Obama taking more dividend gains

[QUOTE="mingmao3046"][QUOTE="Guybrush_3"]

You really don't pay attention to what is going on in the US if you have to ask that question. (It has a lot to do with the deficit and the fact that far too much of the wealth in this country in concentrated in just a small percentage of people's hands)

Guybrush_3

It's both, and you completely ingored the second half of what I said.

[QUOTE="Guybrush_3"]

[QUOTE="mingmao3046"] The government has a spending problem. Not a "not enough taxes coming in" problem. mingmao3046

It's both, and you completely ingored the second half of what I said.

I said nothing of the sort, but you're going to try and twist my words to make it seem that way, and you will intentionally miss the actual point, because you are willfully ignorant (which is worse then being actually stupid), and then I will explain it further, and you will either miss the point again (because you know, willful ignorance) or you will ignore it. You're not worth arguing with.

[QUOTE="GIJames248"]

[QUOTE="Guybrush_3"]

flat income taxes are a terrible idea. How do people not understand this?

Guybrush_3

Isn't everyone getting the same military protection, used of the roads, and legal process as everyone else?

It seems pretty common sense to me. It's not like everyone is paying the same amount of taxes.

It only seems common sense because you don't understand how the economy actually works.

Enlighten me if you would be so kind. Although I was approaching the issue more from a social contract and moral philosophy perspective than an economic one, so I am genuinely curious to hear how it would be economically bad for everyone to pay taxes at the same tax rate (or very close to same tax rate, with the rich maybe paying a few percent more at most). Morally and politically, I'm not sure how you can argue for drastically different tax rates (if you actually make people pay all of the tax instead of letting the rich get off on a plethora of loopholes and tax breaks).

[QUOTE="mingmao3046"][QUOTE="Guybrush_3"]

It's both, and you completely ingored the second half of what I said.

Guybrush_3

I said nothing of the sort, but you're going to try and twist my words to make it seem that way, and you will intentionally miss the actual point, because you are willfully ignorant (which is worse then being actually stupid), and then I will explain it further, and you will either miss the point again (because you know, willful ignorance) or you will ignore it. You're not worth arguing with.

[QUOTE="Guybrush_3"]

[QUOTE="GIJames248"]

Isn't everyone getting the same military protection, used of the roads, and legal process as everyone else?

It seems pretty common sense to me. It's not like everyone is paying the same amount of taxes.

GIJames248

It only seems common sense because you don't understand how the economy actually works.

Enlighten me if you would be so kind. Although I was approaching the issue more from a social contract and moral philosophy perspective than an economic one, so I am genuinely curious to hear how it would be economically bad for everyone to pay taxes at the same tax rate (or very close to same tax rate, with the rich maybe paying a few percent more at most). Morally and politically, I'm not sure how you can argue for drastically different tax rates (if you actually make people pay all of the tax instead of letting the rich get off on a plethora of loopholes and tax breaks).

I appologize if I came off as rude earlier. I'm used to dealing with assh*les like mingmaow. Anyway. There are a number of reasons a flat tax is bad. One reason it's bad is because you actually end up with poor people paying more of their income (percentage wise) in taxes. This happens because so many other taxes are skewed against the poor and middle class. (There are many other taxes besides federal income tax) If you had a flat income tax then rich people would actually end up paying a much lower percentage of their income in total taxes than most people, even without loopholes.

Another reason it's bad because 20% means a lot more to someone who has to spend every dime to get by than someone who has millions of dollars, even if the 20% of poor persons is a much lower dollar amount. Take away too much from a poor person and they can't pay rent. Do the same to a rich man and it just means less money in the bank and maybe a few fewer luxuries.

Yet another reason is that contries with a relatively flat level of income inequalities have considerably better quality of life (life expectancy, infant mortality, economic growth, happiness, trust, etc) when you control for everything else. This is true even if the flatness of the income levels is caused by high levels of taxes. (therefore you can argue that it's morally wrong to have extreme levels of inequality)

and a flat tax would probably cause economic colapse in the US. Adding 15%-20% on the poorest half of the country would virtually wipe them out causing them to rely more heavily on government services just to survive, which would require more government expenditures which would require higher taxes creating a visicous cycle, until something breaks (either the government or the poor and lower middle class) Then you have the next quarter of the country getting a moderate tax increase (because all of their income would be taxed at the levels only the top of their income is being taxed at now) Those people would no longer be able to buy a lot of the things that they buy beyond the basics because they are paying a good bit more in taxes. This in turn hurts economic growth because people just aren't buying stuff. which sends us down again. It's just bad news all around.