unconventional idea to modify the income tax laws

[jimmytavino 16]

.... i'm not sure why this approach has not been considered sooner... but in this country ( USA ) we keep fighting about percentages and about rich vs. non rich and about needing to bolster the "revenues" so as to cover the "expenses"....

but how about.. ??? an income tax system that varies....
based on the TYPE of income.. and How it's generated....

I have felt for many years now, that income which is made in the
" Artistic Field " such as music, movies, TV and Professional Sports,,
might be taxed differently ,( i. e. More heavily ) than say, income made in the "Service to others" field, such as public service jobs, teaching, nursing, fire fighting, and yes even Police Service.. The former "jobs" create HUGE wealth for folks like actors, musicians, pro sports types... who then are in a position to hire tax attorneys and accountants to "work the system" so that they pay as LITTLE as possible.... Case in point ,, i see Ashton & Demi are gonna split 290 Million Bucks....

Why not pop those folks ,,,at say, a 40 or 50 % rate..... They will still "live the good life". will still jet -set all over the world, at their leisure, and will continue to want for Nothing"... USE those specific revenues to earmark funding of the ARTS...and Sports, at the regional and local levels...

I'd rather see, theater, sports, and the arts get funded right here in our communities, allowing More people to take part, in such activities... Right now,, the general populations' level of such activity, is basically limited to BUYING tickets, CDs DVDs. and living their artistic dreams through someone ELSE....OR engaging in them, at Their own Expense
of time AND $$$$$ and making not a Dime from it...

Tax hard working teachers, and Garbage men, and certain other professsions at a lower rate.....or hell.... at ZERO....
this would encourage MORE people to enter into those fields.. would leave those folks more NET income to spend in their own communities to "spur the economy"...and would offset annual salaries which are waaay below the true VALUE of their work...
Who adds more to the well being of our society.. the CEOS and BAnkers?? who shuffle the money of OTHERS?? and then take a BIG slice of it as "earned" commission? The attorneys who mostly Insert themselves into the business of others... and TAke a BIG slice...?? and rate themselves at Hundreds of dollars / Hour?? or the Medical "understructure",, Nurses, aides, attendants, (NOT the Doctors,,) who create the foundation upon which the "big Shot" surgeons, specialists, and "experts" are able to ply their trade ? and make millions??

What about The Teachers, the factory workers, the ditch diggers, and the laborers? who day in and day out handle the major and minor aspects of "keeping things on track "???in our daily lives...
Who IS more important??


i know that such a plan would be quite complicated and maybe not so widely accepted but the current plan is equally complicated and not widely accepted... try going to IRS.gov..... page after page after page of confusing and complex wording....

I often wonder, what ever happened to the concept of "the Starving Artist" who labors at his or her craft,, for Nothing... lives in a creative but penniless way.. for the LOVE of the craft at which they may toil..
Instead We have elevated so many of those folks ( actors musicians, athletes) to a point of Regal Stature,, irrespective of their Morals, ethics, behavior, and way of life...much of which is questionable...

it might be about time that some things changed....
i dunno.......
thoughts??????

[rushmc 18]

The biggest debate I see here would be deciding what the value is.

who gets to decide what a society would see as valuable and at what rate to tax (or not tax) it

Besides, a system like this still gives politions the power to pick winners and losers

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[popsjumper 2]

Quote

Let's get movie tickets back under $5 and Pro-sports games back to $25 a family. The middle class is suffering! We need cheap concert tickets!

Hell yeah! Those bozos priced me out of business years ago.

Concert - Pink Floyd $5
Saturday matinee - double feature, newsreel, cartoon $0.75
Lazy time - 5-finger baggie of pot $15

Life is less enjoyable these days.

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

[wmw999 2,128]

If you think the tax code is complicated and full of lobbying opportunities now, just imagine what it would be under those circumstances.

Even with the "types of income" being divided into wages, capital gains, etc. it's tough.

But, frankly, thinking outside the box is good right now. When I found out our much-vaunted super committee wasn't even meeting together it was clear that nothing was going to come of that.

Folks: people are going to hurt. some of them are Republicans who signed Grover Norquist's no-new-taxes pledge. some of them are poor people woh are already hurting. Some of them are farmers. Some of them are sick people who are already hurting. Some of them are veterans, soldiers, investors.

US dz.commers are among them, regardless. No matter who you are in the US, you benefit from governmental services, among them ones you don't even consider.

