Romney VP

[SB Shock]

What gets lost in the shuffle is the fact that our tax rates are the lowest they've been in multiple generations especially at the upper income levels

So for you and those who believe we should raise taxes, what % do you think your taxes should be raised that would be fair for you?

[Rocky Mountain Shock]

So for you and those who believe we should raise taxes, what % do you think your taxes should be raised that would be fair for you?

Fair question. I don't have an exact percent for you. I know I pay a lower rate on more income--adjusted for inflation--than my parents paid when I was born. I don't think that's fair to them. I think I'm spoiled--you won't hear that very often from my generation! To get our budget balanced and our country's debt paid off, I don't believe our currently ultra low historical rates are sustainable. Spending needs to be cut for sure, I absolutely agree with that. But just like a business looks to cut costs, it also looks to raise revenue. The top marginal rate needs to increase substantially (yes, that's open to interpretation, and I'm sure that little tidbit is going to be replied to earnestly...), just like the current bottom marginal rate shouldn't be 10%. It needs to be a shared effort, and yes it's gonna hurt. I don't know what the magic numbers are, but I'm willing to listen to people smarter than me who have some educated opinion on what they should be.

[SB Shock]

Fair question. I don't have an exact percent for you. I know I pay a lower rate on more income--adjusted for inflation--than my parents paid when I was born. I don't think that's fair to them. I think I'm spoiled--you won't hear that very often from my generation! To get our budget balanced and our country's debt paid off, I don't believe our currently ultra low historical rates are sustainable. Spending needs to be cut for sure, I absolutely agree with that. But just like a business looks to cut costs, it also looks to raise revenue. The top marginal rate needs to increase substantially (yes, that's open to interpretation, and I'm sure that little tidbit is going to be replied to earnestly...), just like the current bottom marginal rate shouldn't be 10%. It needs to be a shared effort, and yes it's gonna hurt. I don't know what the magic numbers are, but I'm willing to listen to people smarter than me who have some educated opinion on what they should be.

I'm not interested in what you think others should be taxed, or what others think you should be taxed, I just want to know how much more you think would be fair for you to give the government to spend? 5%, 10%, 20%, 25% more? Others can chime in who think taxes should be raised.

[SubGod22]

Personally, I'm not interested in raising taxes until we have an honest debate and make actual decisions about spending cuts. One we've established that, then I'm open to talking about taxes and where they should be set. I don't know where all the tax brackets line up, but everyone should have to pay something. And nobody should ever have to give up half of what they earn or more. But first things first, figure out the spending side and move from there.

[pinstripers]

The first thing any business does, to improve the bottom line, is to cut waste. Next is to become more effecient.

[Smooth007]

I'm not interested in what you think others should be taxed, or what others think you should be taxed, I just want to know how much more you think would be fair for you to give the government to spend? 5%, 10%, 20%, 25% more? Others can chime in who think taxes should be raised.

Personally, I thinking reducing spending by 20% immediately would be a start. However, this number has to include defense budgets, when at war, that is not included in any budget figures. I love that Ryan has been bold enough to outline a budget plan and verbally recognizes the serious situation we are in. Romney and Obama have to play straight politics and are vague at every turn. I just disagree with a few of Ryan's priorities. However, absent another plan, his is the best because it attempts to recover.

[1979Shocker]

The first thing any business does, to improve the bottom line, is to cut waste. Next is to become more effecient.

Followed by cheaper labor.

[WuDrWu]

Sometimes....but what is your point?

[Rocky Mountain Shock]

I'm not interested in what you think others should be taxed, or what others think you should be taxed, I just want to know how much more you think would be fair for you to give the government to spend? 5%, 10%, 20%, 25% more? Others can chime in who think taxes should be raised.

Perhaps I misunderstood your question, and perhaps you misunderstood my answer. Let me be more to the point then. I don't know what the "right" answer is, I'm not sure anyone does. I pay what is a historically low rate of tax on my income in a period of time in which our nation's debt and spending is at an all time high. I think going back to rates as they were in the early 1980s under Reagan, coupled with focused spending cuts, is a possible answer. When the budget is balanced and the debt is paid off, then let's cut tax rates.

Raising taxes isn't on anyone's list of favorite things to do. I don't bring up the possibility lightly. Spending cuts HAVE to happen, but let's remember that fiscal responsibility isn't limited to just gutting the Federal budget.

[Rocky Mountain Shock]

Followed by cheaper labor.

That's pretty accurate. Since labor is one of the largest single expenses a typical business has, payrolls are one of the first cuts and one of the last things added when things improve. Capital spending is usually another immediate casualty in a downturn. Right there is the bulk of the "waste."

[pinstripers]

Obama says he can improve things by cutting waste, fraud, and abuse. He is not doing it, but always says it, like as if he might do it down the road. He won't.

[1979Shocker]

Speaking of labor rates, we all know that one way for increase revenues coming into the government is by businesses hiring more labor giving the government a bigger labor force for taxes. Another way, which businesses aren't too eager to do because it hurts their bottom line, is to increase the wages of their employees, which results in employees paying more taxes. A side effect is that the employees have more money to spend making it necessary for the employer to hire more to restock the decreasing inventory.

Moving businesses overseas to get at the cheaper labor just decreases revenues and makes the deficit problem worse.

[SB Shock]

Perhaps I misunderstood your question, and perhaps you misunderstood my answer. Let me be more to the point then. I don't know what the "right" answer is, I'm not sure anyone does. I pay what is a historically low rate of tax on my income in a period of time in which our nation's debt and spending is at an all time high. I think going back to rates as they were in the early 1980s under Reagan, coupled with focused spending cuts, is a possible answer. When the budget is balanced and the debt is paid off, then let's cut tax rates.

Raising taxes isn't on anyone's list of favorite things to do. I don't bring up the possibility lightly. Spending cuts HAVE to happen, but let's remember that fiscal responsibility isn't limited to just gutting the Federal budget.

My question is much more simpler than you are making it. You obviously believe taxes should be increased, how much of increase would you find acceptable for you before it would become a burden?

For example if you make 2,000 per pay period ($52,000/year) up to what % would u be able to pay (this should be easily scalable for whatever your circumstances are) - these $ are what would be withheld:

5% - $100
10% - $200
15% - $300
20% - $400

[60Shock]

Obama says he can improve things by cutting waste, fraud, and abuse. He is not doing it, but always says it, like as if he might do it down the road. He won't.

Obviously, he does not want to do so.

The CEO of IBM around a year or so ago was interviewed on CNN (no less). He stated that he had just recently briefed Obama and his advisors and offered him an already completely tested IBM computer program that would identify Medicare and Medicade fraud estimated in the amount over $950 billion the first year. He furher stated that IBM would run this program at no cost whatsoever to the government.

In closing the CEO of IBM indicated he was thanked, but was basically told that his services would not be needed without really any reasons given for not accepting the offer.

Go figure.

[rrshock]

I think a gradual increase in taxes over a 5 year period might be a better solution. People won't notice it near as much and the money is still getting there.

And also cutting the military budget in half could do a whole lot to help the nation's finances.