4 ms·

Your pay most likely comes from sales of goods and services, buyers of which are taxed at a lower rate. They are using after tax income, so it is double taxatio

by webXL 16y ago

Your pay most likely comes from sales of goods and services, buyers of which are taxed at a lower rate. They are using after tax income, so it is double taxation there, too. But value was created in those instances, so one can say that the government helped create that value to justify it. I supposed the value of the stock can also be viewed in that manner, but why should it be taxed as much as income, when goods and services aren't?

jshen 16y ago
because someone like warren buffet shouldn't pay a lower percentage of his income in taxes than the rest of us. Hell, you're the one that is making the case that a worker generates more value than people who gamble on stocks.
- webXL 16y ago
  News Flash: Warren Buffet pays more in percentage terms than you do: http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2011/02/distribution_of_1.html http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2011/02/distribution_of_... And he gives a lot more away to charity in percentage terms, too!
  - jshen 16y ago
    I pay way more than 17.7% of my income. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/27/AR2007062700097.html http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06... Warren E. Buffett was his usual folksy self Tuesday night at a fundraiser for Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) as he slammed a system that allows the very rich to pay taxes at a lower rate than the middle class. Buffett cited himself, the third-richest person in the world, as an example. Last year, Buffett said, he was taxed at 17.7 percent on his taxable income of more than $46 million. His receptionist was taxed at about 30 percent. Buffett said that was despite the fact that he was not trying to av
    - webXL 16y ago
      If Warren Buffet only paid 17.7% of his income in '06, then other top-1%'ers pay a lot more than 31.2%! (see CBO Effect Tax Rates 2006: http://www.cbo.gov/publications/collections/tax/2009/effective_rates.pdf http://www.cbo.gov/publications/collections/tax/2009/effecti...) Warren Buffet uses tax loopholes (perfectly legal) to keep more of his money, which he plans to give away to various charities by the time he dies. The solution is to close loopholes and encourage more charity among the super rich, so that the government doesn't need to do as much charity when it can't afford to, and the wealthy are still able to create jobs by not having an effective tax rate much higher than 31%.
      - jshen 16y ago
        They do pay less than us, and it's that way because they make a lot of their money as capital gains which are taxed at a rate far lower than the taxes we pay on income. The forbes 400 pays a significantly lower tax rate than I do as programmer. That's not debatable, it's a simple fact. I think they should pay at least the same rate as I do, don't you? http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2007/1126/042b.html http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2007/1126/042b.html
        webXL 16y ago
        No, they do not pay less! The top 1% has an average effective tax rate of 32% -- much higher than yours! This includes capital gains taxes! It's whatever amount they send to the IRS divided by the amount they receive as income (including proceeds from stock transactions). Methodolgy CBO's analysis of effective tax rates assumes that households bear the burden of the taxes that they pay directly, such as individual income taxes (including taxes on interest, dividends and capital gains) and employees' share of payroll taxes. The analysis assumes--as do most economists--that employers' share of payroll taxes is passed on to employees in the form of lower wages than would otherwise be paid. Therefore, the amount of those taxes is included in employees' income, and the taxes are counted as part of employees' tax burden. CBO estimates payroll taxes and individual income taxes, including refundable tax credits, with a tax "calculator" that applies the tax law for the relevant year to the tax return data from the SOI. Excise taxes are assumed to fall on households according to their consumption of taxed goods (such as tobacco and alcohol). Excise taxes that affect intermediate goods, which are paid by businesses, are attributed to households in proportion to their overall consumption. CBO assumes that each household spends the same on taxed goods as similar household with comparable income in the Consumer Expenditure Survey. Far less consensus exists about how to attribute corporate income taxes (and taxes on capital income generally). In this analysis, CBO assumes that corporate income taxes are borne by owners of capital in proportion to their income from interest, dividends, capital gains, and rents. Over the long term, however, some models suggest that at least part of the burden falls on labor income. http://www.cbo.gov/publications/collections/tax/2009/methodology.pdf http://www.cbo.gov/publications/collections/tax/2009/methodo... "taxes that they pay directly, such as individual income taxes (including taxes on interest, dividends and capital gains)"

by webXL 16y ago

jshen 16y ago

because someone like warren buffet shouldn't pay a lower percentage of his income in taxes than the rest of us. Hell, you're the one that is making the case that a worker generates more value than people who gamble on stocks.