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[GeorgiaDon 340]

Quote

I have felt for many years now, that income which is made in the
" Artistic Field " such as music, movies, TV and Professional Sports,,
might be taxed differently ,( i. e. More heavily ) than say, income made in the "Service to others" field, such as public service jobs, teaching, nursing, fire fighting, and yes even Police Service.. The former "jobs" create HUGE wealth for folks like actors, musicians, pro sports types... who then are in a position to hire tax attorneys and accountants to "work the system" so that they pay as LITTLE as possible.... Case in point ,, i see Ashton & Demi are gonna split 290 Million Bucks....

I don't know what kind of social circle you move in, but I know lots of "starving artists" (and musicians), few of whom are able to make any kind of a decent living at their art and so have to teach or do other things to survive. I think if implemented your plan would just result in even fewer artists/musicians being able to make it through the years when they are getting known, so we would have even less music (and art) to choose from.

On the other hand, I can see no good reason why people who actually work for a living, including those who produce creative products, are taxed at a higher rate than those who earn their income through investments and never have to put in an honest day's work.

Don

_____________________________________
Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996)
“Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

those who earn their income through{{whatever}} and never have to put in an honest day's work.

It's none of my business how someone makes their lawful income and I'm not arrogant enough to declare one person's work as honest and another's as crooked.


The idea is idiotic and just more social engineering. Gov should just stay out of it and treat all income streams equally.

the idea is not "unconventional" either - it's pretty much the whole reason there's two very disfunctional parties - each of which tries so hard to make subjective value judgments on how people live and then punishing those they don't like and rewarding those they do like.


I like this thread - it just shows that people are just like those parties - they all want to decide for others how they get punished and rewarded - rather than just stay out of their business.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[kelpdiver 2]

Jimmy - read (or more likely, reread) Animal Farm (Orwell). As soon as you attempt to select those deserving greater or lesser taxation, you cross past the point where some animals are more equal than others. Or as a human example, exactly what Orwell referred to, communism. Party officials live well. The rest, not so.

There are thousands (hundreds of?) would be actors in LA that are doing any job they can until they can get their break. At what point would you suggest higher taxation for them? In Bruce Campbell's autobiography (If Chins Could Kill), he talks about how much he earned as the lead star of Army of Darkness, the third and biggest of the Evil Dead trilogy. It wasn't big money - it was quite far from it. Bruce has made a lot more money from the cult around Ash than he did from the movies directly.

Aston and Demi are certainly in a different ballpark, but again it's defined by their income, not by their field of work. Also notable that Aston is making his money as an actor and as a producer (iow, employs people). Would you tax income as a producer differently?

NFL athletes make a minimum salary of 285,000 as rookies, and then it scales upwards. Overall average is 1.1, dragged up by the superstars. Sounds great, but for the fact that their average career is 3.5 or 6 years (depends on if you take the player's association methodology versus the owners), and it typically ends with a serious injury. If you spent that money like a middle class person, or as importantly, if you spent some of that time in college getting a degree or at least a plan after football, you could do alright on that money, but not lavishly. So again any notion of a higher tax against success should be based on salary.

RNs and firefighters and cops tend to be well paid, with strong pensions and often absurd OT pay. Fire fighters in particular are untouchables since 9/11. Some of the others you list (teachers) aren't in nearly so strong a position.

[rehmwa 2]

and tax the hell out of skydiving professionals too. they are just playing, it's not like real work

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[billvon 2,406]

>Tax hard working teachers, and Garbage men, and certain
>other professsions at a lower rate.....or hell.... at ZERO....

Except you'd have to have a "lazy garbage man" exception. Our garbage is now picked up by two guys driving a truck with a robot arm. Two guys? Really? Heck, the robot should get the tax exemption; it's doing all the work.

[rehmwa 2]

damn straight - why all the hating on hardworking robots?




except for that whole 'trying to take over the earth and make mankind a slave race to their need for little gears and lubricants' thing

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[kallend 1,635]

Quote

and tax the hell out of skydiving professionals too. they are just playing, it's not like real work

Yeah, like packers declare their income.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[billvon 2,406]

>Yeah, like packers declare their income.

Exactly. We need an extra tax on them to counteract their scofflaw ways and ensure they pay their fair share.

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

>Yeah, like packers declare their income.

Exactly. We need an extra tax on them to counteract their scofflaw ways and ensure they pay their fair share.

because that's where the money is

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[GeorgiaDon 340]

Quote

It's none of my business how someone makes their lawful income...

agreed

Quote

Gov should just stay out of it and treat all income streams equally.

agreed. Currently income generated from employment is taxed at a higher rate than income generated from investments, which is taxed as capital gains. This is indeed social engineering, a declaration that investment income is of more value to society (and needs to be encouraged by taxing it at a lower rate)) compared to employment income. Remove the "social engineering" and count income generated from investments the same as other forms of income.

