airdvr 197 #1 July 10, 2012 Morning Bell: Obama’s Tax Hike on Job Creators According to the Treasury study, 4.3 million of these small businesses employed workers in 2007 (the most recent year for which data are available). The Treasury report shows that 1.2 million, or 28 percent, of them earned more than $200,000—the income threshold over which President Obama’s tax increase would apply. More importantly for job creation, those 28 percent of businesses earned almost all—91 percent—of the income earned by flow-through employer-businesses. http://blog.heritage.org/2012/07/10/morning-bell-obamas-tax-hike-on-job-creators/Please don't dent the planet. Destinations by Roxanne Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,621 #2 July 10, 2012 QuoteMorning Bell: Obama’s Tax Hike on Job Creators According to the Treasury study, 4.3 million of these small businesses employed workers in 2007 (the most recent year for which data are available). The Treasury report shows that 1.2 million, or 28 percent, of them earned more than $200,000—the income threshold over which President Obama’s tax increase would apply. More importantly for job creation, those 28 percent of businesses earned almost all—91 percent—of the income earned by flow-through employer-businesses. http://blog.heritage.org/2012/07/10/morning-bell-obamas-tax-hike-on-job-creators/ As opposed to a borrow and spend Republican.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airdvr 197 #3 July 10, 2012 QuoteAs opposed to a borrow and spend Republican really John? You want to go there?Please don't dent the planet. Destinations by Roxanne Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
headoverheels 291 #4 July 10, 2012 BFD, how MUCH over $200k did they earn? How many single business owners earned over $200k, vs. married earning over $250k? It will be a lot less than 28 percent. Of course those 28 percent earned almost all (91%) of income, just like the top 10% (or 5% or 1%) of tax payers get a huge slice of the total income. Of course, your quoted web site was in favor of the mandate a while back, when it was a Republican idea. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #5 July 10, 2012 QuoteOf course those 28 percent earned almost all (91%) of income, just like the top 10% (or 5% or 1%) of tax payers get a huge slice of the total income. Interesting stats...where are they from? According to the IRS tax stats (2009), the 200k+ filers (roughly the top 3%) earned 26% of the total income, and paid 50% of the total income taxes. 500k+ filers are 0.5% of filers, earn 14% of the total income and pay 30% of the total income taxes. The dreadful evil millionaires are 0.16% of filers, earn 9.5% of the total income and pay 20.5% of the total income taxes. So...how much *MORE* of the burden to you think they should carry?Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,621 #6 July 10, 2012 QuoteQuoteOf course those 28 percent earned almost all (91%) of income, just like the top 10% (or 5% or 1%) of tax payers get a huge slice of the total income. Interesting stats...where are they from? According to the IRS tax stats (2009), the 200k+ filers (roughly the top 3%) earned 26% of the total income, and paid 50% of the total income taxes. 500k+ filers are 0.5% of filers, earn 14% of the total income and pay 30% of the total income taxes. The dreadful evil millionaires are 0.16% of filers, earn 9.5% of the total income and pay 20.5% of the total income taxes. So...how much *MORE* of the burden to you think they should carry? Enough that their overall tax rate is not less than that of their administrative assistants. Investment income should be taxed like any other income, not at some special favored rate for the rich.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #7 July 10, 2012 QuoteQuoteQuoteOf course those 28 percent earned almost all (91%) of income, just like the top 10% (or 5% or 1%) of tax payers get a huge slice of the total income. Interesting stats...where are they from? According to the IRS tax stats (2009), the 200k+ filers (roughly the top 3%) earned 26% of the total income, and paid 50% of the total income taxes. 500k+ filers are 0.5% of filers, earn 14% of the total income and pay 30% of the total income taxes. The dreadful evil millionaires are 0.16% of filers, earn 9.5% of the total income and pay 20.5% of the total income taxes. So...how much *MORE* of the burden to you think they should carry? Enough that their overall tax rate is not less than that of their administrative assistants. Investment income should be taxed like any other income, not at some special favored rate for the rich. It's not - anyone that invests gets that rate, not just the rich. Class envy is *so* petty.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #8 July 10, 2012 QuoteIt's not - anyone that invests gets that rate, not just the rich. Class envy is *so* petty. it's still stupid - income is income, taxing different buckets at different rates is just social engineering - which the gov should stay out of ... 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 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,621 #9 July 10, 2012 QuoteQuoteIt's not - anyone that invests gets that rate, not just the rich. Class envy is *so* petty. it's still stupid - income is income, taxing different buckets at different rates is just social engineering - which the gov should stay out of +1... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rstanley0312 0 #10 July 10, 2012 QuoteQuoteQuoteOf course those 28 percent earned almost all (91%) of income, just like the top 10% (or 5% or 1%) of tax payers get a huge slice of the total income. Interesting stats...where are they from? According to the IRS tax stats (2009), the 200k+ filers (roughly the top 3%) earned 26% of the total income, and paid 50% of the total income taxes. 