iRV2 Forums

iRV2 Forums (http://www.irv2.com/forums/)
-   Just Conversation (http://www.irv2.com/forums/f64/)
-   -   Love to pay taxes - move to Oklahoma (http://www.irv2.com/forums/f64/love-to-pay-taxes-move-to-oklahoma-29244.html)

Jim S. 05-23-2007 05:16 AM

I move to OK 2 years ago and have been amazed by the taxes and fees. 8.5% sales tax even on food, high property taxes, 6% state income tax, $90 for tags for my 5 year old car, and they have boat owners, it cost me $145/year for an old 20ft boat. I you let your tag expire during the winter on your rv they fine you in addition to the cost of a plate. STUPID

Jim S. 05-23-2007 05:16 AM

I move to OK 2 years ago and have been amazed by the taxes and fees. 8.5% sales tax even on food, high property taxes, 6% state income tax, $90 for tags for my 5 year old car, and they have boat owners, it cost me $145/year for an old 20ft boat. I you let your tag expire during the winter on your rv they fine you in addition to the cost of a plate. STUPID

Bill Davis 05-23-2007 07:50 AM

Sounds like OK is not OK...

TXiceman 05-23-2007 06:28 PM

The government is going to get your money one way or the other. When we lived in a small town in NE OK, our property taxes for a home on 1.5 acres and a 900 sq. ft shop was only $962.00 per year.

Back in Texas, insurance is about the same, auto and Rv registration is pretty much the same, no state taxes, but my property tax is over 5 times more.

You earn the money and get it just long enough to put it in the bank before turning it over to the government.

Ken

MonacoMama 05-23-2007 07:41 PM

I cannot understand why no one wants to go a set percent of taxes -you make 25,000 you pay the same percent ats the guy who made 250,000 ( ie - 10% for the 25,000 would be 2,500 whereas 10%on the 250,000 is 25,000) ..BTW..I am NOT saying tax should be 10% - just using that as an easy example...




apackof2 05-24-2007 02:55 AM

I cannot understand why we do not have a "tax revolution" in this country

You know, "I am mad as **** and I am not gonna take it anymore"!

Unfortunately it seems a great deal of Americans have been brainwashed into thinking that the government instead of self-sufficiently is the answer to all their problems! If only people realized how much more self-sufficient they would be with more of their own money in their pockets as opposed to the federal government!

Look at your next paycheck and think how much you could do and save if so much of your hard earned money wasn't deducted for taxes

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by MonacoMama:
I cannot understand why no one wants to go a set percent of taxes -you make 25,000 you pay the same percent ats the guy who made 250,000 ( ie - 10% for the 25,000 would be 2,500 whereas 10%on the 250,000 is 25,000) ..BTW..I am NOT saying tax should be 10% - just using that as an easy example... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

hamguy 05-24-2007 04:34 AM

Simple. Doing so would put thousands of Union government workers on the street, take a major control mechanism away from lawmakers (the power to tax is the power to dominate. Always has been...always will be). And put tax attorneys/accountants in a tizzy.

http://irv2.infopop.cc/images/sign0098.gif http://irv2.infopop.cc/images/sign0086.gif

Vegascpl 05-24-2007 04:40 AM

It's all pretty simple. You all supported tax breaks for the wealthiest 2% of the country. You can see the effect of those tax breaks. Sales at Walmart where low and middle income folks shop sales are down. Sales at high end stores like Sac's and Neiman's are way up. That's because the wealthiest 2% have a lot more money to spend on $500 shirts.

In order to pay for those tax breaks the Federal government decided that state and local government should do more of what the Feds used to do. However, they didn't send money just the requirements. Therefore state and local government were left with no choice but to raise taxes. It's one of those things you ask for it and you got it! Effectively we have passed the major tax burden from wealthy to the middle class, which is you!

It's only a dream that we'll ever be able to lower taxes in the future. When you borrow money you have to pay it back. It's that simple. We are borrowing enormous amounts of money for tax beaks and Iraq. Someone has to pay it back. Therefore we'll never be able to reduce taxes.

As for the flat tax maybe not a bad idea. The problem is how to you handle businesses? You certainly can't tax on gross profit. No one could stay in business. Then you are right back into the mess we have now. Personally I prefer a sales tax. If you have enough money to buy you are paying taxes. That would eliminate the need and expense of IRS. How could that be a bad thing?

Michael

2005 Dutch Star 40's 4 slide
2005 BMW K1200LT motorcycle on lift
2006 Ford Escape Hybrid

hamguy 05-24-2007 04:54 AM

Did you know that 50% of the workers in this country pay NO TAXES at all? How many jobs have you been given by a minimumm wage worker? The 'tax breaks' given the WEALTHY (those making over $70000/year) have give rise to the best and richest ecomony in the history of the world. Unemployment at &lt;4.5%. Inflation under 3%.

Believe the liberal koolaid if you want but I will stick with the facts as I see them.

Vegascpl 05-24-2007 05:46 AM

I don't know where you got the $70,000 figure there are some minimal tax benefits at that level. However, those who really benefit from the tax breaks average over $342,000. Here is a link even thought I'm sure you'll reject it http://www.ctj.org/html/gwb0602.htm

I have no idea where you got the 50% figure. However, you are correct that a lot of low income people pay no taxes and the number of people who are paying no taxes is increasing. We've been traveling cross country and it's amazing when you look at how a lot of people live in Middle America. There is a tremendous number of people living in poverty in this country. The middle class is quickly disappearing. The wealthy are getting wealthier and the poor are getting poorer. Just a guess here but I'd bet that many of you are supporting policies that are hurting you financially.

