Because They've Earned It

[Shocker]

Ok, well from what I've read here, and I've only skimmed the last few pages to get up to date, it seems to me that some here think that if you are super rich, you should be taxed higher to support those who do not make as much money. Or, if that doesn't follow, then they at least think that if you are not one of the super rich, then you will need to become dependant on the government to meet your needs. I would argue that it is not the government's job to take the place of charities, as well it is not the governments job to redistribute wealth, regardless of how hard one may think the rich had to pay for it. Now, maybe in a traditional sense, an executive may not work 'hard', but they are worth what they are paid. Now before anyone craps thier pants from what i just said, let me say it again... EXECUTIVES ARE WORTH THEIR PAY, and here is why.

While the U.S. economy is not a capitalist economy in its pure form, it is capitalistic. One of the fundamental concepts of capitalism is supply and demand. Most people only think of supply and demand when it comes to how much you might pay for a certain good or service, however you can apply the same idea to the labor force. You can take any job and an employer will only be willing to pay up to a certain amount to fill that position (demand). At different levels of pay, different amounts of people will be willing to work and become part of the labor force (supply). So for the people who may not be making much for their efforts, know that there is a supply of people who would do the job for the same or less, which keeps pay down. That is one reason unions are effective, they essentially cut off the supply from the people who demand it.

While most people at the bottom of an organization may not see it or know it, executives play an important role in a company. They are the leaders, they set strategy, decide on production levels, prices, they make all the important business decisions and have to do all of this while trying to stay competitive in a global economy. Now, when you look at a good executive, a company is going to pay a lot of money for that person. Good executives are hard to come by. Ok, a small company is not going to have the resources to pay for one, but a large, fortune 500 company is, and when they are depending on the leadership and vision a good executive has, they are going to pay them a lot. It is more of an investment, in that if they pick the right one, they can turn around a company and make them more money in the long run. If they can't pay them what they are worth, they will leave to work somewhere else, possibly even a competitor.

Take Bill Gates for instance. What is a 'fair' rate to tax the richest man in the world? He is a college dropout who created one of the most sucessful companies in the world, and most of his wealth has come from appreciation in Microsoft stock as well as what he made from Microsoft. Once the company matured, how much work do you think he did? Should he be taxed more than the rest of the population? Is it the governments job to decide that even? If you think he should be taxed more for the benefit of the 'less fortunate', consider this. As a wealthy individual, he created the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. The foundation's grants have provided funds for college scholarships for under-represented minorities, AIDS prevention, diseases prevalent in third world countries, and other causes. The Foundation has also pledged over $7 billion to its various causes, including $1 billion to the United Negro College Fund. Also consider that this is not the exception, but a norm with wealthy. Most don't hoard their wealth. Warren Buffett matches all of Gate's contributions to the foundation. Would that money be better spent by the government? Most can agree that if the government had that extra money, it would end up in 'pork' projects rather than in the hands of the less fortunate. So rather than take their money, let us put more responsibility on the shoulders of the people so their is less dependancy on the government, as well as also more hope and faith that people will continue to be generous with their money for the causes they believe in rather than give it to the government in the form of taxes to be spent on causes the government believes in.

I know... long and rambling, but now I've said my piece. have a superb day

[yesman065]

Well written Shocker. You make some great points!

[Shawnee123]

Shock did make some good points. If anyone remembers, oh so long ago, was that my objection that the underlying attitude is that if you DON'T make a lot of money you are lazy or stoooopid. This was my problem with it all along.

At any rate, I like Rkz idea of a flat tax. This means flat tax...no high paid tax preparers finding loopholes to save the rich thousands of dollars, and no reward for popping out babies to afford the poor a giant refund of money which they did not initially pay.

So, you see, I am really for equality for the masses, not just those who can afford it, not just those who have the knowledge to fudge it, and not just those who play the system and reap the benefits of people like me: the middle class.

I have said it before and I'll say it again: the middle class is disappearing, and a country without a middle class cannot sustain itself.

