Times are Hard

Times are hard and they are going to get tougher as to the OP. Here from the WSJ, marginal tax rates will top 70%.

...To cover the Congressional Budget Office projection of Mr. Obama's $841 billion deficit in 2016 requires a 31.7% increase in all income tax rates (and that's assuming the Social Security income cap is removed). This raises the top rate to 52.2% and brings the total combined marginal tax rate to 68.8%. Government, in short, would take over two-thirds of any incremental earnings...

Take a teacher in California earning $60,000. A current federal rate of 25%, a 9.5% California rate, and 15.3% payroll tax yield a combined income tax rate of 45%. The income tax increases to cover the CBO's projected federal deficit in 2016 raises that to 52%. Covering future Social Security and Medicare deficits brings the combined marginal tax rate on that middle-income taxpayer to an astounding 71%. That teacher working a summer job would keep just 29% of her wages.

All this has me worried that it will now take TTH longer to retire and move to France.

To play devils advocate, I only wish we had Clinton back in office when the Democrats actually believed in running a budget surplus with a balanced budget.

You have made allegation that I ran Lauren Summerhill off with remarks in these two threads. Would you care to point out the so called offending remarks that were the straw that broke the camel's back.

I would be happy to explain any misunderstanding you are having trouble with.

You can't be any slower than never..... Originally Posted by WTF

Come on I B, I want to right any wrong (if there in fact is one)

Please let me know where I did what Marshall did.

Help me out, I have reread the thread and can't seem to find wtf you were getting at.

So....what is the threshold for being labled "rich"? Is is 50k, 100k, 200K per year?
Are we who strive for years to establish a business, who spend 8 or more years post high school getting multiple degrees to be punished for being successful? Are you "rich" if you make 1/2 a million per year? Or do you have to make more than 1 million per year to be "rich". Does it depend on where you live like California or New York?
After all the cost of living is much higher there. Housing is 2 or 3 times more expensive in NY city than most places in Texas. But, the IRS does not take where you live or the cost of living into account when setting your tax rate.

So....what is the threshold for being labled "rich"? Is is 50k, 100k, 200K per year?
. Originally Posted by Jdriller

they (polititians) wont define "rich" because it serves as a talking point to divide .Nothing gets clearly defined so the rules can continuosly evolve.Liberals hate specifics as again, new rules always have to be enacted to serve the next purpose continually evolving.

Are we who strive for years to establish a business, who spend 8 or more years post high school getting multiple degrees to be punished for being successful? Originally Posted by Jdriller

Punished? Spare me. While your posts lead me to seriously doubt that your circumstances are as you claim them to be, having to pay a 35% tax rate on income over $200,000....while living in a 3500 sq foot house with a 3 car garage, a big screen TV in almost every room, and a maid is not "being punished".

At least no more so than needing to juggle 2 jobs....to keep your 11 year old Dodge on the road, pay your rent on your 600 sq foot apartment, as you go without any paid vacation time, while juggling your bills to keep your electricity and your heat on....all the while living on canned food is...."being punished". And you think someone like that getting a better deal on their taxes is......just so unfair? Wow.

You may claim you're "being punished", but the flip side of that is that you're also "rewarded" to a far greater extent than many people who, frankly, work twice as hard as you do. I could probably name 100 jobs that pay under $50,000/yr, that people like you wouldn't take if they paid $400,000/yr.

Housing is 2 or 3 times more expensive in NY city than most places in Texas. But, the IRS does not take where you live or the cost of living into account when setting your tax rate.

Now this is a good point. And if you have a resolution to balance the scales, let's hear it.

they (polititians) wont define "rich" because it serves as a talking point to divide. Originally Posted by JONBALLS

No, we won't define "rich" because doing so is not necessary and whining about it is as inane as most of your posts. The tax code is very explicit in where it sets its points and that's all that matters. That said, if you have a problem with generic terms being used to describe a fluid demographic, then....

Liberals hate specifics

....i'd suggest you stop using them.

Exactly WHAT is the 'punishment' for being rich? Being in a higher bracket and paying (or supposed to pay) more taxes than poor people?

That's like a super hero and being pissed because he or she has to lift heavy shit, things that it would take 'normal' people much longer to do. Imagine Superman complaining about having to pick up a 5-ton truck.

Superman: Why the hell do I have to lift it? If 200 weak people got together they could do it.

Sensible person: Sure, they COULD do it pooling their strength together, but they'll break their backs doing it, not to mention exhausting themselves. Those that are weaker will still lift things, but it will be something along their strength level. You could do it without even breaking a sweat.

Those in greater position to do big things should do so, not because they feel like it's a burden, but because it's the right thing TO do.

