# Taxing the "rich" **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [July 24, 2011, 9:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/taxing-the-rich/590209 "2011-07-24T21:14:54Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 10
**Author:** ![SenorBeef](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/senorbeef/32/2220_2.png) [@SenorBeef](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SenorBeef)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2011, 7:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/taxing-the-rich/590209/181 "2011-07-26T07:15:52Z")
For the record, I consider pinning down Starving Artist to black and white factual claims that counter his statements, which then make him avoid the thread for a while\*, to be a public service. I will accept donations of jellybeans and slurpees. - I know it’s only temporary, and that he’ll be back with the same erroneous claims after a short break. Getting him to go away for a while is the best we can do. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2011, 7:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/taxing-the-rich/590209/182 "2011-07-26T07:23:57Z")
> [@Starving\_Artist](#): > > A government that is constantly seeking to insinuate itself into our lives and control what we have and do, and which seeks to forcibly redistribute income from one population group to another. And as I just said to **SenorBeef** , which seeks to borrow and spend and not live within its means. That is what my beef is. Did you have this beef when Reagan, Bush and W were borrowing and spending or is it only when the Democrats gets into the white house? I can accept that you have a different idea of how much government we should have and I can see how taxing the rich to feed and clothe the poor might bother you but please leave the bullshit about fiscal responsibility at the door. > [@](#): > > Sure, as long as we can agree that historical highs were due to unusual circumstances such as war recovery and/or 50 years of Democratic domination of congress, and have nothing whatsoever to do with what rates ought to be now. There’s always a fucking excuse that explains away the facts isn’t there? America did pretty ducking good during those 50 years of Democratic domination, we had our problems but the economy wasn’t one of them. Its ridiculous to chalk up the Democratic surpluses (or small deficits) from 1945 to 1980 and chalk it up to extenuating circumstances and then say the rates “OUGHT TO BE” some other rate. We racked up huge deficits during Reagan, Bush and W. I suppose Obama is racking up huge deficits as well but his deficits are not significantly larger than W’s last deficit (remember the 2009 budget gets passed and signed while he is president). > [@](#): > > In that regard my complaint is twofold: 1) More and more people are being classified as “poor” regardless of whether anyone would reasonable define them that way by any other standard; and 2) yeah, I think that if low income earners can be expected to pay gas tax and sales tax and state tax and local tax and Social Security and Medicare/Medicade payments, they can also pay at least something in the way of income tax. The advantages of living in this country are touted by the left constantly to excuse higher taxes on the rich, yet poor people have access to the same roads, the same police and fire services, the same military protection, etc. as everyone else. Simply having an income lower than some arbitrary number set by some government bureaucrat should not exempt you in my opinion from chipping in to supprort the country whose benefits and protections you enjoy as well. I agree, everyone should pay an income tax. It shoud still be progressive but it is bad for the citizenry when a significant minority of the citizenry pays nothing, perhaps a 5% base tax rate. Of course the top marginal rate should go up to at least 50%. ---
**Author:** ![Starving\_Artist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/aeb1de/32.png) [@Starving\_Artist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Starving_Artist)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2011, 7:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/taxing-the-rich/590209/183 "2011-07-26T07:31:36Z")
> [@SenorBeef](#): > > For the record, I consider pinning down Starving Artist to black and white factual claims that counter his statements, which then make him avoid the thread for a while\*, to be a public service. I will accept donations of jellybeans and slurpees. > > - I know it’s only temporary, and that he’ll be back with the same erroneous claims after a short break. Getting him to go away for a while is the best we can do. Aw, now, **Beefy** , here you go acting like an asshole again after I was just so polite to you. And what’s worse now you’re trying to take credit for chasing me away when John Sandford is the real culprit. Really not very sporting of you, you know. Not very honest either. But I suppose I shouldn’t be surprised. Chow. (Laughing condescention and spelling lesson coming in one…two…) 😃 ---
