It's about time we had a thread specifically discussing taxes. I know some people here have various views, and then of course Zippy's "OK SO LETS TAX THIS THING AT 15% YEAH THAT SOUNDS GOOD AND THEN THAT THING AT WHATEVER AND WE ARE GOOD RIGHT?".

Lets keep this thread as factual and accurate as possible. No made-up numbers. No "BUT BUT THE TAX CODE IS INCOMPREHENSIBLE" dismissals.

Gonna kick it off with a news post from Washington Post. I don't like E.J. Dionne, but on this he's right.

[url]http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/28/AR2010072804529.html[/url]

I'll bold the most important parts if you want to skim it.

[quote]Can a nation remain a superpower if its internal politics are incorrigibly stupid?

THIS STORY
Political stupidity, U.S. style
Readers debate stupid economic tricks and taxes
Start with taxes. In every other serious democracy, conservative political parties feel at least some obligation to match their tax policies with their spending plans. David Cameron, the new Conservative prime minister in Britain, is a leading example.

He recently offered a rather brutal budget that includes severe cutbacks. I have doubts about some of them, but at least Cameron cared enough about reducing his country's deficit that alongside the cuts he also proposed an increase in the value-added tax, from 17.5 percent to 20 percent. Imagine: a fiscal conservative who really is a fiscal conservative.

That could never happen here because the fairy tale of supply-side economics insists that taxes are always too high, especially on the rich.

This is why Democrats will be fools if they don't try to turn the Republicans' refusal to raise taxes on families earning more than $250,000 a year into an election issue. If Democrats go into a headlong retreat on this, they will have no standing to govern.

[b]The simple truth is that the wealthy in the United States -- the people who have made almost all the income gains in recent years -- are undertaxed compared with everyone else.[/b]

Consider two reports from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. One, issued last month, highlighted findings from the Congressional Budget Office showing that "the gaps in after-tax income between the richest 1 percent of Americans and the middle and poorest fifths of the country more than tripled between 1979 and 2007."

The other, from February, used Internal Revenue Service data to show that [b]the effective federal income tax rate for the 400 taxpayers with the very highest incomes declined by nearly half in just over a decade, even as their pre-tax incomes have grown five times larger.[/b]

[b]The study found that the top 400 households "paid 16.6 percent of their income in federal individual income taxes in 2007, down from 30 percent in 1995." [/b] We are talking here about truly rich people. Using 2007 dollars, it took an adjusted gross income of at least $35 million to make the top 400 in 1992, and $139 million in 2007.

[b]The notion that when we are fighting two wars, we're not supposed to consider raising taxes on such Americans is one sign of a country that's no longer serious. [/b]Why do so few foreign policy hawks acknowledge that if they lack the gumption to ask taxpayers to finance the projection of American military power, we won't be able to project it in the long run?[/quote]

The rest of the article is irrelevant to taxes, but is a good critique of how ridiculous American politics have become if you want to read it.