From the WSJ: “Starting in January 2011, “the rich”—defined by President Obama as individuals earning more than $200,000 and families earning more than $250,000 per year—will see their marginal tax rate rise to 39.6% from 35%. Their effective tax rate will increase even more as certain credits and deductions are phased out.” Anyone know more details about this? Truly frightening.
The worst part is they aren’t going to change the withholding tables so it hits you when you file. This is change we can believe in.
It’s funny how they think an individual making 200k and a family making 250k are equivalent.
What’s frightening about it? When governments are in debt they raise taxes and/or cut spending. Given the US govt debt level, this is hardly surprising. Of course printing money is also an option, if you don’t mind your quality of life falling substantially.
newsuper Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > What’s frightening about it? When governments are > in debt they raise taxes and/or cut spending. > Given the US govt debt level, this is hardly > surprising. > > Of course printing money is also an option, if you > don’t mind your quality of life falling > substantially. its frightening because its going to cause capital flight - look at what’s been happening to NJ with their increased tax rates. businesses and wealthy indivuduals are leaving, so there are less jobs and a decreasing quality of life. i think it would be nice if they cut some of the programs for the people who aren’t looking for jobs and keep popping out kids.
Awesome. My household doesn’t make $250,000 per year, and if households who exceed that amount have to pay more taxes, that’s good for me.
I got to say, what I am truly disgusted at is this: When a young irresponsible couple who are practically living paycheck to paycheck working odds and ends jobs with no ambition or future decide to pop out a few kids, and then take free handouts from the government. The parents can’t provide a good environment or take care of them well in the first place, and shouldn’t be having kids. Bad environments, bad parenting makes the kids go bad and grow up and put more burden on society. And then the democrats, with their “everyone deserves a good life” starts increasing these handouts more and more. Deficit skyrockets, and the real hard-working people have to keep paying for all this. Doesn’t this sound like socialism? At this rate, that’s where we are headed.
iteracom Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I got to say, what I am truly disgusted at is > this: > > When a young irresponsible couple who are > practically living paycheck to paycheck working > odds and ends jobs with no ambition or future > decide to pop out a few kids, and then take free > handouts from the government. > > The parents can’t provide a good environment or > take care of them well in the first place, and > shouldn’t be having kids. Bad environments, bad > parenting makes the kids go bad and grow up and > put more burden on society. > > And then the democrats, with their “everyone > deserves a good life” starts increasing these > handouts more and more. Deficit skyrockets, and > the real hard-working people have to keep paying > for all this. Doesn’t this sound like socialism? > At this rate, that’s where we are headed. Wow way to generalize…not everyone falls into this category. In fact a majority are under severe financial hardship due to loss of job or health related issues, disablility etc. 40 percent of our deficit is due to bloated defense expenditure and another 40 percent Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and no one will touch those. So this is the only PC solution to fight the deficit.
frisian Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Awesome. My household doesn’t make $250,000 per > year, and if households who exceed that amount > have to pay more taxes, that’s good for me. actually its not - because those people making 250k+ will leave your town/area and your town/area will lose out on jobs, growth and quality of living.
iteracom Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I got to say, what I am truly disgusted at is > this: > > When a young irresponsible couple who are > practically living paycheck to paycheck working > odds and ends jobs with no ambition or future > decide to pop out a few kids, and then take free > handouts from the government. > > The parents can’t provide a good environment or > take care of them well in the first place, and > shouldn’t be having kids. Bad environments, bad > parenting makes the kids go bad and grow up and > put more burden on society. > > And then the democrats, with their “everyone > deserves a good life” starts increasing these > handouts more and more. Deficit skyrockets, and > the real hard-working people have to keep paying > for all this. Doesn’t this sound like socialism? > At this rate, that’s where we are headed. What if you came from such a background? It has more to do with coincidence and pure luck that you think you made any right choices in your life so far.
mar350 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > frisian Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Awesome. My household doesn’t make $250,000 > per > > year, and if households who exceed that amount > > have to pay more taxes, that’s good for me. > > > actually its not - because those people making > 250k+ will leave your town/area and your town/area > will lose out on jobs, growth and quality of > living. Are you fvcking kidding me? You really think an extra 4% tax on the income you earn above 250k is really going to make people leave the country? Girl please, I know no one wants more taxes but that’s just retarded.
