Tax the 1%ers and banks to pay for austerity?

[Baff1 0]

You can walk for nothing :)

In any case, the protest is not about not owning property or not having a job or not having money, it's a protest about the huge institutions wrecking the economy. On this topic, rich and poor alike can be united.

They can be, but I expect the only people this will unite is the far left.

[walker 0]

Hi all

The news that the head of the tax office let Goldman Sachs and other big tax evaders off millions in tax, after being wined and dined by the city, just goes to show that the problems and shortages in national finance are caused by the 1%ers and bankers.

Until the shortfall in nation states finance caused by the unscrupulous scroungers of the 1%ers and bankers is dealt with by a significant rise in taxation and serious prison terms, for the boards and persons involved in tax evasion, are meted out; capitalism will continue to fail.

As I pointed out earlier the social contract is broken; until it is fixed, capitalism will continue to fail; just as it is doing right now.

Kind regards walker

Edited November 11, 2011 by walker

[st_dux 26]

The news that the head of the tax office let Goldman Sachs and other big tax evaders off millions in tax, after being wined and dined by the city, just goes to show that the problems and shortages in national finance are caused by the 1%ers and bankers.

(emphasis added)

The problem is with the head of the tax office, and more generally, the government. Simplifying the tax code and disallowing the government to grant special favors and create loopholes for the "1%ers" is the only way to solve the problem in the long term.

[walker 0]

Hi St_Dux

The problem is the corruption that the 1%ers and bankers engage in round the world is not being dealt with; far too much carrot and not enough stick. Far too many bleeding heart Libertarians whining that the 1%ers and bankers are not paid enough already.

Time to tax them until they scream.

Kind regards walker

[Baff1 0]

(emphasis added)

The problem is with the head of the tax office, and more generally, the government. Simplifying the tax code and disallowing the government to grant special favors and create loopholes for the "1%ers" is the only way to solve the problem in the long term.

The problem with a simplified taxes is; when one person pays £1,000 all-in, the person standing next to him who pays £10,000 all-in suddenly realises how much of a ride he is being taken for and becomes filled with rage.

[dmarkwick 261]

The problem with a simplified taxes is; when one person pays £1,000 all-in, the person standing next to him who pays £10,000 all-in suddenly realises how much of a ride he is being taken for and becomes filled with rage.

If both are paying the same percentage, no rage :)

[Baff1 0]

Tax isn't paid in %, it's paid in £.

What difference would a percentage score make to a man who has just paid £9,000 more for the exact same service as the person standing next to him got for only £1,000?

He's still just been ripped off for £9,000 whatever platitudes you think to offer him.

Not to mention having been treated as a second class citizen and positively discriminated against.

We both pay 10% but my 10% has to be ten times bigger than your 10%. Uh huh?

Expect rage.

If you rub peoples noses too deeply into the injustices of a taxation sytem, they will rebel. Everytime.

Edited November 11, 2011 by Baff1

[st_dux 26]

The problem is the corruption that the 1%ers and bankers engage in round the world is not being dealt with; far too much carrot and not enough stick. Far too many bleeding heart Libertarians whining that the 1%ers and bankers are not paid enough already.

Time to tax them until they scream.

That would be catastrophic for the worldwide economy. Despite the government corruption that has been encouraged by some of the "1%ers" (government corruption that has only been able to occur because the government has been given too much power), most of the wealth and jobs in the world today have been generated by the 1%. It has nothing to do with them "being paid enough"; it has to do with allowing and encouraging them to invest in new wealth-generating ventures. Overtaxing them will just encourage them to lay off their workers and close their factories to retire somewhere in the Caribbean.

You cannot generate a successful economy through force. Just ask Mao.

We both pay 10% but my 10% has to be ten times bigger than your 10%. Uh huh?

Expect rage.

If you rub peoples noses too deeply into the injustices of a taxation sytem, they will rebel. Everytime.

The tax system is already like this and everyone knows it. In fact, it's more extreme because the person with higher income not only has a larger 10% but he will also have to pay more than 10%. This is called "progressive taxation" and it's used throughout the Western world with relatively little rage; most of the rage comes from those paying the least in taxes. I don't see how simplifying the tax code would change any of this.