500k+ filers are 0.5% of filers, earn 14% of the total income and pay 30% of the total income taxes. The dreadful evil millionaires are 0.16% of filers, earn 9.5% of the total income and pay 20.5% of the total income taxes. So...how much *MORE* of the burden to you think they should carry? Enough that their overall tax rate is not less than that of their administrative assistants. Investment income should be taxed like any other income, not at some special favored rate for the rich. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aufAtuTwKlELife is all about ass....either you're kicking it, kissing it, working it off, or trying to get a piece of it. Muff Brother #4382 Dudeist Skydiver #000 www.fundraiseadventure.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #11 July 10, 2012 QuoteQuoteIt's not - anyone that invests gets that rate, not just the rich. Class envy is *so* petty. it's still stupid - income is income, taxing different buckets at different rates is just social engineering - which the gov should stay out of Claiming that "the rich" get a special rate is social engineering as well.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #12 July 10, 2012 QuoteQuoteQuoteIt's not - anyone that invests gets that rate, not just the rich. Class envy is *so* petty. it's still stupid - income is income, taxing different buckets at different rates is just social engineering - which the gov should stay out of +1 then of course you agree that having a progressive rate structure is also unnecessary social engineering as is mortgage deductions and subsidies for solar panels and subsidies to banks and industries to keep them alive and cars for cash efforts etc etc etc I don't like all of these - I think it's unnecessary I don't like the lefty philosophy, because they want to play favorites all the time and meddle with who gets which bennies I don't like the 'typical' righties, because they claim to want my philosophy, but then they cry if they think they'll lose their precious special rates and deductions (it would be easier if we wiped the slate clean and just establish a single set of rules) ... 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 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rstanley0312 0 #13 July 10, 2012 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteIt's not - anyone that invests gets that rate, not just the rich. Class envy is *so* petty. it's still stupid - income is income, taxing different buckets at different rates is just social engineering - which the gov should stay out of +1 then of course you agree that having a progressive rate structure is also unnecessary social engineering as is mortgage deductions and subsidies for solar panels and subsidies to banks and industries to keep them alive and cars for cash efforts etc etc etc I don't like all of these - I think it's unnecessary I don't like the lefty philosophy, because they want to play favorites all the time and meddle with who gets which bennies I don't like the 'typical' righties, because they claim to want my philosophy, but then they cry if they think they'll lose their precious special rates and deductions (it would be easier if we wiped the slate clean and just establish a single set of rules) I think you are saying flat tax... are you? If so I agree. Get rid of the deductions and make everyone pay their "fair" share!Life is all about ass....either you're kicking it, kissing it, working it off, or trying to get a piece of it. Muff Brother #4382 Dudeist Skydiver #000 www.fundraiseadventure.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #14 July 10, 2012 QuoteQuoteQuoteIt's not - anyone that invests gets that rate, not just the rich. Class envy is *so* petty. it's still stupid - income is income, taxing different buckets at different rates is just social engineering - which the gov should stay out of Claiming that "the rich" get a special rate is social engineering as well. no, it's just marketing your statement doesn't even make any sense, Mike - the rich get to take advantage of the special rates much more than those with no investment income - it's pretty clear it's a boon to a certain income class I don't like it any better than welfare for other income classes - government shouldn't be trying to pick winners and losers ... 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 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #15 July 10, 2012 QuoteI think you are saying flat tax... are you? If so I agree. Get rid of the deductions and make everyone pay their "fair" share! yes - get rid of all deductions, all incentives, every single little 'special gift' that the politicians 'gave' to the people to buy their votes - (that goes for multi-millionaires CEOs, welfare moms, and the middle class) - then tax at one rate for all sources of income (richer people pay more dollars - so it's still progressive in amount - but equal in proportion (proportion is also considered a share)) A uniform $$ amount (everyone pays the same amount rather than the same percentage) is also fair - but I don't think it's doable or practical of course, "fair" is subjective to the max - that's just my definition what's 'fair' about someone with low income paying nothing? what's 'fair' about the uber rich getting special deductions that only they can leverage and paying nothing? what's 'fair' about a home owner paying less than a non-home owner? etc etc etc ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rstanley0312 0 #16 July 10, 2012 QuoteQuoteI think you are saying flat tax... are you? If so I agree. Get rid of the deductions and make everyone pay their "fair" share! yes - get rid of all deductions, all incentives, every single little 'special gift' that the politicians 'gave' to the people to buy their votes - (that goes for multi-millionaires CEOs, welfare moms, and the middle class) - then tax at one rate for all sources of income (richer people pay more dollars - so it's still progressive in amount - but equal in proportion (proportion is also considered a share)) A uniform $$ amount (everyone pays the same amount rather than the same percentage) is also fair - but I don't think it's doable or practical of course, "fair" is subjective to the max - that's just my definition what's 'fair' about someone with low income paying nothing? what's 'fair' about the uber rich getting special deductions that only they can leverage and paying nothing? what's 'fair' about a home owner paying less than a non-home owner? etc etc etc Agree 100%Life is all about ass....either you're kicking it, kissing it, working it off, or trying to get a piece of it. Muff Brother #4382 Dudeist Skydiver #000 www.fundraiseadventure.