against the constant tax increase (they've raised cig taxes like 5 times in the last 3 years) against a minority that has no[/b] real representation in Congress.
...

So, potheads and hookers would be fairly represented?

...
However, I'd guess at least 35% of the nation smokes pot illegally right now.
...

Aaaah. But, but, how can you know this?
I'd say 50% of the nation smokes and drinks illegally (underaged) and the other half do so legally.

If you were to make pot legal - today - I'd like to say over half the nation would go out and buy a bag, if for no other reason than to say they did. Slap a ridiculous 10-20% luxury tax on it and people will still pay for it.

So, pot is made legal today, and within ten years it displaces cigarettes and then... you guessed it, we start with the constant tax increases! Yey!

What would the economic consequences of this be? What about the international scene?

Colombia suddenly goes bankrupt? California changes its economy to be marijuana-based?

Prostitution is also something that is done illegally right now, why not tap into the market? If nothing else you can make prostitution safer for the hookers and the clients by putting in regulation to businessmen/women instead of pimps and old asian men who own "massage parlors" in Jersey. Mandatory STD tests for the hookers and safe sex practices are required. There is so much you can do to make this illegal act "safer" than it currently is.

Prostitution isn't legal simply because it is perceived as a denigrating "job".

When it becomes an acceptable career path, and I mean with Community Colleges offering diplomas, then things may change.

Right now it seems you just want to implement some "quality control", so next time you aren't stuck with a transsexual dude.

[vicious796]

So, potheads and hookers would be fairly represented?

No, which is sad, but that's a problem with the system we work with, not the legalization process.

Aaaah. But, but, how can you know this?
I'd say 50% of the nation smokes and drinks illegally (underaged) and the other half do so legally.

I used the word "guess" for a reason and I got that number by taking a look around me. I look at my workplace, my friends, my family, and news. By no means do all of them smoke pot but almost every single person I know has at least tried it. Alot of the people I know who don't do it anymore most certainly would if it were legal. I would also say that your number on underage drinkers/smokers is low.

So, pot is made legal today, and within ten years it displaces cigarettes and then... you guessed it, we start with the constant tax increases! Yey!

What would the economic consequences of this be? What about the international scene?

Colombia suddenly goes bankrupt? California changes its economy to be marijuana-based?

Two different products with two different responses to the human body. Alot of people who smoke pot also smoke cigarettes, at least the ones I know. They operate in the same market but are not competitors. I'd also say that Florida is in the best position to grow marijuana:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/20090730/us_time/08599191340100
Apparently, according to a History Channel show I was watching a couple weeks ago, Kentucky is real big into the weed growing also.

Prostitution isn't legal simply because it is perceived as a denigrating "job".

When it becomes an acceptable career path, and I mean with Community Colleges offering diplomas, then things may change.

Right now it seems you just want to implement some "quality control", so next time you aren't stuck with a transsexual dude.

I never said anything about it being acceptable or not, I said it currently isn't safe for either side. Things that are conducted illegally and in the shadows are illegal and in the shadows (There's a Madden-ism). You can't expect to know exactly what you're gonna get, transsexual dude is irrelevant, I'm talking about being shot and robbed or contracting an STD because you were drunk and thought it would be funny. Also, these women are fairly regularly abused and can't do anything about it as they're stuck in this downward spiral. I'm saying, that with proper regulation, it can be safer for them and the client.

You can make a legit business out of it with sound "ethics", just not Christian morals.

[kyanwan]

If they're going to use "healthcare" as an excuse to raise taxes - tax the people who make themselves unhealthy.   I'm all for it.

It's a voluntary tax IMO.   If you don't want to pay it, don't use it.

Alcohol, Tobacco, and legalize pot.   Tax the everloving shit out of it.  Put an excise tax on junk food.   Put an excise tax on fast food.   Put an excise tax on cooking oils/fats.

[vicious796]

If they're going to use "healthcare" as an excuse to raise taxes - tax the people who make themselves unhealthy.   I'm all for it.

It's a voluntary tax IMO.   If you don't want to pay it, don't use it.

Alcohol, Tobacco, and legalize pot.   Tax the everloving shit out of it.  Put an excise tax on junk food.   Put an excise tax on fast food.   Put an excise tax on cooking oils/fats.