[nettrucker 142]

That would be catastrophic for the worldwide economy. Despite the government corruption that has been encouraged by some of the "1%ers" (government corruption that has only been able to occur because the government has been given too much power), most of the wealth and jobs in the world today have been generated by the 1%. It has nothing to do with them "being paid enough"; it has to do with allowing and encouraging them to invest in new wealth-generating ventures. Overtaxing them will just encourage them to lay off their workers and close their factories to retire somewhere in the Caribbean.

You cannot generate a successful economy through force. Just ask Mao.

With all due respect, the catastrophe would be maintaining the actual status quo. I don't want them overtaxed. I want every bank and financial instution investigated for fraud. And if indeed fraud happened than these people should stand trial and be sentenced. It has to do something with justice and abiding the law. But as Greenspan already stated the FED is above the law. Since you don't believe that our economies are wrecked by design you will never understand what I'm talking about.

regards

[Baff1 0]

The tax system is already like this and everyone knows it. .

That's right and every single time someone makes a tax return, it makes them angry.

Everytime I fill my tank with petrol and i realise that £80 out of the £100 I pay is tax!!!

Anger.

We don't expect that labelling it "progressive" will make someone who has to pay more tax than his peers feel that he is experiencing justice. That he is being treated fairly or evenly, let alone democratically.

It just makes him think anyone who uses the word "progressive" is an evil wanker that needs to be shot.

Simpifyng the tax code, makes the disparity between the level of taxes two different people are paying more strikingly obvious.

Harder to ignore.

Call it a percentage, and we have obsfucated the true cost.

Add some extra taxes like rates, road tax, local tax, federal tax, sales tax, gambling tax, alcohol tax, and parking tax, give it an adjustable scale for size of car and house...

And suddenly who really knows what they are paying anymore.

Do you know how much you pay in tax each year? I have no idea myself. How on earth am I expected to calculate that?

The more we break it up, the less anyone can clearly see the big picture. The total amount.

Because if we had tax simplification and we simply sent you a bill for half your yearly income (Tax Freedom Day), that number would be so large as to foment instant revolt.

Chop it up into smaller easier to swallow pieces and you won't get such rage.

You'll still get the usual anger of course.

“The art of taxation consists in so plucking the goose as to obtain the largest possible amount of feathers with the smallest possible amount of hissingâ€

Edited November 11, 2011 by Baff1

[rangerpl 13]

Time to tax them until they scream.

And stop lending their money because they will have none.

Oh well, I guess we can always borrow some from China...

[Fox '09 14]

I think the opposite is true. You might be able to undo 40+ years of corporate takeover of the government by limiting the power of the government, but you're never going to undo the propensity for people on Wall Street (and people in general) to try to use government power to their advantage.

even if you get money out of politics that will always be present unfortunately. But in a system where goverment is not inherently controlled by corporations, and the more the goverment speaks truth, media may be forced to report it, and then checks and balances to keep the power at bay will be 'active' (for lack of a better word).

It won't be perfect but it's not such a slippery slope.

[dmarkwick 261]

That's right and every single time someone makes a tax return, it makes them angry.

Everytime I fill my tank with petrol and i realise that £80 out of the £100 I pay is tax!!!

Anger.

We don't expect that labelling it "progressive" will make someone who has to pay more tax than his peers feel that he is experiencing justice. That he is being treated fairly or evenly, let alone democratically.

It just makes him think anyone who uses the word "progressive" is an evil wanker that needs to be shot.

Simpifyng the tax code, makes the disparity between the level of taxes two different people are paying more strikingly obvious.

Harder to ignore.

Call it a percentage, and we have obsfucated the true cost.

Add some extra taxes like rates, road tax, local tax, federal tax, sales tax, gambling tax, alcohol tax, and parking tax, give it an adjustable scale for size of car and house...

And suddenly who really knows what they are paying anymore.

Do you know how much you pay in tax each year? I have no idea myself. How on earth am I expected to calculate that?

The more we break it up, the less anyone can clearly see the big picture. The total amount.

