Sylvia Lim has suggested 25% income tax for those earning above $1 million.

[chupacabra]

Im not against rich people but against rich people who complains about not being rich enough. Alot of sinkee bosses wine alot about how sinkees are choosy but instead they are the ones that are the whiny bitches. I understand that the poor got alot of shit to complain about but whats up with these rich whiny candyass pussy bosses...

 

[Big Sexy]

what a dumb proposal
this is why i never like the WP policies.
it only benefits the peasants.:oIo:
you cannot just keep taking away from the rich and give it to the poor,
a better way will be to find a way to increase the revenue for the poor so that everyone benefits.

[h=2]Sylvia Lim has suggested 25% income tax for those earning above $1 million.[/h]

.................

​

 

[kongsimi]

do you know in developed angmo countries with social safety net.

middle income taxes amounts to 40%.

25% where got enough for social transfer payments?

 

[shctaw]

WP behaving like PAP.

Rich people are not dumb people. You tax them, they avoid tax altogether.

You end up sabotage the middleclass again and again.

 

[mojito]

With a 10% flat tax, someone earning $100,000 a year pays $10,000 in taxes and those being paid a million a year pay $100,000 in taxes so the rich always pay more anyway without having to introduce a higher tax bracket.

A flat tax rate for everyone, corporate and individuals alike cannot happen when a certain proportion of the population are unable to subsist and retire with their current disposable income. Governments can't set wages for people not on their payroll unless they legislate minimum wages, which would be a real disaster for Singapore because so much of our basic services and infrastructure are propped up by a free flow of cheap foreign labour.

When in doubt, always choose the path of least resistance.

 

[zhihau]

Why tax savings?

brilliant! me support! let's not tax on savings!

 

[winnipegjets]

you cannot just keep taking away from the rich and give it to the poor,
a better way will be to find a way to increase the revenue for the poor so that everyone benefits.

The rich is sinkapore are coddled. They have not been paying their fair share.
Your second statement shows how out of touch you are with realities in sinkapore.

 

[winnipegjets]

I think punishing the rich for being successful is flawed principle no matter how you look at it.

Why view it as punishment? When you have more, you can give abit more.

A flat tax system is the fairest of all. If everyone is taxed at 10% of their income, the message sent out is that it is perfectly acceptable to be rich. Taxing the rich at a higher rate does exactly the opposite.

The rich can afford to pay more. It is not like they are being taxed away everything they earned.

With a 10% flat tax, someone earning $100,000 a year pays $10,000 in taxes and those being paid a million a year pay $100,000 in taxes so the rich always pay more anyway without having to introduce a higher tax bracket.

Why can't the guy making $1 million pay 15 percent? Is that miserly 5 percent too much for him?

It also simplifies the whole system which means money can be saved by getting rid of all the overheads and red tape involved in enforcing and policing complicated tax structures.

It is simple if there are NO exemptions.

Corporate tax should be taxed at the same rate too so that there is no difference in declaring earnings either as corporate income or personal income. Many accountants will go broke but it will mean they can start doing jobs that are more productive than just massaging numbers.

With NO exemptions?

With the current tax laws in NZ, I spend $2000 per annum on an accountant who saves me $10,000 a year. A flat tax would do away with the need for a tax accountant. I'd do my own taxes.

If there are NO exemptions, you won't need the accountant.

 

[Leongsam]

you cannot just keep taking away from the rich and give it to the poor,
a better way will be to find a way to increase the revenue for the poor so that everyone benefits.

It's like penalising Usain Bolt with a 0.5 second penalty, the runner up with a 0.25 second penalty and the 3rd placed runner with a 0.125 second penalty.

The penalty seconds of 0.5 + 0.25 + 0.125 are then redistributed by subtracting the times from the last 3 runners and the medals are then worked out accordingly.

I can guarantee the Olympic stadiums will be empty.

 

[enterprise2]

Oh no.... that would be socialism and anathema to those Republican, Ayn Rand types.

Yes ! Time to make the rich grumpy just like the rest of us.

 

[enterprise2]

Will stop posting with your large bold fonts. If you have something worthwhile to say, it carries the same weight if you post with default font size.

If you post rubbish, huge fonts is not going to make it any less trashy.

You have been warned.

Why don't u just ban her/him ? I am sure all of us will support u if u did!

 

[Big Sexy]

maybe next time when i want to give an increment to a junior staff.
what i will do is simply ask those high earners to take a pay cut and then channel the money to pay those low earners.
save me the trouble of thinking how to increase revenue for the company so that everyone benefits..

It's like penalising Usain Bolt with a 0.5 second penalty, the runner up with a 0.25 second penalty and the 3rd placed runner with a 0.125 second penalty.

The penalty seconds of 0.5 + 0.25 + 0.125 are then redistributed by subtracting the times from the last 3 runners and the medals are then worked out accordingly.

I can guarantee the Olympic stadiums will be empty.

 

[Leongsam]

Why don't u just ban her/him ? I am sure all of us will support u if u did!

Because I don't like banning anyone unless I have no choice. I am not like the PAP.

 

[streetsmart73]

I don't post rubbish boss, I only post the truths.

hi there


1. yo!
2. be it singular or plural.
3. truth is truth hoh

 

[Scrooball (clone)]

Is she stupid?

She wants to impose British type of tax, but what does the country have to offer in exchange?

 

[Big Sexy]

she wants us all to move towards communism
take from the rich and give some to the poor, while the majority of the booty goes into don't know whose coffer.

Is she stupid?

She wants to impose British type of tax, but what does the country have to offer in exchange?

 

[ionzu]

I think punishing the rich for being successful is flawed principle no matter how you look at it.

A flat tax system is the fairest of all. If everyone is taxed at 10% of their income, the message sent out is that it is perfectly acceptable to be rich. Taxing the rich at a higher rate does exactly the opposite.

do all rich view paying their taxes as punishment? the more enlightened ones see it as their duty to return to society for giving them the opportunity to prosper.

 

[Leongsam]

Is she stupid?

She wants to impose British type of tax, but what does the country have to offer in exchange?

What I can't understand is why a bunch of sinkies keep clamouring for the implementation of an ang moh system of welfare.

China has 5000 years of recorded history and I don't recall reading anything about welfare benefits for the surfs.

 

[Kinana]

Is she stupid?

She wants to impose British type of tax, but what does the country have to offer in exchange?

She is stupid. That's why she screws up again n again

 

[ionzu]

she wants us all to move towards communism
take from the rich and give some to the poor, while the majority of the booty goes into don't know whose coffer.

communism is the boggy man tossed up by the fascist right to scare away the socially responsible.