OT- How we feeling about taxes in NE?

[Rcnut223]

The problem is you are focusing on one single tax, income tax. There was a time in the history of this country when the single tax was tariffs. I have been in meetings where school leaders were trying to discover a new way to claim some revenue from citizens. Its not like the federal and state governments haven't invented new and impressive ways to depart us from our earnings. We have a $40 trillion deficit, a $7 trillion budget and $5 trillion in revenues. The single answer now seems to be just tax the rich, they can afford it, They probably can, but does that truly solve the problem or simply put a band aid on it? Anyone who believes this can continue at this rate is fooling themselves.

The answer isn't more taxes, it's less government spending .

 

[Neb79]

The problem is you are focusing on one single tax, income tax. There was a time in the history of this country when the single tax was tariffs. I have been in meetings where school leaders were trying to discover a new way to claim some revenue from citizens. It’s not like the federal and state governments haven't invented new and impressive ways to depart us from our earnings. We have a $40 trillion deficit, a $7 trillion budget and $5 trillion in revenues. The single answer now seems to be just tax the rich, they can afford it, They probably can, but does that truly solve the problem or simply put a band aid on it? Anyone who believes this can continue at this rate is fooling themselves.

There was a time when America got lots of free labor from slaves, too. Should we return to that? Taxing the rich works if it is enforced. No loopholes or deductions. And they are the ones who can afford it. Seems fair. If you are going to use our capitalistic system to become a billionaire, pay the price. Or try your luck in Russia or Mexico. I never understood why so many people making less than 500k cry about taxing those in higher brackets. They pay lawyers and politicians to lobby for them. They don’t need your help. And they sure as hell aren’t going to help you out. I don’t have a problem with work requirements for welfare or eliminating junk food from food stamp eligibility. But this shifting of tax burden from the ultra wealthy the the middle class in crazy, and the middle class supporting it is flat insane.

 

[Huskers12345]

The answer isn't more taxes, it's less government spending .

Gonna probably need both to get out of this mess. Rand Paul has been touting his 6 pennies on the dollar plan. Basically 6% reduction a year for 5 years. Just to balance the budget.

And zero % chance any of these fools adopt any semblance of that plan.

 

[Anon1750875978]

Not so sure Iowa’s Republican base will erode as much as you think/hope.

It will be a gradual process.
Likely two election cycles.

Even the numpties are seeing the damage Republican rule has caused.

 

[Anon1750875978]

Don’t think for a second that Iowa is being run any better.

Oh, I know it isn't.
And what's the common denominator?

 

[TruHusker]

There was a time when America got lots of free labor from slaves, too. Should we return to that? Taxing the rich works if it is enforced. No loopholes or deductions. And they are the ones who can afford it. Seems fair. If you are going to use our capitalistic system to become a billionaire, pay the price. Or try your luck in Russia or Mexico. I never understood why so many people making less than 500k cry about taxing those in higher brackets. They pay lawyers and politicians to lobby for them. They don’t need your help. And they sure as hell aren’t going to help you out. I don’t have a problem with work requirements for welfare or eliminating junk food from food stamp eligibility. But this shifting of tax burden from the ultra wealthy the the middle class in crazy, and the middle class supporting it is flat insane.

The slave remark was stupid. What are these "loopholes" I hear so much about? Name them? What do you want businesses to deduct and just eat? Do you want businesses to grow and thrive or just complain that we only have a few choices because government makes it hard to start a new business? I have asked people what loopholes the rich receive that I cannot access and I never get a reply. You simplify your assertion that all politicians are bought off by business. Farmers have lobbyist, does that mean they are paying off the politicians? How do you expect people to learn about complex businesses without interaction those business leaders.

What do you know about Sweden? They have tons of social programs that are will documented. They also have extremely high taxes in the 60% range with all considered. They tried socialism and it failed miserably so they went back to a capitalistic model. They also tax lower wage earners more than upper wage earners which just the opposite of the US. They reason that the upper wage earners are creating jobs and moving the economy which is necessary.

