Changes will be forced. The unites states is in decay and those who continue to believe in the current system of slavery will suffer. Your world rapidly coming to an end. Drop your faith in this nonsense and adapt.
I appreciate your question about "what is fair?" I am pretty sure our country can't come a decision on this. Table 1 intrigued me because I considered the differences between the percentages to see the added "financial responsibility" between earning categories divided by the difference in the category. Mathematically, it does appear that we are asking those who make less to contribute less and so maybe it is "fair." On the other hand maybe "fair" is to consider the complement ... what a person has remaining. The top 1% have a lot left over compared to someone who is in the bottom 25% ... I wonder if an issue about taxes is that the rich get richer and they can pay wayyyyyy more and still have more money than they would ever need in life. I know that is a philosophical question. I really appreciate how you distinguished between federal and state taxes and how some states who don't have state taxes place a bigger burden on those who make less. Always so much to learn from you! Thanks.
Thanks for the comment. Yes, there are many philosophical discussions one can have about this topic, and most would be very interesting. Unfortunately, many people can't discuss these ideas without becoming emotional, angry, or resorting to personal attacks. If someone does believe the "rich" should pay more, what's the definition of rich, and what is their definition of what is a fair amount? That's one place to start. What's fair and what's best for society while taking into account economic growth becomes a complex discussion in a hurry.😊
Seems like the reason no one can agree on what level of taxes is fair, is because we can't agree on what role the government should play in our lives, and therefore, can't agree on how much funding it needs, or from where that funding should originate. In my opinion, the FIRST goal of taxes (and subsidies) should be to correct market failures due to externalities, where possible. The next goal, again imo, given that we live in an arguably post scarcity society (wester nations), where all of our lower needs can easily be met by our production capacity, should be to provide EVERY American with housing, food, and clothing, at a minimum, regardless of their contribution to society. The next goal, imo, should be to COMPRESS (not eliminate), income inequality, and avoid cases where individuals can wield "kingly" power, due to their immense wealth and impact on society. So imo, income taxes on the uber wealthy are WAY too low, especially compared to pre-80's income tax brackets.
Thank you for the comment and your thoughts. Considering we are running huge yearly deficits in the budget each year, it's unfortunate that there isn't more talk about eliminating unnecessary spending and waste. However, even then, everyone seems to have their own opinions about what they view as waste. The growing government debt and future interest charges against all the debt should be a larger concern for all politicians. Otherwise, there won't be enough money left to provide the basic services most people believe government should provide.
I like this comment - especially about providing every American housing, food, and clothing. Maybe the reason for taxes is so we can live by the "beattitudes" which then means that our taxes extend beyond the US. It's all tricky and good to discuss.
@@MikesFinancialEdge The national debt is certainly not great, but the us government can always print more money and keep raising the debt ceiling. The question is, how long will people be willing to keep buying it up. As long as we are the largest and most robust economy on the planet, whose GDP still dwarfs its debt service, we'll still be seen as "safe". IMO, the more pressing factor right now that weakens global confidence in the USD is political instability. No one cares if we have tons of debt, as long as the growth that debt is fueling will outpace the debt service payments. But civil war and isolationist policies are the destroyer of national utility and wealth. The insanity in our politics may very well be the thing that causes other nations to drastically reduce their USD holdings. But as of right now, every other country seems to be experiencing political craziness and even worse economies, so I guess we're just the best out of the worst, lol.
I certainly agree that the politics in this country are a mess. Unfortunately, politicians care more about damaging the other side than doing what might be in the best interest of the country. As far as the debt goes, it's the unfunded obligations that are a serious concern. Changes have to happen; they can't just print their way out of all of this, or there will be massive inflation. federalbudgetinpictures.com/three-layers-of-massive-debt/
You can never actually own anything, even after you pay it off you will still have to work to pay the government for it every year..... end of year income tax should be entirely nixed, its already illegally still in place from after the war, it was supposed to be temporary. More you spend, more you pay in tax makes the most sense. If you don't have money to spend you don't pay much taxes. If your spending tons of money you pay more in taxes. Every dollar you spend was taxed 1,000 times before you got it, then you were taxed for receiving it, then your taxed for spending it. We pay enough without an end of year fine for having worked. It a Ponzi scheme. Most of us are done paying it, and ready to fight about it if they come.