webXL 16y ago
News Flash: Warren Buffet pays more in percentage terms than you do: http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2011/02/distribution_of_1.html http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2011/02/distribution_of_... And he gives a lot more away to charity in percentage terms, too!
- jshen 16y ago
  I pay way more than 17.7% of my income. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/27/AR2007062700097.html http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06... Warren E. Buffett was his usual folksy self Tuesday night at a fundraiser for Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) as he slammed a system that allows the very rich to pay taxes at a lower rate than the middle class. Buffett cited himself, the third-richest person in the world, as an example. Last year, Buffett said, he was taxed at 17.7 percent on his taxable income of more than $46 million. His receptionist was taxed at about 30 percent. Buffett said that was despite the fact that he was not trying to av
  - webXL 16y ago
    If Warren Buffet only paid 17.7% of his income in '06, then other top-1%'ers pay a lot more than 31.2%! (see CBO Effect Tax Rates 2006: http://www.cbo.gov/publications/collections/tax/2009/effective_rates.pdf http://www.cbo.gov/publications/collections/tax/2009/effecti...) Warren Buffet uses tax loopholes (perfectly legal) to keep more of his money, which he plans to give away to various charities by the time he dies. The solution is to close loopholes and encourage more charity among the super rich, so that the government doesn't need to do as much charity when it can't afford to, and the wealthy are still able to create jobs by not having an effective tax rate much higher than 31%.
    - jshen 16y ago
      They do pay less than us, and it's that way because they make a lot of their money as capital gains which are taxed at a rate far lower than the taxes we pay on income. The forbes 400 pays a significantly lower tax rate than I do as programmer. That's not debatable, it's a simple fact. I think they should pay at least the same rate as I do, don't you? http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2007/1126/042b.html http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2007/1126/042b.html
      - webXL 16y ago
        No, they do not pay less! The top 1% has an average effective tax rate of 32% -- much higher than yours! This includes capital gains taxes! It's whatever amount they send to the IRS divided by the amount they receive as income (including proceeds from stock transactions). Methodolgy CBO's analysis of effective tax rates assumes that households bear the burden of the taxes that they pay directly, such as individual income taxes (including taxes on interest, dividends and capital gains) and employees' share of payroll taxes. The analysis assumes--as do most economists--that employers' share of payroll taxes is passed on to employees in the form of lower wages than would otherwise be paid. Therefore, the amount of those taxes is included in employees' income, and the taxes are counted as part of employees' tax burden. CBO estimates payroll taxes and individual income taxes, including refundable tax credits, with a tax "calculator" that applies the tax law for the relevant year to the tax return data from the SOI. Excise taxes are assumed to fall on households according to their consumption of taxed goods (such as tobacco and alcohol). Excise taxes that affect intermediate goods, which are paid by businesses, are attributed to households in proportion to their overall consumption. CBO assumes that each household spends the same on taxed goods as similar household with comparable income in the Consumer Expenditure Survey. Far less consensus exists about how to attribute corporate income taxes (and taxes on capital income generally). In this analysis, CBO assumes that corporate income taxes are borne by owners of capital in proportion to their income from interest, dividends, capital gains, and rents. Over the long term, however, some models suggest that at least part of the burden falls on labor income. http://www.cbo.gov/publications/collections/tax/2009/methodology.pdf http://www.cbo.gov/publications/collections/tax/2009/methodo... "taxes that they pay directly, such as individual income taxes (including taxes on interest, dividends and capital gains)"