No its not fair, and thats why this country is about to go the way of the Romans, (along with Europe and a lot of other country). When you take from the people who work to give to the people who dont you build distrust and hatred, You end up with a system that is set to collapse. You can not have 50% of the population dependent on the government for its income (more if you include government workers and the military)

I agree with your statements above, but you seem to be forgetting the ultra-wealthy 1% in the US, who shares much of the blame of the current socio-economic situation.

Who really tells the US Government what to do?  The food stamp abusing poor or the ultra-wealthy 1%?

What group consistently do not pay their fair share of taxes?  The barely visible middle class or the ultra-wealthy 1%?

What group is sending jobs to foreign nations?  The mom and pop businesses or the corporations owned by the ultra-wealthy 1%?

Yes, the deadbeats in the US are a contributing factor to the current situation, but to ignore the actions of the ultra-wealthy 1% is irresponsible.


The government has put us and its self into a position where there is no motivation to do better, You get rewarded for not working. I read a book recnently and it was put like this.
Would you put a man in jail if he committed no crime ?
Then why would you reward some one who has done no work ?

How about: if the IRS is willing to gut any middle class American for failing to pay their income taxes, then why does the IRS not confiscate the assets of the ultra-wealthy 1% who repeatedly do not pay their fair share?


The government has got to a point where it would have to tax everybody in the country at 50-60% just to pay its bills. If it did that it would be over thrown ina heart beat. Instead it has printed money to the point where the value of the dollar is worthless. The goveemrnt has no way to pay this dept and must carry on borrowing (printing money) with no possible way to pay it back.  The only possible outcome is an economic collapse followed by hyper inflation and the death of 50% + of the population

That scenario is for certain.


So is this country fair ? no ? can you ever have a fair economy ? no  is their a better option ? im not sure but i know what we have is not working and never will.

Prepare for the end becasue the end is near.

Fairness in this country was lost long ago, if it ever existed.

Yes, the end may very well be near, except for the ultra-wealthy 1% who probably will retreat to their survival bunkers or private islands when the collapse begins and reveal themselves later to start their shenanigans once again to those of us who survive.


Kuleana

When the government own everything and decides who works where and who gets what : that is communisum, Just becasue it was called something else a few hundred years ago it dosent make it a diffrent thing

You are going to be waiting forever. Life will never be fair.

Not really, look at the civil rights movementof the 60's.  Social changes can be made.


What about the institutionalized discrimination that favors tall people over short in basketball?

I fail to see any institutionalized discrimination in basketball.


We are all dealt different hands in life, some get more beneficial hands either because of something innate or something social. Smart, better looking, taller, stronger, etc. All things that lead to an uneven playing field.

I agree.


My model is George Washington Carver. He started life as a slave and had way more challenges in his way in terms of discrimination than most of us today could ever face. Yet he worked hard, succeeded, and founded his own college. He didn't let discrimination in whatever form stop him.

True, a great role model indeed.  However, it does not mean society should not continue to strive and improve life for all.


Kuleana

We need a good definition of fair.

The people at the bottom who don't do anything don't pay their fair share in taxes either.

It often comes down to one thing:  WHO decides what is fair and what is not.  You, as an individual, have no authority to enforce your views on the rest of society.  One might decide it is fair for the producers to keep most of what they produce and give the remainder to those without.  Someone else might decide it's  fair for all to keep an equal share, producer or not, so that all have equal shares.

Fair is a dangerous concept, just like equality.  Seems the people deciding on the rules are more equal, and get treated "fairer", than everyone else.

We need a good definition of fair.

The people at the bottom who don't do anything don't pay their fair share in taxes either.

Who really tells the US Government what to do?  The food stamp abusing poor or the ultra-wealthy 1%?
The poor do, They keep voting in the same retards over and over so they can get their foodstamps

What group consistently do not pay their fair share of taxes?  The barely visible middle class or the ultra-wealthy 1%?
If you taxed the 1% at 100% the money wouldent last a year with all the entitlements the US govement has. The problem is not the 1% its the 50%+ of americans on entitlment programs who pay zero tax and/or get paid returns that they  paid nothing towards.