I'm sure you'll dismiss any figures that don't come from a conservative blog. However, all you need to do is look at your personal situation. Are you paying more in state and local taxes? The tax burden on the middle class is increasing. That includes those making $70,000 even with the minimal tax breaks. While more people are living in poverty and the wealthy are getting wealthier. You really don't need anyone to tell you that you should be able to see it!

As for the economy, do you think that the real figure, of nearly a Trillion dollars that we are borrowing to keep the Federal government functioning has anything to do with that? The governemt is spending lots of money these days, but how does that help you? What do you expect will happen if we were not borrowing hundreds of billions to keep the Iraq war going? This isn't rocket science. It's a personal thing. After you purchase necessities food, heat, drugs and such how much money do you have in your pocket for those things you'd like to have? Are you traveling farther in your RV today than you did 7 years ago?

It's time to get off the Conservative vs Liberal ideals and start thinking about what this all means to you personally. Isn't that more important?

Michael

2005 Dutch Star 40' 4 slides
2005 BMW K1200LT on lift
2006 Ford Escape Hybrid

Dalsn1 05-24-2007 07:39 AM

"As for the flat tax maybe not a bad idea. The problem is how to you handle businesses? You certainly can't tax on gross profit. No one could stay in business. Then you are right back into the mess we have now. Personally I prefer a sales tax. If you have enough money to buy you are paying taxes. That would eliminate the need and expense of IRS. How could that be a bad thing?"

What we need to do is revert the tax back to the way it was at inception with a very high top bracket. Flat tax is a bad idea for the vast majority of tax payers. Business and personal income tax should be an even 50/50 split.

Steve

hamguy 05-24-2007 01:38 PM

Business's would pay NO taxes. The tax event would occur at time of sale if the tax were on sales tax basis. If on an income basis, they would be taxed as they are now.

Another person asked where I got my numbers. They are readily available on any number of sources. The numbers vary a bit but in general are the same. The 50% number IS ACCURATE. R

Right now, I am on a cell connect but when the WiFi comes back, I will provide links.

apackof2 05-26-2007 04:55 AM

You first!

It's time to get off the Conservative vs Liberal ideals and start thinking about what this all means to you personally. Isn't that more important?[QUOTE]Originally posted by Vegascpl:

I'm sure you'll dismiss any figures that don't come from a conservative blog

Just like you dismiss any facts that don't come from your liberal playbook.

Married Couples Pay Majority of Federal Income Taxes, Received Majority of Bush Tax Cuts

by Scott A. Hodge

The Tax Foundation
Fiscal Fact No. 17

One of the biggest mistakes made in recent reports on the effects of the Bush tax cuts is that they fail to account for the highly varied composition of taxpayers within each income group. Despite the fact that no tax return is alike, analysts tend to lump taxpayers into broad income groups (called quintiles, or fifths) and estimate how the tax cuts benefited taxpayers generally within each income group.

For example, a well cited analysis by the Tax Policy Center, a joint project of the Brookings Institution and Urban Institute, determined that the top fifth of taxpayers received roughly 65 percent of the tax cuts while the middle fifth received only 10 percent of the benefits. To critics, these results are proof that the tax cuts unfairly benefited only the rich. But these results are perfectly understandable if we look at the composition of single and married taxpayers within each income group.

Table 1 displays the distribution of married and single taxpayers within each income group, their tax liability before the Bush tax cuts, and their tax liability after the tax cuts. The table clearly shows that single taxpayers comprise the vast majority of taxpayers within the first, second, and middle income groups, while married couples are overwhelmingly found in the highest two income groups.


For example, just 16 percent of all the taxpayers in the poorest quintile of taxpayers are married couples (those filing jointly or separately), while 84 percent of those "poor" taxpayers are single workers or single parents with children. These taxpayers pay virtually no income taxes to begin with so, naturally, they received very little in benefits from the Bush tax cuts.

At the other end of the income spectrum, 86 percent of the so-called "richest" 20 percent of taxpayers are married couples (63 percent are dual income), while just 14 percent of these higher income taxpayers are singles. Because so many of these dual-income working couples are in higher tax brackets, they naturally pay most of the income taxes today. Remarkably, married couples in the wealthiest quintile account for just 17 percent of all tax returns, but they pay a whopping 68 percent of all income taxes. Considering that tax burden, we should not be surprised that these "upper-income" married couples received 60 percent of the Bush tax cuts.

One of the most generous components of the tax cut plan was the increase in the value of the child credit from $500 to $1,000. Since married couples in the top two income groups raise the majority of children in America, the bulk of the child credit benefits accrued to these above average-income married couples.

While the candidates often talk about helping the "middle-class," the majority of taxpayers within the statistical middle (those taxpayers earning between $25,500 and $41,640) are single, not traditional married couples with children. Since there are so few dependent children and working married couples in the statistical middle, it is not surprising that this income group received so little of the Bush tax cuts.

Attached Files

DonavonP 05-26-2007 06:36 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Jim S.:
I move to OK 2 years ago and have been amazed by the taxes and fees. 8.5% sales tax even on food, high property taxes, 6% state income tax, $90 for tags for my 5 year old car, and they have boat owners, it cost me $145/year for an old 20ft boat. I you let your tag expire during the winter on your rv they fine you in addition to the cost of a plate. STUPID </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Here's a comparison with other states. The Tax Foundation is "suppose" to be unbiased.

Looks like there are only 5 other states cheaper on taxes than OK.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:15 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.