I think the "tax the rich" crowd is believing a simple slogan. The rich have it and won't miss it so that makes it OK to take it from them. I am not rich by any means nor do I envy the rich. Think about this - how did most of them get rich? Bezos borrowed $300k from his parents to start a CD/ magazine business. Sam Walton went broke trying to start his cherished five and dime stores until he finally figured it out. Windows was purchased for nearly nothing and developed into a massive corporation. Apple was a clunky computer in its early days, I used one. Musk has started and sold more companies that most will even know. Facebook was a novel idea that has taken off. So who then makes these people rich? Not the government. Its everyone who buys their products like iPhones, computers, Amazon, shop at Walmart, computer storage, netflix and the list goes on and on. People don't flinch a bit paying $200 a month for an phone and the plan. We rarely had a phone growing up but it was a different age. Finally, for math sakes, go ahead and just take $250 billion from Musk and apply it to the $7 trillion budget. It will only last a few weeks and then what about job creation and sustaining with that money?

Just my opinions.

 

[Neb79]

The slave remark was stupid. What are these "loopholes" I hear so much about? Name them? What do you want businesses to deduct and just eat? Do you want businesses to grow and thrive or just complain that we only have a few choices because government makes it hard to start a new business? I have asked people what loopholes the rich receive that I cannot access and I never get a reply. You simplify your assertion that all politicians are bought off by business. Farmers have lobbyist, does that mean they are paying off the politicians? How do you expect people to learn about complex businesses without interaction those business leaders.

What do you know about Sweden? They have tons of social programs that are will documented. They also have extremely high taxes in the 60% range with all considered. They tried socialism and it failed miserably so they went back to a capitalistic model. They also tax lower wage earners more than upper wage earners which just the opposite of the US. They reason that the upper wage earners are creating jobs and moving the economy which is necessary.

I think the "tax the rich" crowd is believing a simple slogan. The rich have it and won't miss it so that makes it OK to take it from them. I am not rich by any means nor do I envy the rich. Think about this - how did most of them get rich? Bezos borrowed $300k from his parents to start a CD/ magazine business. Sam Walton went broke trying to start his cherished five and dime stores until he finally figured it out. Windows was purchased for nearly nothing and developed into a massive corporation. Apple was a clunky computer in its early days, I used one. Musk has started and sold more companies that most will even know. Facebook was a novel idea that has taken off. So who then makes these people rich? Not the government. Its everyone who buys their products like iPhones, computers, Amazon, shop at Walmart, computer storage, netflix and the list goes on and on. People don't flinch a bit paying $200 a month for an phone and the plan. We rarely had a phone growing up but it was a different age. Finally, for math sakes, go ahead and just take $250 billion from Musk and apply it to the $7 trillion budget. It will only last a few weeks and then what about job creation and sustaining with that money?

Just my opinions.

Keep defending the billionaires. They have suffered so horribly. We should all share the burden so they can recover.

 

[king_kong__]

rich people pay for literally everything in this country

anyone who thinks their measly pittance makes a difference is clueless

IMO nobody making under $50k/year should pay any income taxes (they also shouldn't be able to vote)

 

[HuskerO58]

And none of these billionaires are paying the 30-40% they are complaining about now. I tell you one thing. People from that era actually feared the IRS because they didn’t have politicians telling you that the IRS was your enemy. I remember every year my grandpa always made sure to file his taxes on time and correctly. I asked him why he made such a big deal out of it. He said “That’s how they got Al Capone”. After all the stuff Capone got away with, it was the IRS that got him. That was in a lot of people’s minds in the 50’s. So I’m sure a lot of ultra rich didn’t pay the full 91%. But in general, income taxes on the wealthy were much higher and they actually paid more. So instead of arguing about the semantics of exactly 91%, can we agree that the rate paid in the 50’s was likely much higher than what is paid now, or do you just want to argue so you don’t have to acknowledge that?