What group is sending jobs to foreign nations?  The mom and pop businesses or the corporations owned by the ultra-wealthy 1%?
Fair trade agreements have eliminated the safeguards (tarifs) designed to stop this from happening. The government has pushed the jobs abroad. The government (that the poor people voted in)  has done made it this way. They also treat us companys that register abrtoad as off shor companys allowing them to keep money in tax havens, Again the poor people voted these people into power.

Yes, the deadbeats in the US are a contributing factor to the current situation, but to ignore the actions of the ultra-wealthy 1% is irresponsible.
Why are the ultra wealthy wealthy ? Becasue poor people keep buying their crap, Want to break them. STOP BUYING CRAP and invest in the future. $5 starbucks a day = 1825 a year. 5 years thats over $9k of cooffe that you could made at home for $900 (if you really needed that caffeine fix)



How about: if the IRS is willing to gut any middle class American for failing to pay their income taxes, then why does the IRS not confiscate the assets of the ultra-wealthy 1% who repeatedly do not pay their fair share?
What is this fair share bullshit ? The govement should not be taking taxs ( You dont pay taxs the government Takes them by force) the federal government should be paid by tarifs on imported and exported goods and by the states (who can collect taxs from the people) The only way to have a FAIR tax would be a flat rate with no refunds or exceptions OR a sales tax on all products. You would also have to implement a tariff system on all imported goods. The problem is thats not what liberals want they want people with more money to pay more money and as stated above that does not fix the problem as the amount of money collected can not fix the deficit system, The only thing it dose is reduce the wealth of those that have money and that has nothing to do with being fair but comes down to jealousy

Fairness in this country was lost long ago, if it ever existed.

Yes, the end may very well be near, except for the ultra-wealthy 1% who probably will retreat to their survival bunkers or private islands when the collapse begins and reveal themselves later to start their shenanigans once again to those of us who survive.
Fairness existed before the government got to the point where it made every person into a slave. They took away the right to claim land and implemented a tax system that forces people to work have money to pay taxs. Even if you barter/trade with people you are still required to record and pay taxs on the value of that transaction even if no money changed hands.
The biggest problem today is no one wants to start from the bottom. As a human as an Animal we have one job on this planet. And thats to make sure our children survive and have a better life then us. To many people are not willing to do the work or make the sacrifices needed to make this true and until they do this species is doomed to repeat itself over and over.

What group is sending jobs to foreign nations?  The mom and pop businesses or the corporations owned by the ultra-wealthy 1%?
Fair trade agreements have eliminated the safeguards (tarifs) designed to stop this from happening. The government has pushed the jobs abroad. The government (that the poor people voted in)  has done made it this way. They also treat us companys that register abrtoad as off shor companys allowing them to keep money in tax havens, Again the poor people voted these people into power.

Your analysis is very naive in that you shift the blame of the offshoring of jobs and utilization of tax havens to the poor who voted the guilty administration into power.  You really think the poor lobbied for the elimination of tariffs and existence of offshore companies?  I got new for you, the existence of those items would still be a reality even if the Republicans took power.  The ultra-wealthy 1% does not discriminate among the political parties they donate and/or bribe in order to get what they want.

Kuleana

A great many companies in this country, I would say of larger companies it's the majority, are owned by a great many stockholders, not only the wealthy 1%.  The wealthy who started or purchased companies may have controlling shares, but the stockholders are you, me, anyone with mutual funds and 401Ks, direct stock purchaser, employees  and retirees with a portion of their portfolios in the stock market.

Its true that many Americans can claim ownership in some of the largest corporations in the US.  However, if it is true that the stock market is undermined by the 1% via insider trading and other illegal activities that adversely affect other stocks and if you were one of those affected stockholders, shouldn't you hold those responsible accountable for their actions?


Most of these companies make decisions for the good of the owners, because the owners want to see profits.  As far as numbers go, I'll say the middle class represents the largest number of stockholders in the country, while the 1% represents those holding the largest share of ownership.

In terms of absolute number of people who can claim ownership in stock traded companies, you are correct.  However, it is still the 1% that relatively owns the majority of most of those stock traded companies due to the controlling interest they posses.


If you hurt the 1%, you also hurt the middle class, and the middle class is less able to absorb financial losses.

Not necessarily.  When I think of main street middle class Americans, I think of people who either work for some company or own their own businesses that are independent of the stock market.  Sure, there are a great many people who work for the 1%, but the number who do not are much higher in number.  The policies that ought to be enacted to prevent corporate wrongdoings should fairly monitor the activities of all companies, but be much more strict to those companies of the 1%.


