In them United States the top 20% of earners pay in excess of 85% of the total taxes. You can google "percentage of taxes paid by wealthy 2018" to get the figures. The "2018" was my effort to get the latest figures (most of what is available seems to be between 2015-2017). When you talk to those in the upper 10/20% they will tell you how much they are paying and also how much of the total they are paying. They do not talk about how much they are making.

This one has always been of interest to me. Some are suggesting that the rich should get charged more. We have done that in the past and I have no problem with that. The rich, for instance, get tax breaks on many of the things they do for their income. Capital gains, for instance, is charged at a lower rate (there are several of these sorts of things). I will also agree that the rich pay more than those who are not rich (and that is dandy with me). My point is that we have an INCOME tax and, as such, it should cover ALL income! Nailing somebody, for instance, 2% because they are rich is probably not a great idea. If we just kept the current system but applied it to ALL income, we would probably increase our income tax revenues significantly.

The reason for the complexity and size of our code is pretty simple. When we fix it we add to it, when somebody buys enough politicians to 'help' it gets added to. When we want to do something for the poor it gets added to. Taxes are for paying bills - not social engineering! I believe its possible to create a fair and just tax code. I also believe that once a tax code is established that it cannot be changed without a 2/3 majority, in both houses agreeing to such. That, at least, would go far, insofar as the complexity is concerned.
s a little like Social Security. The plan was that everybody pays in and gets to retire on what they paid in. It was not a giveaway. The giveaway was in SSI (Social Security Supplimental Income). this was setup to help people who
My point is that if we are not going to eventually go broke giving it all to the very rich (the last income tax 'cut' was a really bad idea) then we need to actually do something about our tax code. We currently have what is considered one of the more complex, confusing, and arcane tax codes in the entire world. Its literally books long and nobody really understands it all. Its a bit like a religious tome with a bunch of accounts as the tax priest class. Anytime our congress 'fixes' it actually means that they haven't removed anything so much as they have added yet more to an already incompreheIn them United States the top 20% of earners pay in excess of 85% of the total taxes. You can google "percentage of taxes paid by wealthy 2018" to get the figures. The "2018" was my effort to get the latest figures (most of what is available seems to be between 2015-2017). When you talk to those in the upper 10/20% they will tell you how much they are paying and also how much of the total they are paying. They do not talk about how much they are making.

This one has always been of interest to me. Some are suggesting that the rich should get charged more. We have done that in the past and I have no problem with that. The rich, for instance, get tax breaks on many of the things they do for their income. Capital gains, for instance, is charged at a lower rate (there are several of these sorts of things). I will also agree that the rich pay more than those who are not rich (and that is dandy with me). My point is that we have an INCOME tax and, as such, it should cover ALL income! Nailing somebody, for instance, 2% because they are rich is probably not a great idea. If we just kept the current system but applied it to ALL income, we would probably increase our income tax revenues significantly.

The reason for the complexity and size of our code is pretty simple. When we fix it we add to it, when somebody buys enough politicians to 'help' it gets added to. When we want to do something for the poor it gets added to. Taxes are for paying bills - not social engineering! I believe its possible to create a fair and just tax code. I also believe that once a tax code is established that it cannot be changed without a 2/3 majority, in both houses agreeing to such. That, at least, would go far, insofar as the complexity is concerned.

There are a lot of suggestions going on, right now - each and every one will increase the complexity and bulk of the code (not a real good idea) This is not a simple thing and cannot be done overnight. All that being said, its really time to at least start the process?