TAX CUTS WILL THEY STIMULATE THE ECONOMY? READ MY POST BEFORE RESPONDING PLEASE

COG your thoughts are welcome here, I am just not sure why you would call me a socialist. I would love to see a new tax system, in fact I started a thread over it. I was trying to ask the questions others would but dont want to. I am not against the fair tax, I am not sure it would work because rich people wont spend like poor people. I am not an economist but I do understand the economy and how it works. I appreciated your comments upto being called a socialist, so I ask you to stick around.

DD, you got most of the answer. While the middle class and poor spend all of their income, the rich do not, thus they are not taxed as much. Thus lowering their tax liability to a level much less than that of the middle class. Effectively, you would have the middle class paying a much higher percentage of their income on taxes as opposed to the rich.

It comes down to one thing that COG said. It comes down to the rich getting richer. Originally Posted by kcbigpapa

I don't usually like to partake in these kinds of discussions, but I feel compelled this time. A big flaw in what you are saying kcbigpapa is the assumption that most of the federal taxes collected comes from purchases, which is incorrect. The federal government collects income taxes on individuals and companies and not through a federal sales tax as there is no such thing (yet).

In fact the rich pay an abnormally high amount of individual income taxes compared to the poor and middle class. According to the Office of Tax Analysis, the U.S. individual income tax is "highly progressive," with a small group of higher-income taxpayers paying most of the individual income taxes each year.

What that means is that the top 5 percent of taxpayers pay more than one-half (53.8 percent) of all individual income taxes. The top 1 percent of taxpayers pay 33.7 percent of all individual income taxes. This group of taxpayers has paid more than 30 percent of individual income taxes since 1995. Moreover, since 1990 this group’s tax share has grown faster than their income share.

Taxpayers who rank in the top 50 percent of taxpayers by income pay virtually all individual income taxes. In all years since 1990, taxpayers in this group have paid over 94 percent of all individual income taxes. In 2000, 2001, and 2002, this group paid over 96 percent of the total.

This link http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/income...hopaysmost.htm shows one of the clearer assessments of our current tax break down.

Now if the discussion turns to which economic group is paying more in taxes due to what they purchase.....well I haven't seen any stats to show that the middle or lower class spend more of their income on stuff than the rich but if they do, then it is their choice to do so as I'm sure that no one is holding a gun to their head and making them buy flat screen tv's or playstations.

LOL! I'm going back to the reviews. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

But, who will be left to tell us how good the theory of a "fair to the rich tax" tax is? I'm all for it. As a matter of fact there are times I randomly drive to Mission Hills, ring doorbells, and hand the home owners my hard earned money for nothing. Just feels right, plus I know it will benefit me in the long run. Wasn't there a chapter in one of the "fair to the rich tax" tax books suggesting this? It had to be in at least a brochure somewhere at least.

Anyone remember how Steve Forbes was against the estate tax that the GOP so cleverly dubbed the death tax? I am guessing it was because he wanted his daddy's money tax-free. So few are affected by this tax yet so many wanted to make sure the likes of Paris Hilton had tax-free money. The rich want very low taxes for themselves, no estate tax and no capital gains. Lets look at this. Say Bill Gates is worth $40 billion, most of which is wealth derived from his stock holding in Microsoft. So that $40 billion would be completely nontaxable under GOP plans. Under GOP plans:

Bill Gates
$40 billion worth at death
$0 taxes

Bill Gates offspring worth at death (estimated to double every 20 years and death at 80)
$640 billion worth at death
$0 taxes

Makes a lot of sense. What is it with having a lot of money that makes you want to have more and more and more?

I don't usually like to partake in these kinds of discussions, but I feel compelled this time. A big flaw in what you are saying kcbigpapa is the assumption that most of the federal taxes collected comes from purchases, which is incorrect. The federal government collects income taxes on individuals and companies and not through a federal sales tax as there is no such thing (yet).

In fact the rich pay an abnormally high amount of individual income taxes compared to the poor and middle class. According to the Office of Tax Analysis, the U.S. individual income tax is "highly progressive," with a small group of higher-income taxpayers paying most of the individual income taxes each year.

What that means is that the top 5 percent of taxpayers pay more than one-half (53.8 percent) of all individual income taxes. The top 1 percent of taxpayers pay 33.7 percent of all individual income taxes. This group of taxpayers has paid more than 30 percent of individual income taxes since 1995. Moreover, since 1990 this group’s tax share has grown faster than their income share.

Taxpayers who rank in the top 50 percent of taxpayers by income pay virtually all individual income taxes. In all years since 1990, taxpayers in this group have paid over 94 percent of all individual income taxes. In 2000, 2001, and 2002, this group paid over 96 percent of the total.

This link http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/income...hopaysmost.htm shows one of the clearer assessments of our current tax break down.

Now if the discussion turns to which economic group is paying more in taxes due to what they purchase.....well I haven't seen any stats to show that the middle or lower class spend more of their income on stuff than the rich but if they do, then it is their choice to do so as I'm sure that no one is holding a gun to their head and making them buy flat screen tv's or playstations. Originally Posted by nsafun05

Papa was discussing the fair tax which would eliminate most of the stuff you are speaking about in favor of a national sales tax.

I don't usually like to partake in these kinds of discussions, but I feel compelled this time. A big flaw in what you are saying kcbigpapa is the assumption that most of the federal taxes collected comes from purchases, which is incorrect. The federal government collects income taxes on individuals and companies and not through a federal sales tax as there is no such thing (yet). Originally Posted by nsafun05

My comments were based on a consumption tax. May not have been clear though. It would be based on the end of income taxes with the consumption tax taking its place.

