Gizmo Williams

It really only feels that way...we naturally hate to pay taxes. However, most tax credits are phased out. While they do impact you...it is not as shocking as they feel.

CaptTurbo

Let me ask this. Taxes have gone up A LOT over the last 20 years. Anyone see any added benefit? in fact during that time we have come up with additional ways to make revenue such as casinos here in PA. That money disappeared.

So what did we get for all we gave?

CaptTurbo

No I get that. And I am not crying that I do it and others dont. Im crying about not seeing the fruits of those labors. Much of it went in the market. others in huge tax increases for me. Heck they took the money Bush gave us because I hit a new bracket. The bend over bracket.

RugbyMuffin

Agreed. But taxes are not going to go away.

I certainly agree we get NOTHING out of taxes, and that this government has the means to run itself.

But that goes back to the biggest problem in this country today. Corruption.

But the situation is what it is. Taxes are here to stay and someone has to foot the bill. I think the super-rich (over 1 million/yr) should take care of the super poor (?????/yr)

__________________

2013 Current Roster: Click Here
2013 Final 53 Prediction:Click Here
2013 Current Starters:Click Here

Gaddabout

My dad had a personal income in that area for more than a decade, but more than half of it went back into his business expenses. Numbers can be very deceiving when it comes to how you're required to account for personal income. He wasn't actually bringing home that much money, but had that amount of "personal income events."

__________________
Before I saw him, I could figure things out. He was the first guy I saw close-up and just didn't get what he was doing. Josh Freese on Vinnie Colaiuta

RugbyMuffin

Well, I with you on this.

You are gettin screwed. It sucks. It it makes you feel any better I would vote for that ridiculous increase to be dealt with people higher up on the food chain.

__________________

2013 Current Roster: Click Here
2013 Final 53 Prediction:Click Here
2013 Current Starters:Click Here

MigratingOsprey

exactly

and rugby - i have no problems for households that make under $100k ...... it is my demographic after all and I came up from a lot lower

not lazy or anything, just not financially motivated .... different priorities and the like

and since you asked, the people making more money tend to contribute skilled labor, produce innovation and products that allow those on the lower scale of income to have a life with more ease

not to mention the already higher tax burden they carry

__________________
"Memories and drinks don't mix too well"

40yearfan

The question is how does that get accomplished. By the government making them do so or by various charitable organizations soliciting funds from those people and using them to help the super poor. I choose the latter. It is much less expensive than if the government handles it and you have a broader array of people giving their time and money to accomplish this goal.

__________________
Old age isn't so bad when you consider the alternative.

MigratingOsprey

and for the record i'm not satisfied at all with my healthcare coverage options or the options of my wife ....... hers is completely provided which is nice, but the rate for a dependent is insane

mine is a shared contribution approach

it's definitely better than nothing, but it's expensive as compared to the benefits we receive ..... and when we need benefits it's costly and a giant hassle

i would love for some meaningful reform ..... what I fear is adding on an additional expense to like situated people without providing any actual enhancement

pretty much paying more for the same service

__________________
"Memories and drinks don't mix too well"

arthurracoon

Military spending and medicare payments.

__________________
Signed,

arthurpostpadder

DWKB

True, but effective tax rate is what matters to me, no? As for the employer portion of SS, it's only theory that I would see that income should it not be allocated to the government.

First year I owned my home and was married with a wife in graduate school. I had no idea what kind of tax situation I was looking at.

__________________
"[Rock Chalk Jayhawk] is the greatest college cheer ever devised" --Teddy Roosevelt

RugbyMuffin

I think at this point I need to get off the soap box. It seems making 250k a year is far more complex than it sounds.

When I say 250k a year I am not saying net worth. I am talking about the money that goes towards your family/private life and not your business.

But all that goes beyong my experience and knowledge.

To sum up I feel if you are making more then your should pay more on taxes. Because numbers are numbers and how important, or better, or your value to society doesn't plan into it. Yet, this specific tax increase seems to be ridiculously unfair to one tax bracket.

Good stuff though. It got me thinking in other directions to say the least.

__________________

2013 Current Roster: Click Here
2013 Final 53 Prediction:Click Here
2013 Current Starters:Click Here

RugbyMuffin

Wait, wait.

The WORKERS provide innovation, skilled labor, and products. The WORKERS build the product.

It is all the owner's vision, but he NEEDS the workers to accomplish his goal.

One mand doesn't build the yachts that the company I work for produces. The owner hires and pays his employees in return for thier skills to accomplish his goal.

There is a respect that should be given for those whose vision supplies jobs, and trade for said society. But without his employee's his vision is a doodle on a piece of paper.

As much as I need to be paid, is as much as my employor needs me to be a source of cheap electrical engineering/design.

The point being is that optimally we pay taxes because we know we must rely on others to have a functioning society, a society that allows for the innovation to flow, allows for us all to effeciently keep the world moving.

I can see how an arguement can be made for the owner putting more into society than say the average worker, but an arguement can be made that an owner cannot put anything into anything without said worker.

Can't have all cheifs and no indians.

__________________

2013 Current Roster: Click Here
2013 Final 53 Prediction:Click Here
2013 Current Starters:Click Here

MigratingOsprey

except skilled workers get paid

you could have a family of skilled plumbers and they could hit $100k in household income

doctors add for their costs, correct?

owners are the vision, the drive and the financial risk taker when they come up with a new product.

those that can help them make that vision a reality will be compensated by the value they add to the process and how the product is valued in the marketplace

i went to a school that had a lot of engineers ..... i don't know any of them in my graduating class that are making less than $70k a year (most made that out of the gate)

i have two buddies who chose to forego engineering and become teachers

and even as lowly compensated as teachers are, a household with 2 teachers will usually be in excess of $80k in household income

the difference between $100k in household income and $150k in household income isn't that great

__________________
"Memories and drinks don't mix too well"

Duckjake

Sure but for the purposes of the discussion we were talking about the base rates.

As for the employer portion of SS that is still an income tax no matter who pays it. Especially for small business and the Self Employed.

I match the SS tax based on my EEs income. So it is an income tax. I pay it instead of them. Whether I would keep it or give it to them in the form of higher pay is irrelevant in that context.

BTW: If you live in Arizona there is a rabid Cards fan who is a whiz with taxes and a member of this board. If you and your wife get to the point you need a good tax adviser, and if she's in Grad school you probably will, PM me and I'll give you his company name. Great guy too. Even 40year likes him.

__________________
Forget the pay. Can the guy play.