But shouldn't the wealthy be able to keep their money because they worked hard to get where they are? I'm not saying it's like this for all cases, but probably most.
True and I know good and well about how jobless people can take advantage of benefits. I live in brooklyn and see alot of people living in special appartements with no job driving in brand new audi's taking advantage of their benefits.
Not all wealthy people work hard for their money, lot's of people are born into it. And same with poor people born into poverty. Therefore, poorer children have less access to tools that can help them acquire wealth (education, money, etc.) whereas already wealthy children do.
So many economical problems would be solved if we had equal opportunity.
Education as long as you live in a populated area should be free. (Public schools) education nowadays in america is something that can be afforded. And not all people have the skills to be succesfull some people dont know how to deal with their money. In turn equal opportunity is something that can be found in a fictional book it just doesnt work sometimes.
Thank you, soccerch1ck! Inheritance is something a lot of people forget about. Plus, very wealthy people like the Koch's tend to create this myth about themselves: came from humble beginnings, worked hard all their lives, and got what they deserved. Super rich people are often the children of super rich people, and just continue on down the line.
Public Education is always free, but it's not equal. Public education is based on the area's tax money so that's why Beverly Hill's richest don't send their kids to private schools, because Beverly Hills (just one of the examples) is practically an elite private school. Where as we have areas with people already in poverty, where schools are horrible and children aren't encouraged to go to school because who wants to go to a school they probably can't get anything from? So with this system, once again, people in poverty are practically set up for failure. And it's not like they can move to areas with better schools because most can't afford the taxes.
Well like you said yourself, the rich inherited their money. That means they already owned it, why should that be taxed? Lets say you are in the bottom 0.001% of the population have pretty much nothing, and then you win the lotto and win 100 million bucks. You take the lump sum so its now ~70 million. Thats gonna get taxed extremely heavily so now you are down to maybe 30 million that you actually receive. Well since you were so poor before, you spend a decent amount of it on yourself/family, but aren't used to having money so you save most of it and by the time you die you still have 20 million dollars (spent 10 million). Now you decide to leave all you have left to your only son, so he inherits that 20 million dollars. Thats already taxed money (you paid 40 million in taxes already when you first got it) so he should get all 20 million right? Well he would....except theres estate taxes and inheritance taxes, so he wont be getting 20, by the time all thats over he might get 10.
10 million, thats good enough right? I mean who couldn't live off of 10 million dollars? But think about this. You won 100 to begin with, you spent 10 million of it in your lifetime, and your son spent 10 million of it (lets say he wasn't as prudent as you and blows through it all) That means, of that 100 million dollars, your family actually got to receive and spend 20 million of it. 20% went to you, and 80% was taxed in one way or another at some point in time. The amount of taxes in dollars YOU alone paid, were equal to what thousands of others paid in taxes (if they paid any and weren't refunded all of it for being too low of an income).
And yes, there are ways around that 80% tax rate from above (donating to charity, forming trusts rather than inheritances, etc.) Its just to prove a point that the "rich" are paying more than their fair share in taxes.
Few statistical numbers for you, the top 1% (the super rich) account for over 1/5 of the federal taxes. The top 20% (the fairly rich - super rich) account for almost 70%. The top 40% (Almost anybody making above average) account for over 85%.
That means that the entire bottom 60% of the population, pay only 15% of the federal tax dollars. Almost half the population is entirely refunded and pays ZERO federal taxes. You know whos paying for those people instead? The rich. When you say the rich don't pay their fair share of taxes, you are absolutely right. THEY PAY TOO DAM MUCH to compensate for half the population that doesn't have to pay any or next to none.
I highly doubt almost half of the population pays zero federal taxes... but I will say this world needs a change in heart. Your example is very specific in comparison to a extremely vast topic. Secondly, someone who inherits money did not work for their money, they were lucky that they were born to wealthy parents. And lastly, my point was about equal opportunity, not where people who have more than enough money to live happily, while others barely have enough to survive let alone be happy, money goes.
EDIT: and I'm not saying wealthy children's inheritance should be taken away, I'm just saying every child should have the opportunity to gain the same wealth those kids were born with
while the GOP does have a history of this, I guess you haven't watched the news where Obama is giving huge amounts to the wealthy, not only in tax breaks. Why don't you go check and see how much tax GE has paid in taxes since Obama has taken office
Companies paying taxes and people paying taxes are different. You know that right? Companies are allowed to pay less taxes so that they have more incentive to keep hiring people. It may not always work out quite so nobly, but maybe consider why things are done.
Company money is taxed at some point anyway, whether its when they pay employees, when the owner takes it out themselves, or when they pay stockholders, its gonna get taxed. When the corporation pays taxes too, its called double taxed.
So many economical problems would be solved if we had equal opportunity.
And yes, there are ways around that 80% tax rate from above (donating to charity, forming trusts rather than inheritances, etc.) Its just to prove a point that the "rich" are paying more than their fair share in taxes.
That means that the entire bottom 60% of the population, pay only 15% of the federal tax dollars. Almost half the population is entirely refunded and pays ZERO federal taxes. You know whos paying for those people instead? The rich. When you say the rich don't pay their fair share of taxes, you are absolutely right. THEY PAY TOO DAM MUCH to compensate for half the population that doesn't have to pay any or next to none.
EDIT: and I'm not saying wealthy children's inheritance should be taken away, I'm just saying every child should have the opportunity to gain the same wealth those kids were born with
http://nationalpriorities.org/analysis/2012/presidents-budget-fy2013/