Should The Rich Have to Pay More Tax? If Yes, Why? If No, Why Not?

1. 86

   Shil1978posted 12 years ago

   Should The Rich Have to Pay More Tax?  If Yes, Why?  If No, Why Not?

   replyreport
2. 84

   Express10posted 12 years ago

   As a whole, I say no because there are many people who are rich who pay their fair share or more. On top of this, there are plenty of affluent people that give large sums to various charities, many actually directly helping the hungry and homeless. I feel that those who are being very aggressive or even fraudulent in their deductions, tax shelters, and the like should be forced to pay a larger portion. But I cannot agree with an across the board higher tax on the rich. If this came to be, more rich people would choose to hide shelter their funds in legal and illegal ways. There are also a fair number of people who are not rich that get refunds or lessen their tax burden by being aggressive in their deductions or being fraudulent. Is this okay simply because they make less money than a millionaire or billionaire? I don't believe so.

   replyreport
3. 60

   ib radmastersposted 12 years ago

   I think that everyone should pay their fair share of taxes.
   I don't think that the Income Tax is the best way to have that concept of fair share.
   
   A National Sales Tax with a fixed percentage like that of state sales taxes would be a fairer tax system and less invasive of personal privacy.

   replyreport
4. 60

   Torrustyposted 12 years ago

   The Rich in the United States, and all over the world for that matter, should definitely pay a much higher progressive tax. While the rich may actually pay more money in comparison to the poor and middle class folks, their total wealth still far exceeds anything that the poor may have. Sure, some people work hard to get where they are, but unless that person is still on the floor manufacturing their product, then they are out of touch with the workers. When you get down to it, even a very progressive income tax will still leave the rich with plenty of money that can go into rich person activities like living longer, eating better, and vacationing more. Hopefully these funds acquired from the rich can go into education first and foremost as schools are in desperate need of funds in this day and age.

   replyreport
5. 59

   T. R. Brownposted 12 years ago

   In total dollars yes because we should each pay a proportionate share of the load.  However, the idea of a progressive tax is very simply one group deciding that they deserve to take from another group under threat of force.  Look at what Torrusty just said.  He or she acknowledges that the "rich" generally do actually earn the money, but Torrusty and those of like mind deserve to take at will because they have the ability to take via mob rule.  They want it, therefore they will take it. 
   
   For those who have educated themselves about who the "rich" really are, it is very clear that the bulk of that population (around 80% of all millionaires) simply followed a path of saving and building a business or investments over time.  It's not glamorous and certainly not quick but those are the actual people Torrusty wants to squeeze.  Think about that, they sacrificed for a lifetime to build wealth, only to have others dictate to them that they are now somehow beholden to those who were unwilling to make the same sacrifices. 
   
   My facts are easily checked:  The Millionaire Next Door by Thomas J. Stanley is the most compressive study on millionaires to date, and should be read by those who are constantly attacking the “rich”.

   replyreport