If you want us to acknowledge it, then provide the specifics.

What did they actually pay in the 1950s?
What are they actually paying today?

Then we can come to an agreement on whether it was "much higher" or not.

 

[huskerfan1414]

There was a time when America got lots of free labor from slaves, too. Should we return to that? Taxing the rich works if it is enforced. No loopholes or deductions. And they are the ones who can afford it. Seems fair. If you are going to use our capitalistic system to become a billionaire, pay the price. Or try your luck in Russia or Mexico. I never understood why so many people making less than 500k cry about taxing those in higher brackets. They pay lawyers and politicians to lobby for them. They don’t need your help. And they sure as hell aren’t going to help you out. I don’t have a problem with work requirements for welfare or eliminating junk food from food stamp eligibility. But this shifting of tax burden from the ultra wealthy the the middle class in crazy, and the middle class supporting it is flat insane.

ffs dude.

 

[huskerfan1414]

Haha communities with a high % of old people would just have ghetto roads, schools, and stuff like fire services.

Nope.

 

[huskerfan1414]

Exactly which services are you willing to sacrifice to offset reduced revenue???

Road maintenance, emergency response/reduced staffing, less Hiway Patrol officers, reduced $$$ to the University of Nebraska and public schools???
I'm interested in your solutions!
Many States have a balanced budget statute in their constitution that revenue and expenses must be equal or nearly equal. It's known as the "99%" rule.
It's clear the Radical Right has screamed for always cutting taxes without thinking more than 1 year ahead.

University and public schools ABSOLUTELY decrease spending. Easy.

Thanks!

 

[huskerfan1414]

Over the last 30 yrs or so when it comes to property taxes especially when talking schools, they always get manipulated to favor lincoln and omaha area schools because they fail to keep their valuations up to date and within the range mandated by law.

Unicameral is outdated because it doesn't represent nebraska anymore. No check and balance. It only represents lincoln omaha and cities along the platte river and I80

YEP!

 

[HuskerO58]

There was a time when America got lots of free labor from slaves, too. Should we return to that?

LOL!!!

TruHusker: "One time in our history our gov't got it's revenue mostly from tariffs"
Neb79: "Oh so you want to go back to slavery?!?!!?"

So comical!

 

[Anon1750875978]

University and public schools ABSOLUTELY decrease spending. Easy.

Thanks!

Great idea.
Heaven forbid we educate kids.
They could eventually vote Blue!

No wonder Trump loves the poorly educated.

 

[HuskerO58]

Taxing the rich works if it is enforced. No loopholes or deductions. And they are the ones who can afford it. Seems fair.

Wait... Weren't you claiming that the tax code back in the 1950s worked? There were loopholes & deductions back then.

But that was when you thought the ultra-rich were actually paying 90% though, wasn't it. So your, "let's go back to the 1950s" comment is null & void, right?

 

[steinek11]

Keep defending the billionaires. They have suffered so horribly. We should all share the burden so they can recover.

We need to tax the poor. Those freeloaders are just a net drain on society. Sucking up benefits, but contributing very little. They need a little bit of incentive to get off the couch.

 

[UltimateGarageHusker]

Oh, I know it isn't.
And what's the common denominator?

Politicians that get “voted” in. They are all trying to but their votes with promises. Our system can only survive by going to an appointed system via lottery. You get rewarded with a federal pension only if you ended your term with a balanced budget and zero deficit

 

[UltimateGarageHusker]

The slave remark was stupid. What are these "loopholes" I hear so much about? Name them? What do you want businesses to deduct and just eat? Do you want businesses to grow and thrive or just complain that we only have a few choices because government makes it hard to start a new business? I have asked people what loopholes the rich receive that I cannot access and I never get a reply. You simplify your assertion that all politicians are bought off by business. Farmers have lobbyist, does that mean they are paying off the politicians? How do you expect people to learn about complex businesses without interaction those business leaders.

