Why the rich should pay more in taxes

Nimrod thinks the rich pay taxes! :laughing2 The rich can afford fancy lawyers, accountants, and have powerful friends that allow them to pay minor fines if they get caught evading, like Timothy Geithner.

"We don't pay taxes. Only the little people pay taxes. "

Leona Helmsley

I'm sure this logic will not get past your class envy.

Indeed.. one of the world's richest men explains why he's a democrat:

Message to Wash. Post 's Romano: Warren Buffett explained why he supports Dems | Media Matters for America (http://mediamatters.org/research/200707190007)

Speaking at a $4,600-a-seat fundraiser in New York for Senator Hillary Clinton, Mr Buffett, who is worth an estimated $52 billion (£26 billion), said: "The 400 of us [here] pay a lower part of our income in taxes than our receptionists do, or our cleaning ladies, for that matter. If you're in the luckiest 1 per cent of humanity, you owe it to the rest of humanity to think about the other 99 per cent."

Mr Buffett said that he was taxed at 17.7 per cent on the $46 million he made last year, without trying to avoid paying higher taxes, while his secretary, who earned $60,000, was taxed at 30 per cent.

[...]

Mr Buffett, who runs the investment group Berkshire Hathaway and is widely regarded as the world's most successful investor, said that he was a Democrat because Republicans are more likely to think: "I'm making $80 million a year -- God must have intended me to have a lower tax rate."

Why should you have to pay more in taxes for the more money you make? Just because a person earns more money you think the government should get to take more?
As I said money isn't infinite. Those who hoard without putting back into the system are somewhat penalized on it. The poorer you are the more money you put back into the system proportionately. So if you're making more and more a year you're keeping some of the finite money from reaching other hands.

It's simple, really.

According to this study, the top 1% of income earners pay 40% of the taxes collected and more than all taxes collected from the bottom 95%:

The Tax Foundation - Tax Burden of Top 1% Now Exceeds That of Bottom 95% (http://www.taxfoundation.org/blog/show/24944.html)

"Some in Washington say the tax system is still not progressive enough. However, the recent IRS data bolsters the findings of an OECD [Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development] study released last year showing that the U.S.—not France or Sweden—has the most progressive income tax system among OECD nations. We rely more heavily on the top 10 percent of taxpayers than does any nation and our poor people have the lowest tax burden of those in any nation."

Whether you agree with the system or not, it is pretty clear that, in the US, the rich pay taxes. BTW - Leona Helmsely went to jail and paid over 7 million in fines and restitution for tax evasion.

If you're talking total then sure.. the top 1pct probably earn more than most of the other 95

As I said money isn't infinite. Those who hoard without putting back into the system are somewhat penalized on it. The poorer you are the more money you put back into the system proportionately. So if you're making more and more a year you're keeping some of the finite money from reaching other hands.

It's simple, really.

As an economics guy I take umbrage with the notion that they're not putting the money back into the system. The only way you can keep money out of the system is put it under a mattress.

If you're spending it, it's in the system. If you're starting a business with it, it's in the system. If you're investing with it, it's in the system. And if you're saving it, it's in the system.

Even if you put your billions in a money market fund, or even a savings account in the bank, that money is doing society a lot of good. The bank takes your money and loans it to people as they finance business ventures, college educations, building an addition on their home, whatever.

And whatever is earned on interest or dividends ends up taxed at the same rate as regular income. Yes that can be shielded to an extent, but I can do the same thing as an average joe. So I'm not really sure what you're talking about, the money is definitely "in the system".

As far as Buffett paying a lower % of his money than his cleaning lady , it is because Buffett .... "chooses" not to pay himself an income , but pays his cleaning by way of income . If WB wants to , he can pay himself a salary and pay his cleaning lady through dividends , he could also give a gift / bonus every year and pay the gift tax on it for her .Lessons From How Grace Groner Made and Gave Away $7 Million - The Wealth Report - WSJ (http://blogs.wsj.com/wealth/2010/03/08/how-a-secretary-made-and-gave-away-7-million/) .. had the feds taxed her at 70% U.S. Treasury - Fact Sheet on the History of the U.S. Tax System (http://www.ustreas.gov/education/fact-sheets/taxes/ustax.shtml) , she would have never been able to do this .

If you're talking total then sure.. the top 1pct probably earn more than most of the other 95

The top 1% in income account for slightly over 40% of all income taxed.

The top .1% account for 20% of income taxed. The adjusted gross income cut off for that .1% is 2.1 Million (if you make more than 2.1 you are in the top .1%)

The adjusted gross income cut off for the top 1% is ~410K.

So yes. The rich make a lot of money. They also pay (as the tables from my previous post show) more taxes than the rest of the "Average Joe's" combined.

Hate the rich, envy them, whatever. If you think the methodology of the statistics is incorredct and can actually dispute the facts, fine.

But opinions without factual basis are simply prejudices.

As an economics guy I take umbrage with the notion that they're not putting the money back into the system. The only way you can keep money out of the system is put it under a mattress.

If you're spending it, it's in the system. If you're starting a business with it, it's in the system. If you're investing with it, it's in the system. And if you're saving it, it's in the system.

Even if you put your billions in a money market fund, or even a savings account in the bank, that money is doing society a lot of good. The bank takes your money and loans it to people as they finance business ventures, college educations, building an addition on their home, whatever.

And whatever is earned on interest or dividends ends up taxed at the same rate as regular income. Yes that can be shielded to an extent, but I can do the same thing as an average joe. So I'm not really sure what you're talking about, the money is definitely "in the system".

like I said, proportionately

certainly you understand finance better since that's your thing.. but there's a lot of money of theirs NOT going into the system as well

someone making 20k a year will probably put in nearly all of that

someone worth 100mil probably isn't putting 90% of that back into the system

like I said, proportionately

certainly you understand finance better since that's your thing.. but there's a lot of money of theirs NOT going into the system as well

someone making 20k a year will probably put in nearly all of that

someone worth 100mil probably isn't putting 90% of that back into the system

Just tell me where you are getting your facts. You making them up or have you actually researched your position?

How are the rich "not putting it back into the system". Do they have underground vaults with money stacked and locked away?

Just tell me where you are getting your facts. You making them up or have you actually researched your position?

How are the rich "not putting it back into the system". Do they have underground vaults with money stacked and locked away?

The rich are certainly putting it back into the system. Separately, many probably do have underground vaults.

Sometimes I wonder if people (not anyone here, but a general question) look at things from a Darwinian-like perspective; that people should always strive to attain as much as they can (objects, money, whatever gets your rocks off) and that those who can't seem grab themselves by their bootstraps or catch a break and attain what they need should be shunned, ignored or otherwise not helped because they are not fit enough (in whatever way necessary) to move up the proverbial ladder.

And I'm not saying that Joe Sixfigures should be the one helping out those who are in need, so don't accuse me of that.