Do not pass go, do not collect $1,900,000+I have pondered whether President Obama's plan to tack those making more than $250K per year will make a difference. I recently read a Time Magazine article, and I can say that yes, it really will make a difference in reducing the deficit.
You see, overall, the top 0.1% of the income distribution in our country (in 2006, the most recent year data was available) was made up of 148,361 taxpayers who took home more than $1.9 million each. That does not seem like that many in a country with more than 250 million people, but these 148,361 people represent 11.6% of the personal income for our country. So, will raising taxes on these people make a difference, yes!
I am sure that they can do without the $100,000 of taxes. Heck, I could live nicely on the $100,000, let alone more than $1 million.
I remember during the campaign, CNN interviewed Charles Barkley about Obama's plan to raise taxes on him and others who make more than $250,000. Charles was cool, said he doesn't have a problem with that...it's a drop in the bucket to him, and he's happy to help those in our country who aren't as fortunate as he has been in his life.
ReplyDeleteI'll look forward to reading the full article. You didn't throw it away, did you? LOL
B.
I think I'd be comfy with $100K too. The rich get richer ya know and it is time for that to stop.
ReplyDeleteHere in the UK we have a tiered tax system and also some benefit top ups for those who are low incomes, it can really make a difference to those families living close to the poverty line.
ReplyDeleteYasmin
I couldn't agree more, a 100k would go an insanely long ways in my world. (Hugs)Indigo
ReplyDeleteMy family could live comfortably for a couple years on 100K, but that's besides the point. I don't think a Robin Hood notion of 'the rich are bad, let's take their coin' is a worthwhile excuse for taking $ away from someone that earned it. Trim the pork from the stimulus bill if Obama's so worried about the defecit. We are slipping towards a Socialist Nanny State, and most people seem to enjoy the prospect (yourself not included, I know).
ReplyDeleteBTW - that Barkley quote is true, but crud. A few years back he said the opposite, and has often argued conservative finanical positions, but in his backing of Obama he did what he had to to back his candidate. I'm sure he's already scouting for a dozen new tax loopholes, and I don't blame him.
You are right on! Yes, I agree that it will make a tremendous difference! Go Obama!
ReplyDeleteHugs, Rose
Slapinions is right on point. Something else apparently no one is considering is the number of small business owners who earn more than the $250K tax gouge line. According to a 2006 study, more than 99% of the businesses in the U.S. employ fewer than 500 employees. The average income of the owner was $258,400/year. Now those of you who own small businesses know first hand how much extremely hard work it is. It's NOT a 40 hour per week job. It's a lot of very hard work, & now the government is going to come along & say they're going to tax them MORE?? Small businesses are already taxed into the ground. You haven't seen taxes until you are considered self-employed.
ReplyDeleteSo, what does this mean to those who are all for it? Job layoffs for one. When a businesses expenses start climbing, cutbacks are made & jobs lost. It also means higher prices. We are ALL going to pay for this.
Increasing taxes on the upper income tier also discourages the will to succeed. I know that I wouldn't be overly excited about working hard, earning a good income only to take home less. What sense would that make? That happened to me once years ago when I was just starting my career. I was earning less than $20,000/year in the early '80's, got about a 3% pay raise, took home LESS. I know how it feels, & I was beyond angry. I actually asked for my pay raise to be taken back, because I couldn't afford the "raise". They couldn't though, state law prohibited it, so I just had to live on less.
And as far as the difference? When you're considering a Federal defict in the trillions of dollars,that is rising astronomically literally by the minute, tremendous difference? No, absolutely not.
Slapinions' solution was exactly right - cut the pork barrel spending & earmarks out of the so-called economic stimulus if Obama's so concerned about the deficit. We are indeed moving rapidly towards a Socialist Nanny State as Slapinions has suggested, & according to a poll I saw recently, our entitlement-minded the-world-owes-me majority of the American public is in favor of it.
Dirk
THE FIRST AMENDMENT, NOT POLITICALLY CORRECT II
http://tsalagiman2.blogspot.com/