Unemployed?

I think you are very close and also realized that I have jacked this post and want to apologize to everyone here! I will not only step down from my soap box, but rather smash it and step away!

 

lets go up to jackman maine to look for a job. we can prove we're looking for a job. and while we're there, we can get some hunting in.

if I owned a company, a business, or were a professional, and considered rich, and they decided to tax me at a higher rate, I guarantee "YOU" would pay for it. IT GETS PASSED ON-AND DON'T THINK IT DOESN'T.

it sounds good, but the end result is-WE PAY FOR IT.
if I were a dentist and they hit me with higher taxes.
$160 for filling, now $225
$1500 for root canal, now $2000.
if I owned a septic co.
$225 to pump now $300.
$15,000 for turkey mound, now $20,000
this is only a way to get more tax money out of us, through an indirect way. this is a wolf in sheeps clothing.

 

This is a common economic straw man. Doesn't really work this way, because companies or tradesmen that do this stuff price themselves out of the market. This is only really a feasible strategy if you're in a tiny town and the only option, without competition. It also works if you provide a better quality product or service than your competition, but convincing the populace of that can be tricky.

Aside from that, increasing price to increase income will help in gross dollars, but more income to defeat an increased percentage income tax is...well, just silly.

Third item: Tax rates don't affect cost, market does. This is evident if you watch the CPI compared to Tax rates. At the beginning of the Bush administration tax rates, especially on the wealthy (i.e. business owners and upper management), were dropped significantly. They are still down, because the Obama administration has not opted to let those cuts expire.

However, the price of consumer goods and services has continued to rise, in some areas alarmingly so.

This tells us that decreased taxes do not equal decreased prices for the consumer; only increased profit for the seller. Conversely, increased taxes won't automatically mean increased prices; just decreased profit margin as companies won't price themselves out of business to their competition as mentioned above.

 

correct me if it's different down there , but isn't the amount you pay into the unemployment system a fixed percentage based on your earnings ?

 

x2. I'm not going to touch on the politics, but it pisses me off over-hearing all the hippies on campus complain about taxes. Then I correct them when they say "Everyone who makes over $100k doesn't pay taxes," and they get pissed at me for correcting them, and then they say that the government brainwashed me into thinking that. Then they say I don't know what the tax rules are. Are you kidding me? "I'm a f****** TAX ACCOUNTING major studying for the CPA Exam!!!! You hippies want to argue with me on tax law? Go for it!" Then they get more pissed, call me fascist, and walk away. Some people...

 

This ^^

 

College students are adorable.

I get way too much enjoyment out of this meme:

http://www.quickmeme.com/Creepy-Wonka/

 

I count myself as self employed, however I do not have a steady job. I still find ways to make income with odd jobs and several other things. I used to have a steady job, however what was demanded of us got to be too much for me. I'm a hard worker, but the way they treated us wasn't worth it.

 

I got laid off a year ago, I was on unemployment for a few months while getting a certificate in addition to my degree. I did look for work the entire time but unemployment allowed me to find a great job vs being forced to take the first offer. Some might say that's milking it but i have payed taxes since I was 16 and the system paid me back! (well just a little vs what I paid in) but now that I'm making almost double what I was at my previous job I'm definitly paying the state back.
In short I think it's a great system as long as it's not abused.

 

usually the business channel,WSJ,forbes,and fortune state that big corporations don't pay taxes. they actually do, but it's all passed onto the consumer. that's what I was getting at in prior post. are they all wrong?

 

This is where we get into the slippery slope of what is defined as "taxes" and what counts as "paid".

Tax law is obviously complex. Through any number of various qualifications depending on revenue (or lack thereof) of subsidiaries, investment holdings, expenses, etc. large corporations in the US can avoid paying typical taxes on earnings, profits, what most people would think of as "income".

Some of these qualifications are good for the economy and offset burdensome costs for businesses, allowing them to invest more and hire/retain more employees.

Others are mainly loopholes that have lobbied for by writing big checks to congressmen.

Which qualifies as which is a very subjective thing. The people gaining from these special rules would obviously call them necessary. People who don't gain from them would have a much less rosy view of them.

As for "taxes being passed on to the consumer", that's never really been found to occur in practice. Companies will generally price their products as high as the market will allow to maximize profit margin. If taxes are lower, so much the better - but the company will not lower prices of its goods or services. It will simply profit more.

