23% sales tax; no fed. income tax

[GenuineRisk]

Originally Posted by ultracapper

why don't you take your money and invest it in a company that you can own and operate, thereby contributing to the local economy, instead of handing it over to people that know what they are doing, so that you don't have to do a single thing and still make money, and have the right to complain how much money those people are making that you are just jumping on for a free ride?

One could say the same thing about a lot of the hereditary wealthy, who are living the ultimate free ride. A person I know who works for many of them refers to them as the "Lucky Sperm Club."

[GenuineRisk]

This is a kick-ass thread, guys; I'd nominate it for one of the best OT threads ever (how is that possible when I barely contributed to it? Tee hee).

But I want to clarify something about the progressive income tax that a lot of people seem to be getting wrong. People are all taxed equally- what is taxed unequally is the money. Bill Gates doesn't pay any more tax on the first $20,000 of his income than does the McDonalds worker down the street. As one's income goes up, the percentage of the additional income subject to taxation is what increases.

So, to use Rupert's example of a man selling a machine for $100 million-- under a progressive tax system that would cap out at 95% tax after, say, $90 million, only the last $10 million would be subject to a 95% tax rate. Not the full $100 million.

(And in our system, of course, people deduct the cost of creating something as business expenses, further reducing the amount of money eligible for taxation. I doubt that $100 million dollar machine was created for $4.99)

Just wanted to clear that up- it's an easy misconception to have about progressive tax systems.

By the way, Timm, I have several friends who are getting by on $25,000 or less. Not easily, and God help them if they get sick, as they can't afford health care in our messed-up health system, but they're struggling by.

[Danzig]

altho it would be a grand scheme if everyone could get along with everyone, help everyone, etc--the reality is that it wouldn't work, as a goodly portion of the humans on this world would be perfectly content to continue to sit on their ass while sharing equally the fruits of others labors. it happens now, it would continue to happen. there are those who struggle mightily, i know my husband and i did for years....some never get out of poverty, some do. the answer isn't to take from those that have and give to those that don't. the answer would be to help those that don't have to achieve--education, opoortunities, job training etc. of course you'll still have those too lazy to try--i have a hard time feeling any sympathy at all for them--and we all can name some like that. a brother in law perhaps, a sister who milks granny while crying about her destitution while she sits home all day doing nothing.

as for health care, it's always astonishing to me when i give a new hire their paperwork to get healthcare, and they don't bother. don't get sick, so why would i want healthcare? they say...and jr is on arkids, so why should i pay for coverage? then there's, her stepdad wants to adopt her, but then we'd have to pay for her coverage, as right now the state covers her since i don't have to claim his income. yeah, cause it's my responsibility to pay for mine, my husband, my kids coverage--and her kids as well. sure, i see the reasoning.
oh, then there's the guy who worked with my husband on 'disability'--he can't work with this bad back...but he sure can hunt, fish, etc....