Or someone tall being asked to reach something on a high shelf.

Tall person: Well, if two or three short people got together...

Before you even rip these analogies apart (sure, they're flawed), the point I'm trying to make is, if you're in a BETTER POSITION TO DO SOMETHING, that others can't do or would struggle to do, what the f**k is so hard about doing it? You're in a position of greater responsibility, whether you got there by your own means or lucked into it or defaulted into it or whatever, YOU'RE THERE.

Mofo's with millions and billions, corporations with tens, even hundreds of billions of dollars, hogging up the money, COULDN'T SPEND ALL THE MONEY IN 1,000 LIFETIMES, acting like it's too much of a pain in the ass to pay taxes. In a country, a FREE COUNTRY, maintained on the backs of poor people and teenage soldiers, marines, airmen, and sailors, who have been THIS close to not getting paid, DYING for these fuckers, who constantly look for ways to hide their money, while it's in some endless process of recycling interest...it just baffles me to insane levels. Grossing $100 billion, for example, and if you paid taxes on it, you still end up with $60B or so, give or take. That's still a shitload of money that you CAN'T SPEND in a 100-year lifespan. Even if you or your company made a 'paltry' 100 million, that's still a hell of a lot of money to split up. Pay your taxes on it and move on.

These types must be COMPLETELY SURE that there is no Hell.

That's like a super hero and being pissed because he or she has to lift heavy shit, Originally Posted by Rambro Creed

Awesome!

if you're in a BETTER POSITION TO DO SOMETHING, that others can't do or would struggle to do, what the f**k is so hard about doing it?

Exactly. There's a reason fat, out of shape 55 year olds aren't allowed to enter the military and go to war.

Speaking of which, how many of these, at least public (i'm talking about you, Rush Limbaugh), whiners who complain that they're being "punished" for being successful, how many of them begged out of military service because "other people were in a better position to go" than they were?

How many?

Excellent post, RC.

I have a house I rent to "low income" tenants.Their utilities are subsidized.In the winter, the windows on the second floor are routinely left open with the thermostat set on its highest setting.Also, several rooms contain portable electric heaters the tenant bought.Would it be the "right" thing to do, or better yet, the sensible thing to do, to close the windows so fossil fuels arent continually wasted?I think FREE WILL is a funny thing..there is a DEFINATE stigma to me being a "rich" landloard from my tenants, and no one ever asked me my tax rate while insinuating how "rich" I am. Dont think I am but I do have to conserve on my thermostat settings in the middle of winter and most definatly dont and cant leave my windows open.

I have a house I rent to "low income" tenants.Their utilities are subsidized. Originally Posted by JONBALLS

What's the definition of "subsidized"? Or would you rather not say, preferring people believe that our taxes are paying their entire utility bill?

.Would it be the "right" thing to do, or better yet, the sensible thing to do, to close the windows so fossil fuels arent continually wasted?. Originally Posted by JONBALLS

Rambro Creed?or do we leave it up to free will?

there is a DEFINATE stigma to me being a "rich" landloard and no one ever asked me my tax rate while insinuating how "rich" I am. Originally Posted by JONBALLS

Nobody here has ever suggested you were rich. Except you. Just now. So what's your point?

Rambro Creed?or do we leave it up to free will? Originally Posted by JONBALLS

Could you elaborate a bit?

Sensible person: You could do it without even breaking a sweat.

Those in greater position to do big things should do so, not because they feel like it's a burden, but because it's the right thing TO do

if you're in a BETTER POSITION TO DO SOMETHING, that others can't do You're in a position of greater responsibility, whether you got there by your own means or lucked into it or defaulted into it
In a country, a FREE COUNTRY, maintained on the backs of poor people and teenage soldiers, marines, airmen, and sailors,. Originally Posted by Rambro Creed

I have a house I rent to "low income" tenants.Their utilities are subsidized.In the winter, the windows on the second floor are routinely left open with the thermostat set on its highest setting.Also, several rooms contain portable electric heaters the tenant bought.Would it be the "right" thing to do, or better yet, the sensible thing to do, to close the windows so fossil fuels arent continually wasted?I think FREE WILL is a funny thing... Originally Posted by JONBALLS

Could you elaborate a bit? Originally Posted by Rambro Creed

Cannot people just exercise "free will"?

In a country, a FREE COUNTRY, maintained on the backs of poor people and teenage soldiers, marines, airmen, and sailors, who have been THIS close to not getting paid, DYING for these fuckers, who constantly look for ways to hide their money,. Originally Posted by Rambro Creed

Cannot people just exercise "free will"? Originally Posted by JONBALLS

You mean like a Hobson choice.

Join the army or the alternative....

Yea thats the ticket