There are many uses for that money, more than 20% of the USA's money belongs to the rich(1% of the population). That money has many more uses that for their leisure. Many are in the streets in poverty while the rich make money. Do the rich need all this money? No. Some may ask, do we have the right to take off the rich, yes! They took money off us. With flat tax, everyone has to pay an equal amount, it suits the rich, but many will not be able to afford it. Proggresive tax is much better. It allows everyone to be taxed according to their income. Much fairer!
You are referring to the idea of a progressive income tax, meaning tax rates increase as a person's income increases. This is the tax system utilized by almost all developed countries, and for good reason. The moral justification of the rich being obligated to give back more to society lies in the fact that generally, the rich have taken more from society. While individual effort is no doubt a significant aspect of a person's ability to amass wealth, there are background factors which play a much larger role. Economic exchange, the route to wealth, is only possible due to a strong community and economy. In a ravaged, third world country, a man could work as hard as any other, but still fail to become as prosperous because they suffer from a lack of advantages such as inadequate education, fewer economic connections, etc. Even here in America, your capability to get richer than the next guy is in part influenced by an upper hand you have been given at some point in your life, one you may not even see or understand. Therefore, we can assume that to some degree, those who achieve have benefited from these advantages that the poor have not. Thus, it makes sense that they should carry a greater responsibility to contribute to society.
We need to tax the rich more because it is one of the sure ways that we can put our economy back onto a stable and sound path. Republicans constantly bash liberal ideas for not working logically on paper. Since most of their economic policies fail, their only argument is that liberal systems may not work in theory. What most people don't realize is there is a huge difference between what works on paper and what happens in real life. On paper, it doest look right to tax certain people more, but in real life, it works, affluent people still have tons of money to spare, and at the same time, small businesses bloom, jobs sky rocket, people are confident enough to invest in the stock market, and the government can pay off its debts and move in a forward, rather than backward direction.
Everyone says that the rich worked hard for their money and shouldn't have to pay more. So does that mean they are saying that the lower class people aren't working just as hard, if not harder? Last time I checked, a film star pushed into cereal commericals as a child who somehow magically climbed the later without even bothering to go to college and try to earn a degree or whatever the heck it is didn't work nearly as hard as the first generation college graduate who is working as a single parent and barely scraping by enough money for food and to keep the roof over their heads! Being lucky has nothing to do with working hard. Besides, if they have SO MUCH money, what's the harm in paying just a LITTLE BIT more?
The theory of the Invisible Hand which states that when individuals try to amass wealth they do so by doing trading, disbursing and employing others which leaves society better off as a whole. While this may be true to some extent, the current stagnation of wealth amongst the very few seems to contradict it. This is where tax brackets come in, an embodiment of the Difference Principle. Imposing higher taxes on the wealthiest and using that money to boost infrastructures that benefit the poorest will help in closing the burgeoning gap between the rich and the poor
The rich are paying a big majority of federal taxes, but there are so many poor that they pay most of taxes, and it may support the government, but all it does is keep the poor, poor; and the rich richer. As Izazovnog said at the top of the page, "there are more uses for money than for leisure".
Preferably I would have a flat tax, but given the current tax system I believe it makes perfect sense to tax the rich more. In the United States tax system there are several people who do not pay tax because there wages are low. This works out well, however, it needs to be balanced out so the government makes up those revenues elsewhere. Since over taxing what little is left of the middle class would only cause them to fall into the lower group, it make more sense to tax the wealthy who can afford to live without the extra money.
I believe the rich have so much to give but they only use it on them. What I don't understand, is why the government would try and take tax money from those who have nothing, like the lower-classes, when the rich have so much to offer. I don't doubt that the rich work hard to get what they have, but so do the middle-classes; the lower-classes take all the jobs that no one ever wants to do. The rich have way better connections than others do, so why not give back? It's not like they would miss a little money from their massive bank accounts anyways.
Only one percent of the U.S is in the upper class. The upper class is the top layer of
society in the United States, consisting of those with great wealth and power and may also be
referred as the rich.They are 100x more wealthy than the average American, compared to where twenty percent of people polled last month said they sometimes didn’t have enough money to put food on the table. The wealthy should have enough money to take care of the poor, and a way that can be done is if they are taxed.The poor should not pay more taxes than the rich, because the poor do not have enough money to maintain the engines of capitalism, so the poor need help from the wealthy to support that.. The rich, being the wealthy have majority of the money in the United States. They must be charged with higher taxes to not only be fair but to help close the wealth gap.
The wealthy upper class have well enough money to support the poor. There may be a small amount of billionaires in the world but they make up a lot of the money in the world, they have a lot of extra money that can be put to a good cause and help the poor with wealth problems. There is a very big difference between the wealthy and the poor, the wealth can support their self and others like the poor, were as the poor can barely support their self, the poor need lots of help from the wealth to get back on their feet, and a way that can be done is if the rich have higher taxes. The rich will still have plenty of money after higher taxes. Sixty eigtht percent of millionaires say they support the tax increase for those earning $1 million or more, according to a survey by The spectrum group.