What do you know about Sweden? They have tons of social programs that are will documented. They also have extremely high taxes in the 60% range with all considered. They tried socialism and it failed miserably so they went back to a capitalistic model. They also tax lower wage earners more than upper wage earners which just the opposite of the US. They reason that the upper wage earners are creating jobs and moving the economy which is necessary.

I think the "tax the rich" crowd is believing a simple slogan. The rich have it and won't miss it so that makes it OK to take it from them. I am not rich by any means nor do I envy the rich. Think about this - how did most of them get rich? Bezos borrowed $300k from his parents to start a CD/ magazine business. Sam Walton went broke trying to start his cherished five and dime stores until he finally figured it out. Windows was purchased for nearly nothing and developed into a massive corporation. Apple was a clunky computer in its early days, I used one. Musk has started and sold more companies that most will even know. Facebook was a novel idea that has taken off. So who then makes these people rich? Not the government. Its everyone who buys their products like iPhones, computers, Amazon, shop at Walmart, computer storage, netflix and the list goes on and on. People don't flinch a bit paying $200 a month for an phone and the plan. We rarely had a phone growing up but it was a different age. Finally, for math sakes, go ahead and just take $250 billion from Musk and apply it to the $7 trillion budget. It will only last a few weeks and then what about job creation and sustaining with that money?

Just my opinions.

Wow. Powerful response. One that all should read.

Keep defending the billionaires. They have suffered so horribly. We should all share the burden so they can recover.

University and public schools ABSOLUTELY decrease spending. Easy.

Thanks!

If it was up to me I’d close everything within the university system EXCEPT the athletic department. Our university system is a waste. we get nothing for the 3.5 billion we spend. Most of the graduates coming out of there are liberal retards. And we fund that 3.5 billion?

 

[Huskers12345]

Wow. Powerful response. One that all should read.



If it was up to me I’d close everything within the university system EXCEPT the athletic department. Our university system is a waste. we get nothing for the 3.5 billion we spend. Most of the graduates coming out of there are liberal retards. And we fund that 3.5 billion?

Always easy to tell who has never spent much time on campus. Calling UNL liberal is beyond hilarious.

 

[HuskerO58]

Taxing the rich works if it is enforced. No loopholes or deductions. And they are the ones who can afford it. Seems fair. If you are going to use our capitalistic system to become a billionaire, pay the price.

The government could always justify what is "fair".

For example: Even if you're earning $80k per year. The gov't can say, "Well you make way more than those earning $30k per year so you can afford a 50% tax rate. You'd still be taking home 33% more than those who are only earning $30k per year."

Pay what price? They took the risk, they should be rewarded for what they accomplished. As long we they didn't cheat, steal, threaten or kill to gain that success. Why do you want them to punished or to "pay the price"?

 

[UltimateGarageHusker]

Great idea.
Heaven forbid we educate kids.
They could eventually vote Blue!

No wonder Trump loves the poorly educated.

You mean the free education libtards.

Always easy to tell who has never spent much time on campus. Calling UNL liberal is beyond hilarious.

I graduated from there. Literally owned a bat that was one of the closest to it. Let me guess…..you don’t even live in Nebraska

 

[UltimateGarageHusker]

Always easy to tell who has never spent much time on campus. Calling UNL liberal is beyond hilarious.

I got an idea. How about tax payers not funding these liptards. You will disagree because it doesn’t affect you living somewhere else

 

[Huskers12345]

You mean the free education libtards.

I graduated from there. Literally owned a bat that was one of the closest to it. Let me guess…..you don’t even live in Nebraska

What percentage of students at UNL would you consider libtards? It's mostly just a bunch of normal kids.

Are you a libtard?

 

[Redscarlet]

You must be the dumbest son of a ***** on here

You nailed it, what do you expect he’s from the Clarkeye state.