**Author:** ![curlcoat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ea5d25/32.png) [@curlcoat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/curlcoat)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2011, 8:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/taxing-the-rich/590209/184 "2011-07-26T08:45:13Z")
> [@quixotic78](#): > > Quite possibly. I find communicating with you pretty unpleasant. Well, my husband isn’t a biased twit who jumps to conclusions. > [@](#): > > Channeling Jackie Chiles: Who was talking about tax write-offs? I wasn’t talking about tax write-offs. You weren’t talking about tax write-offs. Show me where you said tax write-offs: I was talking about write-offs since the original subject was the lack of difference my our lifestyle after losing +/- $20,000 annual income - apparently in the middle of the night last night I wasn’t paying close enough attention to my terms for your liking. OTOH, since you completely ignore the subject of that post to come in and yell that OMG _everybody_ qualified for the Bush tax cuts, I’d say your error is worse. > [@kenetic](#): > > So you didn’t say this?: Obviously I did - did you have a point? > [@](#): > > Cite for “There are a _lot_ of people who are happy to live on very little money because they simply have no interest in working for a living”? Seriously? You are completely unaware of the people who are second and third generation welfare? You’ve never lived any place where a neighbor sat around on his butt doing just enough work to buy beer and cigarettes? > [@](#): > > I know a lot of people who don’t prioritize making money and are happy with what they have, but to say “they simply have no interest in working for a living” is a ridiculous stereotype. It’s just a variation on the standard “poor people are lazy” meme, and not even a very original one at that. Since I didn’t say that, or anything close, I have no idea why you would bring it up. > [@](#): > > Pointing out other factors that might cause someone not to try for a higher salary is just strengthening my argument and weakening yours. How is that? You seem to be of the impression that I think that all poor people are poor because they don’t wish to work, which isn’t even close to true, so it might be interesting to see why you think multiple reasons why someone may not wish to work hard to move up a tax bracket is weakening my argument. > [@](#): > > Also, I’m sure it’s been pointed out to you many times, but I guess it needs repeating: “working harder” =/= “making more money”. Luck and opportunity are pretty huge factors. I’m not saying all rich people didn’t work for it, I’m sure a lot of them did, but to simply insist that there’s a consistent and unquestionable 1-1 correspondence between work and income is ridiculously naive. At what point did I even indicate a 1-1 correspondence between work and income, much less that it is unquestionable? Perhaps if you just stick with what I actually say and not what you appear to want to attach to it, you wouldn’t have so much trouble with my posts. > [@](#): > > No, I’m calling it ridiculous because it’s been shown to be ridiculous many, many times. OK then - cite? > [@Ravenman](#): > > If we were to revert to 1990s-era taxes, do you know how much “extra” in taxes that person making $550,000 would pay on that additional $50,000 in income? > > $1,500. > > Would you really give up $50,000 in gross income because of a tax bill that’s $1,500 more than today? No. However, that isn’t where we are now, and I don’t have a lot of faith that we will go back to it. Also, is that $1,500 just the IRS taxes? Seems it would have to be, given that low number. ---
**Author:** ![curlcoat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ea5d25/32.png) [@curlcoat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/curlcoat)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2011, 8:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/taxing-the-rich/590209/185 "2011-07-26T08:53:35Z")
> [@sh1bu1](#): > > I am not sure what you are trying to say: > > Your husband makes so much money that you don’t miss the $10K+ after tax dollars, or > Somehow defying all logic and facts the tax code resulted in you having almost the same after-tax income as before. No matter how much my husband makes I’m sure I’d miss $10K (where did you get that number) since by no standard are we rich. As for defying all logic and facts, sorry but the facts I listed are the facts in play. There has been a slight drop in our discretionary income, but not 10 or 20K worth. ---
**Author:** ![Darth\_Panda](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ee7513/32.png) [@Darth\_Panda](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Darth_Panda)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2011, 8:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/taxing-the-rich/590209/186 "2011-07-26T08:53:40Z")
> [@SenorBeef](#): > > I will accept donations of jellybeans and slurpees. Well, I’m not rich, but I think I have some quatloos laying around. ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2011, 12:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/taxing-the-rich/590209/187 "2011-07-26T12:33:51Z")
