the_only_slip posted:Pu238 posted:Guantanamo Bay was terrible, with or without NIN music. Nobody wants to be associated with inhumanity. It is a shame NIN was.
But I still hate the politics. I love NIN but I don't agree with TR's political views. As a member of the "rich" (although I can't for the love of God find most of the money I'm supposed to be swimming in), I don't believe in a tax system where people who earn more should have to pay a higher percentage of their wages. Flat tax, baby. That's fair.
Bush-bashing is annoying. Obama-worshipping is even more annoying. TR is guilty of both. In his little world here, of which I am a guest, that is his luxury. But, at risk of being blocked and stoned and scolded, I read it as just another celebrity shoving his views down my throat.
So why do I visit this site? I don't know. I was thinking of buying a t-shirt but
changed my mind.
While I'm straining to keep from pontificating, if you're preaching about the misfortune of being "a member of the 'rich'" take a course in corporate tax or even basic tax; you have no idea what you are talking about. You can hire an attorney who can help you get all the deductions to your little capitalist heart's desire. As a tax lawyer, I can say that you are completely ignorant of the benefits to being "well to do", yet you preach a flat tax. Take a course in tax planning and then tell us how you feel.
Kinda sorta true. He may be "rich" enough to fall within the top income bracket, but if the guy has to pay any kind of payroll tax, he can't take advantage of the holes in the tax code. Someone making $400k is always going to get royally screwed compared to the guy making even half that amount through his own business.
I agree that if the person you're talking to is truly rich - mid-to-high-six figures, maybe even seven, all liquid - he should be hiring an attorney to figure out his taxes. If he's heavily invested, he should be paying very little by way of capital gains. If he's just someone unfortunate (a term I'm obviously using tongue-in-cheek) enough to have a high paying corporate position in NYC, LA or SF, then there's not a lot he can do, since his employer is going to gleefully give away half his income and won't let him be an independent contractor. If he's making $200,000 individually, he's getting taxed at the top marginal rate but doesn't have enough by way of liquidity or net worth (assets), it's hard to make tax shelters. Even if he wanted to make them, the legal fees would eat up a substantial portion of what he was saving. Plus, at that point, the AMT would erode an benefit he previously received for paying state and local taxes.
There was a great article recently about the burdens of these people. I don't remember where it was published, maybe the WaPo, but talked about HENRYs - High Earners, Not Rich Yet. Basically these were families of successful/professional spouses, accountants, lawyers, doctors, pharmacists, etc., who were killed by the AMT and the top marginal rate, but didn't have enough income to benefit from the kind of tax-evading mechanisms the rich use.
As for the flat tax, i don't think it's a viable option. I also don't think a consumption tax would work, since it would lead to lumpy, uneven revenue collection that could leave the government cash-starved. But everyone can agree that the AMT, which was instituted in the 1960s to more aggressively tax fewer than 1000 of the nation's highest earners, needs to be repealed. There's no provision in it to adjust for inflation and congress has to revise it every year as it unintentionally brings more middle class families within its income range - people whom the tax was never intended to affect.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/16/2008 11:23PM by devoy.
Trent making the best of his brand new off tour freer time! It wasn't Trent doing it but I bet this Iraqi journalist is one of his heroes now!