[Aliantha]

Can I ask a question about flat tax please.

If you want everyone to pay the same rate of tax, does that mean you'll raise it a bit for the lower incomes and lower it for higher?

If that's the case, and your country already has massive poverty problems associated with minimum wage earners etc, how do you think that will be recieved?

[Flint]

Originally Posted by Aliantha

Can I ask a question about flat tax please.

If you want everyone to pay the same rate of tax, does that mean you'll raise it a bit for the lower incomes and lower it for higher?

If that's the case, and your country already has massive poverty problems associated with minimum wage earners etc, how do you think that will be recieved?

Thats' why it will never, ever, ever get anywhere within a thousand miles of even being considered.
It would wreck the whole system and ruin millions of people's lives. Some things look good "on paper" . . .

That makes no sense... The poor would pay less in taxes than they do now.
Most poor pay most of their taxes in sales tax and would pay less due to having less income and the poor and middle class are those who support the flat tax the most when it is discussed.
It is the rich, who would end-up paying the most in increases because of the elimination of loopholes and shelters, who fight it and put the most spin against it during those discussions.
Because something is difficult does not mean one does not try. As a Libertarian, all I believe in is an uphill battle. This past election shows that many things one does not believe is possible are often just around the corner.
NOTHING is impossible as long as one never gives in to that pathetic word for losers.
A flat tax is a "Flat Tax"... there are no loopholes, 2% or 10%, that is IT, no matter WHAT, come Armageddon, cancer, three arms, the boogie man or a "religious institution".
Income is income or paying for something is paying for something, end of story.
Again, I don't care how you do it. (yes that includes your kids damn education, your housing and food, etc, etc, etc...)

[glatt]

Originally Posted by rkzenrage

A flat tax is a "Flat Tax"... there are no loopholes, 2% or 10%, that is IT, no matter WHAT, come Armageddon, cancer, three arms, the boogie man or a "religious institution".
Income is income or paying for something is paying for something, end of story.

Just because you say it is the end of the story, doesn't make it so.

Take a look at the lesson of the movie "Coming To America" as an example of loopholes that will still exist with a flat tax. You probably have heard of this story. Paramount, the maker of the movie, was found to have stolen the idea for the movie from a script submitted by Art Buchwald. He was awarded damages. Even though the movie grossed over $350 million dollars, Paramount claimed there was no "net profit" made. They were able to use a fancy high priced accounting firm to show that the movie made no profit.

Those fancy high priced accounting firms are still going to be around after a flat tax, and they will work for the rich only, showing that they didn't make as much money as everyone assumes they did. Income is income for the poor, but income is not income for the rich.

[JayMcGee]

Whilst we in the UK have a sliding scale for income tax, we also have a huge number of tax allowances, concessions, tax-credits & rebates etc. And although I am a committed socialist, I too favour the concept of a flat-rate tax.

10% - 15% of income (earned or otherwise). No allowances, consessions, tax-write-offs. Not only would it generate as much as the present system it would save on all those civil servants in the Inland Revenue whose sole duty it is to check all those allowances....

Oh, and I would apply it to corporations too....

(back in the 70's, it was said that, because of clever use of tax avoidance schemes, the secretaries at Shell UK headquarters paid more in tax than Shell UK itself did)

Oh, I agree, any corp/sports team/etc that pays a salary to anyone = fair salary.
No one has a right to say squat.

It is the height of ignorance and envy to bitch about what someone else makes.

[Aliantha]

Wouldn't that still make it difficult for someone to break out of a poverty cycle though?

Please explain how.

[Aliantha]

I'm asking the question. Don't you think it would make it harder for someone to actually get ahead in your country, knowing what your health care system is like just for starters.

That has nothing to do with revamping our tax system... OT red herring.

In my above statement I showed how it would make it easier for the poor to do better under a flat-tax system.

[Aliantha]

In theory your system seems good rkz, but I don't think it would work in practice for reasons like health care etc.

Maybe it would though. You could be right.

Please tell me how health care has anything to do with this?