Why NOT tax the rich more?

United States
November 17, 2011 8:54pm CST
Hey we have a budget to get into more balance... why not increase taxes on the wealthiest in a law taht would sunset soon. Like the way the Bush tax cuts were supposed to sunset. In Eurpoe the question is open there as well... why not tax the rich more
1 person likes this
16 responses
@urbandekay (18312)
18 Nov 11
The rich employ accountants to lie for them to the tax man and avoid paying tax. Fix the loopholes and the rich move abroad. What is needed is international agreement on taxes so that those more able to afford to contribute do all the best urban
1 person likes this
@Fatcat44 (1142)
• United States
18 Nov 11
And these are the same rich who says "Tax us more?" There is a problem when you link these two point together!
@Taskr36 (13925)
• United States
18 Nov 11
Urban, your argument makes no sense. You claim the rich are using accountants to lie. That is criminal tax evasion and it's not just the rich that do it. Loopholes are completely different. Loopholes allow someone to LEGALLY pay less taxes. Fixing loopholes will do nothing to deter criminals so if you really believe that such behavior is that common, your solution will accomplish nothing. Your international agreement idea would never work either as the countries that benefit from companies being moved abroad LIKE getting the extra jobs and the tax revenue that comes with them.
@urbandekay (18312)
18 Nov 11
Yes, I thought you would understand the slightly less than accurate use of the word 'lie.' Secondly, countries do exploit their lower tax regimes to attract the rich, countries compete to attract the rich but a better system would be that international agreement to which I refer, that way all countries would benefit from the tax revenue. Fair and just regimes exist when there are checks and balances to power, global corporations are now excessively powerful, to the point where they can dictate their terms to governments, international agreement on taxation would address to some extent that imbalance of power all the best urban
@xfahctor (14131)
• Lancaster, New Hampshire
18 Nov 11
A better question would be "Why tax ANYONE more?"
1 person likes this
@J0hnluvs (10)
18 Nov 11
Never raise the taxes on a few when they already pay the majority of taxes today. Here are the facts TOP 1% of America pays 39% of taxes TOP 10% of America pays 69% of taxes BOTTOM 50% pays 3% of taxes So what is considered rich in America? If you make roughly $300,000 a year you are part of the richest 1 percent in America. So what they make more money, you should be able to make as much money as you want without government having to control you and mold you. Imagine this, what if your son or daughter walked into their classroom with a bag of candy and the teacher decided to take away her candy and give it out to everyone in school wouldn't you be disappointed? We need to share but not give free hand-outs. People are missing the point about hard work and self reliance. This country was built on hard work and economic opportunity that is unparalleled in the world.
@blue65packer (11835)
• United States
18 Nov 11
Good question! I would like to see that happen! I don't know why President Obama doesn't do it! I have heard more of the rich wouldn't mind being taxed more! Instead the middle class,the poor do and cuts are made in programs that should not be! It never ends!
@sierras236 (2740)
• United States
18 Nov 11
But why would you? What solid reason do you have to support the idea? It wouldn't balance the budget. It wouldn't stop the government from spending beyond its means. It wouldn't create more jobs. It wouldn't balance the already discriminatory tax code. It wouldn't save Medicare, Medicaid or Social Security. What exactly would it do? Fund one government program for one day? How exactly is that going to fix things.
• United States
19 Nov 11
I finally figured out why "taxing the rich" is so not happening. That's because that particular phrasing rates about a ten on the BS meter. It is setting little alarm bells off. It is the problem of reality versus fantasy.
@Taskr36 (13925)
• United States
18 Nov 11
The simple answer, they are already being taxed more than anyone else. Why should we keep punishing success. The more detailed answer, it won't fix ANYTHING. You could literally rob every penny owned by the Forbes 400 and it would only balance the budget for one year. On year two you wouldn't collect a dime of revenue from them because they'd be broke. We don't have a revenue problem, we have a spending problem. The tax cuts proposed by democrats would SUPPOSEDLY generate up to $300 billion in revenue. That isn't going to fix our $1.5 trillion deficit.
