Talk about a problem I'd love to have.
Republicans: 47% PAY NO TAXES. FREELOADERS!
All right, we'll increase the population that pays income tax.
Republicans: MIDDLE CLASS TAX HIKES! AHHHHHH!
Fine, where do you think these increased revenues should come from?
Republicans: TAXES BAD. FREELOADERS. AMERICA. FREEDOM.
We should not be so confident of this. This election, unlike the one in 2010, will likely be a close result and that means no one should be confident of how it will turn out.
Sure, if Romney and the Congressional Rs win, it will be revised in some way, if not reversed entirely.
But if Obama wins his second term and the Congress remains at parity with a divided House and Senate, why would we expect any reversal at all?
The fact is that the Democrats want to raise as many taxes as they can get away with so that they can pay for as many entitlement programs as they can. Call it redistribution or "fairness," those who earn money will see more of that money being taken away and offered up to those who do not.
Look at what programs are funded by these increases. Obamacare is entirely dependent on more taxes for funding. Oh, and the Medicare cuts, too. We can't forget those.
Does anyone seriously think that these increases would be reversed and Obamacare left to flounder by the Democrats?
The taxes of Taxmageddon are not the only ones that will be imposed. These are just the proximate ones. There will be even more further down the pike, impacting further down the income scales.
Nobody said that 50% of America has a $1M estate.
Generally we're talking about retirees when concerned with the estate tax. It's not difficult for middle class retirees to have a $1M in assets. Think about someone who purchased a home in the 70's or 80's. Think about the value in some peoples' ESOP.
I had a client who was a mundane telephone company employee. He had well over a million in his stock purchase plan. He had been accumulating stock in his plan since the 70's.
Heck, I know retired elementary school teachers with over a million. Depends on where you lived (e.g., a crappy little beach town in FL where real estate is now worth about $1,000 per foot of beach front, or which company you worked for and how their stock has grown over the decades).
But you knew that, or should have, because the article explains it:
Fern
Yes, I'm sure the average American dies with $1M+ in assets.This statement demonstrates the lack of understanding and class warfare inherent in your own world view.
Middle-class people who own a home who properly funded their retirement will have at least 1 million dollars in assets after they retire. Especially if they owned their own business.
Where would you like the money to be spent? I ask because you'll have no input.
Because taxes are stealing and stealing is wrong. IMO it's because the Federal Government is far to huge and spends far to much money. Shrinking the amount they actually take in would shrink the amount they actually do, which would shrink the amount others are able to exploit and take control of it from us. It's really shitty this whole thing, imo neither the Dems or Reps want to fix anything because they're the ones who have created this system and situation. They want to prolong it for as long as they can, hoping to die well before it falls out below them.
hahaI'd like to see it spent on Incorruptible's Special Education tuition.
I'd like to see it spent on Incorruptible's Special Education tuition.
So, do you think the country would function better with less Government? How are taxes "stealing"?
You seem to lack the intelligence to comprehend the very simple situation at hand. Allow me to help you.
Democrats want to raise taxes on the 53% to allow the freeloaders to continue to freeload forever.
Republicans want the freeloaders to go back to work, thereby removing them from the 47% pool of freeloaders.
Grover Norquist has the congress by the balls with his no tax increase pledge. The only laws Republicans can pass are tax decreases. By going over the cliff the Bush tax cuts expire and everybody pays higher taxes. Now the Democrats are free to act. They will propose legislation to cut taxes on the middle class but leave the rich paying at the higher rate as is the law when the Bush cuts expire. There will be no increase proposed for the rich, but tax cuts to the Bush levels for the middle class will be proposed by the Democrats. Now the Republicans are free from Norquist. They can vote to lower taxes on the middle class and the rich will get no tax cuts nor any increases either. It's win win except for the rich, unless, of course, the Republicans won't vote for a tax cut for the middle class which would make them total and obvious hypocrites. And the law will be retroactive for the full tax year leaving only the rich to pay at the rate they did before Bush. The democrats get revenue from the rich and the Republicans get tax cuts for the middle class. Sweet, no. This is why we need to go over the cliff. It's the only way to defeat traitors that took a pledge to a man instead of a nation.
I'd like to see it spent on Incorruptible's Special Education tuition.
it is very easy to get to 1 mill in assets.
Yes, I'm sure the average American dies with $1M+ in assets.
it is very easy to get to 1 mill in assets. my parents have a house on farm land that is worth 500k, 3 or 4 hundred in retirement, plus contents and other assets. sounds like this will kill every small family farm in the country, as land and land/water rights and farming equipment can be worth way more than 1 million, while the family has little cash.
43% on dividends is CRAZY! whats the point of investing if i have to give half of it to the .gov? good thing i'm selling all my stock to buy a house this year.
You should go on a nationwide tour and tell everyone how easy it is and why they must suck at life if they can't do it, too.it is very easy to get to 1 mill in assets. my parents have a house on farm land that is worth 500k, 3 or 4 hundred in retirement, plus contents and other assets. sounds like this will kill every small family farm in the country, as land and land/water rights and farming equipment can be worth way more than 1 million, while the family has little cash.
43% on dividends is CRAZY! whats the point of investing if i have to give half of it to the .gov? good thing i'm selling all my stock to buy a house this year.
If Fidelity's retirement planner is correct and the market performs on average, and I take out 85% of my income after retirement, I will die with $14.1 Million. If I take out 100% of my income after retirement, I will die with a scant $4.7 Million.
If the market performs poorly over the next 20 years, I will die at 93 completely broke...but having taken out 85% of my income the entire time.
This could be avoided if Republicans would put the interests of the nation ahead of the interests of their hyper-rich campaign contributors. In other words: here it comes.
I agree with your point concerning the Dems utter failure to put their fleeting majority to use. I blame a lack of leadership on the part of Obama for this. Obama should have driven the healthcare reform effort instead of trying to play fair broker between the two parties. For the political effort expended on Obamacare we might have gotten to a single payer system. Same with most other issues, Obama was simply too enamored of his own victory to capitalize on it.Wait wait wait...
Now I normally don't poke my head into P&N too often, but didn't the democrats have TWO FULL YEARS OF CONTROL of both congress and the presidency to fix shit? And all they did was pass a health care law that really fell short of expectations.
Please.
Blame both sides for the entire mess. I'm tired of the finger pointing without taking some god damn responsibility.
Looks like highest tax bracket under Obama's plan (Clinton rates?) is 39.6%, Romney 28%
Dividend tax rate will probably remain unchanged for a lot of people, but top rate under Obama will be 39.6% (ordinary income), but stay at 15% under Romney.
Capital Gains rate again will probably be unchanged from current for quite a few people, but highest earners under Obama will pay 20% (instead of current 15%), Romney will maintain current 15% rate.
Allowing the Bush cuts to expire for the top 2% looks more like $70B/yr-
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/11/us/politics/11tax.html?_r=1
It's a start at closing the budget gap, and a start at closing the inequality gap as well.
In order to be politically palatable, tax increases need to start at the top, reach down into lower incomes only as absolutely required. In order to be fair & reasonable, tax increases need to leave out Romney's 47% entirely.
Yes- taxes need to go up, but not for segments of the population whose share of national income has shrunk & who are being asked to sacrifice in different ways.
If pie in the sky were real, we'd all be fat, dumb & happy.
www.fidelity.comYour account activity summary from the beginning of the calendar year is shown below.
Personal Rate of Return from 01/01/2012 to 09/20/2012 is 15.0%*
Retirement still years away? Find out if you’re on track to save enough for retirement with Retirement Quick Check.