Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Contact Us | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 

Are you in favor of a fourth tax tier on the wealthiest Minnesotans?

  1. Yes
  2. No
 
 
 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(18)

ProgressMarshall

Apr-11-13 7:43 PM

What wiil tax rate be when combining federal "tax the rich" and Dayton "tax the rich" proposals?

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

ProgressMarshall

Apr-11-13 7:44 PM

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

westline

Apr-11-13 9:49 PM

If I have $40 billion dollars in accounts in the Cayman Islands, but do not have any income in Minnesota, my income tax is zero. If I owe $5 million dollars to my bank, and have assets of $1 million dollars, and an income of $2 million dollars, my net worth will be around negative $2 million dollars, yet I will be taxed on being "rich". The first man, is rich, yet pays no taxes. The second man is hard-working, and honest. but is less rich than your local sparrow, yet he must pay for being hard-working and honest. How about we stop saying tax the rich, and say tax the hard-working honest people?

2 Agrees | 19 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Canntt

Apr-12-13 8:38 AM

why does there have to be "tiers" why not just a flat tax across the board? everybody pays the same rate, no deductions, no refunds, no loopholes, one rate for everyone, those that make more would still pay more, but everyone would have some skin in the game...

3 Agrees | 17 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

rangeral

Apr-12-13 10:22 AM

We don't need more taxes, we need substantially less spending.

3 Agrees | 19 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

hartman75

Apr-12-13 2:51 PM

"If I owe $5 million dollars to my bank, and have assets of $1 million dollars, and an income of $2 million dollars, my net worth will be around negative $2 million dollars, yet I will be taxed on being "rich"."

In your example westline, you would owe zero in taxes since it's inconceivable that anyone with only $1million in assets could obtain a bank would loan of $5 million. Nice try. Most CEO's now make 380 times the average worker. Why not make their taxes 380 times greater?

You have a point though, westline. We should consider a wealth tax in addition to an income tax. Check out the "politizane" "wealth inequity" video based on a study by Dan Ariely and Michael Norton. We are fast becoming a plutocracy, if we are not there already.

19 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

westline

Apr-12-13 3:28 PM

I don't think you would make a very good defense lawyer, Hartman. I think it is inconceivable that we re-elected Obama. Yet it happened. Maybe the second man in my story lost $10 million worth of assets after he got the loan. A wealth tax! Are you serious? That sounds like something a democrat would come up with. Taxing dollars that have already been taxed. When will it end? My point is not to invent still more taxes, but to more accurately name the tax on the rich, to the tax on the hard-working, honest people.

2 Agrees | 18 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

hartman75

Apr-12-13 4:21 PM

You didn't bother to check out the video OR the study, westline. Explain how hedge fund managers work harder than average Americans yet earn millions MORE while taxed at a LOWER rate. How many jobs do hedge fund managers create? The wealthy control our financial system, political system AND tax policies ALL to their benefit. A redistribution of wealth exists and it’s been happening for the past 30+ years - taking wealth from 90% of hard working Americans while the top 10% rake it in. Every independent study/graph/fact proves the reality; the top 10% have increased their wealth far more than the bottom 90% so that the top 10% now control 2/3rds of our nation’s wealth. Because they work harder than the rest of us? Who are you trying to fool, westline? From ’92-’07, 400 taxpayers with the highest income saw their income increase 392% while their tax rate decreased 37%. Until now, which group has been forced to pick up the slack?

19 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

rangeral

Apr-12-13 11:57 PM

hartman, you once again display your lack of knowledge about economics and you have no grasp of tax laws work.

Capital gains are taxed at a lower rate due to the risk of holding investments for a long period of time. if you sell before that time, you pay the regular tax rate.

Warren Buffet talks about others paying a higher rate but he has yet to write a check to the treasury - federal or state - for the higher amount he talks about.

3 Agrees | 18 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Spendstop

Apr-14-13 1:51 PM

Intersting, Obama's tax return was just released. He had an adjusted gross income of 608,611 dollars. They paid 112,214 in federal income tax, so their rate was 18.4 percent. Yes sir tax the rich!!! Also I am trying to figure out Bidens return. He had an income of 307,586 and yet he collected 29,761 dollars in social security. It seems to me the rules are not for the elite.

2 Agrees | 18 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

rangeral

Apr-14-13 6:00 PM

Uncle Joe is 70, therefore no reduction in SS earnings.

3 Agrees | 16 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

commonman

Apr-15-13 7:13 PM

Why are these comments about Billions & Millions of dollars? My family income is far less than one hundred thousand. "Tax the rich" has a whole different meaning for the vast majority of us.

14 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

eburke

Apr-15-13 10:57 PM

The tax code is a mess and everyone knows it. For federal, a flat tax, no deductions except for mortgage and charity, and for state, a broad sales tax with a low, flat income tax. Back with the federal tax code, its desire is to achieve fairness, but the effect of such a utopian undertaking is to provide a fertile ground for lobbyists and big corporate money. Simplify the code and the end result is the rich, measured by the effective tax rate, will pay more as a percentage than the poor. I would also consider a VAT tax, but that is for another post.

1 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

eburke

Apr-15-13 10:57 PM

The tax code is a mess and everyone knows it. For federal, a flat tax, no deductions except for mortgage and charity, and for state, a broad sales tax with a low, flat income tax. Back with the federal tax code, its desire is to achieve fairness, but the effect of such a utopian undertaking is to provide a fertile ground for lobbyists and big corporate money. Simplify the code and the end result is the rich, measured by the effective tax rate, will pay more as a percentage than the poor. I would also consider a VAT tax, but that is for another post.

1 Agrees | 14 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

rangeral

Apr-15-13 11:58 PM

A Value Added Tax, added through multiple layers of transactions, would only make sense if you do away with income tax and sales tax. Otherwise, it is a costly add-on.

It is amazing that some folks don't know how income tax works with Social Security and earnings.

2 Agrees | 13 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

SELyonCo

Apr-16-13 10:51 AM

There is something wrong with a system that takes a larger percentage of the income earned for actually working than the income received from investing the money.

It says we don't value the contributions of people who actually produce something as highly as the contributions of people who don't work.

Here is a real simple fact: until Reagan lowered the taxes on the wealthy under the theory that they would invest more, all classes in the U.S. saw increased wealth year over year at a more or less equal rate of growth.

Since the introduction of Reaganomics the wealthy have seen unprecedented growth in income while the other classes have stagnated. We Americans are fond of denouncing conutries that promote the advance of a privileged few at the expense of the masses, yet we've become the biggest offender. And the argument that we're different because everyone has teh opportunity just doesn't cut it anymore. You can't get a job managing a fast food place these days without a c

11 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

SELyonCo

Apr-16-13 10:52 AM

cont:

You can't get a job managing a fast food place these days without a college degree, and the cost of college is bankrupting people.

12 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

sumyounguy

Jul-04-13 12:24 PM

eburke:"The tax code is a mess and everyone knows it. For federal, a flat tax, no deductions except for mortgage and charity, and for state, a broad sales tax with a low, flat income tax. Back with the federal tax code, its desire is to achieve fairness, but the effect of such a utopian undertaking is to provide a fertile ground for lobbyists and big corporate money. Simplify the code and the end result is the rich, measured by the effective tax rate, will pay more as a percentage than the poor. I would also consider a VAT tax, but that is for another post. "

eburke is a smart person

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 18 of 18 comments
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or
 
 

 

I am looking for:
in:
News, Blogs & Events Web