Taxes should they be higher or lower?

Taxes should they be higher or lower?

It's not that taxes should be higher, taxes should be fair and the government should acquire more money.

At a time in america's history when people make more money than ever, people should be willing to donate more money to their gov't so it has more options and can do more for its citizens.

everyone should be required to pay the same percentage of their income to the gov't and social security. Since people make different amounts of income, each person will donate a different dollar amount but, everyone will pay the same percentage. Simply put: People who make more money, pay more. People who make less money, pay less.

You said:
"At a time in america's history when people make more money than ever, people should be willing to donate more money to their gov't so it has more options and can do more for its citizens."

At a time in America when unemployment rates are at 9.7%
http://www.google.com/publicdata?ds=usunemployment&met=unemployment_rate&tdim=true&q=What+is+the+unemployment+rate

At a time in America when the dollar of today is worth 29.5% less than it was 10 years ago
http://www.coinnews.net/tools/cpi-inflation-calculator/

You said:
"taxes should be fair" & "everyone should be required to pay the same percentage"

What should that percentage be? You know that's not how it is now. The tax percentage is based on someones annual salary and the hard core taxes on buisness owners and buisness's makes it harder for buisness's to higher more people meaning taxes go up because government trys to pump out more welfare. Also the government makes less money because less people can pay taxes because less people work.

I do like
"taxes should be fair" & "everyone should be required to pay the same percentage"

More than how things are though. I like that but I personally would like to push it a step further and lower taxes in such a way so that buisness's and the private sector have more breathing room and so that they can higher more and lower product prices.(Which results in a chain of the next buisness doing the same thing)

I asked what the percentage's should be but I can't answer that question ether I guess I'll have to do some reasearch.

As my source will show americans do make more money on average than they used to earn.
A person who made $325,000 in 1979 would have made $1.1million.
http://lanekenworthy.net/2008/03/09/the-best-inequality-graph/
In the early 1900's an average person would earn $2 a day witch works out to an annual salary of $730 on average.

Americans definitely make more money than they used to earn.

Obviously those on unemployment wouldn't have incomes to tax so, there should be harsher punishments for not finding a job. If they do not use effort to find work they would be put into government service.

P.S I colored the letters so people wouldn't get as sleepy reading.

You said:
"A person who made $325,000 in 1979 would have made $1.1million."

Ok but look the rate of inflation since then is 197.1% so $1.1 million today isn't really anymore today than 325,000 was then
In fact 325,000 of those dollars today is worth, $965,250 today.... How did you get $1.1 million? (inflation since 05 has increased 10.4% Also unemployment has increased signifigantly )

I got two inflation clocks this time there off by $0.33. Point I'm getting across here is you want us to pay more taxes to a more out of control government.
(http://www.halfhill.com/inflation.html)
(http://www.coinnews.net/tools/cpi-inflation-calculator/)

But you see 325 thousand then is worth 3 times more what it is today that's why people get payed more in number of dollars but the weight of value behind it is less.

Besides you got just the "top 1% averaged" I'm sorry one percent of the country won't pay off
$11,000,000,000,000.00 even if they and the rest of the rest of the nation was taxed 100% of there hard earned dollars.
http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/

In 1978 50% earned above $10,000 and "48.6% of that 50% earned between 10,000 & 50,000 a year."
- Scource book "Reagans in his own hand" Page 278. This could also be found in his radio speech Titled Taxes again June 5, 1978. He said the same thing again in July 31, 1978 in a speech Titled Economics 2 Page 259 of the same book.

"The unemployment rate averaged 5.8% during the first nine months of 1979. Thus, entering the fall of 1979, unemployment was slightly above its average over the previous fifteen years while inflation was at a troublingly high level."
-http://www.frbsf.org/publications/economics/letter/2004/el2004-35.html

While today "Real median household income in the United States climbed 1.3 percent between 2006 and 2007, reaching $50,233, according to a report released today by the U.S. Census Bureau. This is the third annual increase in real median household income. "

However you see even the bottom 1.4% of the top 50% then is making $29,700 today I don't need to get started on those probably making $15,000 which would be $44,550 today hardly less than our average $50,233. Not to mention if we took a specific medium today it would be even less beause inflation from 07-09 is 4%. Oh, oops, I guess that money then is worth 4% more than I thought.

Point is we don't really make much more than they did back then because of inflation, yet we have more debt and higher unemployment, lower taxes would work to lower the unemployment.

1 last thing
You said:
"In the early 1900's an average person would earn $2 a day witch works out to an annual salary of $730 on average."
&
"Americans definitely make more money than they used to earn."

