11 Answers

I think it should be even across the board same rate for rich or poor and all in between, just cause a guy worked hard and got ahead in life why should he be penalized..

YES and stop the money laundering via the Congressional manipulation of the tax codes.

If you mean to stop the tax avoidence scams some rich people use then I agree.

I believe the tax rate should be the same for everyone, then you would know everyone was contributing  pro rata of their income, say 35%.

I do not believe that the people who earn top money should be penalised for their ability to be well paid for their obvious ability. I equaly DO believe these same well paid should NOT be able to avoid their fare share of tax.

Yes, but I don't think that you are going to balance the budget on the backs of the rich.

42%

What?  and take away all the tax write offs on things like wild monthly parties in their big yachts, caviar, champagne, and sexy women?  Not a chance.

42% seems like a light tap.

i just heard a show called City Arts and Lectures, on KQED Radio 88.5 fm.  The guest was Jeffrey Sacks.  He advises countries about economics around the world.  I hope if anyone has time they probably could hear it on the internet.  He sumed up to total problem going on in the USA and the history of our economics and how we got here and how we can get out of the problems going on.

The idea of income tax based on material sales is a very interesting concept.  The more a family makes the more they spend.   

We would probably be buying goods from blackmarket garage sales or a tent in a parking lot and  Craigslist to avoid the income tax. 

This has been tried in the U.K. and the result produced was that they took their business elsewhere which actually caused less tax to be received than if they never had raised their taxes.

My belief is that their must be a peer movement from within that group to influence others to give back.

The key word here is tax PAYER....one who actually IS paying taxes.  I believe a straight across the board flat rate would be most fair, with incentives instead of loopholes for deductions and credits....for everybody.
 
My personal belief is we in the US would be way better off if those elected to "serve" their constituents would pay THEIR fair share, reduce their inflated salaries to "stipends" (after all, they are supposed to be "public servants", not "public served", cut out the absurd perks and benefits, and rely on Social Security, Medicare and IRA and/or retirement pensions to which they contribute their own money. By limiting terms for Congress as well as the President, and perhaps re-evaluating our local and state guidelines for elected officials, we might be able to make at least a small dent in some of our budget crises. People who ingrain themselves into elected positions are making a career where the opportunity should not exist.  You want to SERVE the people, SERVE the people, but don't expect to be served for the rest of your life BY the people.  (And then there are those whose spouse's get elected to replace them when they "retire" from public service")

Cutting jobs in the government sector while maintaining their own overly lavish lifestyles is not serving the needs of the public. Giving IOUs to state employees, raising the cost of a speeding ticket to well over Average Joe's monthly income and charging $35 for a state ID that cost $6 eight years ago disgusts me. The DMV is closed nearly as much as it is OPEN, and that is one office where the public needs access. THOSE employees have their wages decreased, public service suffers, and the elected jokers light cigars with $100 bills.  I needed to get a document from the local police department.....the hours for getting THAT done were M-TH  10-2.  You call that available to the public?  Most people work those hours. I had one day off and it took over an hour to get the paperwork...no way it could have happened in just a lunch period. 

This tax season, I am preparing and filing taxes, not for the upper middle class or upper class, who, of course, have bonafide CPA's, but for "average Joe".   You can't imagine the monkey business that goes on with many of them.  Some receive refunds that meet or nearly pass their AGI (Adjusted Gross Income).  It's not difficult to manufacture scenarios that benefit "the poor".

Many also receive government assistance.  One taxpayer brought in a w-2 for less than $1000 (didn't need to file at all) and assured me had received no assistance of any kind all year AND paid rent for 12 months....looked like no meals had been missed, either, AND claimed a dependent  plus a spouse.  (Wonder where they really got their money....)

Inflation is out of control for us little guys. A Happy Meal cost $1.99 ($2) when my kids were eating them ten years ago.  Now they are $3.99 or more.  That's 100% more, and the quantity is exactly the same. 

Thanks for letting me vent.