Don

_____________________________________
Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996)
“Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

[rehmwa 2]

absolutely. and inheritance. and gifts. etc etc etc

But I still take exception to "actually work for a living" and "never have to put in an honest day's work" comments - It's just another way of saying you've decided for others what's worthwhile or not.

I'm sure you can find lazy investors/teachers/firemen etc and you can also find really hard working of the same. Heck, I can do it just amongst my personal acquaintances for those three jobs.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[popsjumper 2]

Quote

Jimmy - read (or more likely, reread) Animal Farm (Orwell). As soon as you attempt to select those deserving greater or lesser taxation, you cross past the point where some animals are more equal than others. Or as a human example, exactly what Orwell referred to, communism. Party officials live well. The rest, not so.

Somewhat like what we Americans are faced with already and have been since day 1?

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

[popsjumper 2]

Jimmy...I like it. You're thinkin'. Somewhat more so than most 'Merican sheeple.

I have always wondered why the ones doing the physical labor and/or the most beneficial jobs are not paid as much, or more, than the pencil pushers.

-Farmers vs the middle man and such.
-Builders vs designers and such
-Laborers vs the straw boss and such

(OK, OK...so I'm a dreamer, get over it everybody)

But, off the top of my head I don't see how it could be made to be workable in real life.

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

[popsjumper 2]

Quote

>Yeah, like packers declare their income.

Exactly. We need an extra tax on them to counteract their scofflaw ways and ensure they pay their fair share.

They would be in the Zero Tax group. They actually work for a living.

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

[champu 1]

If you re-read your post you've basically just said "tax people who make more at a higher rate" and all you've done is enumerate some of the groups you feel make a lot or don't make a lot. Do you have examples of people who make a lot of money who should be taxed at a lower rate or people who don't make very much who should be taxed heavily? I'm trying to get a better understanding of how this is really different than the more simple concept of a progressive tax structure.

And remember, when you ask yourself the question of "who is more valuable" in terms of deciding tax rates on individuals, you don't get to pit a large group of people against a single person, or a huge group of people against a tiny group of people like factory workers vs. CEOs. "Who's more valuable? An orthopedic surgeon or six nurses?" I really can't answer that, it depends on what people come in with that shift, doesn't it?

[billvon 2,406]

>They would be in the Zero Tax group. They actually work for a living.

What? They're recreatin'!

[jimmytavino 16]

Quote

Jimmy...I like it. You're thinkin'. Somewhat more so than most 'Merican sheeple.***


...while my post is based on an "off the top of my head" idea...i will agree that trying to make it Happen,,, WOULD be complex...
the concept has mostly evolved, as i've watched those in the Entertainment Industry, make millions and millions...year after year....In lots of cases working for less than 6 months of THAT year, ( think Pro athletes) and from watching Actors and musicians who only need to produce one or two movies or records a year,,,,

Am i jealous?? not really...good for themm... I just think that in the real scheme of things, while entertaining, their work is NOT crucial to societies' well being...and it wouldn't hurt, for them to contribute more......


As for allllll other occupations... YES it would be tough to place a Value on it since values are so subjective..
BUT an independent and impartial review might be able to categorize work into 3 or 4 levels.

1. service workers, foundation level medical workers, educators, hell..... even day-care operators... low paying til one has endured years and years of hard work, at which point SOME folks start to earn a decent wage. Entry level jobs in these sectors pay very little. So tax them in a moderate way. Use those funds for education, libraries, and to reduce property taxes for those who Own homes and commercial buildings.

2. manufacturing workers, factory workers, those who "punch in" and "punch out" , who work on lines and in assembly facilities and who do somewhat monotonous jobs... Tax them at a rate which still allows for a good net wage... They can simply come in and then LEave each day. NOT having to worry about things the way UPPER Management May, hopefully doing their work soas to insure the continued EXISTENCE of their company but basically "leaving their work, AT work", when quitting time rolls around... USE those funds to pay for infra-structure repair , interstate highways, and maybe high speed train service tracks, switches, stations etc.

3. bankers, stock market managers, C E O s, Upper managment...College Administrators and all TENURED college professors... Those who do "not much" to get their hands dirty, but rake in the big bucks , off the backs of underlings.. tax them pretty heavily. Use THAT money to fund the defense department...