Wasn’t that the top rate 10 years ago for almost a decade? I agree with the retarded statement.
artvandalay Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Are you fvcking kidding me? You really think an > extra 4% tax on the income you earn above 250k is > really going to make people leave the country? > Girl please, I know no one wants more taxes but > that’s just retarded. everyone has their tipping point. when you add that to other local taxes and remove credits it makes a lot more sense to move, or hide your income. if you are making good money you can afford to invest in shelters. my example is NJ - look at the flight they have had as many people/firms have left by simpley crossing borders to PA or DE. it would be harder to leave the country, but my point is that increasing taxes is not the answer.
mar350 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > artvandalay Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Are you fvcking kidding me? You really think an > > extra 4% tax on the income you earn above 250k > is > > really going to make people leave the country? > > Girl please, I know no one wants more taxes but > > that’s just retarded. > > > everyone has their tipping point. when you add > that to other local taxes and remove credits it > makes a lot more sense to move, or hide your > income. if you are making good money you can > afford to invest in shelters. > > my example is NJ - look at the flight they have > had as many people/firms have left by simpley > crossing borders to PA or DE. > > it would be harder to leave the country, but my > point is that increasing taxes is not the answer. That example doesn’t really apply to this situation, moving to a different state won’t help you avoid federal income taxes. Tax evasion is illegal, and the US has been cracking down big time - e.g. on Swiss banks to disclose records. I don’t disagree with you that taxes have economic consequences, I just think you need to think a little more about what they actually are instead of spewing non-sense.
We have a major entitlement problem. Until we fix that, we have to pay for these things somehow. I say tackle the spending, but that’s not as sexy as saying we’ll just tax the greedy rich folks.
Actually the tax rate is just going back to the days of Bill Clinton. We ended up with a surplus at the end of is term.
To the OP: What about this frightens you? It seems like a relatively minor adjustment being that it is only applicable to your earnings over those thresholds. I am one of the last people to be classified as a BO supporter, but this decision appears to be one of the better ones he’s made. In regards to the issue of “capital flight”, I don’t see many people leaving the country over this issue. And since this is a federal tax, that is precisely what would need to happen to avoid the higher tax. Comparing this to the NJ situation is a really awful analogy. Furthermore, as a NJ resident and homeowner, I can comment with certainty that the tax increases imposed on our residents via higher property taxes blow away this increase in the marginal rate. My prop taxes have gone up by double digit percentage points in each of the past 3 years. Moreover, I live no more than an hour from each of Delaware and PA, and moving there is not hard to imagine at all.
mar350 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > frisian Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Awesome. My household doesn’t make $250,000 > per > > year, and if households who exceed that amount > > have to pay more taxes, that’s good for me. > > > actually its not - because those people making > 250k+ will leave your town/area and your town/area > will lose out on jobs, growth and quality of > living. Wow, even better. Then maybe one of those > $250k jobs will open up for me or my wife. You know, if these people are such total BAMFs, then they are welcome to move to, say, Burkina Faso where they can protect and add to their fortune. But would they be as successful in Burkina Faso as they are in the U.S.? I guess so, since they’re such BAMFs.
i used to live in nj, too. taxes there are insane. the example was given purely to show people’s/business’ reaction to taxes - not as a method to escape federal taxes. its not a large increase in federal taxes, but the 4% doesn’t include loss of deductions. small business will most likely be effected the most. what’s stopping them from incorporating, if the are not already, and logging zero profit (ala Exxon-Mobile)?
marcus phoenix Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Actually the tax rate is just going back to the > days of Bill Clinton. We ended up with a surplus > at the end of is term. Good point, I remember when Clinton raised the tax rate to ~39% and the rest of 90s were marred by economic malaise. Let’s not forget that the roll back to 35% was from an unfunded $2 trillion tax cut and Obama is just letting those expire. End of the world and/or capitalism, it is not.