There is some truth to this.😉 We pay taxes on the money we earn, then we pay taxes when we spend it in the form of sales tax and excise taxes, and if we own property, we pay taxes on that every year.
I'm not sure how many people would be interested in listening to and debating a bunch of laws.😉 I certainly do not claim to be a lawyer or remotely close to any type of Constitutional scholar, but I believe the Constitution gives Congress the right to lay and collect taxes in Article 1. Then, later, the Sixteenth Amendment, ratified in 1913, gave Congress the power to lay and collect taxes on any type of income. At some point, Congress then granted the responsibility to the IRS. Perhaps others can provide a bit more verification.
Fair would be everyone paying the same percentage no matter their income. Imagine a bigger person getting to keep less food they harvest BC they are overweight.
It would be simple and would lower compliance costs, but I think it would be very difficult to sell to people as something that's fair. Many people already believe we should tax the rich even more, but a flat tax isn't a progressive tax. Thus, under a flat tax, high-income earners would probably pay a lower effective tax rate than they currently are paying, shifting a little more burden onto the middle class. However, a progressive nature could be somewhat maintained through generous personal exemptions so that the tax doesn't kick in as early. But, if it were truly a flat tax, it would most likely cause further shortfalls in the government's budget by lowering the taxes paid by high-income earners. It has its pros and cons, but I see it as politically undoable.
This a a very informative video. I also completely agree that a flat tax is not going to happen in the U.S. which is a shame. I am going to refrain from going into a 50 paragraph rant on this topic, but I do believe the tax system penalizes hard work and risk. I have passed through almost every tax bracket in my life. I noticed that the poor are usually not "less fortunate", but instead, suffer from self inflicted financial wounds of instant gratification and false wealth. I read an article in the WSJ in the 90s about income levels, social security and the federal government's actuarial tables- spoiler: no citizen group wins this game. Wait. I almost started my rant.
@@Narxist we have so many people who need to hear the rant and we have so many people who do need assistance that they can't provide for themselves. I am not in favor of the flat tax and I am not in favor of those who take advantage of our tax system. It's a messy thing.
I believe if I remember correctly that I listened to a historian that explained the tea tax that led to the Boston Tea Party and the American Revolution partly was a 2% tax on tea by the British government. Reading the U.S. Constitution and Declaration of Independence with this in mind makes me realize that the founding fathers of America never meant for the USA to be ran as a corporation with it's profiteering branch known as the gigantic Federal Government that it is today. They revolted over, partially, a 2% tax just on one product, much less their entire income, property, sales, etc . 😲
The size of government just keeps growing, leaving one to wonder why all the new government jobs are needed. Not only are our deficits and debt growing at alarming rates, but the government added over 650,000 new jobs in 2023, on top of the 385,000 new jobs in 2022 and 275,000 jobs in 2021. That's over 1.3 million new government jobs in just the past three years!
IMO fair isn't just income to tax rate. It is fair to tax people more for actions that generate harmful externalities. It is fair to tax people who generate income by rent seeking, or creating 0 value to the world. It is fair to tax people who want exclusive property rights to public commons: natural resources, land, water. And the most progressive tax is taxing inheritance.
I left out inheritance tax because, for most people, it's a non-factor. For 2024, the exemption amount is $13.61 million per individual or $27.22 million per married couple. This means investors can transfer up to this amount of assets to their heirs, either during their lifetime or at death, without paying any federal gift or estate tax. A few states do have some inheritance tax, though.
Once you get past the nice sounding talking points, it is interesting to see what people are really paying in taxes and which types of taxes are progressive and which ones are regressive.
@MikesFinancialEdge Actual application of the law and its adjacent statutes and codes. Fun fact. The Soviets had a progressive tax code then implemented a flat tax before their ultimate collapse
What specifically do you disagree with? The information is quoted from all U.S. tax returns and reported by the government, so there is no spin on any of it.
Hello Everyone - Would love to hear your thoughts about the current U.S. tax system and if you think changes need to be made.
Changes will be forced. The unites states is in decay and those who continue to believe in the current system of slavery will suffer. Your world rapidly coming to an end. Drop your faith in this nonsense and adapt.
