Friday, March 27, 2009

One-Out-of-Seven Favor 90% Tax Rate for Millionaires

One-Out-of-Seven Favor 90% Tax Rate for Millionaires

Just one-out-of-seven Americans (14%) would like to see a 90% tax rate on earnings
above a million dollars a year. The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone
survey finds that 74% are opposed to such a high tax rate for the nation's highest
earners. Eighty-five percent (85%) of Republicans oppose the 90% tax rate, along
with 66% of Democrats and 72% of those not affiliated with either major party.

I'm all for someone paying their fair share in taxes, but you have to agree that 90% is way more than their fair share. It's the socialism that the Republicans accused Obama of advocating when he only supported a measly 3-4% increase in taxes -- the same rate of the Clinton years. They shouldn't bitch, that tax rate is lower than it was when their savior -- Ronald Reagan was president. The tax rate right now, is what, 36%? Obama is gonna raise it to 39%? The highest tax rate I'd support would be 50%. I don't care how much you earn, if the government came along and took half of your earnings away I'm sure you'd be pissed, right? But I don't know what word to describe what I'd be if the government came along and took 90% of my earnings...that's just plain robbery.

And speaking of tax hikes....I found this interesting: More Voters Than Ever Say Tax Cuts Help the Economy

Now I don't adhere to any ideology. I believe in doing what's right. In a faltering economy, I don't think raising taxes is the right thing to do - to anyone. When and (a minor if) the economy gets going again, and is strong, then I'd support raising taxes, but only then.

Now before I get called a right-winger like I have been called already today...I just told you, I don't adhere to an ideology. I don't believe in the right wing ways of doing things or the left ways of doing things. Sure, there's some policies on both sides of the aisle that I find appealing, but I do not "belong" to either side. I am a registered independent. Always have been and always will be. I don't care which side of the aisle you cling to, if you do something that I don't like I am going to bash you for it. I won't kiss either side's ass. You both suck in my humble opinion and have done nothing but bring this country down further into the hellhole it is in. The fun part is sitting and watching you two blame each other for it. You're both to fucking blame. I would say that you should work together to fix things -- but history shows that really isn't a good idea, either. When you guys work together, the American people get a double fucking up the ass. So yeah, every 4-8 years you guys take turns in fucking the American people up the ass and that's fine...just as long as it isn't a bipartisan fuckeroo.

Now, I hope I cleared things up. If not, let me know in the comments.



Denford said...

I think a flat tax is best. You see, the more successful you are, most likely the harder you work or the more enterprising you are.

This should be rewarded and the best way to do this is to leave as much money as possible in the hands of the hard worker.

This platform has been taken over by the Conservatives like Steve Forbes but it is a bi-partisan solution that should be supported by anyone who believes in rewarding hard work and inventiveness.

You will find this incentive will spur any country to greater heights as people see the value in applying themselves to their dreams and ambitions.

The country gains, always.

CrackedWorld said...

A 90% tax doesn't do Jack when there are suck a large number of AIG recipients outside our borders that don't pay our taxes anyway.

Cut this thing off at the head. Its politicians in Washington that made it possible for AIG to hand out bonuses to executives that ruined their company and our economy. Republicans should have exposed this to the public before it was passed by a Democrat controlled government. But they did nothing.

They are all supposed to be servants of the public but they really only serve themselves.

ZIRGAR said...

I think a 90% tax is ridiculously high. As liberal as I am I don't believe in eating the rich, but I think that to whom much is given much is required. However, at some point if the tax gets too high it becomes a comedy of diminishing returns. I don't know what number would be fair and equitable to everyone, but I would agree that 50% would be a good cut off for the high end percentage.

Good post.

Stunatra said...

@Denford, exactly.

@Crackedworld, yep.

@Zirgar, thank you.

Thank you everyone for the great comments! And thanks for stopping by! :)

phuckpolitics said...

I'm with Denford - flat tax is the way to go.

Stunatra said...

How about a flat tax of 10% for everyone? No more deductions or loop holes.

I wonder if that would bring the government more revenue than it's bringing in now. It certainly would be a lot easier to collect.

Smellerbee said...

Wow, you all really hate the poor. Joke. Joke.

Though a flat tax does favor the wealthy and "harm" the poor. 10% of a millionaire's fortune is nothing for him, equivalent to his high class call girl budget.

However 10% of an under 20K household is the food budget for one of the children.

That's the reasons we have progressive taxes. So that the burden of society is placed on those who can easily bear it.

Oh, and I don't see how that would increase government revenue. Could you expand on that?

Interesting post.

Stunatra said...

I figure that a flat tax eliminating tax loop holes and deductions would help keep the money in government providing more revenue. If the tax is only 10-20% for everyone, it would be fair and I don't think people would try to avoid their taxes, for the most part.