200 Billion Tax Increase

Discussion in 'Economics' started by dougcs, Oct 12, 2005.

  1. acrary

    acrary

    I'm in the top 1% income bracket. According to research I've seen the top 1% earn 16% of all income and pay 34% of all Federal taxes. My opinion is the tax system should be class neutral (if you earn 10% of all income you should pay 10% of all taxes) . As it is now, there is the paying class and the user class with a serious disconnect. I'd love to see a balanced budget amendment with all the tax increases that it would imply. That way the country would see there is no free lunch. While we're at it, I'd also love to see a sliding scale tariff on imported goods (the rate depends on the amount of the imbalance with the US). The funds could go toward reducing the deficit. That way the world could see there is no free lunch to prosperity.

    http://www.taxfoundation.org/taxdata/show/250.html
     
    #11     Oct 12, 2005
  2. Kin,

    You have really got that mortgage interest rule mixed up. It has nothing to do with interest paid, but the face value of the loan itself. so if you have a 2M dollar loan on your home and you pay 100K per year in interest, you can only deduct half of it or 50K because the other 50K of interest is attributable to the part of the mortgage that exceeded 1M. So reducing this limit to 350K will affect all Americans that have a loan on their home over 350K, or basically all of california and the coatal cities.
     
    #12     Oct 12, 2005
  3. acrary

    acrary

    One thing that doesn't make sense is the panels argument that the top 2% get most of the benefit from the home interest deduction. The reality is if you're in the top 2% income earners the interest deduction is phased out so you get nothing. I have no mortgages on my properties because there is nothing I could write off.
     
    #13     Oct 12, 2005
  4. Well said and I fully agree.
     
    #14     Oct 12, 2005
  5. Joe and Pal, that would make more sense. :D Thanks for informing me of my error.
     
    #15     Oct 12, 2005
  6. Class neutral is an issue that is much too far downstream of the problem imo. The real issue is that federal taxes should be a tenth of what they are now.
     
    #16     Oct 12, 2005
  7. They cant be. Where do think the money to pay the interest bill for all this debt comes from?

    http://www.publicdebt.treas.gov/opd/opdpenny.htm
     
    #17     Oct 12, 2005
  8. #18     Oct 12, 2005
  9. True. I'd go for half of what they are as a starting point though...
     
    #19     Oct 12, 2005
  10. Well, well..look who is on that Bush's appointed panel...taken directly from the msnbc link you posted...yes, Charlie Rossotti from the CARLYLE GROUP....

    "Charles Rossotti, senior adviser to the Carlyle Group, the investment firm, and a member of the panel, says the system tends to encourage the construction of bigger houses rather than an increase in the number of people who own their home."
     
    #20     Oct 12, 2005