So the cat is finally out of the bag. Romney has revealed that he paid 13.9% of his total earnings in 2011 toward taxes. This is just ridiculous. I mean, I knew there were loopholes in our income tax system, but this is no "hole". Romney took his $20 million in capital gains and marched right through the Arc de Triomphe. While Uncle Sam drops the iron fist of income tax collection on us workers on a payroll (the highest pay up to 35%), Romney and millionaires alike are effortlessly walking through a wall of swiss cheese.
Romney released his tax returns after Newt Gingrich, who was the first to reveal his financials to the public. Seeing how he paid more than 30% of his earnings in taxes, Gingrich was obviously not shy in releasing his tax returns. However, tax experts say Newt could owe up to tens of thousands of dollars in medicare tax. Whatever the case, it doesn't matter a bit to me, because I just don't like Gingrich as a person. His behavior and speech just reeks too much of a self-aggrandizing prick who didn't, doesn't, and won't give a rat's ass about the average American. He left a bad impression right from the get-go, and bad impressions are hard to extinguish, even if he "supposedly" represents the "mom and pop" small business owner who's supposed to be the free market's poster boy. And furthermore, would we really want the president, the Commander in Chief, the symbol of the American spirit, to be someone named "Newt"? (Mitt is not a very promising name for a president but it's way better than Newt)
Anyway, back to the subject on hand. Warren Buffet was the first person who brought the 15% rate for capital gains into public attention. Many of us would have just gone on with our daily lives and jobs. Not knowing, not questioning, just trusting that Uncle Sam has some kind of fair taxation system worked out for all of us. Buffet revealed that he was taxed a lesser percentage of his earnings than his employees, and Romney showed us that he paid even less than the 15% dividend tax. Keep in mind that these are the people who have actually agreed to reveal their income tax returns. I wonder what ridiculous percentage some of these other 1%'ers fork over from their annual income.
I have had people argue with me that the top 1% of wealthy Americans pay over half of our taxes in dollars, or some ridiculous number like that. Well if they do, and they could, then they should. But the point is not that the 1% have to contribute more than 50% of the total income tax into the U.S. treasury, but the fact that they can contribute 50%. Doesn't anyone else see something terribly wrong in the fact that 1% of the population are able to pay 50% of the total income tax in a country even though most of them are getting taxed at a lower rate than the other 99%? The people I have spoken to on both sides of the issue have all agreed on one thing: a flat tax rate. Yes, of course that would be great, but if we really took a flat average of all the tax rates, what would really happen? Would we all pay a little more? Or would most of us get a lower rate, and the top 1% have to pay 55% of the total income tax instead? One of the major causes of the American Revolution was taxation without representation. Of course, that's not the case today. We have all these congressmen and senators that represent us. But the question is, are the people that are supposed to represent you being taxed at the same rate as you are?
No comments:
Post a Comment