 

[UltimateGarageHusker]

What percentage of students at UNL would you consider libtards? It's mostly just a bunch of normal kids.

Are you a libtard?

Most. If you have to ask me if I’m a liptard after all these posts then I know what you are. That was a stupid libtard question

 

[HuskerO58]

I never understood why so many people making less than 500k cry about taxing those in higher brackets.

Because there can be a significant mindset difference between the non-super rich Conservatives and just any sort of liberal (rich or poor). The non-super rich Conservative doesn't feel the need to take or accept more of something that they didn't earn themselves. Not true with liberals or socialists. Liberals or socialists feel they're deserving more of something they didn't earn themselves.

 

[TruHusker]

Keep defending the billionaires. They have suffered so horribly. We should all share the burden so they can recover.

That is a standard answer "defending the billionaires." Like they need to be defended. I tend to live close to a world of reality. In the history of mankind there have always been the rich and poor. Jesus Himself said, you will always have the poor with you. To my knowledge there has never been a flat system of equality.

I could use the same approach you attacked me with. Keep defending those that are spending more than we bring in every year! Why is just so easy to take other people's money and then say, oh they won't miss it?

 

[HuskerO58]

Keep defending the billionaires. They have suffered so horribly. We should all share the burden so they can recover.

By defending billionaires you mean telling the likes of you that neither you nor anyone else (government) should be able to take more of their money, right?

Also, no one is claiming that billionaires have suffered. Let alone "horribly". That's just a made-up argument in your head and a failure to understand why even non-ultra rich people don't want your greedy hands on other people's money.

 

[litespeedhuskerfan]

Can you even begin to imagine how much taxes Sydney Sweeney pays?

 

[Neb79]

I have seen the light!!! No one except the poor should pay taxes! Houses need to be super expensive so only good high income people deserve them! Getting rid of head start and defunding education is a great lead up to the fact that college is completely unaffordable. We don’t want them to have any fun before they start making our burgers and sandwiches. We’ve already started making dissent illegal by censoring talk show hosts and calling EVERYONE who disagrees with us a libtard and communist and our country is getting greater every day! Gas prices are high, but I love that because it hurts poor people more than me! And in 2028 I will cheer when Trump decides it will just be better if he stays in office a few more years! I love it!! Thanks guys.

 

[HBK4life_rivals100467]

Can you even begin to imagine how much taxes Sydney Sweeney pays?

Ill pay her taxes for her if I can motorboat those sweater monkeys.

 

[UltimateGarageHusker]

Because there can be a significant mindset difference between the non-super rich Conservatives and just any sort of liberal (rich or poor). The non-super rich Conservative doesn't feel the need to take or accept more of something that they didn't earn themselves. Not true with liberals or socialists. Liberals or socialists feel they're deserving more of something they didn't earn themselves.

Wry nice

 

[UltimateGarageHusker]

By defending billionaires you mean telling the likes of you that neither you nor anyone else (government) should be able to take more of their money, right?

Also, no one is claiming that billionaires have suffered. Let alone "horribly". That's just a made-up argument in your head and a failure to understand why even non-ultra rich people don't want your greedy hands on other people's money.

Why do you deserve their money?

 

[UltimateGarageHusker]

I have seen the light!!! No one except the poor should pay taxes! Houses need to be super expensive so only good high income people deserve them! Getting rid of head start and defunding education is a great lead up to the fact that college is completely unaffordable. We don’t want them to have any fun before they start making our burgers and sandwiches. We’ve already started making dissent illegal by censoring talk show hosts and calling EVERYONE who disagrees with us a libtard and communist and our country is getting greater every day! Gas prices are high, but I love that because it hurts poor people more than me! And in 2028 I will cheer when Trump decides it will just be better if he stays in office a few more years! I love it!! Thanks guys.

Donate more of your money to the cause. The taxes you pay are a minimum. You can elect to pay more instead of just insisting everyone else pay more. Suck it up buttercup or shut up

 

[HuskerO58]

Why do you deserve their money?