4. professional athletes, actors, musicians who surpass 2 million bucks a year. tax them REAL heavy and earmark those funds for Arts and sports at the local level, dovetailed into use of ALL public school buildings. Start programs where members of a community can USE the public school facilities, for excersize, for study, for Arts,, during OFF school, hours. ( EVERYONE who participates in such useage WILL sign and adhere to a waiver of their right to sue, should they turn an ankle on the hoops court, or should they, in some other way, be injured...)
Why should we have to pay a memebership fee, at a Health club??? when we have (usually ) top level facilities right in our own Towns which have been Paid for, with Our property Taxes...

yes yes. i Know that this entire concept is subject to all sorts of scrutiny and critique, and could be tough to implement. Still if structured FAirly,,, very few could really dispute the possibility of it's working...
Don't like the upper levels of taxation??? choose a different career. wanna pitch in, AND save on income taxes??? choose a service career.
As for 'wanna be ' actors,,, whose enthusiasm and drive,,,, i would NEVER want to squelch... at least WHILE they are being a waiter, or working retail somewhere, or taking on part time work... at least for THOSE wages,, they are NOT being taxed so heavily...
i suppose it comes down to.
" From those , to whom Much has been Given,,,, MUCH is required".....

i appreciate all the comments made here, and of course, " it's ALWAYS never simple"... but some type of parity would go a long way towards establishing a better sense,, That "we're ALL in this together" and could help eliminate the wide ranging disparity which is leading this country AND the entire world down a slick and slippery slope... all because of economics..
IMHO

certainly these points here can be subjected to other forum members picking them apart, one by one, and in SC i'd expect as much.... But i'd challenge everyone who comments,,,, to suggest a revision, or an alternative, to what i've suggested,,, rather than just blasting it... thanks.

jmy.....out.

[nanook 1]

Quote

Am i jealous?? not really...good for themm... I just think that in the real scheme of things, while entertaining, their work is NOT crucial to societies' well being...and it wouldn't hurt, for them to contribute more......

this is where I disagree. Ask any active duty Service Member. Entertainment has always been one of the biggest, if not the most important thing to society due to morale. Hell, look at technology advancements outside of Science. It's mostly there to bring Entertainment more efficiently.

_____________________________

"The trouble with quotes on the internet is that you can never know if they are genuine" - Abraham Lincoln

[billvon 2,406]

>...College Administrators and all TENURED college professors

So give benefits to the less skilled, less experienced and less educated teachers, but hammer the more experienced ones? Doesn't make much sense. Is it something about tenure you don't like?

Let's take the most likely result of your plan. No one gets "tenure" any more, and instead they get "seniority." Are you OK with then taxing all teachers the same?

>as i've watched those in the Entertainment Industry, make millions and millions...year
>after year....In lots of cases working for less than 6 months of THAT year, ( think Pro
>athletes) and from watching Actors and musicians who only need to produce one or
>two movies or records a year,,,,

Do you want to hammer them because they make a lot of money, or because they are working in a "useless" field? Because most entertainers make peanuts, so hammering them doesn't give you much money. (And skydiving is probably the most useless field of all, so look out!)

>Still if structured FAirly,,, very few could really dispute the possibility of it's working...

Oh, you can make anything work. But no two people will agree what's fair. Are you really going to hammer a George Bailey and give a break to a union factory worker who manages to do maybe five hours of work a week?

>but some type of parity would go a long way towards establishing a better sense,,
> That "we're ALL in this together" . . .

Honestly I think your proposal does the opposite. It tells some people (bankers) "you're a worthless parasite" and tells other people (day care operators) "you're special." It's another way to divide people into classes.

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

>Honestly I think your proposal does the opposite. It tells some people (bankers) "you're a worthless parasite" and tells other people (day care operators) "you're special." It's another way to divide people into classes.

another good point

Adding complexity just because someone has a subjective opinion on the value of another's worth..... it's just nuts. The whole concept makes me very sick to even think of what's behind it - let alone the consequences of such a system and opportunities for huge abuse - let alone the need for a very complex and expensive tax collection division.

simpler is better - this is so in the direction of both fiscal and social destructiveness, it's hard to say where to start to comment

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

yes yes. i Know that this entire concept is subject to all sorts of scrutiny and critique, and could be tough to implement. Still if structured FAirly,,, very few could really dispute the possibility of it's working...
Don't like the upper levels of taxation??? choose a different career. wanna pitch in, AND save on income taxes??? choose a service career.

In practice, I suspect we'd see a constantly moving battlefield, with winners today become losers tomorrow. It would be like working for Wells Fargo - never end division of people. It wouldn't really work out to say "pick a career and you'll know what to expect." By the time you make it, the reality will be very different.