Inflation since 1913 is 2078.13% meaning $2 then is worth $43.57 today That means an average annual salary of theirs is worth $31,806.1 today. http://www.coinnews.net/tools/cpi-inflation-calculator/ (only went back to 1913)

But if this other site is right

"Cumulative U.S. Retail Price Inflation (Annual Average)
1900-2009 = 2857.56%" From- http://www.halfhill.com/inflation.html

Then $2 in the 1900's is worth $59.14 today so the annual $730 would be worth $43,172 today. Also I doubt there nat. Debt was about 1 mil and I doubt there unemployment rate was about 5.0% Also to everyone else in the world except for the king they were were rich I imagine I wouldn't of complained.

Well did you mean individual person or family? I did familys with my numbers but it seems for the 1900's you said

"in the early 1900's an average person would earn $2 a day"

I'm a have to write this stuff down or I'm a forget all of it. (This is fun though or I think)

Please explain to me sir, how lowering taxes helps with unemployment or our government situation?
how can ou make progress with less money?!!!

My point was in physical dollar amount americans make more money so they should be grateful for that money and be willing to donate more to their government so it can utilize it to make improvements.

Cuchulainn wrote:

Please explain to me sir, how lowering taxes helps with unemployment or our government situation?
how can ou make progress with less money?!!!

My point was in physical dollar amount americans make more money so they should be grateful for that money and be willing to donate more to their government so it can utilize it to make improvements.

I want to mind you that just because you can take more money from someone doesn't mean you have more in monarchys Kings did that all the time while the countrys died. There is actually a lot of logic behind lowering minimum wage and taxes to lower unemployment, inflation and national debt.
It works like this when you lower minimum wage and taxes, buisness of all sorts don't have to pay as much on products, to the government and to their employee's meaning they can lower product prices for more sales and make the same percentage profit. Also they can higher more people because they pay less taxes and don't have to pay employee's as much.
This trickles down to the next buisness as they pay less for products and they pay their employee's less and people don't need as much money in income because the government takes less money from an individual not to mention your every day items cost less since buisness's sell items for less. Then inflation lowers because less money is needed in circulation it also lowers because more people can pay taxes and Government doesn't need to make as many shelters to overlook unemployed people. Nor do they pay out nearly as much well fare. Then more people can pay taxes becuase more people work haven't you heard the saying "less is more"? You might only drink diet coke cause it's healthier for you but you end up drinking more of it meaning it becomes less healthy except this time its taxes you get less money per person but you get more persons giving you money.
This also eventually lowers crime rates as when buisness's can higher more people the lower end minimum wage jobs can higher more too and they'll higher teenagers meaning teenagers spend more time working and less time doing other things that can get them in trouble.
Get it? Reagan put this into work and it was succesful for his 8 years but it didn't continue since other people don't agree with this method but I think it makes a lot of sense and in Reagans time things did get better in economics, military, domestic and foreign relations. The U.S government works for the people not us for it without the private sector the government is nothing.

http://www.miseryindex.us/urbymonth.asp These are unemployment rates from the 40's to now I want you to look at the unemployment rates of the 70's to the 90's

The levels are high compared to the 60's and Reagan gets high unemployment it gets high in his second year but it drops signifigantly by his 3rd year and gets lower and continues to do so till his term ends because he lowered taxes signifigantly.

How can a government with a huge deficit and a failing economy function without acquiring money to function with?!!!!

you do realize in your simulated world that people will have to be satisfied with making less money from their employers. Most americans would frown and protest that action.

I dont want to insult Ronald Reagan, he was a good man and President of the US. He did an amazing job with the cold war. But Domesticly things were not so wonderful-less opportunities people of race and women. He could have done more with the middle east as well.

economically his presidency only looked so wonderful do to the slight crissies of Carter's term due to an unvavering policy to use diplomacy instead of violence against the middle eastern men who held american captives and would not sell oil to us.

"How can a government with a huge deficit and a failing economy function without acquiring money to function with?!!!!"


Look the reason why we are in the deficit were in now is because the government tried to become more and more overbearing and has tried to demand more and more money when you lower taxes and minimum wage the private sector can flourish on its own without government programs which means less government spending. You cut taxes and minimum wage down to lower inflation and make the private sector more independent and makes the government less involved which means less reckless government spending which is what put us in this deficit.

