Why Do We Get Onto the Rich About Taxes?

[Aldebaran]

That's not really defined anywhere, I think there's flexibility and that the wider the scope of people, the harder it is to come with a meaningful poverty line. What that extends to is that it is harder to define "rich." What is very well off in terms of dollars in many parts of the country would not be well off in New York City. And not all of the rich are equally rich. Upper middle class to me is "rich," but upper middle class in New York City is likely a lot less than hundreds of millions, let alone billions of dollars a year. If you're making $500 million, you can afford more than someone making $1 million, it's common sense. As to how much to tax certain people or incomes specifically, I don't have an answer to that.

Well, the only reason I asked about the 2 different incomes and their corresponding taxation amounts as to what's fair is because even though one is charged only $200 while the other is paying $10,000 is because they are the exact same percentage of 10%. To me, that's fair because they're both being taxed equally. But most people think that the person with more income should be charged two, three or even four times the percentage. Right now, that's already happening, and people still think that's not fair--to the person who actually pays a lower percentage!

 

[Nithavela]

Well, the only reason I asked about the 2 different incomes and their corresponding taxation amounts as to what's fair is because even though one is charged only $200 while the other is paying $10,000 is because they are the exact same percentage of 10%. To me, that's fair because they're both being taxed equally. But most people think that the person with more income should be charged two, three or even four times the percentage. Right now, that's already happening, and people still think that's not fair--to the person who actually pays a lower percentage!

I don't think you understand how progressive taxation works.

 

[Sketcher]

Well, the only reason I asked about the 2 different incomes and their corresponding taxation amounts as to what's fair is because even though one is charged only $200 while the other is paying $10,000 is because they are the exact same percentage of 10%. To me, that's fair because they're both being taxed equally. But most people think that the person with more income should be charged two, three or even four times the percentage. Right now, that's already happening, and people still think that's not fair--to the person who actually pays a lower percentage!

What's fair depends on where the millionaire lives, and overall cost of living in that area. What I can tell you with more certainty is that when I was making less than $20,000, 10% was more to me then than it is to me now.

 

[Aldebaran]

I don't think you understand how progressive taxation works.

I understand it perfectly, as it happens here in America. One person pays 10% of their income in taxes while another pays 35% and is accused of still not paying their "fair share".

 

[Nithavela]

I understand it perfectly, as it happens here in America. One person pays 10% of their income in taxes while another pays 35% and is accused of still not paying their "fair share".

No, that's exactly not how it works.

 

[Aldebaran]

No, that's exactly not how it works.

Wikipedia disagrees: Progressive tax - Wikipedia

 

[Nithavela]

Wikipedia disagrees: Progressive tax - Wikipedia

Progressive tax works in such a way that everyone is taxed equally for the money he earns in each tax bracket. If someone earns 50k or 500k, both are taxed the same amount for their first 50k. The higher tax only applies to the money that is above the tax treshhold.

 

[Sketcher]

Progressive tax works in such a way that everyone is taxed equally for the money he earns in each tax bracket. If someone earns 50k or 500k, both are taxed the same amount for their first 50k. The higher tax only applies to the money that is above the tax treshhold.

Which is still messed up the way we implement it in the US. The jump from 15% to 25% on middle-class incomes is not right. The tax plan the Senate passed still has the jump, though the marginal tax rates are lower.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Which is still messed up the way we implement it in the US. The jump from 15% to 25% on middle-class incomes is not right. The tax plan the Senate passed still has the jump, though the marginal tax rates are lower.

I never understood the huge jump between brackets. I see no 'simplification' in it as one's final taxable income can be easily figured using a more incremental system. And if people have trouble with it perhaps we should focus more on math skills in school. As it is the tax liability of the 'next' bracket comes down like a sledgehammer on many.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Without trying to sound insensitive there's nothing on our birth certificates that indicates that life is going to be easy or fair, or that we are going to get rich. The irony of course is that the present day offers more opportunities for both than ever before in this country.

 

[FireDragon76]

Those who have, have no right to lecture those who have not, about envy.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Those who have, have no right to lecture those who have not, about envy.

I agree, but sometimes we do like to offer advice from our experiences that might help those "who have not". And sometimes it might be taken as criticism no matter how well intended.

 

[Aldebaran]

Those who have, have no right to lecture those who have not, about envy.

Does having an income of less than $11,000 a year make me a "have" or a "have not"? If the latter, then am I one to "lecture" about the subject? Certainly, it doesn't make me middle or upper class. But from where I am, I say envy is something we should avoid. I could envy those who make $30,000 a year, and those people could envy those who make $200,000 a year. Then those people can envy the millionaires who will envy the billionaires. Where should envy stop? How about from the beginning?

 

[FireDragon76]

Envy stops in the next world. It still doesn't make it right for the rich to tell the poor "don't be envious". It's like a fat guy lecturing you on losing weight.

 

[Aldebaran]

Envy stops in the next world. It still doesn't make it right for the rich to tell the poor "don't be envious".

Were you responding to me? I said my income is less than $11,000 a year. That doesn't make me rich. I'm saying "don't be envious". God says it too, and he's richer than everyone on Earth put together. He owns the entire universe you know.

It's like a fat guy lecturing you on losing weight.

Are you implying that the only way to become rich is to be envious?

 

[FireDragon76]

Well then, it's like the starving person telling another starving person,"don't be gluttonous".

God's word for me is not necessarily "don't be envious". What God's word is for you, is going to be different for every person. It's the Holy Spirits job to speak that word to you personally.

 

[Aldebaran]

Well then, it's like the starving person telling another starving person,"don't be gluttonous".

God's word for me is not necessarily "don't be envious". What God's word is for you, is going to be different for every person. It's the Holy Spirits job to speak that word to you personally.

Even if a starving person told another to not be gluttonous, he would be telling the truth. Perhaps everyone who is poor should encourage each other to rob banks since they're all poor. Should any of those people speak up and say, "No, that is wrong?"

Exodus 20:17 speaks to all of us: "You shall not covet your neighbor's house; you shall not covet your neighbor's wife or his male servant or his female servant or his ox or his donkey or anything that belongs to your neighbor."

 

[FireDragon76]

But accusing somebody of a sin without reason is wrong. A poor person has good reasons to feel envious, they feel privation and lack.

 

[Aldebaran]

But accusing somebody of a sin without reason is wrong. A poor person has good reasons to feel envious, they feel privation and lack.

Should they also feel that theft is ok, or hatred, or greed? Certain situations can increase how likely we are to feel certain things, but it doesn't make it not a sin to act on those things. A person can rightly feel anger toward someone for a terrible wrong committed, but that doesn't make it not a sin to murder the person over it.

 

[FireDragon76]

I'm just arguing it's not right for those with power to tell those without power that they are worse sinners than anybody else. It's a form of shaming and it isn't right. IF they don't like somebody else's faults, the Christian thing to do is to help rather than to scorn or shame.