@andy77e (5165)
• United States
19 Nov 11
Well the problem is, it does not work. First, taxes tend to hit the poor and middle class, more than the wealthy. Take Warren Buffet. Buffet often talks about how the wealthy should pay more income tax. But Buffet's little secret is, that won't effect him. Most of Buffet's income these days, come in the form of stocks and bonds and property he owns. Income taxes doesn't effect that. So who is that income tax going to effect? Well, typically people who get most of their income in wages.... that would be us. See, income tax is a tax on those who need income, not those who have wealth. In effect, it doesn't hurt the wealthy, so much as it prevents more people from becoming wealthy. But there's another problem. People who have large incomes, also have the ability to move that money around in ways, that we can not. For example, the CEO of a company can take stock options instead of income. I've heard of some CEOs taking only $100K a year, and the rest in stock... to avoid taxes. Or, some CEO will take company 'perks' in leu of cash. So instead of getting $250K a year, they'll take deed to property, or free company jet service, or company paid for vacations and cruises. Again, to avoid taxes. And finally, they'll leave. Some other people have mentioned this, and it's entirely true. If you close all the deductions, remove every tax shelter, and clamp down on the rich... they'll leave. And there are more than enough countries out there right now that are more than willing to accept them. Take Israel for example. Israel recently passed a new tax law that says if you move to Israel, you can work, run a business, and earn an income completely tax free, ZERO income tax at all, for 10 years. Brazil has the most wealthy friendly laws in all of Latin America. They openly encourage big business and the upper class. They have more CEOs, the highest paid CEOs, and the most Millionaires in south America. Do not think that the rich are stuck in America. They can leave more easily than any of us. And finally, we've tried it before. It didn't work then. Why would it work now? In the 70s, 60s 50s, the highest marginal tax was from 70% to 90%. Was the government swimming in money? No. In fact we ran a deficit most of the time then too. So this idea that if we passed a huge tax hike, we'd just have money coming out our ears to pay for all these government programs, just isn't true.
@Queen_11 (308)
• Philippines
18 Nov 11
I'll go for both efficient tax collection and wealth distribution instead. If the tax is lowered or removed, much better so that I could have more money to spend on my personal needs :)
@Fatcat44 (1142)
• United States
18 Nov 11
The rich spend the money a lot more responsible than NObama.
• Canada
18 Nov 11
The problem is that that more money you have, the more opportunities you have to hide from the tax man. The system is flawed to say the least, but increasing taxes sometimes doesn't work anyway. It would be more beneficial to have higher income earners pay more health or education tax etc, so the rich are submitting to the system that also helps the less fortunate.
@jtj_hello (627)
• Philippines
18 Nov 11
I think you were right. they have the resources yet they want to be tax the same way poor are tax. I should be that they are tax more than poors are.I hope the government will consider this.
@Triple0 (1907)
• Australia
18 Nov 11
That's what's happening in Australia, there was a proposed plan to tax the rich more because of a carbon tax while the less fortunate families get tax benefits. Of course, a lot of people were against this, that's why the prime minister isn't very popular. I like the idea of taxing the rich more and too offer some form of benefit for the families with low incomes. I fall into this category and I do receive some benefits but I have been going through lots of expensive education so it's not exactly helping The tax isn't happening until 1-2 years time when there's an election again. Pretty much, everyone is being taxed more for the carbon tax and right now, the country is experiencing some financial difficulties and families have tried to restrict their spending. The economy is trying to bounce back but who knows when it'll happen. I don't think lots of wealthy people will be happy to be taxed way more.
@bobmnu (8160)
• United States
18 Nov 11
Part of the rational for taxing the rich is that they only need so much money to live on. In 2009 the President put pressure on Wall Street and the Banks (the bad guys) not to pay the big bonus to employees. Most of them got along without too much trouble. They simply cut back on their spending. There were almost no Bonus parties, a big event in New York City, They put off buying a new car or a new home. They did not buy clothes for the parties. The people showed them or did they? The car dealerships did not sell cars so the sales people received no commissions which resulted in fewer presents for their families. The restaurants did not host the parties so the wait staff did not have jobs and no tips. The state of New York lost about 2 Billion dollars in tax revenue and the city lost close to a Billion dollars in lost tax revenue.
@matersfish (6311)
• United States
18 Nov 11
Why not actually fix the system that has blown the budget and caused debt before okaying the beast to take even more money? "Money" is always the easiest fix that never fixes anything. In my estimation, people who only want to throw money on problems are mentally challenged and are too inept to be in charge of solving problems. More money spent doesn't create anything but more debt.
@scheng1 (24742)
• Singapore
18 Nov 11
Hi Valentine, if you increase taxes for the rich, then they will move out of the country. When that happens, it means that the country will get even lesser money, and the whole economy will collapse. The rich does not become rich if they are not capable. Every country wants the ultra rich to migrate there. The rich people will buy land and properties, employ many servants, and spend money on food, cars and other luxuries. A single rich person provides many jobs for the country. If he moves his company to a place where he stays, many more jobs will cease in his former land. If all the rich people move out, then the country will have more jobless people.
• United States
18 Nov 11
I don't understand what you're getting at. There are way better ways to get rid of a deficit created by the government. Why make people who have worked to get their money pay for everyone else? That makes absolutely no sense. If I worked my rear off to make a lot of money and I ended up having to give most of it to the government, I don't think I'd be a happy camper. All you need do is look at Greece. The rich were paying for the poor and those who refused to get jobs and they got sick of it and stopped paying. Bottom line is that you can't make one group of people pay for the rest. Socialism and communism are just plain bunk.