Yeah! You know, people dying also seems to raise the cost of healthcare, let's make a deathbed tax as well. On top of that, people in retirement homes are really just dead people walking and congregating, let's charge a retirement home tax also. While we're at it, we should tax the things they're doing with their money they've collecting off Social Security and/or government pensions from their husbands dying in WWII, let's tax bingo night, they're only drinking and putting plastic chips over numbers.

Then, let's make the prize money be automatically recorded as income and then we can tax them at the end of the year on it! Driving is also unhealthy so let's raise the taxes on gasoline some more, the people are willing to pay it! Sitting behind computers posting about the government when you could be out jogging is also unhealthy and doesn't help morale either... Internet tax. Tax cable, tax groceries, tax cell phone service.

But we're still all about CHANGE! Don't expect to see the normal tax and spend Democrats in this office! We should tax that slogan too.

[mrjpark]

Don't forget the Retard Tax!

[Stsin]

While Vicious talks about a 20-30% tax on newly legalized substances, recent tobacco tax has gone way overboard to it being silly to compare.  Like said there's been taxes on it forever.  But this last decade we've seen an increase from a percentage of the sales, to over TEN TIMES the cost of the product.  There's gotta be a limit but none is in sight, since everyone is jumping in and grabbing this free money by adding their own tax to cover their failing budgets.  It's like have a small $10 jar of coffee suddenly costing over $100.  Surely taking advantage of an addiction.

So I do not believe in using Sin taxes to cover a bad budget that should not exist.  Everyone should be held equally responsible instead of placing the burden on a minority.  Because if it's only a few that pay, then there's a lack of initiative to repair it, with more consistently being voted in by the other majority not sharing such burden.

But there should be a tax on them, only if that money is to cover the expenses of distribution and controllment, also funding centers and medicine for those wanting to kick the habit.  In otherwords, it has to be related to the costs of that substance, unlike what they've been doing to tobacco tax.

But sadly, this is not going to happen in the US.  We are already accustomed to putting as much burden elsewhere as possible.  Accepting no guilt with self made justifications, as long as someone else pays.  In other countries, their tobacco taxes are used specifically to treat the extra burdens caused by it.  Like smokers get more medical treatment, since after all they paid more.  While the US consistently uses the health issue to raise such taxes, but none of those billions taken annually go specifically back to the smoker.  No aids in quitting, no aid in medical treatment.  Just used to fund some unrelated pork added by a politician to help him get re-elected.

back on topic:  Same reason why increasing the tax on the rich is so appealing to many.  We are inherently selfish within our own closed world.  It's the age of irresponsibility .ie always someone elses fault and they should pay.

Btw smokers, check out the e-cigs.  Using Blucigs now and it's much better than expected.  Cheaper than tobacco and it's actually fun to use.  With it being more convenient and cheaper now, I can tell that these are going to become really popular.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2KEEvrNUaK0
Then can say FUCK YOU to the government and all those who keep supporting tax increases.  Soon everyone will share the burden of billions of increased taxes

[relic2279]

back on topic:  Same reason why increasing the tax on the rich is so appealing to many.  We are inherently selfish within our own closed world.  It's the age of irresponsibility .ie always someone elses fault and they should pay.

I'm not directing this at you Stsin, the above quote just brought some ideas into my head.



I want a severe increase on taxing the rich. Not because I want someone else to pay my way or anything even remotely like that, but because they're not paying enough. Back in the 50's and 60's, the tax rate was much, much higher then it is now. It has been continuing to drop and our economy has seen recession after recession ever since.

Take these stats for instance. List of countries and the taxes as % GDP:  We're the number 1 country in the world economically, and our tax rate is incredibly low in comparison. Also note the highest taxed per GDP countries in the western world. Almost double ours. The top 5 like denmark, norway, belgium, sweden, france, italy all have the best standards of living in the world. Which also probably correlates.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_tax_revenue_as_percentage_of_GDP

This thing about companies leaving if we raise our taxes is idiotic. All those countries are nearly double our tax rate, yet I don't see McDonalds or any other company up and leaving because of the tax rate. Propaganda...