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #17 July 10, 2012 Quoteno, it's just marketing your statement doesn't even make any sense, Mike - the rich get to take advantage of the special rates much more than those with no investment income - it's pretty clear it's a boon to a certain income class If you hold less than a year, you pay your normal income tax on the profit. If you hold more than one year, you pay either 0% (10/15% tax brackets) or 15% (all other brackets) on the profit. ANYBODY that invests gets those same rates, whether they're Joe Sixpack or George Soros. There's no "special rates" just for the rich.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bertt 0 #18 July 10, 2012 Why should job doers get taxed at a higher rate than job creators?You don't have to outrun the bear. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
headoverheels 291 #19 July 10, 2012 QuoteQuoteI think you are saying flat tax... are you? If so I agree. Get rid of the deductions and make everyone pay their "fair" share! yes - get rid of all deductions, all incentives, every single little 'special gift' that the politicians 'gave' to the people to buy their votes - (that goes for multi-millionaires CEOs, welfare moms, and the middle class) - then tax at one rate for all sources of income (richer people pay more dollars - so it's still progressive in amount - but equal in proportion (proportion is also considered a share)) A uniform $$ amount (everyone pays the same amount rather than the same percentage) is also fair - but I don't think it's doable or practical of course, "fair" is subjective to the max - that's just my definition what's 'fair' about someone with low income paying nothing? what's 'fair' about the uber rich getting special deductions that only they can leverage and paying nothing? what's 'fair' about a home owner paying less than a non-home owner? etc etc etc Let's get rid of deductions for dependents while we are at it, and eliminate the marriage penalty (a pet peeve of mine). Are we going to roll in Social Security, or eliminate the cap? Otherwise, the poor are paying higher % taxes than the rich, just as the middle class are now. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
headoverheels 291 #20 July 10, 2012 So would you favor either a true flat tax on income, or a flat tax with some zero bracket (say 10k per earner)? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rstanley0312 0 #21 July 10, 2012 QuoteWhy should job doers get taxed at a higher rate than job creators? http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/jul/10/cbo-rich-pay-outsized-share-taxes/Life is all about ass....either you're kicking it, kissing it, working it off, or trying to get a piece of it. Muff Brother #4382 Dudeist Skydiver #000 www.fundraiseadventure.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airdvr 197 #22 July 10, 2012 So let's just say Barry gets the tax rates he wants. It would generate roughly 85 billion annually. Enough to run the government for 8 1/2 days. This is shooting bee bees at a tank. Meanwhile, while we go back and forth over taxes 3.1 million people have gone on disability since June of 2009. In June of this year alone 80,000 jobs were created, but 85,000 went on disability.Please don't dent the planet. Destinations by Roxanne Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #23 July 10, 2012 Quote ANYBODY that invests gets those same rates, whether they're Joe Sixpack or George Soros. There's no "special rates" just for the rich. you're purposely ignoring who has the ability to use investment income and who doesn't - you know that, don't be obtuse to the actual point of the statement If we gave a special deduction for investments over $2,000,000 you could make the same argument admit it - you are a social liberal that wants to socially engineer a special spending and investment behavior rather than just let the market run freely - ... 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 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #24 July 10, 2012 QuoteLet's get rid of deductions for dependents while we are at it, and eliminate the marriage penalty (a pet peeve of mine). Are we going to roll in Social Security, or eliminate the cap? Otherwise, the poor are paying higher % taxes than the rich, just as the middle class are now. yes, yes and yes --- why does the government have different rules for being married? two individuals should file for themselves, it's not the government's business who is partnering or not - not in terms of revenue collection --- why does the government also have to meddle in retirement income in the first place? ... 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 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #25 July 10, 2012 QuoteSo would you favor either a true flat tax on income, or a flat tax with some zero bracket (say 10k per earner)? Why should ANY income be exempt? Else it just becomes a game of where to set the amount such that enough people get by free to buy each election. Why stop at $10K? how about $45K? does that get 51% of the vote? How about $200K? I know a few here that would like that just fine too. Everybody pays starting at dollar number 1. The personal exemption is just as flawed as the child deduction and all those other things. ... 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 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
