Are The Rich Taxed Enough?

James Madison once stated inequality of the rich and poor predicament to be “evil” and believed that the government should avoid an “immoderate, and especially unmerited, accumulation of riches” (Johnston, 2016). As one of the founding fathers of our nation, James Madison had a concern about the separation between the rich and the poor. He felt the government should do what it could to avoid the separation, which one can infer that he meant for the government to tax the rich by a greater percentage, thus reducing the financial burden on the poor. A rift has always been present between the rich and the poor throughout history. Depending upon the job, the working class may or may not make enough to support a family. At this point, the

Although many Americans believe the top one percent should have higher tax rates there are also many people who believe that the wealthy pay more than their fair share of taxes.

According to a speech given by Melancton Smith, because "The wealthy are in the habit of expensive living, they will tax the public highly and spend their money. They find no difficulty in paying their taxes, but people of the middling class do feel these difficulties. Therefore, representatives from the middling class, from their frugal habits, will be careful how they increase taxes.""Being in the habit of expensive living, they will tax the public highly and spend their money. They find no difficulty in paying their taxes, but people of the middling class do feel these difficulties. Therefore, representatives from the middling class, from their frugal habits, will be careful how they increase taxes."This means that higher class will tax the people highly, because they do not have trouble paying taxes. On the other hand, the middle class people would know the reasonable amount to tax because it is not as easy for them to pay. Also, Amos Singletary stated in his speech that, "These lawyers, and men of learning, and moneyed men, that talk so finely and gloss over matters so smoothly, to make us poor illiterate people swallow down the pill." "These lawyers, and men of learning, and moneyed men, that talk so finely and gloss over matters so smoothly, to make us poor illiterate people swallow down the pill,"This means The wealthy men talk so finely, they will get out of

The rich should not be taxed more. Increasing tax rates for the upper class will not solve the present inequality problem. The wealthy americans should be expected the same amount of taxes as the poor for equality. Those who earn more shouldn't help the less fortunate because they worked harder for the money they earn.

In recent years, a growing gap between the wealthy and the middle class has grown, as the wealth of the world has increased significantly, yet only a minority of individuals get to enjoy it. Income inequality has been proven to be detrimental to not only the economy, but to the overall well-being of a nation as it leads to societal upset and can potentially prompt a decline in progression as a nation. Over time, income inequality has led to negative results in the United States, as well as many other nations including Greece. Consequently, the solution to prevent income inequality from deteriorating a nation and prevent economic upset is to ultimately tax those who are wealthier at a higher rate and put said money towards education and healthcare

Generally, the income earners pay less income tax and more payroll taxes while the high-end income earners pay more income tax and less payroll taxes. The low income earners however get credit benefits as the government pays for their payroll taxes. Therefore, the high income racket still suffers the burden of individual taxes. In 2014, the bottom 20% had an effective tax rate of -4.5% while the top 1% faced an average of 24.6% a margin of 29% creates a very huge economical gap between the rich and the poor. This only ends up hurting the economy more. As a result, I believe the highest effective tax that should be applied to the top 1% should not be more than 20%. If it goes beyond 20%, they shall start demanding for tax cuts and further design ways to evade the tax payments.

Amity Shlaes talks about how presidents such as Nixon, and Bush removed millions of Americans from the tax bracket completely and that those same exact people don’t want a proportional tax rate and want to tax the rich because “they can afford it”. That just seems unfair and unjust. The first video was very opinionated saying that the rich now make more money than before, of course they have the money now due to war times & depressions being over however, the less money they have the less likely they’re to make more investments into other things such as creating more offices, and hiring more people to work for their company

Alyssa Battistoni makes some very good points in her article, “The Public Overwhelming Wants It: Why Is Taxing the Rich So Hard?” regarding how the wealthy have a big part in influencing the government and taxes. Her article makes valid points on how we, as citizens, under estimate the political influence of the rich and that we have a hard time understanding the magnitude of the economic inequality and the relationship it has with political power (Battistoni, 720). She states that many of the politicians themselves are in the wealthy category. This article shows the frustration Battistoni feels by the tone and wording she uses to make her examples such as when she states that we are getting caught in a negative feedback cycle as the rich

“Considering that the top marginal tax rate for the wealthiest Americans today is 35 percent, that figure seems astounding. But it's true that in the 1950s, the top marginal tax rates were over 90 percent” (Farley). Many may think, how does lower taxes on the highest income earners have an effect on them. Simple, less funding of programs that enrich the quality of one’s life. When the government does not receive the needed funding spending cuts must be made. Unfortunately, these spending cuts are more often than not are on government programs that help those who are

This week the reading by Frank in the Inequality Reader caught my attention. It talked about how the current tax system in the US is not conducive to helping society. It also mentions how an increase in taxes for the top earners would help not only the poor but also the rich. He also includes how the wealthy “have been made worse off, on balance, by recent tax cuts” (Frank 732). This reading made me think of the current GOP tax plan being signed and debated in congress.

Before delving into the topic at hand, a look at the current and projected tax system will help understand the predicament of taxing the upper class. According to Bardes, Schmidt, and Shelley, in the textbook American Government and Politics Today: Brief Edition, Americans pay a variety of federal, state, and local taxes, which are all assessed on most sources of income, sales and land. Bardes et al, made their agenda clear by pointing out that “the wealthy receive a much greater share of their income from these sources (capital gains, rents, royalties, interests, dividends, or profits from business), than others do (315).” But what is considered wealthy? In the article, Who gets to be “Rich”, Jordan Weissmann reported that a household income of around $113,000 lands one at the top 10% of income earners, while $394,000 makes one a

It is with out a doubt that in our country the United States of America the lower and middle class have the common perception that the government and the “super rich” have some kind of unknown agreement to maintain extremely lower tax rates on the “super rich”. What do the “super rich” do with all the saved money coming from the tax cut is another unknown, perhaps some luxurious new home, car, or maybe put it to work and continue getting richer. While all this may be true to some degree, one of the “super rich” elite members has stepped fourth not only once but a few time but none compare to his current attempt to make change.

In the article “Of the 1%, by the 1%, for the 1%” Joseph Stiglitz, a noble prize winning economist, argues that the upper 1% controls about 40% of all wealth in America. This top 1% has taken about a quarter of all income in America, and has seen their income rise about 18% in the past decade. This has made the inequality between classes in the US expand. Eventually, this inequality gap will even hurt the top 1%, because the other 99% will either fight for a bigger piece or just stop working all together. The top 1% can buy anything they need, but their fate realizes on the other 99% to work hard and not fight back. If the 99% stopped working, there would be a simple way to gain back money… that would be to raise taxes on the rich. However, the rich get rich by capital gains, which have a low tax policy. So overall, the upper percent can eventually learn, but a majority of the time it is too little too late.

What do you think would happen if the rich paid more taxes? Would there be a better economy or would it be worst, maybe even stay the same. Increasing the taxes would help out our economy in a few ways. one way that it would help out our economy is that not only would there be less of a concentration of profit at the top of our social ladder there would be more revenue for the funding of civil union jobs. Also not to mention causing the bigger corporations to have to pay more so they would be unable to escape with the majority of the illegal activity they do today. Lastly if the government were to crack down on offshoring it would help with collecting taxes and the money would return to the people and back into circulation for our economy. Here are some reasons why the rich should pay higher taxes.