We need to bring back the tax system of the 1940's-1970's. You know, the one where if you got a lot of money, the government taxed your ass raw. If I remember right, I think that the top rate was 70% on the wealthy.
Now....before you break out the tar, feathers, and rope, hear me out. I think that the current tax rate (low) is a way to let the wealthy gain power at the expense of the less-than-wealthy. If you allow rich folk to keep too much of their money, they invariably start using it to buy the government to use for their own purposes.
So, here is my proposal. I propose that we set a maximum rate for all income taxes, local, state, federal. Local gets 15% of the total taxes, States get 30% of the total taxes, and feds get 55% of the total taxes. There are no deductions, there are no payroll taxes, there are not different types of income, capital gains are taxed the same as the income. This percentage is the amount that is deducted from your paycheck, period.
- <$8,000 per year income = no taxes $8001 to $20,000 = 5% of total income
- $20,001 to $50,000 = 15% of total income
- $50,001 to $100,000 = 20% of total income
- $100,001 to $250,000 = 30% of total income
- $250,001 to $1,000,000 = 40% of total income
- > $1,000,001 = 60% of total income
I will say this flat out. I want to do this to cripple the ability of the rich to buy the government they want.
I also propose a similar income tax on corporations. The corporations will be taxed on revenue. No exemptions, no fancy accounting. Revenue, Period. If you get a check for a dollar, you pay taxes on a dollar.
- <$100,000 net sales =5% of net receipts.
- $100,001 to $500,000 = 10% on net receipts
- $500,001 to $1,000,000 =15% of net receipts
- $1,000,001 to $10,000,000 = 20% of net receipts
- >10,000,001 = 30% of net receipts
There will be no taxes on interest income.
The rich aren't our friends. They have usually (there are exceptions) got rich by exploiting either people or tax laws or buying privilege from the government. Cripple their ability to write the rules in their favor.
9 comments:
Comrade?
Sounds like a workers paradise. Next step would be to erect the politburo.. Maybe the Gulag for all those tax evaders.
And of course we'd need a foriegn component to hunt down all those filthy rich people who fled the country..
What I always find shocking is that any time one questions the viability and moral basis of capitalism, one is invariably labeled a communist.
My feeling is that capitalism is a poor system, both morally and politically, to base a country's economy.
Unfortunately, nothing else has worked.
But capitalism must constantly be restrained. Every time that we have allowed capitalism to be unfettered it has gone through the same cycle of false growth, fraud, and collapse. Every time this cycle has completed, the rich have increased their share of the wealth at the expense of the poor.
Sorry that I rained on your parade. But I think we are seeing the effects of allowing capitalism too much freedom.
My issue with what you are talking about is that it is income redistribution. The only thing I hate more than the rich is those who believe they should support everyone else via taxes.
If you want to eliminate the rich peoples access to government:
1) reform campaigns so that even the little guy could afford to run. Make it impossible for big business to donate (aka buy) a candidate during the election process.
2) Eliminate federal income taxes all together. If there is no money there the rich wont go there. Spread the wealth amongst the state legislatures so there are far more yet smaller pieces of the pie.
3) Place over sight on the politicians themselves and require all financial information be made public for both the candidate as well as the offical and their spouces. No financial secrets and all sources of income can be validated.
Income redistribution has never worked and it is communist.
Anonymous:
I would disagree on all points. The disagreement starts at the "income redistribution has never worked" stage.
I believe that the experiences of the European countries, most notably the Scandanavians, give lie to this statement. Income redistibution is one of the basic duties of a government. The creation of armies, the building of dams, every government function is by definition a "redistribution of wealth". What you are saying is that you don't like it.
Consider first your idea of campaign reform. This is redistribution of wealth. If you pay money to a poor candidate to run his campaign, how can it be called anything else?
Elimination of the federal income tax and creation of state income taxes will not solve the problem, the redistribution of wealth will merely take place at a lower level of government and I can see no evidence that state-level politicians are any less venal than federal level politicians. With the advent of larger piles of money at the state level, I would posit that we would have 50 different problems instead of a single federal problem.
As for your last idea, I am ambivalent concerning this one. While yooking hard at politicians is always a good thing, I can't ever remember one claiming a bribe on his income tax.
This is a fun conversation....we should be drinking beer. Politics are a hoot providing you don't take them too seriously
Poor candidate? Thats not the way it would work. All candidates would recieve public funding and would not be able to put even a single penny of their own money NOR fund raised money into their campaign.. Even playing field. All people are eligible for same benefit.
As for dams etc. Everyone gets benefit from that including (and maybe more so) the rich. Medicaid, etc isn't that way. Only the poor get that.
Bottom line anything that takes more from one group yet gives less is income redistribution and is a communist policy.
All of that said. your plan would compeltely fail anyway. Anyone with money has the ability to work their way around your little plan. Just like they do now. If it requires putting the money in off shore accounts and buying the legislaters from abroad do you honestly think it will stop them?
Give me a break. We already see our jobs going overseas. Your plan would only accelerate that. its not like the sheeple would stop buying the products. Thats already been demonstrated.
But of course more people would be unemployeed in the mean time. Just like they were back in the 70s times two.
The root of our problem is an all powerful, and filthy rich central government.
Its a one stop shopping center for the rich and powerful.
And they have complete power over every state. Think back to when the Fed was encouraging the states to raise the minimum drinking age to 21. A perfect example of strong arming the states into doing its bidding. No highway funds if you don't. Same could apply to education funds and all sorts of other earmarks for infrastructure or whatever.
All because the Fed is the primary revenue clearing house now thanks to the 16th amendment.
Only the rich can afford to play the politics game at that level. And the rewards are measured in the trillions.
Before the 16th amendment the fed had plenty of money to get what it needed done and the states had the ability to tax for roads, education, etc without needing federal funds.
Kinda makes you wonder how well the constitutional amendment process could work when the very states needed to ratify them are also at the mercy of the Fed who drafts them huhh..
Have to agree with anonymous. Redistribution is communism. I don't care how much money any one or any corporation makes. That is pretty much what life is about. The problem as I see it is too much spending. Too much pork. Too many oxygen thieves suckin at Uncle Sams tit. I don't have any solutions, but taxing the rich isn't going to work either
Eliminating the worlds Central Banks alone would place the wealthy back on a level playing field with the rest of us. The next step would be to truly let the "Free Market" work the way it is supposed to which would give everyone an equall chance at sucess. Try to start a small business today with very little capital outlay is almost impossible due to the legal roadblocks that have been set up by the "Wealthy" and the "State". Today we do not live under a "Free Market" system. What we live under now is what is known as a "Corporate Oligarchy", and any type of income redistribution will only make matters worse for us on the bottom and lower middle class.
Consider your people at the tax break intervals, someone a few cents into the next tax bracket would take a hell of a whipping. Percentages are fair if they apply to all equally, but with a healthy lack of taxes for the people in the lowest income levels - say for now $30,000, and adjusted for REAL inflation. The government is getting way too much money to waste now, especially if they can afford foreign aid, so lets say a 25% tax rate on any income over $30,000 with no exclusions or exemptions. Then the tax money could be apportioned like you said.
It would be nice to get the money flowing in a trickle up pattern, instead of a trickle down pattern.
Post a Comment