Posted on 07/07/2009 9:56:20 AM PDT by reaganaut1
Very liberal to define “rich” in terms of income, not assets. My limo lib friends, now retired in their early 60’s, have no “salary” but plenty of assets, are not “rich” - my wife and I, with two incomes but owning much less, are “rich”, thus pay the taxes my lib friends advocate, while they do not.
How much do you want to bet Ted Kennedy isn’t “rich” b/c he “just” makes $176K as a senator?
The answer is the Fair Tax (see www.fairtax.org). There are bills pending in both the House and Senate to end the federal income tax in all its forms, replacing it with a national retail sales tax on new goods and services (not used goods). This would close down the IRS and toss some 60,000 pages of tax code, instructions and forms into the dust bin of history. The Fair Tax would result in unprecedented economic growth in the U.S., attracting capital and brains from all over the world. It would give us a huge competitive advantage over other countries.
But of course it would be the end of Congress’s ability to play with our lives via the tax code, so the Socialist Obama and the Socialist Congress are opposed to it. I recommend everyone go to the web site, www.fairtax.org and learn about it. Then consider supporting this initiative by donating and/or bombarding your Congressmorons with mail telling them we need the Fair Tax.
We DON’T need national sales taxes on top of the federal income tax, but it is very likely that Obama’s Socialist Party will push for various national sales taxes and surcharges to pay for it’s reckless excesses. One example is their proposed $1,000 fine for anyone who does not buy medical insurance. This “fine” of course would be tacked onto your federal income tax bill, following the idiotic example set in Massachusetts.
Hollywood glitteratti and sports figures that lean left should also be exempt.
“Careful FRiend. There’s stuff in the works in the House to turn “your” 401K/Roth money into a cash cow for the government.”
I have two problems with Roth, and 1 with 401k/IRA. For the Roth, if you are at the higher income levels, you are better off mathematically taking the tax deferrment. The reason is that you probability of being in a lower bracket at 65 is high and the extra money can grow faster.
For all of these types of accounts, my problem is that the gov’t can change the rules at any time. That money is earmarked as under special rules. Personally, I would rather pay my taxes and have free&clear savings. Those savings can be used in a pinch, but the retirement accounts are basically off limits.
You will note that I did leave room via the ellipses (...) /grin
Stay away, everyone! It is terrible here. We're covered with rattlesnakes and don't have socialized medicine. Guns litter the streets! We don't have art programs or mass transit! Our illegal immigrants vote Republican! No interpretive dance! Many places don't take credit cards! We burn trash in our pastures just to generate more CO2! Cockroaches the size of small dogs! Packs of dogs the size of compact cars! Compact cars the size of SUVs!
(If any of the above actually appeals to you, I guess you can stay for a while. But bring ammo; we're running low and we're going to need a lot more really soon).
Do you have SPECIFIC items that I can write my Congress-critter about? I have heard these fears and seen the attempts in Europe, but do not know of any details here.
Having moved everything into IRAs and then moving chunks into Roths, this is my great fear, that the VAMPIRES of Congress will, ONCE AGAIN, rob the ants to feed the grasshoppers! After all, was that not what they did with the Chrysler Bond holders?
“Making $200k/year makes one “rich??” HA!!”
Note the terminology. Wealthy. High income and wealth are completely separate descriptors. People with $X in net assets are wealthy. People who earn income over $Y are high income.
I know wealthy people with no income, high income people with no wealth, high income people who have wealth, and people who fall into neither category. I would venture a guess that statistically, most high income people are not wealthy.
I’ve said for years the goal of all of this is to ensure that high income people cannot become wealthy. Most of the politicians either have theirs already, or will once they become lobbyists, authors or paid speakers.
I had a democratic operative tell me once, “the only people who should get rich are ones who have a ‘big event’ in their lives like a lottery, sold business, or fantastic invention”.
“
I thought nobody making less then 250k was going to get a tax increase?”
Paging 0b0z0 and Rohm and other 0b0z0 thugs to answer your question.
I’m beginning to wish even that was true. The ability is running out fast here. I am facing 2 or 3 kids in college in the next few years. Crushing taxes and no financial aid for you - you make too much. Any extra I work to bring in more goes > 50% to the government. I’m getting really tired of being on the receiving end of the governments royal working over.
So I am thinking they really mean the increasing the start of the 33% bracket, not $200K, basically increasing the 33% bracket to 37%. And they were also talking about eliminating the Social Security witholding cap, which would add another 6.2% (12.4% if you are self-employed). And 1.45% (2.9% self-employed) for Medicare. That a marginal tax rate of 44.65% or 52.3% if you are self-employed. And that's before state taxes. In Georgia, that is another 6%, so 50.65% (58.3% self-employed).
if the husband makes 125k a year and the wife makes 80k a year, are they wealthy?
The problem is that as your income goes up to that level, so do your taxes. My husband and I together are blessed to make slightly over that mark. However, if you add the taxes from the increased bracket, the rolldown of your itemized deductions, and the lovely alternative minimum tax, we probable take home the same amount or slightly less than people making 20-30 thousand less than we do.
I’ getting tired of getting “soaked” to pay for everyone else. Last year we paid well over 60K in just federal and state income tax, and it could have been more than that - my PTSD over it blocks out the real number unless I go back and look it up. If socialized medicine comes along, I plan to retire, dramatically reduce my income, sell my big house in favor of a smaller one, and change my lifestyle a lot. It won’t hurt me at all, but it certainly will hurt the car salesman, the appliance store, the home depot guy......
No, no, no... You see, that was a CAMPAIGN promise, and the campaign is over.
It sounds like you have a lot of ability, as a result you will be carrying a heavy load. Now, we also know that very few have legitimate needs so your ability is used to fund the government goons.
Not one dime for those below 250k...
Yeah right
I say we launch a lawsuit. Alisnki rule #4 make them live by their own rules. Every time they propose a tax on people making less than 250k we should file a suit for breach of promise. And demand every piece of documentation on how they came up with the cost of the plan, and how they are going to pay for it. After all it was supposed to be the most open administration in history. Sure we will lose, but we make them admit, in court, under oath, that they never intended to keep their campaign promises. Also if we get enough of them under oath often enough we might catch one in a perjury trap. FIGHT BY THEIR RULES.
“It won’t hurt me at all, but it certainly will hurt the car salesman, the appliance store, the home depot guy......”
Worse yet, the most hurt will be your patients. Imagine if this thinking applies to only 1/3 of the MD’s out there.....
No kidding
One of my colleagues remarked if the county was socialist, at least we would get some of the goodies. The way it is now, we get to pay for everyone else’s soup, but get none ourselves.
(not that I am wishing for socialism, I’m not)
Your colleague is mistaken. In socialism, no one gets any goodies. That is the beauty of it all.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.