The poor have been trying to support the engines of capitalism, but are just getting buried in more taxes, the only way out of their wealth gap is a little help from the wealthy, the wealthy have been able to support their businesses, themselves and still have extra money to spend on whatever they like. One of the best things their extra money could go to is the poor, that will not only help close the wealth gap but help Americans live an equal life to others.
A fundamental myth of economics is "trickle-down" theory. Supposedly, if you give the rich more money, they will inevitably spend it on products boosting the entire economy. As nice as this is in theory, in actuality, it rarely ever works. Most of the time, the rich actually sit on their wealth, hoarding it. Or, they put it into securities, which have some benefit to the economy as a whole, but little benefit to the lower classes. Yet some negative votes have brought up the theory of the rich fleeing the country and placing money in tax havens. This is true. Thus, the best option is to close significant tax loopholes, such as repatriation (putting money from your company in a foreign branch/department), giving the government the revenue without driving the rich away. A simpler tax code is what the US desperately needs.
I remember when Mitt Romney ran for president, It turns out people were mad because he only paid 5% of his income in income taxes, By some calculation. It didn't matter that the amount turned out to be 20 million bucks or something, It was the proportion that made people angry.
I think that corporations should be taxed according to a flat tax, And should be regulated so that fixed proportions of profit go to employee bonuses and fixed portions go to owners as dividends. This would allow the owners of companies to ride the same winds as thier employees, But still be able to profit greatly depending on thier equity in the company. And, Once a corporation occupies a space too big for real competition, It should be dismantled or broken up, And not allowed to use it's size to eliminate competition by selling below cost or other unfair practices.
Even Amazon started as a small company, And Jeff Bezos took financial risks to get it going. For every Amazon there are 10 companies no one ever heard of, That failed to make it, And cost the original owners thier homes or put them in deep debt. Extreme profitability is the reward for taking risks and should be honored.
Think about it. More than not these "rich" people became this way through their own brilliance, Own ideas, And own hard work. And many of these people already do donate, Or at least have non-profit or charitable funds for the poor. And while you were working 6 or 7 hours a day, They were loosing sleep building their business. Its merely a matter of entitlement. Therefore the rich should not be taxed more. As a matter of fact, A large percentage or the lower income economy do not have working mothers of fathers, And only rely on the money from YOUR wallets to get by. Now, I'm not saying this is true for everyone, But I am pointing out a legitimate point. Plus, A lot of the money from the rich is used to run the company/business they are in.
A lot of people say that taxes should be fair. And by that, they mean the rich should pay more and the poor should pay less. But, the rich people's money is there own, hard earned money. They worked for it. And back to equality. If people want real equality, then everyone pays EQUAL taxes. It shouldn't be based on income.
Poor people are also greedy. They want money, wealth, power etc. just as much as anyone else, and while they might not even see it themselves, the only reason they're pushing for "equality" with higher tax rates on the rich is to line their own pockets.
I guarantee that if the same people demanding this were rich, and were the one's getting taxed more, they would object to it. They support equality so long as it benefits themselves, and if that's the case, their opinions should be held as invalid.
If they're so concerned about the poor/those in poverty, why don't they all just live in tents and live off of the bar minimum food scraps so they can support some truly impoverished families in Africa?
For the most part, wealthy individuals are hardworking and smart with their money. If i went though 10 years of medical school or built my business from the ground up, i would expect to live a more comfortable life than the person who dropped out of high school. That being said, I wouldn't mind paying more taxes if i saw the money going to the right places. If someone has ptsd from defending our country, a single working mother has to support her kids or a disabled individual needs government help, then by all means give them %75 of my paycheck. But when i see a un-employed healthy work able adult driving around in a 60k escilade talking on their iPhone and counting food stamps, you better believe I'm pissed to see that I'm supporting them to live like they work as hard as i do. If i had it my way, taxes would be placed on what you buy, not on how hard you work.
Just because they make more money doesn't mean its the middle and lower classes right to take it. They should pay the same amount normal people do and what ever the law is. They shouldn't have to pay for some lazy persons food stamps that doesn't want to get a job.
Because im sure someone in their family or the rich themselves have worked hard to get the money they have so why would they have to pay more? Punishing someone for the time and effort they put in to there job. I strongly believe in my opinion and think that the rich should not be taxed more
The rich work there ass off to get money so why should they give it to people that are lazy and don't want a job? They can fundraise if they want but it's there money that was earnt so they shouldn't pay for everyone else! It's your responsibility to work!
Rich people and lesser class people should have to pay the same percent in taxes because most people would argue that everyone is equal and that means that everyone should pay an equal percent weather it be 10%, 20% or 30%. If those who do have more money than others pay the same percentage they are still paying more than those with less because 10% of 500,000 is 50,000 and 10% of 60,000 is 6,000 so in the end rich people pay the same ratio but they also pay more just because they're pay check is bigger.
They've all worked very hard to get where they are and what they deserve. Why should the government take that away from them to give it so someone else who hasn't put the same amount of effort they have. Democratic country people. Not socialist. Do some research. Maybe everyone should actually pay taxes not just the rich...