That argument won't wash. Virtually EVERYBODY can afford SOME tax, even if it's only a dollar a year. By your metric, everyone should remit some amount to the government. (Not that I'm opposed to the idea, mind you.)
Yep. Here, one is free to fail as well as succeed.
We pride ourselves on equal opportunity. You take pride in equal outcomes.
There IS a difference.
exactly Never seen a poor man create a job
There are those that are meant to be employees and those that are meant to be employers. The employee has zero risk, the employer has 100% of the risk and should be comensated accordingly
I agree, I'm not saying they should. I'm just saying the ones that say they don't pay enough have yet to step up and pay what they think is enough. I also believe that if you're getting gvmt assistance you should be required to take a drug test just like all the people that are paying for your assistance.
But, he is one of Obamas cronies that doesn't think the rich pay enough, but still avoids all he can. I think there is a word for that
True, but it is still a right off for them. And when people think or feel the tax code is fair, they cheat less and pay what is required. So yes, a sensible tax code does take care of itself
Lots of ways to become destitute.
How about people who have worked, never really saved much, then got sick or old?
Some may have worked, some may have never been able to work. The ones seen as just lazy get everyone upset.
Still, there are plenty of material goods to go around. Not everyone can have a BMW (yet) but there's no need to starve people either. I think we've moved past that.
I agree with the concept that some should be paid more than others but the average person making a hiring decision isn't taking any more risk than the person accepting the job.
If you read what I wrote and come to the conclusion that I think only some people should pay tax, you need to read again.
Just about everybody does pay some tax. Income tax is not the only tax paid.
All I say is that some people can afford to pay more income tax. When you see huge salaries being paid, that should be obvious. The point that 5% pay 60% of taxes supports that idea.
The "poor" in the UK have been creating a lot of jobs lately. Every night.
Ah, the refuge of the scoundrel when his mantra of "the rich can afford it": The poor pay taxes, too!
And the rich pay the same taxes to which you refer as the poor. In fact, the rich pay MORE in sales taxes, excise taxes, property taxes, payroll taxes, road tolls, and every other kind of tax their is. (And they get fewer benefits for their 'contribution'.)
Further, whether someone can "afford" more taxes is the icon of the degenerate scoundrel. EVERYONE can afford to pay more taxes. Therefore, EVERYONE according to your scheme should pay more!
I remember the time when LBJ put a tax on taxes! That's exactly what he did. It was a surtax to pay for the VietNam war. "Figure your income tax, then add ten percent. Send in the check. It's only ten percent!" We endured that foolishness for two years.
But everybody could AFFORD an additional ten percent, so the surtax was thereby justified.
Bah!
"Percival P. Cassidy" wrote
Charities, churches, fraternal organizations do it all the time. Income fluctuates in real life so budgets get changed as needed.
"ChairMan" wrote
He keeps the people writing checks at the welfare off ice employed.
wrote
It could easily be class warfare. I went to school, I worked hard and today I make a good living with what I consider easy work. It took me a long time and many 60 hour weeks to get to this point. If someone chose not to study, not to work at a responsible job, they should not get a tax break and make me pay more.
Some people don't have the physical or mental ability to make a lot of money and deserve a break, but there are a lot that just don't care but expect me to pay a bigger share. Screw them!
I'm ready to agree with your last sentiment.
All we need is a good scheme for figuring out which is which.
If they never saved much that's their fault for squandering their money. The fact that they spent their money on toys instead of saving for the future is no reason I should have to give them my money.
If you want those material things all you need to do is work.
Maybe you have moved past that because your liberal thieves in congress feel they need to legislate my savings to those who are not to eager to work so they can get re-elected -- but I haven't.
Too much of the time the call for taxing the rich boils down to "I think someone is making too much and we need to take it away until I feel more comfortable". Lousy way to make tax policy.
Bullshit! If the guy doing the hiring (your example) hires a thief the next day his entire inventory could be missing. Is that your method of sharing the wealth?
Hmm, I hate to admit it but you're right.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.