Because if we had tax simplification and we simply sent you a bill for half your yearly income (Tax Freedom Day), that number would be so large as to foment instant revolt.

Chop it up into smaller easier to swallow pieces and you won't get such rage.

You'll still get the usual anger of course.

“The art of taxation consists in so plucking the goose as to obtain the largest possible amount of feathers with the smallest possible amount of hissingâ€

Well I can see that your particular anger seems to stem from the simple fact that tax exists at all... as such I cannot assuage that. However, your above explanation doesn't address the point that a flat simple % rate is fairer than the system we have right now; where the higher earners pay more percentage than the lower earners (up to the point where you become a 1%er anyway). That should make you furious.

A simple flat rate % seems to me to be about as simple as any tax system could possibly be, with the exception of a flat absolute value rate (e.g. everyone pays the same sum, say £2000 per year, whatever their earnings). But that would seem to me to be even more unfair.

So, given that tax exists, maybe we should just concentrate on how to make that fairer rather than simply rage that it exists? :)

[Baff1 0]

A % rate is not fairer than what we have now. It's the same as what we have now.

A % rate penalises people who earn more.

Makes second class citisens out of them.

Fair is everybody pays the same and receives the same.

Taxation and fairness are not two words that sit happily next to eachother.

There are things I am willing to pay tax towards. And things that I am unwilling to pay tax towards but forced to.

Many things in fact that I consider to be either anti-social and against my personal/national/global intrests. The vast bulk of all my tax is spent in this negative way.

The reason we need unfair taxes, as opposed to modest taxes that can be reasonably expect to be gathered by applying a modest and equal fee to all, is because a load of bastards force people to pay taxes they are unwilling to.

This is not fairmess.

One person is paying taxes willingly towards things he wishs to contribute to, and another is being forced to contribute to things that he does not wish to, and that adversely affect him.

I don't believe it can be or will be changed from within.

The correct solution is rage.

In England we had a very unpopular tax called the Poll Tax.

A lot of people argued and debated ways to make it fairer.

The population however, raged. En masse.

They protested and critically refused to pay and the tax was withdrawn.

Rage is the most effective solution to mass injustice on a national scale.

When you deserve to be angry, you should be angry and you should let those people who are provoking your anger understand that you can make consequences for them and that you are willing to and going to.

That is the only way. That is all certain people are able to respect. Force.

You can't reason with a Walker for example. You can't ever hope to persuade him to see sense or be reasonable.

If such as he attempts to dictate to other people, the only recourse they will have to prevent him from doing so is force.

We can argue about fair tax until the cows come home, but the way to get tax justice is the way the Americans did. En masse, at gunpoint.

Rage.

Edited November 12, 2011 by Baff1

[PELHAM 10]

The tax was actually called the community charge and the local council would charge a fixed tax per adult resident, hence a poll tax, there was a reduction for poor people. This charged each person for the services provided in their community. Many thought it was unfair as the rich would pay the same amount as anyone else to have their bin emptied irrespective of the price of their house.

It was not scrapped as baff1 suggests through mass protests although it's unpopularity was a factor. There were many problems with collection - the main one being the determination of the amunt of people living in the house and the problem of tennents only living in a property for part of the year and then moving before the bill arrived. So the system had to be changed. The large amount of non-payers who abused the legal system (the law had to be changed to make the system more enforceable) ended up forcing the VAT rate up to 17.5%. So the militant council estate mob got to skip their tax bill for 1-2 years while everyone else had to pay as usual and a bit extra to make up for them.

It was renamed and changed slightly to the 'council tax' with a different collection system and the population was still taxed per person but at a rate tied to the value of the property the person lived in. So not a great victory for rage as we still have essentially the same thing, you just pay a bit more than the next guy if you have a slightly bigger house.

E.g. myself and my wife pay roughly 4x the amount of a family of 4 living in a council house who use 10x the amount of local services we do. This is called fair and every time I wheel my bin to the kerb (it's usually only 25% full) I wonder why I have to pay for things I don't use and will never use.

Edited November 13, 2011 by PELHAM

[dmarkwick 261]

A % rate is not fairer than what we have now. It's the same as what we have now.