Look at this

Reagan set the national trend for lower taxes and George H. Bush kept lower taxes an inflation dropped dramatically. Our deficit to today is coming from a dramtic increase in taxes and ridiculous government spending. If the Obama administration continues to do things like you suggest things will get much worse and you'll see that, that method doesn't work the government isn't supposed to be this big. I pray however that things don't get as bad as they likely will for you to see that whats happening now doesn't work. Also what Reagan has tried only lasted so long we weren't able to actually see its full affects.
Rate of inflation from 1969-1979 was 97.8%
Rate of inflation from 1979-1989 was 70.8%
Rate of inflation from 1989-1999 was 34.4%
Rate of inlfation from 1999-2009 was 29.5%

and please read this it'll give a good idea of Reagans record in his 2 terms http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc1/Reaganomics.html

If I could find information on him as govenor of california you would find that his lowering taxes there was great and that the economy there flourished, the only flaws in his presidency is congress was willing to cut back more on government spending and that because of the cold war the Reagan administration had to spend lots of money building up military so that the russians, cubans, vitamese and north koreans would stand back and there was a huge battle in pushing communism back. Explaining the increase in national debt.

Ones last thing

"you do realize in your simulated world that people will have to be satisfied with making less money from their employers. Most Americans would frown and protest that action."

I explained that product prices would be lowered so people don't need as much cash and the items they buy are taxed less also inflation goes down so each individual bill is worth more I also forgot to mention foreign items will be way cheaper because inflation will go down. Lastly I make minimum wage so my paycheck too would be cut but it really wouldn't be.

I realize that things will cost less across the board. But it would still mean americans would physically make less money. THey would not approve of this move.

The private sector and the free market aren't exactly flourishing on their own right now, and many americans would be suffering without the government's assistance. Is helping the auto companies (our main production of american products) stay affloat reckless governments spending?

Raising taxes is a reansonable solution when america is in deseprate need of some rescuing.

Cuchulainn wrote:

I realize that things will cost less across the board. But it would still mean americans would physically make less money. THey would not approve of this move.

The private sector and the free market aren't exactly flourishing on their own right now, and many americans would be suffering without the government's assistance. Is helping the auto companies (our main production of american products) stay affloat reckless governments spending?

Raising taxes is a reansonable solution when america is in deseprate need of some rescuing.

Ok but did we need to bail out GM? Ford would still be here they haven't excepted bailout money, there American brand vehicles the problem now is that the government now owns GM that's dangerous your afraid to trust individuals in the private sector do you trust the government with this much control? Also why would you give a guy who just wasted his money gambaling to go gamble again if he did so stupidly once? You wouldn't so why should the government and the private sector could flourish better if it didn't pay so much to the government on everything, not to mention the government wouldn't be this bankrupt if it hadn't tried to bail everyone out. You want to raise taxes to bail out the government out of bail out money? I want to pay loans off with loans and I want that loan to pay off my loan. That doesn't make any sense or cents.

Could you explain the process of raising taxes to help stabalize the economy? The impact on individuals, inflation, buisness, even national debt? I'm sorry for not asking sooner I've been doing more speaking than listening but I explained how lower taxes work how does higher taxes work?

I want to apologize for whats been said previously because I feel I have poorly answered this

"you do realize in your simulated world that people will have to be satisfied with making less money from their employers."

They actually won't be making physically less money if inflation goes down they will be physically making more, if we increase minimum wage pay only to keep up with inflation the worth of their money is imaginary.


"My point was in physical dollar amount americans make more money so they should be grateful for that money and be willing to donate more to their government so it can utilize it to make improvements."

Also to increase minumwage wage to keep up with inflation is not to mention a heavier tax on Americans because when they make more but the money is worth less they still fall into a tax bracket that has the same number even though the size of that number has shrunken so not only is the Americans dollar worth less but he is taxed more. In the end he is making less because that pay raise doesn't cover the increase in tax.

Would you prefer getting payed less or see more money take away? Lastly, lowering minimum wage doesn't gurantee Americans will get payed less it just lowers the requirment private sector jobs still dictate the pay and no buisness will pay someone with experience a ridiculously low pay if it'll cause them to not work. This just allows more people to be hired so that they can work their way up. Not to mention Ronald Reagan did lower the national debt with his plan by the time he had promised 1991 it didn't go down much but it did.

"Please explain to me sir, how lowering taxes helps with unemployment or our government situation?
how can ou make progress with less money?!!!"

Actually also lowering taxes decreases strain on private buisness's so they can higher more people.

But I ask you

How can a buisness higher more people if less money is being taken away from them by the government?!?!?

In reality this is sort of like your redistribution of wealth idea, except your just not giving as much money to the government by individuals although the total is more and giving more money to more people.