I think the question is why don’t average income Americans demand that rich Americans pay more in taxes?
Because average Americans are rightly convinced that the government is run by rich Americans and is working for rich Americans. Most are convinced that it is useless to try to fight that fact. There was some little glimmer of hope that things might change for average Americans while Bernie Sanders was doing so well running for president, but then Hilary the Corporate Candidate chicaned Bernie out of the race.
So, Corporate Billionaires win again, average Americans thought, fuck it, I’ll vote for Trump.
Yeah, the rich will get more tax breaks, but they always do. At least those asshole rich will have Trump to fuck them up.
That’s what happened. Average Americans are too fat, overworked, and exhausted for a real revolution demanding more taxes from the rich. They don’t think they could win anyway, so they don’t try.
Currently, the top tax rate for 2017 is 39.6% for incomes over $418,400 (single filers). Who would object to making this an even 40%? or even 41%? What about adding a new rate of 45% for incomes over $1million? Anyone object to that? Why?
Or another test:
Currently the Social Security tax only applies to the first $127,200 of income. Would anyone object to making this applicable to ALL income? I’m not sure why it doesn’t anyway. Even if you are a tax hater, if you make less than that, why does it not seem unfair to you that ALL your money is subject to Social Security tax, but only 50% of a person making $250,000? 83% (roughly) of Americans make less than $100,000. Why aren’t they ALL clamoring to make Social Security tax apply to ALL income? Including all income would not hurt anyone making under $127,000, and could only help the Social Security system.
I hand out paychecks to 13 employees (not literally, actually, all but 2 are on direct deposit), many of whom make more than I do. I am not poor, exactly, but from 2008 to 2012 my income was barely over or even below the federal poverty guideline, and right now I only take enough from the business to cover my bills.
When is the last time a large corporation with lots of highly paid CEOs added a significant number of jobs? Large corporations are all about cutting costs in their mature state, they are usually not interested in growth.
Most entrepreneurs that are actually growing businesses and hiring people are “poor” compared to the incomes of the CEOs of businesses that are laying off and offshoring their production. They also usually are going to be paying much higher taxes on what they pay themselves than the CEOs.
The reason that people care how millionaires are taxed is because they think that they could become millionaires, but don’t think it it’d be worth it if the have to pay more taxes.
I’m for higher taxes on those who are very well off, but a few problems. Wealthy people have the resources to move their money around. It’s not the 39% tax that is at issue, it is that most of the wealthy people pay closer to the 15% capital gains tax, while people who earn a paycheck are those who are subjected to a progressive income tax. Raising the top marginal rate to 90% isn’t going to change that, but eliminating the loophole that allows them to take all of their income as capital gains, or changing the way capital gains works so that you actually do pay higher taxes on short term investments, and all the taxes are tied to your total income, would do far more to increase the share of taxes that they pay.
For example, you make capital gains taxed at 2 tax brackets higher than your income for less than 6 months, 1 higher for 6-12 months, at your marginal rate for 1-5 years, and lower than your marginal rate after, 5-10 1 lower, 10-20 2 lower, and if you want to encourage that sort of long term investment, also allow taxpayers to adjust their cost basis by inflation if they have held it for over 20 years.
Social security is a different issue. I am i favor of getting rid of the cap, but it does cause issues. Technically, it is not a tax and entitlement, it is a retirement plan. The more you pay in, the more you get out. So, having people making $100,000,000 a year paying into it would be great, as that would ad another $15,000,000 to the fund, but what to do when they retire? Do they actually get their ss checks based on what they paid in?
Personally I am in favor of officially turning ssn into a tax and entitlement, as well as extending the range at which you can receive benefits, maybe even turning it into a de facto guaranteed basic income, but there are those who may disagree.
I get the feeling that some people view the wealth of the rich as being something akin to a public resource, like an untapped reservoir of petroleum. *“Look at all that money sitting there lying unused in the bank accounts of the 1% – think of how many students we could give an education to with that money, think of how many schools could be built, how many cancer patients could be treated.”
*
Well it does indirectly answer your question. Some folks are upset about the rich “not being taxed heavily enough” because they consider the wealth of the rich to be a public resource, and by not taxing it enough, they think the government is allowing that public resource to go to waste. Like letting a reservoir of petroleum sit there in the ground, unused (or gold, or aluminum, or whatever.)
Sure, I agree. I can understand people who aren’t rich thinking that rich people are not taxed enough. But my question is about people who are NOT rich themselves, who think the rich are taxed enough already, and why do they think that - “Sure, I only make $45,000 a year, but I think Bill Gates is taxed enough, and don’t want to see a tax increase for guys like him”
So far, principle stance against certain types of taxation, and Republican brainwashing (:)) seem to be some answers given. Anything else?
How big is your house? Do you have any spare rooms or even a corner in a room that isn’t being utilized? Are you letting homeless people live in the spare spaces in your house? Do you have a yard? Are you letting homeless people camp out in your yard? You don’t need a couch. Let a homeless person sleep on it. Or sell it and give the money to charity.
Do you have any money in a savings account? If so, why are you hoarding money that could go to a charity.
You don’t need to have a house when an apartment is just fine. Sell your house and move into an apartment. Give the money from the sell to a charity.
You don’t need more than one shirt and pair of pants and socks. Sell the rest of your clothes and give the money to charity.
If you really cared you would do all those things.
The difficulty in implementation is part of the theory as to why people care.
As far as that goes, that was at the end of my post, when I said that people think that they could become millionaires, but don’t want to if they think that they will have to pay more in taxes.
As someone quoted upthread, Americans are a nation of embarrassed millionaires.
Speak as a certified arm-chair psychologist - People are aspirational. People want their lives to be better, and consequently admire those that they consider their betters. People especially want to be liked by their betters. As much as some people may vigorously deny it (F*ck those MFers thinking they’re better than me!) deep down they want to be them, they would trade paychecks with them in a hot second.
Taxes hurt. We don’t want to see someone we admire being hurt.
So, at a deep level, we have sympathy for the rich. Kinda odd, if you ask me.
Ah OK, I totally misunderstood the OP question then.
It’s a “principle” thing. Plenty of people take the political side of those whom they aren’t. Plenty of white people have sided with minorities before, plenty of men support feminism, plenty of straight folks support LGBT, plenty of poor or middle-class folks don’t want “excessive” taxation of the rich, etc.
As others have pointed out, it’s easy to say “The rich should do more to help others” when “the rich” are a nebulous, airy-fairy, other-worldly concept of billionaire tycoons sipping cognac and flying on Gulfstreams and sailing on yachts.
Many folks are much more prickly and defensive when they are rich “relative to others” – the person earning $50,000 a year but doesn’t want to let a homeless person stay in a bedroom in his house – because it’s his house.
This was mentioned up thread. But a case could be made for supporting minorities, LGBT, feminism, etc. What is the case for not wanting “excessive” taxation of the rich? Hurts the economy? It’s not fair? Or is it really just what other posters have said, someday we hope to be millionaires and don’t want to pay high taxes once we are there?
It’s a fairness thing; i.e., if the “rich” earn 32 percent of all income, they shouldn’t pay 77 percent of all taxes. (I made those figures up but that is the argument.)