# Taxes from the Rich **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 13, 2011, 4:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/taxes-from-the-rich/599547 "2011-10-13T16:11:49Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Hi\_Medlo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/a183cd/32.png) [@Hi\_Medlo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hi_Medlo)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2011, 4:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/taxes-from-the-rich/599547/1 "2011-10-13T16:11:49Z")
One of the basic tenets of the Occupy (insert name here) movement is that the rich are making too much money and aren’t paying enough taxes. I’m curious, how much revenue would be created if The Rich (your definition) paid a fair share (again, your definition) of the tax burden. Would it cover the deficits we have now? Would it fund the programs generally demanded by Occupy? ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2011, 4:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/taxes-from-the-rich/599547/2 "2011-10-13T16:13:08Z")
Yes. Yes. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2011, 4:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/taxes-from-the-rich/599547/3 "2011-10-13T16:18:23Z")
I can’t answer for any of the demonstrators, but allowing the Bush tax cuts to expire would go a long way toward reducing the deficit for example. ---
**Author:** ![Sage\_Rat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sage_rat/32/399_2.png) [@Sage\_Rat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sage_Rat)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2011, 4:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/taxes-from-the-rich/599547/4 "2011-10-13T16:28:27Z")
Hard to say. Based upon income, nearly all taxable money is held by the middle class. Based upon wealth, the top 10% owns most of everything. But wealth includes things like houses, cars, stock, etc. You can’t tax someone 10% of their house every year (i.e. removing 10% of the physical house and carting it off). You can only tax them on their money, which would mean when they buy/sell their house, when they buy/sell their car, or when they buy/sell their stocks. I’m fairly certain that some of those are already being taxed, but perhaps not at a progressive rate (i.e. purchasing a car might be taxed at 10% regardless of whether it’s a $20k car of a $1m car). In the case of a car, taxing more expensive cars at a higher rate is easy. But if you taxed stock transactions by the total number of shares being purchased, people would just buy them in smaller chunks. If you taxed stock purchases based on the purchasers income level, then they’d ask for a lower income but more stock options. That just means that less stock is available to sell to the public, hindering growth. Overall, taxing wealth is rather difficult. ---
**Author:** ![Sage\_Rat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sage_rat/32/399_2.png) [@Sage\_Rat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sage_Rat)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2011, 4:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/taxes-from-the-rich/599547/5 "2011-10-13T16:30:42Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > I can’t answer for any of the demonstrators, but allowing the Bush tax cuts to expire would go a long way toward reducing the deficit for example. Possibly true, but on the other hand, both stimulus packages and tax cutting are based on Keynesian policy. If you’re injecting stimulus money and raising taxes at the same time, then you’re not accomplishing anything. You’re supposed to wait until after the economy has picked up before you start balancing your budget, and blithely run yourself into debt until that point. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2011, 4:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/taxes-from-the-rich/599547/6 "2011-10-13T16:51:58Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > Yes. Yes. Cite. Cite. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2011, 5:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/taxes-from-the-rich/599547/7 "2011-10-13T17:04:30Z")
> [@Sage\_Rat](#): > > You’re supposed to wait until after the economy has picked up before you start balancing your budget Stop making sense. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2011, 5:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/taxes-from-the-rich/599547/8 "2011-10-13T17:04:32Z")
> [@Hi\_Medlo](#): > > Would it fund the programs generally demanded by Occupy? This part depends on what they are demanding. Have they decided? Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![septimus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/septimus/32/410_2.png) [@septimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/septimus)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2011, 5:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/taxes-from-the-rich/599547/9 "2011-10-13T17:07:42Z")
> [@Sage\_Rat](#): > > Based upon income, nearly all taxable money is held by the middle class. Either your data is incorrect, or “nearly all” doesn’t mean what you think it means. ---
**Author:** ![Sage\_Rat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sage_rat/32/399_2.png) [@Sage\_Rat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sage_Rat)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2011, 5:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/taxes-from-the-rich/599547/10 "2011-10-13T17:24:42Z")
> [@septimus](#): > > Either your data is incorrect, or “nearly all” doesn’t mean what you think it means. Multiply the income by the number of people with that income and you get [an image like this](http://publius2point0.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/taxabledistribution.png) (total amount of taxable money is the area under the curve). The reality would be more blocky looking, since most people have a yearly income that is a multiple of $1000, but otherwise it’s accurate. Here’s the real income statistics: [http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/cpstables/032011/perinc/new11\_000.htm](http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/cpstables/032011/perinc/new11_000.htm) ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2011, 5:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/taxes-from-the-rich/599547/11 "2011-10-13T17:32:00Z")
The top 1% paid $380B in taxes (I think that is 2008 data) and the deficit is about $1.3T. We would have to increase their taxes about 300% to cover the deficit. If the OP means the debt instead of the deficit, then I think we’re about 10x that. ---
