Redistribution of wealth

The poor pay nothing because they make nothing and the wealthiest pay nothing because they have all the loopholes. Thh folks in the middle are footing the bills. The same way with large companies. GE paid about 3% in US taxes because they are in so well with the current administration and have off shore shelters that keep them from paying taxes. Originally Posted by topsgt38801

So true. The poor the disabled and the elderly on medicare generally have no money to give.

"nevermind"!!

If people understood the Progressive AND regressive nature of the way we collect taxes in this country, there would be much less bitching about the poor

If people understood that there isn't anything "progressive" about socialism there would be much less bitching about those who are not poor.

Tudor and your dad, You are missing my point. I dont mind paying my share of taxes, I am disagreeing with the distribution.

Municpal Bond's interest income.....nice income stream, no taxes (if bonds are from the state you file in)!

The ones with the highest incomes are not necessarily the wealthiest. Originally Posted by pjorourke

if you work, you will be taxed.

the wealthy arent taxed as they dont work; they have the ability to so arrange their affairs as to limit exposer to tax.

the only way to "re-distribute" wealth from the truly wealthy is confiscation or the "death" tax

Oh darling. Spend a week with me in New Orleans. After you see the system abuse I see on a daily basis, surely your bleeding heart would be mended. In the meantime, I'm happy to be your charity case, lol Originally Posted by heidilynnla

His bleeding heart is stone. It ain't changin' any time soon.

Exactly. And that points out a major problem with the income tax system. Those who are wealthy without the need for income pay nothing.

A national sales tax with a standard refund of some amount to cover taxes on food etc.would change this. It would also change the way America does business, the never ending, usually unproductive business travel with expensive hotels and dining would no longer be deductible.

All of the wealth in the world does nothing for it's holder unless it is invested (producing taxable income) or spent. If income isn't taxed there might be an added incentive to invest, otherwise, there would be no escaping the tax man if it's spent.

An old story, not especially related, but this is as good a place as any to insert it:

A businessman puts a $100 bill on the front desk of a small town hotel. "Here is a deposit, I want to see the room first before I decide to stay here."
As soon as he went up stairs the clerk grabbed the bill and ran to the meat market to pay his bill of credit with the butcher.
The butcher ran to the feed store with the same bill to pay his grain bill.
The feed store owner rushed to pay the farmer who grew the grain.
The farmer hurried to pay the escort who had graciously extended him credit.
Finally, the escort laid the $100 bill on the front desk to pay for the room she had been using, just before the businessman reclaimed the deposit having decided not to stay.

All bills paid, with no net change in who owned the $100 bill, yet the butcher, the feed store owner, the farmer and the hotel all had to pay taxes. Originally Posted by Iaintliein

The problem with our current government and a national sales tax is that they will never impliment it the way it should be. They would rather keep the progressive income tax the way it is and then add a national sales tax on top of it. Which would hurt the poor even further or give them more reason to redistribute more.

Municpal Bond's interest income.....nice income stream, no taxes (if bonds are from the state you file in)! Originally Posted by vkmaster

Not exactly.

Holders of municipal bonds typically do pay taxes in a de facto sense, since they accept a lower interest rate than they would if they held taxable issues with similar risk profiles. The difference in total return is the tax. The only advantage is that the "tax rate" paid by the bondholder is typically lower than the 35% he would pay on a taxable income stream.

And I would not characterize the returm from munis as a "nice income stream." It's far too meager for my tastes.

Aggressive high net worth individuals are far more likely to invest in things like private equity and commercial real estate projects, which typically pay high rates of return partially sheltered by depreciation. Rarely do they pay an effective tax rate higher than about 15%; sometimes much less.

the only way to "re-distribute" wealth from the truly wealthy is confiscation or the "death" tax Originally Posted by nevergaveitathought

Show me a constitutional basis for "re-distributing" wealth.

A national sales tax with a standard refund of some amount to cover taxes on food etc.would change this. It would also change the way America does business, the never ending, usually unproductive business travel with expensive hotels and dining would no longer be deductible. Originally Posted by Iaintliein

Or change the income tax to a consumption tax. When you tax income, you get less of it. Tax consumption, you get more savings. A virtuous cycle.

In the late 1950s, Chairman Mao sought to further “communize” Chinese society, i.e., the Great Leap Forward, by ending private ownership of property among peasant farmers. As part of the program, Mao sought redistribute what wealth there was among the independent, self-sustaining peasants. There was a consequential reaction. Before “collectivization” could be 100% implemented, peasants spent their savings in unnecessary ways for fear they would otherwise be confiscated. Similarly, livestock was slaughtered and eaten before it could be “collectivized.” In Guangdong province the saying was: “What you eat is yours, what you don’t is anyone’s.” In the new government run canteens, too, “to each according to his needs” was taken literally and people stuffed themselves. The reckoning was not long off. Despite record crop yields, millions starved. Mao’s Great Famine by Frank Dikötter.

“Socialists perform their own miracles. They steal a hundred fresh loaves and fishes, and redistribute a few moldy crumbs and rotten heads. Their miracle of scarcity is genuine, you see, the socialist have no idea how they achieve this miracle. It baffles them. It angers them. It outrages them. Yet, it does not discourage them.” Thomas Sipos.

Show me a constitutional basis for "re-distributing" wealth. Originally Posted by pjorourke

Constitutional???

Are you serious???

Or change the income tax to a consumption tax. When you tax income, you get less of it. Tax consumption, you get more savings. A virtuous cycle. Originally Posted by pjorourke

Quite. Fiscal authorities do not understand incentives.

By the way, your book 'On the Wealth of Nations' is very good.

Quite. Fiscal authorities do not understand incentives.

By the way, your book 'On the Wealth of Nations' is very good. Originally Posted by Clerkenwell

Thanks! I'm glad you liked it.