Perhaps I didn't make my option clear: a flat rate that is payable no exceptions. What we have now is a terrible mire of labyrinthine rules and regulations that allow those people who can afford to hire accountants to pay less tax.

A % rate penalises people who earn more.

Or look at it the other way: gives a respite to people who earn less.

Makes second class citisens out of them.

Drama :)

Fair is everybody pays the same and receives the same.

Taxation and fairness are not two words that sit happily next to eachother.

A flat percentage still sounds the fairest to me. I'm pretty certain that a low-income earner would happily pay more tax for more pay.

There are things I am willing to pay tax towards. And things that I am unwilling to pay tax towards but forced to.

Many things in fact that I consider to be either anti-social and against my personal/national/global intrests. The vast bulk of all my tax is spent in this negative way.

You don't pay tax "towards". You're just making yourself upset over an imaginary concept there. You can just as easily believe that all of *your* tax money is going to something you approve of, while other people's money goes to things they approve of. Might sound dumb, but it's no worse than moaning about paying tax in a system where tax is inevitable ;)

The reason we need unfair taxes, as opposed to modest taxes that can be reasonably expect to be gathered by applying a modest and equal fee to all, is because a load of bastards force people to pay taxes they are unwilling to.

"Modest fee equal to all". Sounds like a flat, no-excuses rate right? Similar to the flat % rate but absolute. We might disagree on how that unfairly impacts on the lower earner on that detail. Lower earners spend a higher proportion (if not all) of their income on essentials, food, housing, clothing etc. You'd be taking essential funds from lower earners unfairly, and leaving higher earners with a higher proportion of disposable income, the tax impacts them far less, less so than a simple linear calculation. I expect you've heard that argument before though :)

This is not fairmess.

One person is paying taxes willingly towards things he wishs to contribute to, and another is being forced to contribute to things that he does not wish to, and that adversely affect him.

That's tax I'm afraid :)

I don't believe it can be or will be changed from within.

The correct solution is rage.

In England we had a very unpopular tax called the Poll Tax.

A lot of people argued and debated ways to make it fairer.

The population however, raged. En masse.

They protested and critically refused to pay and the tax was withdrawn.

Rage is the most effective solution to mass injustice on a national scale.

When you deserve to be angry, you should be angry and you should let those people who are provoking your anger understand that you can make consequences for them and that you are willing to and going to.

That is the only way. That is all certain people are able to respect. Force.

You can't reason with a Walker for example. You can't ever hope to persuade him to see sense or be reasonable.

If such as he attempts to dictate to other people, the only recourse they will have to prevent him from doing so is force.

We can argue about fair tax until the cows come home, but the way to get tax justice is the way the Americans did. En masse, at gunpoint.

Rage.

Rage against unfair taxes is fine. But we disagree on what represents an unfair tax :) (poll tax aside - interesting but irrelevant here).

Edited November 13, 2011 by DMarkwick

[st_dux 26]

With all due respect, the catastrophe would be maintaining the actual status quo. I don't want them overtaxed. I want every bank and financial instution investigated for fraud. And if indeed fraud happened than these people should stand trial and be sentenced. It has to do something with justice and abiding the law. But as Greenspan already stated the FED is above the law. Since you don't believe that our economies are wrecked by design you will never understand what I'm talking about.

regards

I agree that the status quo, left unchanged, will inevitably lead to economic disaster, and I never said anything about ignoring fraud -- clearly, fraud needs to be prosecuted in a free market system -- so I'm not sure what you're on about. I was simply responding to Walker's crazy idea that we should tax all rich people "until they scream" as a solution to our economic growth problem.

A % rate is not fairer than what we have now. It's the same as what we have now.

No, it isn't. What we have now is a progressive tax system in which those with higher levels of income pay higher percentages of tax, i.e., if you earn twice as much as someone else, you don't merely have to pay twice as much in taxes: You have to pay more than twice as much because the fact that you earn twice as much puts you into a higher tax bracket. It penalizes people who earn more even more than a flat tax. On the other hand, it's also so complex and riddled with loopholes and exemptions that some extremely wealthy entities, e.g., GE, can get away without paying much at all in taxes. If it were simplified to a basic flat rate it would both be more fair to typical mid-to-high-income earners and it would make it impossible for super corporations to find ways out of getting taxed at all. The only group that wouldn't benefit from this change would be accountants, who make their living off of those corporations who find it more profitable to spend their cash on tax evasion than expansion (which is, needless to say, very un-capitalistic).