Kuleana

You keep using the term "fair share" what does this even mean ?

Theoretically, fair share to me means societal accountability by all people in a nation.  All citizens must contribute their relative fair share to society, whether it is in the form of their labor, service, capital, or taxes.

So, fair share is relative? 

The top 20% of those filing income tax returns pay 84% of all income taxes.  That's just federal.

The top 1% paid 45.7% -- almost half of all income taxes.

QUESTION:  How much more would make it "fair?"  88%, 95%, 100%??  if 20% are already paying the bulk of taxes, and the other 80% are paying 16%, I'm having a tough time seeing where the fairness is supposed to equal the 1%, 3% or 5% paying more.

First of all, your stats references illustrate the share of taxes paid by income level.  It does not, however, indicate whether the tax base that were used to derive taxes owed by the ultra-wealthy 1% were truly valid or not.

Let me explain, both the federal and state income tax system are all self-reporting.  Hence, anyone can, if they think they can succeed, understate their taxes.  Most middle class people in the US report and pay their fair share.  However, with the assistance of high-paid tax lawyers and advisers, the ultra-wealthy 1% are notorious of creating and utilizing all available loop holes in the existing tax laws, thus, able to grossly understate the amount of taxes they truly owe.  If they can't succeed using loop holes, that's when off-shore tax havens are utilized, which are not available to common citizens by-the-way.

Hence, the answer to your question is not tax rate, but rather cleaning-up the tax reporting guidelines for the ultra-wealthy 1% to ensure they are not side-stepping the current tax system, thereby, paying their accurate fair share of taxes owed to the government.


Kuleana

Quote from: Flapp_Jackson on Today at 08:46:12 PM
So, fair share is relative? 

The top 20% of those filing income tax returns pay 84% of all income taxes.  That's just federal.

The top 1% paid 45.7% -- almost half of all income taxes.

QUESTION:  How much more would make it "fair?"  88%, 95%, 100%??  if 20% are already paying the bulk of taxes, and the other 80% are paying 16%, I'm having a tough time seeing where the fairness is supposed to equal the 1%, 3% or 5% paying more.

First of all, your stats references illustrate the share of taxes paid by income level.  It does not, however, indicate whether the tax base that were used to derive taxes owed by the ultra-wealthy 1% were truly valid or not.

Let me explain, both the federal and state income tax system are all self-reporting.  Hence, anyone can, if they think they can succeed, understate their taxes.  Most middle class people in the US report and pay their fair share.  However, with the assistance of high-paid tax lawyers and advisers, the ultra-wealthy 1% are notorious of creating and utilizing all available loop holes in the existing tax laws, thus, able to grossly understate the amount of taxes they truly owe.  If they can't succeed using loop holes, that's when off-shore tax havens are utilized, which are not available to common citizens by-the-way.

Hence, the answer to your question is not tax rate, but rather cleaning-up the tax reporting guidelines for the ultra-wealthy 1% to ensure they are not side-stepping the current tax system, thereby, paying their accurate fair share of taxes owed to the government.


Kuleana

You didn't answer the question.  I'm not asking "is the 1% paying their fair shar now."  I'm asking "What would be your definition of their fair share, seeing how they already pay close to 50% of taxes collected by the IRS?"

My definition of fair share remains as stated a few posts ago in this thread.  The ultra-wealthy 1% should pay their fair share of taxes owed to the government that reflects their actual tax base that is not lowered via their use of illegal tax loop holes and/or tax havens.  If the 1% paid their fair share in good faith, the US would get a much larger collection of tax revenues that would work to alleviate some of the excess borrowing by the government.


Kuleana

That is SO naive!  The government never has enough money, and always finds a justification to spend us into the hole deeper and deeper.

Assuming a flat tax, with no loopholes, shelters, deductions or exemptions, what is the percentage you'd think is fair for the 1% to pay in taxes?  10%?  15%?  30%? 50%?

If you are looking to what the income tax or any other tax rate should be for a society, I personally think we should let democracy decide and put it up for a popular vote.  If that amount is not enough for the government to handle its obligations, then it should either borrow for the difference, reduce its obligations, or have everyone vote again for a higher rate.

Kuleana