How much would you consider to be their fair share?

Here's a slice of reality: Conservatives give to people as charity. Only the extremely wealthy liberals give to charity at all. When they do give it's to save the ducks or caribou or some behavioral thing like giving contraceptives to 6 year-olds which most of us find perverted. That's the liberal mind set though.

This works out well for some conservatives because we shoot and eat the ducks and caribou. It also works for our Japanese friends who, for every whale being saved, has them all in cans on their grocers shelf.

On the flip side, it works out well for liberals who are never satisfied with any charity they receive. Perhaps we should say that liberals just don't care about ducks any more and why have they lost any feelings for caribou? Free Willy! That's for our Japanese friends! We need more ducks, caribou and canned whale meat!

If we do not have very high taxes on either their unearned income or their estates a few families will end up owning most of the wealth in the country and the rest of us will work for them, I do not think that is fair, but but as long as the return on capital is greater that the growth rate of the economy math tells us it is inevitable.

I can't answer the question with a % - but I can answer the question:

-you should pay for the benefits you receive. So, if I am a Koch brother, and I want the military to prevent, say, China from taking over my manufacturing plants, I should cheerfully pay my fair share of the military. As to protecting my 15 year old Toyota, the Chinese are not interested. I should pay less.

The real answer is:

-right size the government

-pay for it with a fair tax structure.

EDIT: note, the link posted by Taylor is misleading. The chart clearly states "Income Tax" - that is not the operative statistic. Total Tax Burden is the only appropriate measure of what people pay, and would include sales/use tax, property tax, etc, and not be limited to simply income tax.

EDIT2 - you can not talk about only income taxes, the statistic is meaningless. Total Tax Burden is the only rational jumping off point. That is the reason all the % you are getting are balderdash. You have to understand the economics before you can get an answer that makes sense. As to the "fair share" - I told you how a Congressional Committee could arrive at one. There is no arbitrary answer to your question.

Any percentage I state would be as meaningless as any percentage stated by anyone else. What percentage would have any meaning? The fundamental question that should be asked before asking about percentages is about the impact of those tax rates. Who, for instance, would be more adversely impacted by a flat 10% tax rate, someone who makes $20,000 a year or someone who makes $1,000,000 a year? That difference to the person making 20 grand could determine whether or not the light bill for their apartment gets paid. For the person making a million it's whether or not they can afford to keep their vacation house. I'm not saying that the rich should be taxed into the poor house. I am saying that they can afford to pay more and that they benefit more from society. The answer to the question of how much they should pay is more complicated than simply throwing out an arbitrary percentage.

I asked this a few days ago.. Chewy Ivan replied with 90%.. and was serious.

For perspective. .here are the average "effective" tax rates (after applying deductions/credits)

Avg "effective" rates: (After credits/deductions_

0-15K - (-14%)

15-30K - (-5%)

30-50k - 3%

50-100- 8%

100-250k - 13%

250k to 1 mil - 22%

over 1 Mil = 23%

http://taxfoundation.org/blog/chart-day-effective-...

I think that everyone should be on the same personal tax rates and comany tax should be at the same rate...because you earn more you should not be penalized for it...you should not have to pay for people who dont earn a lot....in saying that I am at the moment on sickness benefits and it is apauling. I believe that there should be something looked at for the low income people to assist them....this are the people who are really in trouble....like me... have not worked for 2 years due to illness...have used every cent I have including my superannuation....so payments you should be able to live on while you are sick...things like...a baby bonus is a non essential...if you decide to have a child...make sure that you can pay for them...there are a lot of dodgy people on disability....and people who wrought the system....put the effort into cleaning up the system and treat everyone fair... this is a classic example...I am in my own home...have a mortgage but...if I was to rent my own home and then go and rent myself ...I would get a rental assistance from the government....how bezerk is that...there should not be any rental assistance....the govt. payment should be increased...

Sorry ...I could write a book myself....all the best

A fair share , as stated by the Simpson / Bowles Plan , would be to close all tax loopholes and reduces rates by 35 % for everyone .

I would keep the child care tax credit as it keeps many people who need child care ( mostly working Moms ) in the workforce and doing much better for their family than government assistance .

Yeah, Chevy Ivan is a total socialist.. But I think people are over taxed now.. The rich pay way more in taxes than poor people...

Obama said at one point, you have made enough cash...As he takes another multi-million dollar vacation...This is surreal.

If ten percent (across the board) is good enough for God, it is good enough for the government.