The US Tax System

The documentary “Inequality for All” focusing on Robert Reich, a Berkeley professor, Harvard graduate, and previous Secretary of Labor under Bill Clinton, argues how the United States economy is struggling with the widening income gap; indeed, since the 1970’s, the income gap between the wealthy and middle class has continued to widen which has created many problems within this country.

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

In the Documentary, “Inequality for All”, scholar Robert Reich forces viewers to dissect our Nation’s wealth distribution model and the shattering effects it has on income equality. Reich begins his argument with a staggering piece of evidence that was shocking to learn that the upper 1% of the nation, the wealthy portion, makes up over half of the national income. This means that the remaining 99% of the population of the United States makes up less than half of the income in our nation. This is a gigantic gap that almost seems unfixable in a day where wages are decreasing and expenses keep rising. He identifies that the middle class is rapidly sinking and no longer has the purchasing power to keep the economy stable.

My fellow conservatives and Republicans our countrymen that are Democrats have a valid point. No society can remain strong with wealth disparity in wealth and diminishing opportunities for upward mobility. This is not a novel argument. All the great philosophers of the Western tradition have articulated this. Yet, in 1916, William John Henry Boetcker, a Presbyterian minister,

Everything written in the article titled ‘The Upside of Income Inequality’ by Gary S. Becker and Kevin M. Murphy is not only a manipulation of the reader’s trust but it is also an insult of the reader’s intelligence. The fact that this article was first published in a magazine should speak volumes on the credibility of the statements made by these two authors. Becker and Murphy mention statistics comparing salaries and college educations but it is close to impossible to factor in the entire county to these statistics therefore, they are invalid. The article suggests that taxing the rich more than the lower class or ‘poor’ is similar to offering a subsidy to high school dropouts and taxing those going to college, but this is comparing apples to oranges and frankly it is a laughable comparison. Using appeals is an art form. Appeals help people articulate things that are important to them. Unfortunately, ethos, logos and pathos can be used to manipulate people as proven in this article.

He supports this claim by having a rebuttal for each of Johnston’s claim, statistical data and examples to back up assertions, and finally explaining that the rich are in fact, paying the majority of taxes. Dubay’s purpose is to dispel the misconceptions about the rich in order to discourage Congress from passing a higher tax on the wealthy. He adopts a factual tone for his audience, the readers of The Heritage Foundation and others interested in the topic of government

The current tax code for the United States is almost 74,000 pages long. Or to put that into a different light: About 116 copies of Herman Melville’s Moby Dick. It is small wonder that a few of the announced candidates for President of the United States, have again begun to kick the tires on the topic of a Flat Tax. But is a flat tax actually a solution to our country’s growing tax complexity? What are the potential economic effects of a flat tax (both positive and negative)? Finally, is a flat tax even a viable solution? In short, will it work? As a concept, a flat tax is spectacular. Simplicity at its finest. As a fiscal policy, I believe that same simplicity must be examined and inspected closely.

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

In the United States, the top one percent received about 20 percent of the overall income for 2016. This creates an uneven distribution of income causing Americans to argue about whether or not the wealthy should pay more in federal income taxes. One side of the argument is that the wealthy make a huge portion of the nation’s income; therefore, they should have higher tax rates. The other side argues that wealthy Americans already pay their fair share of taxes by paying nearly 40 percent and should not be forced to pay more. These arguments both use compelling evidence to make their claims; however, a solution could be reached by increasing the tax rate of the top one percent by only 10 to 20 percent.

(What is REDISTRIBUTION OF WEALTH?). Redistribution of wealth policies in the United States take a greater share of income from those families belonging to the top 20th percentile than those families in the bottom percentiles (Prante and Hodge). Families in the top 20th percentile earn on average 50 percent of our nation’s income (Prante and Hodge). As a result the nation’s middle to upper class earners would appear to have stopped achieving as much success due to the redistribution of their money, this causing a tremendous drop in the nation’s income averaging around 39.6 percent. When comparing the top 20th percentile to the bottom 20th percentile, those within the lowest quintile of our population makeup only 3.1 percent of the nation’s income, according to statistics from 2012 (Prante and Hodge). By the process of redistribution, it increased those of the lower quintile incomes by almost $1.1

So my First reason is that the poor people can’t afford a lot of things with taxes because the taxes would make the items more expensive. Poor people don’t even have enough money, but still, the government puts taxes on them too. The government should have fewer taxes on the poor because the poor have so little money and tax make it more expensive. If the government stops taking taxes from poor, the poor people's lives would be easier, because they could get

In Robert Reich documentary “Inequality for All” he makes a compelling discussion about the serious crises that the United States faces due the widening economic gap. He looks to raise awareness of the U.S. economic gap between the rich and poor. According to Reich the widening divide in America is real and growing. Income levels at the middle and labor class is stagnant and are at it’s lowest levels compared to upper class incomes since the beginning of WWII and is growing wider each year. Reich suggests that the economy runs more smoothly when the middle class has jobs with fair wages, when unions are strong, and when middle class workers have some extra money to spend if possible when the government uses the tax policy properly and when it raises the minimum wage regularly to control the income gap between labor and management. In other words Reich argues that economically healthy middle and labor class equality is the foundation of a thriving economy and is necessary to maintaining a sound national infrastructure and educational system within

Tax system is a legal system of imposing and collecting taxes from the citizens of the country. As it has been stated by Albert Einstein, the hardest task in the world is to understand the tax system of a country. The United States’ tax system is so complicated that its tax code contains almost 3 million words and 6,000 pages. Moreover, the taxes implied by city and state governments add more complexity to the federal taxation system. In this case, we do not need to understand the complexity of tax code system in order to get acquainted with the significant role of taxes in American society.

In his book, Capital in the Twenty-First Century, Economist Thomas Piketty argues that global wealth inequality has become a growing problem that will continue in the future, as returns to capital consistently exceed the rate of economic growth in many countries. Piketty maintains the key to solving this problem depends on policies implemented, specifically, a global progressive tax on individual net worth. (Thomas Piketty, Save Capitalism from the Capitalists by Taxing Wealth, Financial Times, (March 28, 2014, 5:42 PM), http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/decdd76e-b50e-11e3-a746-00144feabdc0.html#axzz3UZfQn4YQ). The goal of this tax is to have those with limited earnings and assets pay a small amount, in contrast to the super-rich with billions, who would be required to pay more. Id. Piketty proposes that a steep progressive tax, coupled with a provision requiring assets to be taxed on a worldwide basis, would help reduce wealth inequality and enable those at the bottom to advance financially. Id. Regardless of the