**Author:** ![Mighty\_Mouse](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mighty_mouse/32/7776_2.png) [@Mighty\_Mouse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mighty_Mouse)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2011, 5:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/taxes-from-the-rich/599547/12 "2011-10-13T17:35:07Z")
> [@septimus](#): > > Either your data is incorrect, or “nearly all” doesn’t mean what you think it means. Or “middle class” doesn’t mean what he thinks it does. We are in the “class” defined by the Occcupiers as “rich” (household income over $250k) but we consider ourselves solidly middle class. We have friends whose income is twice that (doctor married to lawyer, for example) who also consider themselves middle class. I think if you take this far enough. Though to be fair, part of the issue is where we live. In Boston, $250k a year is not what it is in Atlanta or Kansas City, places where we used to live much more comfortably on a lot less. In Atlanta our neighbors were doctors and lawyers, now our neighbors are plumbers, roofers and firemen. The houses are twice as expensive and 30% smaller, the neighborhood much less fashionable. But we could certainly stand to pay a lot more in [federal] taxes, it would reduce our savings a lot more than our consumption. Don’t tell my wife I said that. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2011, 5:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/taxes-from-the-rich/599547/13 "2011-10-13T17:35:38Z")
Would that graph dramatically change if capital gains were taxed at the same rate as income? ---
**Author:** ![Mighty\_Mouse](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mighty_mouse/32/7776_2.png) [@Mighty\_Mouse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mighty_Mouse)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2011, 5:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/taxes-from-the-rich/599547/14 "2011-10-13T17:39:07Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > The top 1% paid $380B in taxes (I think that is 2008 data) and the deficit is about $1.3T. We would have to increase their taxes about 300% to cover the deficit. > > If the OP means the debt instead of the deficit, then I think we’re about 10x that. I think you have to cut off the middle class at the 90th percentile rather than the 99th percentile to really make a dent in the deficit. And bring back not only the Clinton era marginal rates, but also take away the preferential rates on capital gains and dividends. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2011, 5:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/taxes-from-the-rich/599547/15 "2011-10-13T17:42:28Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > Cite. Cite. Hey, the OP asked two yes-or-no questions and I answered them. He didn’t ask for details. But my general answer would be that the money exists. We could pay off the national debt if we chose to do so. And we could pay for whatever programs the Occupiers are asked for. I’m not saying these are necessarily good ideas but they are possible. ---
**Author:** ![Sage\_Rat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sage_rat/32/399_2.png) [@Sage\_Rat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sage_Rat)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2011, 5:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/taxes-from-the-rich/599547/16 "2011-10-13T17:42:53Z")
> [@Mighty\_Mouse](#): > > Or “middle class” doesn’t mean what he thinks it does. We are in the “class” defined by the Occcupiers as “rich” (household income over $250k) but we consider ourselves solidly middle class. Going by income data, taxing anyone making over $150k per year is effectively pointless. ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2011, 6:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/taxes-from-the-rich/599547/17 "2011-10-13T18:23:07Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > The top 1% paid $380B in taxes (I think that is 2008 data) and the deficit is about $1.3T. We would have to increase their taxes about 300% to cover the deficit. > > If the OP means the debt instead of the deficit, then I think we’re about 10x that. Stop that terrible argument. You do not have to pay it all off in one year. The Bush tax cuts took 10 years to create it. If we went back to the Clinton tax rates, the debt would be greatly lowered in about 10 years. Dump the stupid Bush tax cuts.But since we are in bad financial trouble raise them more for a few years, with a sunset provision. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2011, 6:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/taxes-from-the-rich/599547/18 "2011-10-13T18:29:24Z")
> [@Mighty\_Mouse](#): > > Or “middle class” doesn’t mean what he thinks it does. We are in the “class” defined by the Occcupiers as “rich” (household income over $250k) but we consider ourselves solidly middle class. We have friends whose income is twice that (doctor married to lawyer, for example) who also consider themselves middle class. I think if you take this far enough. Top 1% is not middle. Self-identification doesn’t mean much, since in America it is more acceptable (less braggy) to call oneself middle class than rich. Hell, Romney claimed to be middle class, right? You also have to count income, not expenses, since expenses are more controllable. My step-brother lives in La Jolla, and is relatively poor for the neighborhood by still rich by any objective measure. > [@](#): > > But we could certainly stand to pay a lot more in [federal] taxes, it would reduce our savings a lot more than our consumption. Don’t tell my wife I said that. Me too. People who have to watch every penny seem to not get this. ---
**Author:** ![Hi\_Medlo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/a183cd/32.png) [@Hi\_Medlo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hi_Medlo)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2011, 6:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/taxes-from-the-rich/599547/19 "2011-10-13T18:42:37Z")
I did indeed mean the budget deficit, not the debt. My curiosity is whether there is a tax structure that would support our current spending, and if there is, could it support more. ---
**Author:** ![Mighty\_Mouse](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mighty_mouse/32/7776_2.png) [@Mighty\_Mouse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mighty_Mouse)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2011, 6:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/taxes-from-the-rich/599547/20 "2011-10-13T18:52:12Z")
> [@Sage\_Rat](#): > > Going by income data, taxing anyone making over $150k per year is effectively pointless. According to this they seem to have 28% of the income of the US and comprise 8% of the households. And the rates of taxation on these folks is historically quite low. I know I paid a higher percentage of income tax on a lower income in 1999 than I did in 2010. So no it would not be pointless, but it would not get you anywhere near closing the entire gap either. Mathematically, the way to close the gap is to raise all the rates back to where they were in 2000. That would be real money, but even that wouldn’t close the entire gap. [http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/macro/032008/hhinc/new06\_000.htm](http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/macro/032008/hhinc/new06_000.htm) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/taxes-from-the-rich/599547.md?page=2)