I appreciate your question about "what is fair?" I am pretty sure our country can't come a decision on this. Table 1 intrigued me because I considered the differences between the percentages to see the added "financial responsibility" between earning categories divided by the difference in the category. Mathematically, it does appear that we are asking those who make less to contribute less and so maybe it is "fair." On the other hand maybe "fair" is to consider the complement ... what a person has remaining. The top 1% have a lot left over compared to someone who is in the bottom 25% ... I wonder if an issue about taxes is that the rich get richer and they can pay wayyyyyy more and still have more money than they would ever need in life. I know that is a philosophical question. I really appreciate how you distinguished between federal and state taxes and how some states who don't have state taxes place a bigger burden on those who make less. Always so much to learn from you! Thanks.
Thanks for the comment. Yes, there are many philosophical discussions one can have about this topic, and most would be very interesting. Unfortunately, many people can't discuss these ideas without becoming emotional, angry, or resorting to personal attacks. If someone does believe the "rich" should pay more, what's the definition of rich, and what is their definition of what is a fair amount? That's one place to start. What's fair and what's best for society while taking into account economic growth becomes a complex discussion in a hurry.😊
Seems like the reason no one can agree on what level of taxes is fair, is because we can't agree on what role the government should play in our lives, and therefore, can't agree on how much funding it needs, or from where that funding should originate. In my opinion, the FIRST goal of taxes (and subsidies) should be to correct market failures due to externalities, where possible. The next goal, again imo, given that we live in an arguably post scarcity society (wester nations), where all of our lower needs can easily be met by our production capacity, should be to provide EVERY American with housing, food, and clothing, at a minimum, regardless of their contribution to society. The next goal, imo, should be to COMPRESS (not eliminate), income inequality, and avoid cases where individuals can wield "kingly" power, due to their immense wealth and impact on society. So imo, income taxes on the uber wealthy are WAY too low, especially compared to pre-80's income tax brackets.
Thank you for the comment and your thoughts. Considering we are running huge yearly deficits in the budget each year, it's unfortunate that there isn't more talk about eliminating unnecessary spending and waste. However, even then, everyone seems to have their own opinions about what they view as waste. The growing government debt and future interest charges against all the debt should be a larger concern for all politicians. Otherwise, there won't be enough money left to provide the basic services most people believe government should provide.
I like this comment - especially about providing every American housing, food, and clothing. Maybe the reason for taxes is so we can live by the "beattitudes" which then means that our taxes extend beyond the US. It's all tricky and good to discuss.
@@MikesFinancialEdge The national debt is certainly not great, but the us government can always print more money and keep raising the debt ceiling. The question is, how long will people be willing to keep buying it up. As long as we are the largest and most robust economy on the planet, whose GDP still dwarfs its debt service, we'll still be seen as "safe". IMO, the more pressing factor right now that weakens global confidence in the USD is political instability. No one cares if we have tons of debt, as long as the growth that debt is fueling will outpace the debt service payments. But civil war and isolationist policies are the destroyer of national utility and wealth. The insanity in our politics may very well be the thing that causes other nations to drastically reduce their USD holdings. But as of right now, every other country seems to be experiencing political craziness and even worse economies, so I guess we're just the best out of the worst, lol.
I certainly agree that the politics in this country are a mess. Unfortunately, politicians care more about damaging the other side than doing what might be in the best interest of the country. As far as the debt goes, it's the unfunded obligations that are a serious concern. Changes have to happen; they can't just print their way out of all of this, or there will be massive inflation. federalbudgetinpictures.com/three-layers-of-massive-debt/
You can never actually own anything, even after you pay it off you will still have to work to pay the government for it every year..... end of year income tax should be entirely nixed, its already illegally still in place from after the war, it was supposed to be temporary. More you spend, more you pay in tax makes the most sense. If you don't have money to spend you don't pay much taxes. If your spending tons of money you pay more in taxes. Every dollar you spend was taxed 1,000 times before you got it, then you were taxed for receiving it, then your taxed for spending it. We pay enough without an end of year fine for having worked. It a Ponzi scheme. Most of us are done paying it, and ready to fight about it if they come.
There is some truth to this.😉 We pay taxes on the money we earn, then we pay taxes when we spend it in the form of sales tax and excise taxes, and if we own property, we pay taxes on that every year.
I’d enjoy an episode on what laws actually say we have to pay taxes. And why.
