Do liberals pay their fair share?

[veritas]

I found a copy of Teresa Heinz Kerry's 2003 tax return.

Her gross income including tax exempt interest was about 5 million.

Her net income tax which includes Alt min is $628,401.

So her effective rate is a little over 12%.

What do you think?

By the way her occupation is "philanthropist"

[Unregistered]

No, she doesn't pay her fair share, but neither do republicans, and they're the ones who lowered all the tax rates.

[veritas]

Does not the liberal believe in wealth redistribution? Could not liberals like Teresa Heinz-Kerry plan her investments in a manner that she could pay a much higher tax rather than using massive tax loopholes?

It seems rather hypocritical to me.

[DaveO]

Not sure of the Liberal/Conservative Split

But among my clients the ones who get their paychecks from the government scream the loudest about their taxes.

[Matt Sova]

Remember

THK was a republican. She was married to Heinz prior to his death and did not change her registration to democrat until John decided to run for president.

Although I am a conservative republican I take no issue with anyone using the tax laws to reduce their tax liability. There is nothing illegal about that. She probably pays a lot of money to top notch CPA's and tax attorneys to reduce her tax liability. Just the same way I do for all of my clients.

Matt

[veritas]

Here is my issue:

Liberals believe in a progressive income tax. Their reasoning is those with more ability should pay more. That's how we got the system of taxation we have today. There is no way with my earnings I can get my federal taxes down to 12%. So how can liberals argue about paying by ability when they don't do it?

[Bees Knees]

Historical Perspective

The federal income tax was first introduced in this country in 1913, and only the top 1% of the wealthiest Americans was subject to it. It has always been a tax on the rich.

Keep in mind that in the early 1900's, the Socialist Movement was spreading across Europe and the United States. Socialists and Communists believed that the wealthy minority controlled the financial lives of the poor and middle class majority, and threatened to take that away from them by force. You also had millions of young soldiers from poor families going off to war to protect the wealth of the rich.

Wealthy Americans during that time period were more in favor of funding these wars with their tax dollars than to allow the poor to take over their wealth under a Communist revolution, as is what happened in Russia during the same time period.

In Russia, the poor were oppressed not only by the wealthy minority, but also by the dictator Czars in power. Maybe the only reason the Socialists succeeded in Russia and not the United States was that at least the poor in the United States still felt they had some political freedoms, even though from a financial perspective, they were equally oppressed by their Russian counterparts. You also had the Union movement in this country -- something the Russians couldn't do either.

At any rate, our system of progressive taxation today is a result of the wealthy giving into pressure to prevent a Social movement from taking over in this country 100 years ago.

[taxmandan]

Here is my issue:

Liberals believe in a progressive income tax. Their reasoning is those with more ability should pay more. That's how we got the system of taxation we have today. There is no way with my earnings I can get my federal taxes down to 12%. So how can liberals argue about paying by ability when they don't do it?

I repectfully disagree. The liberal attitude is to force other people to spend their money on things that the liberal supports, so the liberal doesn't have spend their own money for the cause.

Daniel

[veritas]

Bees I believe you are correct in saying that our country was influenced by a new type of thinking orginating from Europe more specifically Germany.

Our country depended on tariffs for it's primary source of income prior to the 20th century. We did have an income tax instituted during the civil war then repealed later. It was replaced by a flat tax which the supreme court struck down as unconstitutional in 1895.

When the 20th century rolled around we had a new science in economics which originated from Europe. These individuals pressed for an income tax but were afraid it would be shot down again so the 16th amendment was pushed until passed.

The people liked the idea presumably because they didn't think they would pay it. The new economists liked it because they believed in wealth distribution.

So the conclusion is people like taxes as long as someone else pays them just like Teresa Heinz-Kerry.

[Bees Knees]

Wealth re-distribution is exactly what the Socialists and Communists were touting to get the Joe Average guy to go along with them. All the wealth was tied up in the elite few. They thought that was unfair.

The graduated tax system is simply a milder version of what the Socialists in Russia and Europe were advocating.

[Joe Btfsplk]

Soak the rich

Liberals all go for the 'soak the rich' approach. However, their own riches are a horse of another color. What all politicians want, Liberal or Conservative, is to control your money since they have a better idea of what it should be used for than you do.

The only difference is how they get your money and how they spend your money:
Liberal: Tax and Spend
Conservative: Run big deficits and spend.

How to spend:
Liberal: Welfare programs, EITC, affirmative action programs
Conservative: War to protect Oil supplies

[veritas]

Liberals all go for the 'soak the rich' approach. However, their own riches are a horse of another color. What all politicians want, Liberal or Conservative, is to control your money since they have a better idea of what it should be used for than you do.

The only difference is how they get your money and how they spend your money:
Liberal: Tax and Spend
Conservative: Run big deficits and spend.

How to spend:
Liberal: Welfare programs, EITC, affirmative action programs
Conservative: War to protect Oil supplies

Well Joe your definition of conservative is different than mine in some respects.

A true conservative believes you know what's best to do with your money. Conservatives believe in smaller government and more personal responsibilty. And yes we do believe in using a stong military to protect our way of life. Unfortunately many in government today with an r next to their name are in no way representative of a conservative. And make no mistake President Bush is not a conservative nor was his father. At least he believes in lowering the tax burden and I give him credit for that. That being said we can agree that the tax and spend liberals like to spend your money but not their own