> [@Starving\_Artist](#): > > Aw, now, **Beefy** , here you go acting like an asshole again after I was just so polite to you. And what’s worse now you’re trying to take credit for chasing me away when John Sandford is the real culprit. Really not very sporting of you, you know. Not very honest either. > > But I suppose I shouldn’t be surprised. > > Chow. > > (Laughing condescention and spelling lesson coming in one…two…) 😃 Ironically, apart from “ciao”, the only spelling error comes in your little coda about spelling errors. Idiot. I find your lack of shame about being called out and pinned down on your stupidity to be a hallmark of conservatives. I know it is not fair to equate all conservatives with you, and no doubt most would bristle at the comparison. However, it is just remarkable how you spew complete ignorance, get drilled for it, cry that you have something else to do that takes you away from any personal responsibility for your leavings here, **and then come back to post another steamer**! What you lack in shame, integrity, and personal responsibility, you make up for in extreme stupidity. What’s even funnier is that you would spend your time reading the work of a liberal! ---
**Author:** ![DragonAsh](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/db5fbb/32.png) [@DragonAsh](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DragonAsh)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2011, 12:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/taxing-the-rich/590209/188 "2011-07-26T12:41:54Z")
> [@SenorBeef](#): > > Are you insane? It’s never answered? > > I have no desire to punitively punish the rich. > > \ > > The rich simply have the money. :rolleyes: No, you still haven’t answered why I need to pay a higher percentage of my wages. You can’t hand-wave it away with ‘oh, it’s just $10K’ or whatever - it’s money _I_ earned. As noted, I almost certainly invested (i.e., spent) a lot more in my career and such. Now justify taking more away from me than the guy next door. Apparently, it’s “All men are created equal – just don’t tax 'em that way”. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2011, 12:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/taxing-the-rich/590209/189 "2011-07-26T12:50:12Z")
> [@curlcoat](#): > > No. However, that isn’t where we are now, and I don’t have a lot of faith that we will go back to it. Also, is that $1,500 just the IRS taxes? Seems it would have to be, given that low number. Aside from my math error (thanks, I was using a 3% difference in tax rates for some reason) the total change in taxes on that last $50,000 in income would be $2,250. That’s all. As you can plainly see, someone would have to be pretty dumb to think that they would be better off earning $500,000 rather than $550,000 just because their tax bill would go up by $2,250 if the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy were allowed to expire. ---
**Author:** ![quixotic78](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/3ab097/32.png) [@quixotic78](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/quixotic78)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2011, 1:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/taxing-the-rich/590209/190 "2011-07-26T13:22:27Z")
> [@curlcoat](#): > > Well, my husband isn’t a biased twit who jumps to conclusions. I’m sure you’re rubbing off on him, though. > [@](#): > > I was talking about write-offs since the original subject was the lack of difference my our lifestyle after losing +/- $20,000 annual income - apparently in the middle of the night last night I wasn’t paying close enough attention to my terms for your liking. “I was posting in the middle of the night” is the adult equivalent of “The dog ate my homework,” and deserves the same scorn. Besides, in the middle of the night? I show Post 123, where you ridiculously talk about how you don’t qualify for any “tax cuts,” as being posted at 12:36 PM, which would be 10:36 AM in San Diego (and 8:36 AM Hawaii time). Where the hell are you posting from, New Zealand? Regardless, no, you weren’t talking about write-offs. You were talking about tax cuts. You even said tax cuts. You’ve already admitted that you don’t know what you’re talking about, and it’s patently obvious that you would fail a two-question/two-option multiple choice test about the difference between a tax deduction and a tax cut. So why bother talking to you? I think **sh1bu1** said it best: > [@](#): > > I’m glad that you feel free to have such strong opinions about something that you know nothing about. ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2011, 1:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/taxing-the-rich/590209/191 "2011-07-26T13:23:02Z")