Not sure if you're asking me this question or if it's more of a response to Neb79?

 

[PvilleHuskerTim]

Can you even begin to imagine how much taxes Sydney Sweeney pays?

humongous

 

[NEHuskerJack95]

And none of these billionaires are paying the 30-40% they are complaining about now. I tell you one thing. People from that era actually feared the IRS because they didn’t have politicians telling you that the IRS was your enemy. I remember every year my grandpa always made sure to file his taxes on time and correctly. I asked him why he made such a big deal out of it. He said “That’s how they got Al Capone”. After all the stuff Capone got away with, it was the IRS that got him. That was in a lot of people’s minds in the 50’s. So I’m sure a lot of ultra rich didn’t pay the full 91%. But in general, income taxes on the wealthy were much higher and they actually paid more. So instead of arguing about the semantics of exactly 91%, can we agree that the rate paid in the 50’s was likely much higher than what is paid now, or do you just want to argue so you don’t have to acknowledge that?

From Yahoo Finance, hardly a conservative outlet, in July 2024:

There's a common belief that wealthy Americans were heavily taxed in the 1950s, with a top income tax rate of 91%. But was this the case? Let's breakdown what was happening with taxes back then.

The top federal income tax rate was 91% for much of the 1950s. However, this figure is a bit misleading regarding what the wealthy paid. The Tax Foundation explains that the 91% tax rate is only applied to incomes over $200,000, about $2 million in today's dollars.

This means only a tiny fraction of taxpayers reached this income level. The Wall Street Journal said fewer than 10,000 households fell into this top bracket.

Even for those who did earn more than $200,000, not all of their income was taxed at 91%. The 91% rate only applied to the portion of their income above the $200,000 threshold. When all taxes (federal, state, and local) are considered, the richest 1% paid an average of 42% of their income in taxes during the 1950s.

Wealthy Americans back then also had many ways to reduce their taxable income through deductions and shelters. For instance, a doctor could claim paper losses from real estate investments to greatly lower their taxable income.

Imagine a doctor in the 1950s who made $50,000 from his medical practice. He could use $50,000 in paper losses or property depreciation from real estate investments to reduce his taxable income to zero. Many professionals used these kinds of tricks to lower their taxes.
Today, if a doctor makes $500,000, he can only deduct a maximum of $3,000 from his taxable income, regardless of how much he loses on paper.

It's hard to figure out how much taxable income was hidden using tax shelters in the 1950s, making it challenging to compare that time to now. However, per WSJ, we know that from 1958 to 2010, the share of total income taxes paid by the top 3% of earners went up from 2.72% to 3.96%. In contrast, the share of taxes paid by the bottom two-thirds of taxpayers dropped significantly, from 2.7% to just 0.51%.

So, while the official tax rate was high, the amount of income subject to this rate was much lower due to different loopholes.

How does this compare to today? Despite lower official tax rates now, the tax burden on the wealthy hasn't changed as much as you might think. As the Tax Foundation writes, in 2014, the top 1% of taxpayers paid an average of 36.4% of their income in taxes — or about 5.6 percentage points less than in the 1950s.
The idea that high-income Americans in the 1950s paid significantly more taxes is largely a myth. While the top marginal tax rate was 91%, the effective tax rate — the actual percentage of income paid in taxes — was much lower due to deductions and tax shelters.

Today's wealthiest Americans don't face an unusually low tax burden compared to the 1950s. The tax system has changed in many ways, but the overall impact on the tax bills of the rich isn't as dramatically different as the top rates suggest.

So, next time you hear someone talking about the good old days of 91% tax rates, remember that the reality was much more complex. High-income Americans had ways to significantly reduce their tax bills back then, just as they do today.

 

[steinek11]

If we increased tax receipts by 100%, they’d burn through that and then some, and then cry about needing more.