Paper vs. Plastic bags - who cares? Tax both.
I just read yet another article on plastic bags vs. paper bags. The solution is SOOO simple. Simply tax paper or plastic bags 5 cents per bag or 10 cents. That way, when you buy a reuseable shopping bag, it pays for itself in 10 trips. What a deal!
This is such a simple and obvious solution to an environmental problem, and it’s not happening.
Some quick background and links on how both paper and plastic bags are disasters…
On the one hand paper bags are an environmental disaster as their production emits greenhouse gases and a variety of other pollutants, that can cause acid rain, pollute our water, and get into our food chain. On the other hand so do plastic bags, which by the way are not biodegradable and can kill marine life.
Worldwide, an estimated 4 billion plastic bags end up as litter each year. Tied end to end, that’s enough to circle the earth 63 times.
The bags are made from an estimated 12 million gallons of oil.
Carried Interest Tax Break Is So Unfair
"John Paulson, the most successful hedge-fund manager of all, bet against the mortgage market one year and then bet with Glenn Beck in the gold market the next. Paulson made himself $9 billion in fees in just two years. His current tax bill on that $9 billion? Zero.”
This is the trick: “So long as they leave their money, known as “carried interest,” in the hedge fund, their taxes are deferred. They only pay taxes when they cash out, which could be decades from now for younger managers. How do these hedge-fund managers get money in the meantime? By borrowing against the carried interest, often at absurdly low rates—currently about 2 percent.”
It’s Not Fair That Churches Don’t Pay Property Tax
It’s an unfair subsidy to the segment of the population that goes to church. Just like any other targeted tax break, it’s not so good.
Yeah, there are just too many deductions if those making millions can avoid paying tax. Yes there are tax free bonds…but I don’t like the idea that the issuers of those tax free bonds benefit while the federal government gets shafted.
People cite this chart as an example of why the rich aren’t paying enough in tax.
However, if you actually look at the data, you would come to the opposite conclusion.
So looking at the top 1% - their income has about tripled in the last 30 years. In contrast, people in the middle of the pack have seen more subdued gains (20-30%). The other big tax payer, the top 20% has seen gains of about 70+% - but that would be reduced if you consider that the top 1% is part of that pack. So the top 1% has seen huge gains and they should be paying a great percentage of the total tax.
Here’s another link. It says :
the top 1% of income earners did receive 17% of all income in the year 2003 and 21.3% in 2006. That’s up from 12.8% for the top 1% in 1982, which is quite a jump
Recently the top 1% have done even better.
The upper 1 percent of Americans are now taking in nearly a quarter of the nation’s income every year.
This indicates that the top 1%’s share of income has risen 95% (25%/12.8%). It has approximately doubled. This chart suggests that the share of income taxes paid by the top 1% has risen from about 18% to about 40%, about doubling as well.
So actually the rich aren’t paying any more than they did in 1980, and not only that, we’re in a tough spot with huge deficits and the rich are doing unbelievably well on a historical basis, so doesn’t it make sense that the rich do their part rather than shirk responsibility?