> [@DragonAsh](#): > > :rolleyes: > > No, you still haven’t answered why I need to pay a higher percentage of my wages. You can’t hand-wave it away with ‘oh, it’s just $10K’ or whatever - it’s money _I_ earned. As noted, I almost certainly invested (i.e., spent) a lot more in my career and such. Now justify taking more away from me than the guy next door. > > Apparently, it’s “All men are created equal – just don’t tax 'em that way”. Where did you earn it? If the system established and supported by the citizens of the US allowed you such great benefit, seems like it’s in your interest to keep it going. If you needed a suit for your business, you’d consider it an investment towards future net gain. Same for a computer, office furniture, paper, pens, business cards… You’d probably invest in those things without thinking twice. Now, if you needed communication lines, the ability to ship goods safely, the ability to hire capable and prepared employees, protection from marauders, a system for seeing to the health of your employees and customers, a pool of customers with the resources to provide you with the money you earned, would you invest in those things too? ---
**Author:** ![Smurfie](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e9a140/32.png) [@Smurfie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smurfie)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2011, 1:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/taxing-the-rich/590209/192 "2011-07-26T13:50:45Z")
> [@Starving\_Artist](#): > > Notice first of all that I specifically said “income tax”, which to my mind means that I’m talking about federal income tax and not Social Security, Medicare or anything else… For good reason! Did you know that the richest 1% pay far less than their share for these taxes? A person making $10 million a year pays far less of the % of their income than does someone making $40,000. We need to make it so that EVERYONE pays in the same %! I cannot believe we have such an unfair tax system where the rich pay very little of their % of income in taxes and the poor pay a much larger %. Something needs to be done. {of course this excludes federal income tax…but that is ok to ignore in making sweeping statements} ---
**Author:** ![DragonAsh](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/db5fbb/32.png) [@DragonAsh](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DragonAsh)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2011, 2:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/taxing-the-rich/590209/193 "2011-07-26T14:15:55Z")
> [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](#): > > Where did you earn it? If the system established and supported by the citizens of the US allowed you such great benefit, seems like it’s in your interest to keep it going. > > If you needed a suit for your business, you’d consider it an investment towards future net gain. Same for a computer, office furniture, paper, pens, business cards… You’d probably invest in those things without thinking twice. > > Now, if you needed communication lines, the ability to ship goods safely, the ability to hire capable and prepared employees, protection from marauders, a system for seeing to the health of your employees and customers, a pool of customers with the resources to provide you with the money you earned, would you invest in those things too? Sorry, what does this have to do with the justification for me paying a higher percentage of my income to Uncle Sam? Are you suggesting that if I go into a store to buy a new suit, I should pay more than Joe Blow if I make more than he does? ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2011, 2:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/taxing-the-rich/590209/194 "2011-07-26T14:19:50Z")
> [@Smurfie](#): > > Did you know that the richest 1% pay far less than their share for these taxes? A person making $10 million a year pays far less of the % of their income than does someone making $40,000. We need to make it so that EVERYONE pays in the same %! I agree on the first statement – [The richest 400 Americans pay an 18% tax rate.](http://blogs.forbes.com/robertlenzner/2011/07/25/the-400-richest-americans-pay-an-18-tax-rate/) I’m not quite sure on the $40,000 income thing, that’s a pretty big exaggeration. The average tax burden on someone making $40 grand is around 10%, all Federal taxes included. Completely disagree on the last statement. A progressive income tax system is good. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2011, 2:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/taxing-the-rich/590209/195 "2011-07-26T14:20:57Z")
> [@DragonAsh](#): > > Are you suggesting that if I go into a store to buy a new suit, I should pay more than Joe Blow if I make more than he does? Talk about stupid analogies. Paying taxes is not like buying a suit, you moron. ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2011, 3:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/taxing-the-rich/590209/196 "2011-07-26T15:31:16Z")
