Comments on: Is a Middle Class Tax Increase on the Way?

By: Roger

Roger — Sat, 21 Mar 2009 16:01:08 +0000

@Master Po: While it make be true that the top 20% of earners in the US pay 60% (or more) of the government’s tax revenue, that doesn’t mean you can’t ’squeeze more from them’. You have to look at how much of their income they’re actually paying, not how much of the government’s income that translates into.

James B. Stewart noted in an article in the latest SmartMoney (sadly, no link is currently available online) that the top 400 highest grossing individuals in the US paid (on average) 17 percent of their income toward federal taxes. This is one of the lowest rates they’ve ever paid, and is lower than many middle-class people already pay. The argument that they can’t pay any more is false.

A better line of discussion is not COULD they pay more, but whether they SHOULD pay more. If so, how much more? And how can we avoid running into Laffer curve problems, where higher tax rates lead to people gaming the system and hide their income? (And as a side note, whether taxing income is the best way to provide the government with funding in the first place.)

Back to the topic at hand: I think we’re heading, slowly but surely, toward a single-payer, government sponsored system of health care. What exactly the final plan will look like exactly, when it will come into existence, and what, if any, intermediate plans will pop up along the way, I can’t say, but I imagine by the time I’m ready to retire in forty years, employer-paid and sponsored health care will be a thing of the past.

As for taxing current health care benefits, it doesn’t strike me as good policy, but then, perception is more important in politics than reality. If our lawmakers think they can spin a move like that positively (or that, with everything else going on, it can slip by with nobody noticing), they might charge ahead with it, anyway.

By: MasterPo

MasterPo — Thu, 19 Mar 2009 23:54:05 +0000

MJ – The muni bonds was just an example. Just how many tax shelters are they going to allow to remain when the gov is spending TRILLIONS$$$ like a drunk sailor?!

Watch out for your IRA and 401k. That’s next. Mark my words.

By: My Journey

My Journey — Thu, 19 Mar 2009 13:03:21 +0000

@Master Po,

I haven’t checked the numbers for in a while, but I am almost positive that the top 20% pay MORE than 60% share lol!

But the munibond situation I doubt will work out because it has to do with a Supreme Court Case that was heard and decided in the 1800’s…and was actually JUST upheld in 2008 (Google Kentucky v. Davis)

By: MasterPo

MasterPo — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 02:44:08 +0000

Of course there’s going to be a middle class tax increase! Come one, get real.

The top 20% of American earners alredy pay over 60% of the income taxes. There isn’t much more you can squeeze from them.

The poor by definition have nothing so you can’t tax them.

Guess who’s left?

The Messiah already dropped his definition of “middle class” from $250k (during the campaign) down to a mere $75k.

IMO the next step: Out law or at least GREATLY restrict the tax-free’ness of muni bonds. That will hurt the states (afterall, why buy a muni if not for the tax-free interest).

Also watch out for taxing 401k’s, IRA’s, SEPs, SIMPLEs etc etc. That’s too golden a pot of money for the gov to keep it’s dirty fingers off. Especially with the HUGE deficits Commrade Obama is running up.

Welcome to the United Socialist Indebted States of Amerika.

It’s not your father’s country any more…

By: oh boy

oh boy — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 21:18:01 +0000

This is the best way to get Palin elected in 2012.

By: Corporate Barbarian

Corporate Barbarian — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 16:53:31 +0000

I don’t like it. The politicians can say it’s a corporate tax, but it will put more of a burden on workers, either by forcing them to self-insure, or having other benefits reduced (like merit raises). If Obama goes along with this he’s a hypocrite.