I'll define rich as the top 20%, and the top marginal rate should be no greater than 33%, and preferably only 25%, as laid out in an earlier post.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiero 5.7
Printable View
I'll define rich as the top 20%, and the top marginal rate should be no greater than 33%, and preferably only 25%, as laid out in an earlier post.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiero 5.7
I am a huge proponent of equality.Quote:
Originally Posted by Eki
I believe in an equal playing field. I believe in laws that treat everyone equally.
I believe that any law the supports or gives preferred treatment to a group over others is morally wrong. I believe a person should be judged on what he does not on what his excuse is for not succeeding.
It is you who doesn't believe in equality.
Nah...have enough. Never meant much to me.Quote:
Originally Posted by BeansBeansBeans
It is just one of many reasons why i am better than most.Quote:
Originally Posted by Camelopard
Quote:
Originally Posted by anthonyvop
Yep, a legend in your own lunch time and you are a classic case of a person with a narcissistic personality disorder.
I have nothing against rich, I just have objections on how some people get rich, Hazell's way is not among them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiero 5.7
Then you must agree that everything you leave behind should go to the government instead of your offspring or other relatives. Then everyone would have more equal start to life when they start from nothing.Quote:
Originally Posted by anthonyvop
Take for example Paris Hilton, do you think she's rich because what she has done or simply because she is who she is?
Thanks but I'm looking for a fixed figure in pounds dollars or Euros in yearly income, above which some one is "rich" and should be victim to sharply increased taxes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alexamateo
Also for the USA don't forget the same tax tables are used throughout the country. So while $80,000 is taxed the same in California as it is in Louisiana, the person in Louisiana is still going to have more disposable income due to a lower cost of living.
So, in the USA, is $200,000.00 taxable income on a joint return rich?
I understand your question, Fiero. And I see what you're trying to get an answer to. But I've never thought of "rich" as being (necessarily) related to income. Though not in the government's eyes when it comes to setting tax policy, but (true) wealth and riches usually relate more to net worth, not income. Who is "richer", the person who makes $500K/year and has a net worth of $1 million or the person who makes $100K/year and has a net worth of $5 million? One has 5 times the income of the other, but only 1/5 the net worth. Net worth better describes how wealthy (or rich) a person is.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiero 5.7
My biggest problem with the tax system, as it stands now, is its complexity and the fact that the laws change too often... too many damn sunsets and grandfather clauses and what not. I have an MBA and I've been in financially related fields for most of my adult life. Even when I've worked for outside firms, I've owned my own business since I was in my early 20's. But I'll tell you right now, when it comes to taxes and tax planning, I barely have a clue. IMO, too much money is wasted on tax attorneys and tax based financial planning (shelters) that have NO real financial or economic value.
I hear you Jag, but I want to know from the disgruntled proletariat out there at what fixed amount of yearly income do you consider someone rich. Or maybe better asked what is the maximum amount of money anybody should be paid in a year?