Matter of fact, the countries with the highest tax rate's economic growth, on average, exceeded our own:
http://imgur.com/FVjGm.png

So I don't want to hear higher taxes will screw our economy. It's fucking nonsense. It's what will help FIX our economy...

[Sosseres]

It depends on how you raise your taxes. Sweden is actually cheap for companies (though the employees are expensive due to the rules regarding retirement funds and so on) that is how the tax was laid out. People in general pay a lot here, the companies not as much.

[DrmChsr0]

Speaking of taxing the very, very rich...

How do you force them to pay money? I mean, they'll just park their mad cash into tax havens.

Tax the corporations? They'll just move their headquarters to somewhere cheaper. Like Singapore, for instance. The rich love Singapore for being relatively light on taxes.

It's extremely hard to tax the filthy rich since they know how NOT to pay taxes. And we're forced to rely on them since even a hundred small-and-medium enterprises could take ages to integrate into the community.

It's just a lot better to hope the global economy dies from the current crisis since it'll most likely affect everyone.

[relic2279]

Tax the corporations? They'll just move their headquarters to somewhere cheaper. Like Singapore, for instance. The rich love Singapore for being relatively light on taxes.

Well, if they don't want to do business in or with the USA anymore, sure. If taxes were raised on the rich and corporations, and a company moved to Nigeria, you'd still pay taxes to do business within the US. If you have products you need to import into the country, you have to pay tariffs and the like. It's not simple solution as the fear mongerers and uneducated make it sound.

[Sosseres]

Well, if they don't want to do business in or with the USA anymore, sure. If taxes were raised on the rich and corporations, and a company moved to Nigeria, you'd still pay taxes to do business within the US. If you have products you need to import into the country, you have to pay tariffs and the like. It's not simple solution as the fear mongerers and uneducated make it sound.

You can move the entire decision and large parts of the administration abroad to a low tax country and leave the factory there. Just as an example of something easy to do and relatively cheap compared to moving production centres.

[relic2279]

You can move the entire decision and large parts of the administration abroad to a low tax country and leave the factory there. Just as an example of something easy to do and relatively cheap compared to moving production centres.

If it was that simple, I believe companies would already be doing it. Not just in the US, but also in the countries where the tax rates are double ours. Some companies probably already, mostly in the IT field where there are loopholes. Most are not though. Also, the tax rates might be low in some countries, but there are also completely different sets of problems they would face, depending on which country you plan on using to circumvent the system.

[Stsin]

I worked for a German auto company that moved to Mexico.  It's not as difficult as you make it seem, especially with NAFTA.  Just because the well established haven't moved, ignoring their special interest groups in Washington to help them when needed, does not mean it is not viable.  Heck, even Microsoft has threatened to move their headquarters to Canada, less than a 100 miles north, due to antitrust laws.  But it was uneeded since they got their way.  Myth or not, it was not argued that it wasn't viable.  Well, it's the lesser known starting companies we should take care of and keep by not threatening them from growing, which is the US' future.  Let the old dogs die already.

(click to show/hide)

btw, this happened long ago and I was grateful leaving Sachs Automotive.  Needed a career change anyways.  When the top people were leaving, they told us we had nothing to worry about...LOL.  My sis's husband was a financial consultant (Anderson ) and said they always lie to the workers, it's their job.  Well, as a team leader, I was soon released, which they shut my line down a month later.  Then moved the whole plant a year after that.  But it was during the right time, since I was able to get over a year and a half of unemployment.  Which I sure as heck leeched  What do you do with all that free time?  That's when I got started with anime

[relic2279]

They might have moved to mexico for other reasons than evading taxes. Probably did, as many car parts for a many different automakers come from mexico. Microsoft is a software company. It's assets are it's people, coders and patents. Wouldn't be hard to move that particular company. And as you said, it was for anti-trust reasons.

Which is my point. When a company moves, or if they decide to, it's not for taxes. It's usually for a multitude of other reasons.

Doesn't matter anyways, if the economy doesn't get better companies are going to move just to get the hell out.

There is really only one sure fire way to get our deficit and economy under control. Raise taxes and cut spending. One party wants to raise taxes, the other wants to cut spending. BOTH need to happen. If a few companies want to leave? (Which they won't, it's fear mongering) All I can say is, see ya later alligator.