Now if the discussion turns to which economic group is paying more in taxes due to what they purchase.....well I haven't seen any stats to show that the middle or lower class spend more of their income on stuff than the rich but if they do, then it is their choice to do so as I'm sure that no one is holding a gun to their head and making them buy flat screen tv's or playstations. Originally Posted by nsafun05

NSA, simple common sense should tell you that the middle or lower class pay a larger percentage of income on food, gas, utilities, entertainment, etc. A middle class family of four making burgers at home probably pays around the same amount at the store as the rich family of four making burgers at home. As I mentioned in a post a while back, the rich know the score, we have a progressive tax system that is well known. So higher taxes for making more should come as no surprise to anyone. Don't want to pay more in taxes. Don't make as much. No one is holding a gun to their head saying they have to earn more. I didn't realize that stuff such as TV's and PlayStations were a sign of wealth. Silly me thought is was wages, homes, vacation homes, cars, stocks and bonds, 401(k)s and other cash and investment instruments.

Papa was discussing the fair tax which would eliminate most of the stuff you are speaking about in favor of a national sales tax. Originally Posted by dirty dog

I really hate it when I don't read an entire thread. Sorry kcbigpapa. Now I understand what you were referring to. Thx DD.

If 54% of us are paying the bill then we need to take a look at the tax exemptions and off shore banking to get more revenues. The poor don't hide their money in Grand Cayman or Switzerland Banks[/quote]

The 46% who aren't paying any taxes are generally not the uber rich. Look at the thresholds for EIC. In fact, the percentage of the total tax bill paid by the uber rich has steadily been going up.

I have to comment on the estate tax...and the notion that it only affects the very rich. I happen to know a 94 y/o woman who just died...and amazingly left $2 million to her sons. I say amazing because she amassed this on a school teacher's salary. Like I said, she just died, and was able to pass on this generational wealth tax free...and why not...she had already paid taxes on it once. Under the pre-2003 system...and likely the post-2010 system, $780,800 would have instead gone to the federal government. I just don't think that's right. Even if she were Paris Hilton's parents, it wouldn't be fair....but for those who like to bring class envy into the equation, there are alot of frugal little old ladies out there, who will be shafted...and ask an independent farmer what he thinks about the estate tax.

Lacrew, this year, there is no estate tax for 2010. Next year is $1 million. It was $3.5 million in 2009. There is also a $1 million gift exemption, plus currently $13K a year that one may give individually to anyone as an annual gift. I would suggest older Americans hire an accountant and a financial planner to reduce their end of life tax liability. Even if the estate tax were at $780K, the woman you are referring could have reduced her tax liability to basically nothing, if not nothing at all. Don't forget that those numbers above are per individual. Also, find me a farmer whose farm was lost as a result of the estate tax. That seems to be an urban legend. Farmers want special tax rules and then they also want their subsidies as well.

By the way, don't be surprised if you see a lot of old rich people taking their own lives at the end of the year in order to avoid the estate tax.

I left some details out about skipping a generation with some of the money (IRS doubles down), the number of recipients, status of the house, etc...but trust me, the number is correct. The financial planner had worked out the numbers, anticipating the expiration of the repeal...and when she died suddenly, the relatives got substantially more than what they were expecting.

I know the number of farms lost to the estate tax is low, because there are ways to from corporations, etc....but I've seen it happen...up close, first hand....frankly the guy died early and suddenly...and nothing was set up to shield it. Farm lost.

I actually do expect alot of family members to make some very poor end of life decisions for their dying relatives, as Jan 1 approaches, all because of the tax man.

Of all the taxes I can think of, this one seems the most punative to me.

A part of me would like to respond to these posts, but it is a part of me I don't like. I have avoided these discussions for a long time, because they don't bring out the best in me. Like I have said before, my goal is to be happy, regardless of what the government does.

I don't want to call any of you here socialist, capitalist, conservative, liberal or anything like that. The only thing I want to call any of you is friend. This board has supported me during some very difficult times in my life, and I don't want to generate any animosity toward or from anyone on here. Those who helped me greatly, I have no idea where they were politically. Love knows no politics.

So I am going to bow out of this discussion, and apologize for any negative emotions my posts have reflected or generated. I truly don't think that anything we do is going to change the course of the country. I hope I'm wrong, but I fought for a long time, and all I got was frustrated. I'm much happier without my TV, and am able to choose which news I get by clicking on interesting stories.

So all I want from here, is if I should run into any of you at a M&G, or some other venue where we know who each other is, is to have a drink, tell a joke, and share stories of wonderful times with pretty ladies.

I almost forgot, whatever does happen to the country in the future, it will probably be my fault.

Well COG feel free to interject your opinion anytime, I dont take things personally that are said on this board, but I like a good argument LOL. But I would agree nothing we do or say will change a thing. For me it brings about a chance to have a conversation about something other than what new ANAL movies is coming out of West Coast productions, some of these threads make you think, some make you mad LOL. But I never take them personally. So please drop in once in a while and voice an opinion, check out my name the mobster thread some folks like it. There not all from KC some are easy to name LOL.

I almost forgot, whatever does happen to the country in the future, it will probably be my fault. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

We already knew this COG.

I agree with DD, don't take the Sandbox personally. In case you could not tell, I tend to be a smart ass and reflect it in my posts. If I see a post that I find absolutely ridiculous (that is not to say it is ridiculous, but ridiculous to me), then I will let that poster know. I've done it to those on the left and on the right. More on the right though. LOL.

This is the most important thing about the Sandbox COG. LEAVE IT HERE. I have helped my fellow hobbyists out in the other threads when I had the ability to help them out, regardless of their political view, religious affiliation, morals, racial views, etc.