[walker 0]

Hi all

And still we have bleeding heart libertarians whining that in a time of austerity it is OK to claim more than a fair share for the 1%ers and bankers.

Claiming the work that others do as theirs and failing to accept that it was they and they alone that caused the depression is just par for the course with these scroungers.

Instead what we get is these bleeding heart libertarians offering excuse after excuse for the 1%ers and bankers who destroyed capitalism.

It is no wonder that more and more veterans are joining the occupy movements:

http://m.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/nov/12/st-pauls-canon-occupy-protest?cat=uk&type=article

As to the myth that 1%ers pay more tax than the 99%, it is just that, a myth. Taxation is as others have noted more complex than the headline of income tax rates, VAT alone taxes hit the poor more than the rich other taxes do the same.

But the biggest taxes you pay don't go to government. The largest taxes you pay are interest payments you pay for capital from money that the 1%ers and bankers obtain from you. Yeh they lend you back, money they got from your pension, and that they multiply by controling your national bank. Yeh your money again!

And the reason the 1%ers and bankers claim they should be able to use your money to tax you and take profit from your money? They claim to be able to better manage your money than you. Yeh right.

Yet the minute they destroy capitalism by one of their many 1%er banker created bubbles via yet another ponsi scheme financial product they suddenly become a bunch of commie Wall Street Welfare Queens claiming trillions of dollars in bailouts world wide, which they then spend on bonuses 49% wage increases for themselves and lawyers for multi BILLION dollar tax dodges.

By the way watch out for their gold bubble, you have been warned.

And what do they give you 99%?

Rising inflation, what Milton Friedman called the worst and most unfair of of taxes; a decrease in the value of your pension, investments and savings; a wage freeze, unemployment and foreclosure on your home followed by destruction of everything that makes a safe, secure society: from decreasing defense budgets, to less policemen, to cuts in the medicine and education that protect and nurture your children, to anything that protects the poor.

Those who caused the depression and destroyed capitalism won't put their money where their mouth is and refuse to risk their money to put right the disaster they caused.

But hey according to these bleeding heart libertarians: the 1%ers and bankers deserve a bigger share for destroying capitalism, while they say you have to bare the austerity don't they?

My answer? Time to stop the carrots and start using the stick. A 30% increase in taxes on the top 15% of income earners for 5 years or until austerity is no longer required.

Time to punish them with tax levels that make them scream.

Kind Regards walker

Edited November 14, 2011 by walker

[rangerpl 13]

Time to punish them with tax levels that make them scream.

Nice...

You totally ignored my previous post in which I said that, if the banks are taxed, they will simply stop lending us their money, which we need. They're corrupt as hell but they represent an important part of the economy.

If they don't give us credit, somebody else will and I'm not to keen on going to the People's Bank of China to get a mortgage.

Make a coherent counterpoint instead of repeating your rhetoric.

[Beagle 684]

Nice...

If they don't give us credit, somebody else will and I'm not to keen on going to the People's Bank of China to get a mortgage.

Well, alomost all americans do already without knowing. The Dollar ais alrady a property of the peoples bank of china because the USA does not hold any value for the amout of money that is printed.

The day the peoples bank of chinas stop buying Dollars is the day when the last bubbles implodes.

[The Hebrew Hammer 10]

No libertarian worth his salt is going to defend fraud, you want us to improve the situation by taking immoral action for the sake of taking action. We do not support taxation, regardless of race, sex, or wealth.

If you want to see justice served, go after those who lied and cheated their way to the top. Attacking wealth for the sake of wealth is going down the road to mob rule.

[walker 0]

Nice...

You totally ignored my previous post in which I said that, if the banks are taxed, they will simply stop lending us their money, which we need. They're corrupt as hell but they represent an important part of the economy.

