So Obama's answer to high fuel prices is to TAX the oil companies???

[kombayn]

That's a different story. To me it makes sense, the higher income earner should pay a higher income tax. It makes logical sense, but getting back on-topic by raising the Gas tax, this will not help anyone but getting more money to the Government. The Oil company will simply pass the price onto us or they will cut hours and/or jobs in the process to make up for their record profits. They don't want to lose money right now.

[thewise1]

Originally Posted by kombayn

That's a different story. To me it makes sense, the higher income earner should pay a higher income tax. It makes logical sense, but getting back on-topic by raising the Gas tax, this will not help anyone but getting more money to the Government. The Oil company will simply pass the price onto us or they will cut hours and/or jobs in the process to make up for their record profits. They don't want to lose money right now.

Why does that make logical sense? They produce more, thus they get taxed at a higher rate?

[WickedLou9]

Originally Posted by thewise1

Why does that make logical sense? They produce more, thus they get taxed at a higher rate?

What do you mean "produce" ? what are they producing?

[nbiggershaft]

Originally Posted by Ardentfrost

BRILLIANT!

I even already said "brilliant" to that idea...

Except anytime this idea comes up it is interpreted as taxing the oil companies and defenders give the exact same arguments as taxing them.

[kombayn]

Originally Posted by thewise1

Why does that make logical sense? They produce more, thus they get taxed at a higher rate?

Well in a perfect world, we wouldn't have the income tax. All I'm saying is that if the income tax is in place, it makes more sense to have the highest earners get taxed more than the lower earners. That's what makes it logical. I know you have that Mr. Libertarian label, but come on, it's about compromise. People that can't afford to produce or make that much money shouldn't be getting taxed more. That's flawed economics, even an elementary student if you put in + or - equations could figure that out.

[Stylerod]

Originally Posted by kombayn

Well in a perfect world, we wouldn't have the income tax. All I'm saying is that if the income tax is in place, it makes more sense to have the highest earners get taxed more than the lower earners. That's what makes it logical. I know you have that Mr. Libertarian label, but come on, it's about compromise. People that can't afford to produce or make that much money shouldn't be getting taxed more. That's flawed economics, even an elementary student if you put in + or - equations could figure that out.

Well look at that. They do!

The Top 50% pay 96.54% of All Income Taxes
(The top 1% pay more than a third: 34.27%)


The top 1% pay over a third, 34.27% of all income taxes. (Up from 2003: 33.71%) The top 5% pay 54.36% of all income taxes (Up from 2002: 53.80%). The top 10% pay 65.84% (Up from 2002: 65.73%). The top 25% pay 83.88% (Down from 2002: 83.90%). The top 50% pay 96.54% (Up from 2002: 96.50%). The bottom 50%? They pay a paltry 3.46% of all income taxes (Down from 2002: 3.50%). The top 1% is paying nearly ten times the federal income taxes than the bottom 50%! And who earns what? The top 1% earns 16.77% of all income (2002: 16.12%). The top 5% earns 31.18% of all the income (2002: 30.55%). The top 10% earns 42.36% of all the income (2002: 41.77%); the top 25% earns 64.86% of all the income (2002: 64.37%) , and the top 50% earns 86.01% (2002: 85.77%) of all the income.

[WickedLou9]

Originally Posted by Stylerod

Well look at that. They do!

Yeah lets have this debate again. Then we will talk about who controls the wealth and how much taxes they pay conpared to how much money they have, and then we will talk about a flat tax and then we will talk about redistribution of wealth and blah blah blah.