I'm not sure how many people would be interested in listening to and debating a bunch of laws.😉 I certainly do not claim to be a lawyer or remotely close to any type of Constitutional scholar, but I believe the Constitution gives Congress the right to lay and collect taxes in Article 1. Then, later, the Sixteenth Amendment, ratified in 1913, gave Congress the power to lay and collect taxes on any type of income. At some point, Congress then granted the responsibility to the IRS. Perhaps others can provide a bit more verification.
With all the talk about taxes before the election, more people should watch this so they at least know what they are talking about. Good video!
Yes I agree - There is a lot of misinformation out there about our current tax system.
Fair would be everyone paying the same percentage no matter their income. Imagine a bigger person getting to keep less food they harvest BC they are overweight.
Interesting analogy😊
Such good info. What do you think of a straight tax for everyone?
It would be simple and would lower compliance costs, but I think it would be very difficult to sell to people as something that's fair. Many people already believe we should tax the rich even more, but a flat tax isn't a progressive tax. Thus, under a flat tax, high-income earners would probably pay a lower effective tax rate than they currently are paying, shifting a little more burden onto the middle class. However, a progressive nature could be somewhat maintained through generous personal exemptions so that the tax doesn't kick in as early. But, if it were truly a flat tax, it would most likely cause further shortfalls in the government's budget by lowering the taxes paid by high-income earners. It has its pros and cons, but I see it as politically undoable.
This a a very informative video. I also completely agree that a flat tax is not going to happen in the U.S. which is a shame.
I am going to refrain from going into a 50 paragraph rant on this topic, but I do believe the tax system penalizes hard work and risk.
I have passed through almost every tax bracket in my life. I noticed that the poor are usually not "less fortunate", but instead, suffer from self inflicted financial wounds of instant gratification and false wealth.
I read an article in the WSJ in the 90s about income levels, social security and the federal government's actuarial tables- spoiler: no citizen group wins this game.
Wait. I almost started my rant.
Thanks for the comment. Sounds like you've given this topic considerable thought over the years.😉
Fair tax please. No more special treatment for anyone and that means business too.
@@Narxist we have so many people who need to hear the rant and we have so many people who do need assistance that they can't provide for themselves. I am not in favor of the flat tax and I am not in favor of those who take advantage of our tax system. It's a messy thing.
I believe if I remember correctly that I listened to a historian that explained the tea tax that led to the Boston Tea Party and the American Revolution partly was a 2% tax on tea by the British government. Reading the U.S. Constitution and Declaration of Independence with this in mind makes me realize that the founding fathers of America never meant for the USA to be ran as a corporation with it's profiteering branch known as the gigantic Federal Government that it is today. They revolted over, partially, a 2% tax just on one product, much less their entire income, property, sales, etc . 😲
The size of government just keeps growing, leaving one to wonder why all the new government jobs are needed. Not only are our deficits and debt growing at alarming rates, but the government added over 650,000 new jobs in 2023, on top of the 385,000 new jobs in 2022 and 275,000 jobs in 2021. That's over 1.3 million new government jobs in just the past three years!
The only fair tax is one that someone else pays, and not me.
You may have nailed the most popular view.😉
I think that's how we all feel.😆
That's probably true😉
IMO fair isn't just income to tax rate. It is fair to tax people more for actions that generate harmful externalities. It is fair to tax people who generate income by rent seeking, or creating 0 value to the world. It is fair to tax people who want exclusive property rights to public commons: natural resources, land, water. And the most progressive tax is taxing inheritance.
I left out inheritance tax because, for most people, it's a non-factor. For 2024, the exemption amount is $13.61 million per individual or $27.22 million per married couple. This means investors can transfer up to this amount of assets to their heirs, either during their lifetime or at death, without paying any federal gift or estate tax. A few states do have some inheritance tax, though.
After watching this, it's more difficult to say the rich are not paying their fair share. BTW, what is considered enough to be fair?
Once you get past the nice sounding talking points, it is interesting to see what people are really paying in taxes and which types of taxes are progressive and which ones are regressive.
No and theyre misapplied under their statutes and regs and im speaking strictly. The Income Tax.
No? Did you mean you feel they are unfair? What changes do you feel should be made?
@MikesFinancialEdge Actual application of the law and its adjacent statutes and codes.
Fun fact. The Soviets had a progressive tax code then implemented a flat tax before their ultimate collapse
Thanks for the comment and clarification.
I’m calling bs
What specifically do you disagree with? The information is quoted from all U.S. tax returns and reported by the government, so there is no spin on any of it.