Raising prices in response to increased tax rates doesn't really work. Taxes are a percentage. Higher prices may help mitigate things a bit by bringing in more gross dollars, but then you have to eyeball your competition. If they can do with 3% less profit, they'll undercut you, take a large portion of your business, and make up in volume what they've lost in margin.

More or less covers it, I suppose.

 

Once again, a succinct and clear way of summarizing a concept.

A micro example of the last concept that jandrews explained is something that happened not too long ago here in Seattle. A state law was passed adding an additional 9% tax to "junk food." This includes soda, chips, candy, etc. In reaction to this increase, distributors of Pepsi vending machines told our offices that they needed to raise the price of a 20oz bottle from $1 to $1.10.

Obviously, sales fell. Not only because of the price increase, but also because of the fact that it's really inconvenient to scrounge up another $.10 for a damn soda.

6 months later, the tax was repealed and eliminated, but the distributor did not lower his prices back to the original $1.00. This caused outrage throughout the office and within a month all the Pepsi vending machines had been replaced with Coke which charged $1.00.

 

Why?

 

Federal income tax, state income tax, county tax, city tax, local tax, gas tax, entertainment tax, property tax, sin tax, wheel tax, FICA (& other transfer tax), capital gains tax, death tax, gift tax, inheritence tax, medicare tax, sales tax, special purpose tax, excise tax, coustoms tax, government imposed user fees, lisence fees, luxury tax, gas guzzler tax, import tax, unemployment tax, benifits tax, estate tax and many more....

This is off topic from the OP but, considering some of the posts along the way, I think it fits...

If there is anyone that thinks we need another or more tax on anyone feel free to pull out your check book and put your money where your mouth is.

http://ntu.org/tax-basics/who-pays-income-taxes.html

I fall into the top 10% and my household falls into the top 5%. Taxes are my biggest single expense...period. Should I pay more federal income tax then I pay a month for my house?

I am NOT a college grad. I am blue collar, working nights, weekends, in the heat, rain, snow and ice...outside. It's what I want to do and just because I did, does not mean I should have to pay more (or less) than the next guy.

I don't care what Pew or Wiki or whoever else says...the only fair thing to do is CUT GOVERNMENT SPENDING. The fact that it seems evil for someone not wanting to pay more taxes and yet fair for others to take what has or will be paid baffles me.

One flat, no loop hole tax for all, payable on election day...is the only fair way. Otherwise, we continue to promote class warfare and people that don't have "skin" in the game telling those of us that do how to spend our money. If everyone paid the same share as a percentage (IMO) the mental impact on each of us would force all of us to choose our leaders more effectively and force our leaders to perform better.

 

dont have a job atm, didnt look for another one when i got laid off when i was almost 17 lol but i finished HS, am starting college and have done alot of Con-ed and i hope it helps me get a job in the field that i am trying to get a job in.

I am fortunate enough to find enough money working for friends or doing odd jobs to pay for my truck stuff, but to also have my mom supporting me financially while i am in school...still if i can find a full time job so i can pay for my own shit im not gonna whine that it doesnt pay the highest

 

This will work if we drastically cut military spending. I don't see how that's possible with the current political climate and News Corp propaganda machine.

Went over earlier why this works for everyone but the very poor and very rich.

A better way to handle it would be to go to three brackets:

- Under 30k
- 30,001 to 250,000
- 250,000 and up.

Under 30k gets 10%, middle bracket gets 20%, top bracket gets 30%.

Bout the simplest way to clean it up without pushing a TON of the country's labor force into poverty.

 

JANDREWS,

I'm not a demwit or a repuke so I believe there's more than enough blame to go around. If thier in office they are part of the problem.

Check out this link:

http://www.cagw.org/

There are many more other sites but, the waste and excess need to stop.

How many buddies of elected officials have gotten rich and how many elected members of our government (by way of kick backs from funding un-needed projects) are there? Every elected member is to blame for either being on the take or being passive regarding projects like $893,000 on washing ones private parts or $3,000,000 studying how shrimp run or $9,000,000 researching baby names.

With all the taxes out there, I'm willing to bet that if we only had one tax, an income tax with no loop holes that every person paid, even at 30% it would not even come close to covering the government spending.

I say let the cuts begin.

 

You've got PM.

 

I PM'd him because political topics are not welcome in this establishment. And, also, more or less off topic, although we're drifting awful close while discussing the economic effects of tax policy.