> [@DragonAsh](#): > > Sorry, what does this have to do with the justification for me paying a higher percentage of my income to Uncle Sam? If you derive greater benefit from the system, you have a greater stake in making sure that it continues. Insisting otherwise is to cut off your nose to spite your face. That is to say, if the principle of making everyone pay the same amount is more important to you than maintaining the system by which you claim to have benefited, then by all means. At least we’ll all go down together. > [@](#): > > Are you suggesting that if I go into a store to buy a new suit, I should pay more than Joe Blow if I make more than he does? Are you suggesting that everyone should have the same suit? No, what I’m suggesting is that if Joe Blow is not going to benefit from having a suit, he’s not going to buy one, is he? ---
**Author:** ![fumster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/e9c0ed/32.png) [@fumster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/fumster)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2011, 3:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/taxing-the-rich/590209/197 "2011-07-26T15:36:36Z")
> [@curlcoat](#): > > No matter how much my husband makes I’m sure I’d miss $10K (where did you get that number) since by no standard are we rich. As for defying all logic and facts, sorry but the facts I listed are the facts in play. There has been a slight drop in our discretionary income, but not 10 or 20K worth. I don’t believe you any more than I would if you said that you dropped an apple and it went up. It may be that you are overwithholding and will see the money at the end of the year, but what you are claiming is impossible. I know that reality does not have the influence it once did with conservatives. ---
**Author:** ![fumster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/e9c0ed/32.png) [@fumster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/fumster)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2011, 3:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/taxing-the-rich/590209/198 "2011-07-26T15:52:35Z")
> [@sh1bu1](#): > > I don’t believe you any more than I would if you said that you dropped an apple and it went up. > > It may be that you are overwithholding and will see the money at the end of the year, but what you are claiming is impossible. I know that reality does not have the influence it once did with conservatives. Correction: You may have been overwithholding before, and then seen the money at the end of the year. ---
**Author:** ![DragonAsh](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/db5fbb/32.png) [@DragonAsh](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DragonAsh)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2011, 5:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/taxing-the-rich/590209/199 "2011-07-26T17:56:19Z")
> [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](#): > > If you derive greater benefit from the system, you have a greater stake in making sure that it continues. Insisting otherwise is to cut off your nose to spite your face. That is to say, if the principle of making everyone pay the same amount is more important to you than maintaining the system by which you claim to have benefited, then by all means. At least we’ll all go down together.Are you suggesting that everyone should have the same suit? No, what I’m suggesting is that if Joe Blow is not going to benefit from having a suit, he’s not going to buy one, is he? So your argument is, ‘the justification for paying higher %age of income tax is because, well, look where you are now! You should perpetuate the system’? I don’t ‘derive greater benefit’ from the system because of the system. I grew up beyond dirt-poor; the tax system didn’t do me any favors. I got ahead in life because I worked my friggen’ ass off. I see no need to ‘continue the system’ for the systems’ sake. In fact, I happen to think that a flat rate system would make everyone better off. Either way, I’m still waiting for a justification for having to pay a higher percentage of my income in taxes. ---
**Author:** ![Bosstone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/22d042/32.png) [@Bosstone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bosstone)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2011, 6:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/taxing-the-rich/590209/200 "2011-07-26T18:00:01Z")
> [@DragonAsh](#): > > I don’t ‘derive greater benefit’ from the system because of the system. I grew up beyond dirt-poor; the tax system didn’t do me any favors. I got ahead in life because I worked my friggen’ ass off. I see no need to ‘continue the system’ for the systems’ sake. In fact, I happen to think that a flat rate system would make everyone better off. And here we have the archetypical conservative. Note how he assumes his own fortune is due 100% to his own ingenuity, tenacity, and rectal fortitude, and has absolutely no thought for the possibility that the current system created an environment in which he was able to use those qualities to rise above the station he was born into rather than be kept down by those who already held money and power. Up next we have a fellow who believes taxes are theft. Keep to your left folks, plenty of room for everyone… [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/taxing-the-rich/590209.md?page=9) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/taxing-the-rich/590209.md?page=11)