If they don't give us credit, somebody else will and I'm not to keen on going to the People's Bank of China to get a mortgage.

Make a coherent counterpoint instead of repeating your rhetoric.

Hi RangerPL

You ignore the fact the money they lend they get from the 99%'s pensions and savings. They are not giving you credit they are lending you back your money.

You ignore the fact the money the 1%ers and bankers lend you comes from the 99%'s national bank which they amplify using fractional reserve banking backed by the credit value of your nation on your money and your work.

You ignore the fact that highest taxes you pay as a member of the 99% is not to the government but to the 1%ers and bankers from interest/tax they charge you on your money.

You ignore the fact that it was the 1%ers and bankers who caused the depression with the financial instrument based ponsi scheme bubbles that they manufactured.

You ignore the fact that while the 99% suffer austerity the 1%ers and bankers give them selves 49% pay rises and massive bonnuses.

You ignore the fact that despite 1%ers and bankers having broken capitalism, that we gave them a second chance with trillions of dollars of bailout money because they said they could fix capitalism, and that instead they spent the bailout money on raises and bonnuses for them selves.

You ignore the fact that the 1%ers and bankers dodge paying their share of taxation at every opportunity to the tune of billions.

You ignore the fact that after breaking capitalism the 1%ers and bankers dare not put their money where there mouth is to fix capitalism, could it be they don't think it works?

You ignore the iniquity of all this and more.

But stupidly you ignore the fact that the social contract is broken.

Your head seems to be burried in the sand with all that you ignore.

Kind Regards walker

Edited November 14, 2011 by walker

[jblackrupert 14]

Milton Friedman: Why soaking the rich won't work

Wi-D24oCa10

The problem isn't Capitalism.

vjH4QBSwWlg

"The organizer — especially a paid organizer from outside — must first overcome suspicion and establish credibility. Next the organizer must begin the task of agitating: rubbing resentments, fanning hostilities, and searching out controversy"

"Through a process combining HOPE and resentment, the organizer tries to create a "mass army" that brings in as many recruits as possible from local organizations, churches, services groups, labor unions, corner gangs, and individuals"

Saul D. Alinsky

- Rules for Radicals

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rules_for_Radicals (Saul Alinsky dedicated the book to Lucifer - Because he was the "first radical" since he secured his own Kingdom)

Looks like something we're seeing now on the streets

8jG0t-l-sn8

Edited November 14, 2011 by jblackrupert

[walker 0]

No libertarian worth his salt is going to defend fraud, you want us to improve the situation by taking immoral action for the sake of taking action. We do not support taxation, regardless of race, sex, or wealth.

If you want to see justice served, go after those who lied and cheated their way to the top. Attacking wealth for the sake of wealth is going down the road to mob rule.

Hi The Hebrew Hammer

The 1%ers and bankers think capitalism is so broken by their own mismanagement that they will not put their money where their mouth is and risk their money to fix it.

Veterans are joining the occupy movements in increasing numbers.

The social contract is broken.

Work it out.

Or join jblackrupert and fiddle while Rome burns.

Or:

...My answer? Time to stop the carrots and start using the stick. A 30% increase in taxes on the top 15% of income earners for 5 years or until austerity is no longer required...

That has the highest chance to fix capitalism and avert what otherwise is inevitable as well as punishing those who caused the problem.

Kind Regards walker

Edited November 14, 2011 by walker

[PELHAM 10]

"The organizer — especially a paid organizer from outside — must first overcome suspicion and establish credibility. Next the organizer must begin the task of agitating: rubbing resentments, fanning hostilities, and searching out controversy"

"Through a process combining HOPE and resentment, the organizer tries to create a "mass army" that brings in as many recruits as possible from local organizations, churches, services groups, labor unions, corner gangs, and individuals"

Saul D. Alinsky

- Rules for Radicals

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rules_for_Radicals (Saul Alinsky dedicated the book to Lucifer - Because he was the "first radical" since he secured his own Kingdom)

Looks like something we're seeing now on the streets

We are seeing some of this at the moment, it's been done many times before and unfortunately there are always some who fall for it.